Research Paper

Each student shall choose a topic from the suggestion list provided. Please write a 5 page paper on the decided subject. APA style is required. Guidelines for the paper are as follows: Please keep the font between 10 and 12, double space, and use 1 inch margins. Include a cover sheet and a reference page listing your resources in addition to the 4-5 pages of content. Make sure you cite all sources and quotations within the text of your paper (minimum of 5 sources required).

Here are some hints regarding APA Style:

1. Make sure you cite within the text of the paper. This is very important! Any direct quotes, statistics, source ideas, etc must be cited within the paper as well as on the reference page.
2. A cover sheet and reference page listing all resources used are required
3. Pictures may be used in your paper but will not count toward the content of text (5 pages)

TOPIC: The Bible and Politics--How does the Bible influence political thought and action in our culture?

Please note that the paper topics are very vague. It is expected that the writer will develop a much narrower argument from within the broad scope of the topic.

The paper will be 12 pages long, double spaced, in Times New Roman 12 point font. In it you will be expected to advance some sort of argument or thesis (although in the context of a theory paper, a thesis frequently can take the form of a particular form of interpretation which you wish to advance). Providing a proper introduction with a thesis statement would be a good idea.

Although the primary focus of the paper will be the texts outlined below, you will be expected to use secondary literature in supporting your arguments. Please note that all information which is taken from another source even if not directly quoted must be cited. Otherwise, it is plagiarism.

The following questions are based on the four texts. The writer will have to pick at least two authors to answer the questions below. The authors and their texts are:

The Prince-Machiavelli,

Discourses on Livy-Machiavelli,

Leviathan-Thomas Hobbes,

Two Treatises of Government-John Locke,

A Theologico-Political Treatise/ A Political Treatise-Benedict De Spinoza

Please answer only one of the questions.
1) Discuss the role that gender played in relation to early modern political thought with regards to at least two of the thinkers we have studied.

2) The early modern period was a time of dramatic shifts in terms of the status of religion in political life. Compare and contrast two of the thinkers we have read on this issue of religion and politics.

3) In the early modern period that we begin to see a rise of the people as an object of political interest (or, if we look back to the classical period, it is in the early modern period that the people return to this position as an object of political interest). Looking at two of the thinkers we have read, how do they relate to this rise of the power of the people? (Note: If you pick this topic, you cannot write on both Hobbes and Machiavelli).

4) The transition from a feudal serf economy to a capitalist market economy was one of the fundamental shifts which produced modernity as we know it. Describe how two of the thinkers we have read relate to the issue of capitalism.

Please provide a bibliography

Thank you

You task will be to compare/contrast W.E.B. DuBois's works ("Souls of Black Folk" and "Darkwater" and his works from Michael B. Levy's Political Thought in America which are "The Evolution of the Race Problem (1909)" and "Of Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others (1903)" WITH Abraham Lincoln's ideas of the political struggle against slavery/racism. For Lincoln, use Eric Foner's The Story of American Freedom (Chapter 5), his works from Michael B. Levy's Political Thought in America ("Address Before the Young Man's Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois (1838)", "Speech on the Dred Scott Decision (1857)", "First Inaugural Address (1861)" and "The Gettysburg Address (1863)". You must make a critical claim with your thesis, address some of the concepts discussed in class such as equality, liberty, democracy, utilize at least 2 scholarly sources outside the course readings, scholarly meaning "refereed journals." Lincoln and DuBois are to be compared and contrasted on the issue of the political struggle against slavery/racism using these resourses and within this context.

This class is Liberty and Property, about The political thought of John Locke. It is very important that a writer is very familiar or well knowledged with John Locke. If the writer is not then, it is impossible to write a paper.
This paper is final paper which it covers 50% of final grade.

Before you write a paper you should re-read "The second Treatise", and "A discourse on Property" both by John Locke.
"The second Treatise" required reading is chapter from 1 to 19. And "A discourse on Property" is Chapter from 2 to 7.

Paper is asking a question about a current issue of liberty and property(the default topic will be Kelo Vs. New London) by using extensive evidence from Locke and secondary sources.

First, you have to find a case suchs as Kelo Vs. New London.
Then, first 3-4 pages should cover with addresting major three problems related to the case. But not to argue about the problem, and is not argument paper. Structure like John Locke wrote on the book. Try to understand both parties.
Second part 8-10 pages, should cover with John Locke's philosophical idea related to the problems that you addressed.
Last, conclusion 1-3 pages, it is not important who is right. It can be understandable in both parties. Or Such example from kelo Vs. New England, Kelo!!. You can choose it while you are writing.

*Important*
*Clearly identify three questions and backed up by Locke's Philosophical idea.
*Structure base on Locke and gear toward.
*The case must invovle with two Parties such as Kelo Vs. New London. If you are not sure about what is Kelo Vs. New Londong go to the google.com and type "Kelo Vs. New London". It will help to find a case. Also you could look up law.com to find a case. Such as Death penalty, abortion.
*number of evidence is up to you but many evidences are better for the paper. Just use it for appropriately. But it is important that the evidences should backed up from the problems that you address(three questoins, both parties).

Most of the ideologies that we have looked at this week embrace some idea of equality, but equality does not mean the same thing to all of them. Choose two ideologies and
discuss what equality means to each(Note: I take a more liberal stance). Below is the the reading:



Everyone who engages in political activity does so according to some political ideology, whether they are aware of it or not. An ideology contains within it three components:



a worldview that describes and (either implicitly or explicitly) criticizes the world as it is;

a vision of an ideal world; and

a plan of action for achieving this ideal vision



Ideologies may be subject to dispute in whole or in part even by those friendly to the particular ideological tradition. These ideologies are living traditions and are, because of these disputes, continually evolving.



Liberalism

We begin our consideration of ideologies with liberalism. (This should not be confused with liberal or conservative positions in American politics for reasons that will become clear.) Heywood suggests that liberalism is in fact a meta-ideology. Well see that the other ideologies we discuss either adopt or respond to some of the key values and assumptions of this ideology. Well also see that this ideology encompasses most of the political debate within the United States. American conservatives have traditionally adopted a position best described as anti-state liberalism. This view is also called neoliberalism. Those of you who hold conservative political values probably found Thomas Paines views of the state as a necessary evil (Heywood, p. 45) to be close to your own position. The composition of the American right has undergone something of a transformation with the rise of the religious right and the neoconservatives, but the traditional American right has been, like the American left, squarely within the liberal tradition. As we explore liberalism further, you will undoubtedly recognize some of these values and ideas from your own knowledge of American government.

Heywood identifies some key attributes of liberal political thought:



Individualism individuals are seen as more important than the group or, more specifically, the government. Society has value for liberals to the extent that it promotes individual well-being. If it fails to protect or benefit the individuals living within it, the political system loses its legitimacy.

Freedom individual freedom in, economic, political, and moral matters, is a priority within liberalism. Liberalism opposes unnecessary restrictions on freedom they instead favor individuals possession of the greatest possible set of rights and liberties that is consistent with everyone having the same set of rights and liberties. Liberalism focuses on civil and political rights also called negative rights over economic and social rights.

Reason liberals believe in the capacity of human reason to resolve problems and contribute to progress.

Equality most political ideologies embrace some form of equality, but the question becomes: equality of what? For liberals, the answer is two-fold. First, liberalism endorses an equal share of civil and political rights for everyone. Second, they support equality of opportunity with respect to economics. There are two branches of thought on this point: laissez-faire liberalism and welfare liberalism. While the former conception focuses solely on negative rights (specifically equality of opportunity), the latter view favors some redistribution of wealth within society so that people may make use of their equal opportunity.

Toleration because individuals hold equal civil and political rights, liberals endorse toleration of different beliefs and practices. Are there limits to toleration? What about the toleration of views, such as racism, hostile to liberalism? These are contentious issues within the liberal tradition, and we can take them up on the discussion board.

Consent liberals invented the metaphor of the social contract to capture the idea that governmental authority properly depends on the consent of the citizens. In exchange for the governments protection, individuals give up a portion of their liberty, which is unrestricted in the state of nature. If the government fails to fulfill its obligations to its citizens, then it has broken this contract. The selection from Locke in the Hazan reader is an early example of this social contract tradition.

Constitutionalism there are limits to governmental authority even when the government is performing its legitimate functions. These limitations on authority set liberalism apart from authoritarianism or totalitarianism, in which the government enjoys almost unlimited authority over its members.



Liberalism evolved as a response to absolutist monarchy. While the propositions that government should be subject to peoples consent and that individuals are entitled to rights such as free speech may now seem commonplace to us, they were controversial at the time that they evolved. Liberalism, and ensuing democratic revolutions (especially in France), led to rapid social change, which gave rise to conservative political ideologies.



Conservatism

Conservatism is so called because it seeks to conserve some aspect of the current order. Conservative thinkers seek change through gradual reform rather than sudden revolution, and preservation rather than upheaval. Heywood highlights key elements of the conservative tradition:



Tradition conservatives advocate respect for the continuity of authority, institutions, and customs. These elements of society are seen not only as politically significant, but also culturally important.

Pragmatism while liberalism embraces the capacity for human reason to solve problems, conservatives are skeptical about the potential of reason to improve the condition of humanity. Human reason is fallible and, even when we are well-intentioned, we can be wrong about the way to solve social problems. Instead of abstract reason, conservatives place their faith in experience, especially in the body of accumulated experience.

Human imperfection conservatives are skeptical about human nature, and seek to keep out worst impulses in check, with a strong state capable of maintaining law and order.

Organicism the social contract metaphor employed by liberalism sees society as the outcome of an agreement among individuals who retain their individuality. Instead, conservatives see society as a single, cohesive whole. Their model is of society as a single living organism that we cannot reduce to smaller parts.

Hierarchy although they see society as an organic whole, not everyone within this society is equal. Conservatism is, in this respect, an elitist ideology. The natural elite, in their view, should rule and the rest of society should follow. At the same time, the elite owe an obligation to those who are worse off than they are.

Authority conservatives see authority in society as top-down. Those who make up the natural elite take a leadership in society and the rest of society should defer to their leadership. Authority is inherited from previous generations in an unbreakable chain, as discussed in the Burke selection.

Property property plays an important social and political role in the conservative ideology.



Within conservative thought, we find several different strands of thought that embrace these elements to differing degrees. Alongside the anti-state liberalism already mentioned, we find what Heywood calls paternalistic conservatism, neo-conservatism, and the rise of the religious right.

The paternalistic version of conservatism is exemplified by Burke, from whom we have a selection in th Hazan reader. In this variant of conservative thought, society is characterized as organic a living thing that cannot thrive under conditions of individualism or social upheaval. This brand of conservative thought is most prominent in European conservative parties. Europes feudal past facilitates the view of social roles and responsibilities. Americans (and not just conservatives) feel discomfort with the idea of individuals life prospects being shaped by their social position. Individuals possess, in the paternalistic conservative view, a place within society. While the more privileged positions entail greater opportunities, they also obligate those who hold them to care for those less fortunate.

The anti-state liberal or neoliberal position represents the mainstream conservative position in the United States. These conservatives embrace the free market in a way that the paternalistic conservatives do not. They believe that the market and its participants can guide the economy more effectively than can the government. Because they fear the effects of a large state on the economy and individual freedoms, these conservatives favor as small a state as possible. This aspect of neoliberalism sometimes puts these conservatives into conflict with other, emerging strands of conservative thought.

Neoconservatives, for example, advocate the promotion of socially conservative, or traditional, values. Because of this commitment, neoconservatives (often abbreviated to neocons) oppose what they see as threats to cultural unity. These neoconservatives are skeptical about multiculturalism and multilateralism. In terms of their origins, many neocons are former welfare liberals who became disillusioned about the capacity of the government to achieve social goods.

The religious right shares many of these commitments, though they reach them through different reasoning. To the extent that neocons and the religious right favor legislation to enforce their values (for example, a ban on gay marriage), they encounter resistance from mainstream conservatives who object to such enlargement of state authority. These tensions came to the surface during the most recent GOP convention, particularly when Republicans were drafting their party platform.



Socialism

The United States has no major socialist party, which makes it exceptional among the Western polyarchies. Nevertheless, this ideology has been influential globally and the Marxist critique prompted the development of welfare liberalism. Like conservatism, socialism evolved in response to liberalism. Modern socialism emerged as a response to the industrial revolution. The economic inequalities and the working conditions in factories prompted the Marxist insight that these conditions were endemic to the unregulated free market. Elements of Marxism include:



Historical materialism this element of Marxist thought addresses the influence of the economic system on social and political life.

Dialectical change Marx incorporated into his theory Hegels dialectical model. In the simplest terms, this model means that any social system contains some element of its opposite, and this dynamic transforms it into something new. For example, the capitalist economic system, based on free market competition, contains economic forces that lead to the opposite result, consolidation.

Alienation unlike earlier economic systems, in which people maintained control over what they produced, in capitalist economic systems peoples become alienated from the products of their labor. Workers no longer feel an attachment to what they produce or their fellow laborers.

Class struggle private property, in particular the ownership of the means of production, creates a struggle between those who own property (bourgeoisie) and those who do not (proletariat).

Surplus labor the value that goods hold derives, in the Marxist view, from the labor required to make them. To crate the value of the goods they need to survive (to reproduce themselves, in Marxs parlance), workers must perform a certain amount of labor. Lets say this is 5 hours. If the workday is 10 hours, as it was when Marx wrote, then the 5 surplus hours enrich the owner of the means of production.

Proletarian revolution the workers, as a result of this exploitation, will develop a revolutionary class consciousness that will lead them to revolt.

Communism Marx saw the state as a tool of the bourgeoisie to suppress the working class. After the communist revolution, this function would no longer be required. With property held in common and the end of class conflict, the state would wither away.



In the early part of the twentieth century, the revolutionary variant of socialism was the most influential. Marx expected that the first communist revolution would occur in the West, where conditions for the working class were dire. Instead, Lenin led a revolution in Russia, which had not even industrialized, much less developed a proletariat with a revolutionary class consciousness. The conditions in Russia required some amendment to Marxs theory. Lenin developed the idea of a vanguard party to lead the revolution in lieu of the proletariat. This vanguard party would wield power in a temporary dictatorship of the proletariat a dictatorship that, in the Soviet Union, became permanent.

Since the collapse of the USSR, the more influential branch of Marxism has been the reformist social democracy. As Heywood notes, this socialism rejects revolution in favor of gradual reform. In addition to their differences over means, they also disagree in terms of their vision. Reformist social democracy does not insist on common ownership of all property, but instead seeks a balance between the free market and state management of the economy.

Heywood also outlines other ideological traditions: fascism, anarchism, feminism, environmentalism, and religious fundamentalism. The latter three have been to some degree embraced by the two major parties. In other countries, these ideologies form the basis of separate parties. When we get to the differences between electoral systems, some of the reasons for the narrowness of the American political system will become clear

we have seen that the nature of nature differs for different thinkers. Explain what nature means for a) a greek(Plato); b)Catholic Christian(Augustin,Aquinas); c)a Protestant christian(Luther, Calvin); and d)a modern scientific philosopher(Burke,Smith,Locke,...). Nature may be just bodies in motion, or it may include something quite specific to human nature; nature may have a rational telos or it may be there for human use;ect. Explain the political implications of each of these assumption.
i need about 4 short paragraph each dealing with one group. the text which you can use is: Princton Readings In Political Thoughts.this is a essay form question, i care very much more about material and its validity.

For this paper, please pick one of the following topics. Please note that the paper topics are very vague. It is expected that you develop a much narrower argument from within the broad scope of the topic.

In this paper, it will be expected to advance some sort of argument or thesis (although in the content of a theory paper, a thesis frequently can take the form of a particular form of interpretation which you wish to advance). Please provide a proper introduction with a thesis statement. The primary focus of the paper will be based on two texts. YOU NEED TO ALSO USE SECONDARY LITERATURE IN SUPPORTING YOUR ARGUMENT. This secondary literature needs to be peer reviewed scholarly journals. Moreover, the term paper must cite every source upon which you rely for quotations, or specific factual material. Please provide a bibliography or list of works consulted. Don't rely on just two or three peer reviewed journals for example. Spread them out. ALL YOUR SOURCES HAVE TO BE CITED AND BE PEER REVIEWED SCHOLARLY JOURNALS. IF THIS NOT FOUND, THE PAPER WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. If you need specific journals, I can access them for you. Just send me a message. Lastly, do not use endless quotations, half or a page long, but rather a few to support your argument. This is an analysis paper, not a summary of the authors writings.

Choose two authors from the list of four:

1) Immanuel Kant-Perpetual Peace and other Essays-An Answer to the question: What is Enlightenment?, On the Proverb: That May be True in Theory, but is of No Practical use", Speculative Beginnings of Human History, Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Intent, To Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch.

2)Karl Marx Selected Writings-Communist Manifesto,Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, Theses on Feuerbach. On the Jewish Question, Critical Remarks on the Article: ' The King of Prussia and Social Reform, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, Preface to A Critique of Political Economy.

3) John Stuart Mill-On Liberty and Other Essays

4)Friedrich Nietzsche-On the Genealogy of Morality

Once the two authors have been selected, please pick one of the following topics:

1) One of the major themes of post-enlightenment political thought has been the question of the status of history in the political philosophy in the post-enlightenment period. Do we see 'progress' in history, and if so, towards what and via what mechanism? Discuss the question of history in relation to two of the authors you have chosen.

2) Though the question of human nature has always been of interest to political philosophers, in the post-enlightenment period, for a variety of reasons ( the discovery of evolution, new anthropological research) it takes on a particular importance, as well as new and varied approaches. Compare and contrast the role of human nature in two authors that you have chosen

3) It is in the post-enlightenment period first with the rise of capitalism, and then with the coming of industrialism, that we see the beginnings of what might be terms 'mass society'. At the same time we have the beginnings of sociology, the study of social facts and patterns apart from individual beliefs and intentions. Compare and contrast two of the authors you have chosen on the question of 'society' ( whether in relationship to history, or to politics, or to the individual).

4) In the post-enlightenment period we see the increasing acknowledgment, both for better and worse, of groups ( women, colonized peoples) who had historically been marginalized or ignored by traditional European political thought. Discuss how two of the thinkers you have chose engage with questions of historically marginalized groups.

Thank you

THIS ESSAY NEEDS TO BE TURNED IN VIA TURNITIN.COM - MUST HAVE ORIGINAL THOUGHT IN IT.

The essay needs to be a Philosophical argument essentially arguing that the political philosophy of Martin Luther or Thomas Muntzer reflects, or does not reflect, Machiavelliism. The book used is Machiavelli's THE PRINCE, and there are pages of in-class material that I will send over that is the work of Luther and Muntzer.

Official assignment: Must a good politician be morally bad?

Machiavelli seems to think that he is the first person to be realistic about politics. Many modern theorists agree, and consider Machiavelli's THE PRINCE to be one of the main sources for European realpolitik (German for "practical politics" or "political realism"). A central component of this outlook is the view of Machiavelli that "it is necessary for a prince wishing to hold his own to know how to do wrong" (The Prince, chapter XV). In other words, politicians must be willing to get their hands dirty. Carefully explain Machiavelli's view and then decide whether or not such a view is, in some way, reflected in the political thought of Martin Luther and Thomas Muntzer.

Things that will be looked for:
1. Quality of the thesis. Thesis must be clear, specicial (not vague or general), controversial (something a reasonable person can make a good argument against) and substantive (it makes a difference in the field if the thesis is correct).

"Machiavelli,Luther and Muntzer all agree that change can be good" is vague and uncontroversial, and is a very poor example of a thesis. "Luther is a Machiavellian about temporal power, but Muntzer rejects Machiavelli's realpolitik" is a little better. The best thesis would involved a careful definition of realpolitik and would identify very specific ways in which Luther and Muntzer accept or reject the importance of moral restraint on political action.

2.Strength of argument. The argument must prove the thesis. Explicity make and explain reasonable objections to your thesis, to your argument and to your use of evidence. Show that your view is not one-sided, but that you fully understand all relevant sides of the issue and can make a reasonable argument that one specific view is correct.

3. Effective use of evidence. In a scholarly paper like this, exact quotation is very important for two reasons: (a) your argument must be based solidly on what the author actually does say, and (b) you must prove to your reader that you are being faithful to your author. Cite liberally, quote only when the author's exact words are important to your point. A good quotation contains three parts: (a) brief statement of the context of the following quotation both in its own original place, and also how it fits into your argument; (b) exact quotation, correctly attributed; (c) interpretation of the meaning of the passage and its significance for your argument.

Warning: In philosophy you must interpret every quotation, so you cannot have lots of quotations, and you cannot have long quotations. ONE QUOTATION PER AUTHOR USED - One of which MUST be Machiavelli. Using both of the remaining authors, Luther and Muntzer, is recommended but not required.

4. Depth of your thought. Think about the objections each of these thinkers would make against the others. Think about the defenses against those objections that might be made. Can you come up with the important, relevant, original objections that illuminate strengths and weaknesses of their views? Think about how the views of these thinkers might be applied to other situations. Sometimes when you apply a general theory to a specific situation the author did not originally have in mind, you see hidden strengths or weaknesses.

Specific resources to be used:

Machiavelli's "THE PRINCE"
Thomas Muntzer's "The Prague Protest" (1521)
Martin Luther's "Temporal Authority: To What Extent It Should Be Obeyed" (1523)
Thomas Muntzer's "A Highly Provoked Defense" (September, 1524)

Topic your political philosophy
how do your specific opinions on current political issues relate to your positions on the fundamental problems of political thought? Are your political ideas grounded in a world view? How does your concept of human nature influence your think about politics? What are your fundamental political values? How do you define and rank other those values? How do you think government and society ought to be organized? Can you defend your answers to these questions on intellectual grounds? Do your ideas fit together in a coherent framework that could be called a politics philosophy? Are the various parts of your philosophy consistent with one another? To what extent, if any, are your ideas similar to those of the great political thinkers? Can your philosophy be categorized as conservative, liberal. moderate. anarchist...etc?

You can choose not to answer all of these questions,the goal of the paper is to present your political ideas in an integrated framework that is comprehensive , coherent, consistent and clear.

Focus on, given your world views and goals, your values would be applied to specific issues.


I hold a Modern conservatives view
A belief in the value of free markets, limited governemnet and self reliance in economic affairs. Emphasis on order, tradition and gradual change.

World view
For me, politics is a very important part of the world; I have lived under three unique political systems and have seen many more on my travels. Different states have different political philosophy and it developed to be different kinds of governments. For me, people are rational and intelligent, they have the ability of reasoning, but it does not imply that they can do good reason. We see the fire and imply that there is a god behind that fire, or we can think that there are some other things to cause the fire. From this, we can see that people can develop a completely different conclusion from the same premise, and this tell us that there is a difference in our reasoning. There are differences in our genes composition and that implies that we will be difference in terms of size and color. Inequality of wealth and income are root from the nature inequalities of talent , so people should choose what they are best at in order to gain their own maximized interest.
I believed there is objective truth in this world, but human do not have the ability to attend it, they may get very close to it, but they can never reach it. Our world is bound by a lot of facts. But these facts can be temporary facts, it is subjective to the current power. For example in the middle ages the pope said that the sun is surrounding the earth, and that was the truth at that time. The facts that we perceived is just the prevailing information, sometimes research say coffee is good for our health, sometimes it is bad. The solar system was consisting of nine planets, now eight. People easily misinterpret facts as truth. Meanwhile, tradition is the accumulation of humans reason, and it is being challenged for long time, it is much better than our own rational reason.
Value:
Freedom is an important term for every societies, but they define it differently, some think that marijuana is ok, some say it is not, I think that following our own will is the best definition of freedom, however, since we are bounded by the society, we cannot kill others as we like, so the definition should better be doing what you want as long as it will not hurt other individual as your actions consequence.
What is justice? Plato think that justice end in itself and it has harmonious mean. I think that Justice is the bearing of responsibilities of ones action. People get the appropriate result from their action represent justice, people get what they deserved. However, since different people have different kind of view, so justice for one may not be justice for others. It is a kind of subjective value judgment. The killers mum may think that her son is very good and should deserve fewer penalties, but the victims mum may think that the killer must die to pay for his fault for killing her son. From different standpoint, justice is completely different. Believer of God may say that Will of God means justice, non-believer will not think so. Justice is a kind of subjective standard that generate from humans reason. Law is the collective body and guideline for justice for a society. It may not be justice for one, but rather for all the people.
Goals:
Political power should be centralized in order to create a coercive response for solving problems. The centralized body can be served as a coordinator for different opinions in different place and generate a collective response that represent the greatest overall interest of the nation. It should be responsible for providing the environment for the free market and free will to do what people want but not controlling what people do.

Rank ordering of values
It is better to let innocent person go free than to wrongly punish an innocent person.
I will sacrifice some degree of freedom to live in a less violent society.

Strategy and Tactics
The best way to effect change is to participate in the system, Join interest group, speak out to influence people.
Although sometimes law is unjust, we should still obey it but seek the way to change it to maintain the stability of society.
Violence should be minimized, we should seek non-violence way to solve problem against oppression.
The political system is never perfect, and corruption can never be stopped, we should try to adapt to the way it works and then try our best to shape it gradually.

Economic issues:
Capitalist system work best with minimum government intervention. Welfare will create free-rider problem, it should be minimized. Individuals are responsible for their economic situation, they should be paid for the economic decisions that they made, there is no way to blame others as they make their own decision. Government programs are not necessary and will hurt the markets mechanism.

Crime
Harsh penalties are necessary for combating crime. Grey area should be minimize to let guilty people get what they deserved.
Civil Rights
We are doing too much in protecting different peoples right and it is creating reverse discrimination.
Affirmative action is likely to create reverse discrimination and is not fair for all. People should be doing what they are best at, and it is their own choice to do it or not. We cannot ask other people to give off their advantage for not discriminate you for the reason that you are minority.
EX:University are giving priority for minority and it will be unfair for those who have better ability than them.


Women rights
Women should make use of their own advantage of the opportunities that are provided by the free market system, they can do their best to change their own situation with others approval.

Environment
Environment should be fully making use; we can choose our way to make use of the environment. There should not be too many regulations for the environment but guidelines, the market can solve the problem. For example the organic products are more advantageous than normal one. Recycle stuff are competitive too. Fuel efficient car models will be more attractive.

Specific issues
Financial Crisis
The financial crisis is root in the greed of people, everybody are chasing resources irrationally and it exceeds the carrying capacities of them, so it collapse. It is natural and people should be responsible for decisions they made. They were earning money and enjoyed great return previously. Now they paid for what they have done, some people may say that they are not involved in those great profits and they are suffering now, but it is only their problem, they should maximize their own profit, they choose not to involve in the great chance before, that was their decision and they should pay for that. They can also try to stop the greed of others but they did not, so they are responsible too. We are all responsible for our action. Governmet step away from the crisis and let the market perform its recovery.
Please add 2 more issues for me. The paper is like 1600-1800 words
and please modify my points to make it consistent, you can change it as you like. Thank you so much for your help

I need about a full page materials about the following:
moving forward in history we have seen the concept of the individual emerge increasingly become a matterof concern for our theorist. why does this happenGive examples and evidence for(1)why this concept wasn''t there in ancient greece,(2)why Machiavelliconstitutes a turning point,and(3) how and when it reaches its ''final'' form as we considerit today.for each part of the question,identifyone or more theorists who play a rolebe sure to include their presuppositions and historicalsituations as justification for their position.(you can use theorist: Luther,Hobbes,Locke,burke or smith).this is an exam question and i more care about the CORRECT material more than anything else.i need only one page as you say in your order email that it contains 275 words.the text we used is princeton readings in political thoughts

The topic:
John Locke's political ideas and theories that influenced the legal system of the United States of America.

Contents:
The paper should be divided into three parts. Each part talks about one of the Locke's political theories. The parts are:

1. "social contract" theory
2. "natural rights" theory
3. Separation of religion and state

Please, only explain his ideas, don't write about how his ideas affected the legal system of America. That will be in another part of the essay I will write. And the paper should not address or raise any economic issue.
Basically, the essay I'm asking for is a plain summery of John Locke's political ideas.


Sources:
Must use at least 8 of the following resources of books and articles:

Books:
1. A. John Simmons, The Lockean Theory of Rights (Princeton, N.J: Princeton Univ. Press 1992) (1950).

2. Barbara Arneil, John Locke and America: The Defence of English Colonialism (Oxford, England: Clarendon Press 1996).

3. Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press 1967).

4. David N Mayer, The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson, Constitutionalism and democracy (Univ. Press of Virginia 1994).

5. George M. Stephens, Locke, Jefferson, and the Justices Foundations and Failures of the US Government (New York, Algora Publg 2002).

6. Gillian Brown, The Consent of the Governed: The Lockean Legacy in Early American Culture (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ. Press 2001).

7. Greg Forster, John Locke's Politics of Moral Consensus (Cambridge [UK]: Cambridge Univ. Press 2005) (1973).

8. Jerome A. Barron ET AL., Constitutional Law: Principles and Policy: Cases and Materials (Newark, NJ: LexisNexis Matthew Bender 7th ed 2006).

9. John Dunn, The Political Thought of John Locke: An Historical Account of the Argument of the 'Two Treatises of Government' (London: Cambridge Univ. Press 1969).

10. John Locke, Second Treatise of Government (C. B. Macpherson ed., Hackett Publg Co. 1980).

11. Michael P. Zuckert, Natural Rights and the New Republicanism (Princeton, N.J: Princeton Univ. Press 1994).

12. Pierre Manent, An Intellectual History of Liberalism (Rebecca Balinski trans., Princeton Univ. Press 1995) (1987).


13. William A. Dunning, A History of Political Theories from Luther to Montesquieu (New York: Macmillan Co. 1905).

14. William T. Bluhm, Theories of the Political System; Classics of Political Thought & Modern Political Analysis (Englewood Cliffs, N.J, Prentice-Hall 2d ed 1971) (1965).


Articles:

1. Christopher J. Schmidt, Revitalizing the Quiet Ninth Amendment: Determining Unenumerated Rights and Eliminating Substantive Due Process, 32 U. Balt. L. Rev. 169 (2003).

2. David L. Wardle, Reason to Ratify: The Influence of John Lockes Religious Beliefs on the Creation and Adoption of the United States Constitution, 26 Seattle Univ. L. R. 291 (2002).

3. Nicholas L. Divita, John Lockes Theory of Government and Fundamental Constitutional Rights: A Proposal for Understanding, 84 W. Va. L. Rev. 848 (1984).

4. Noah Feldman, The Intellectual Origins of the Establishment Clause, 77 N.Y.U.L. Rev. 346 (2002).
The following are sources can be used in the essay. Must be used at least 10 of them at least, please.

Thank you,
Ali
____________

Books:
1. A. John Simmons, The Lockean Theory of Rights (Princeton, N.J: Princeton Univ. Press 1992) (1950).
2. Barbara Arneil, John Locke and America: The Defence of English Colonialism (Oxford, England: Clarendon Press 1996).
3. Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press 1967).
4. David N Mayer, The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson, Constitutionalism and democracy (Univ. Press of Virginia 1994).
5. George M. Stephens, Locke, Jefferson, and the Justices Foundations and Failures of the US Government (New York, Algora Publg 2002).
6. Gillian Brown, The Consent of the Governed: The Lockean Legacy in Early American Culture (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ. Press 2001).
7. Greg Forster, John Locke's Politics of Moral Consensus (Cambridge [UK]: Cambridge Univ. Press 2005) (1973).
8. Jerome A. Barron ET AL., Constitutional Law: Principles and Policy: Cases and Materials (Newark, NJ: LexisNexis Matthew Bender 7th ed 2006).
9. John Dunn, The Political Thought of John Locke: An Historical Account of the Argument of the 'Two Treatises of Government' (London: Cambridge Univ. Press 1969).
10. John Locke, Second Treatise of Government (C. B. Macpherson ed., Hackett Publg Co. 1980).
11. Michael P. Zuckert, Natural Rights and the New Republicanism (Princeton, N.J: Princeton Univ. Press 1994).
12. Pierre Manent, An Intellectual History of Liberalism (Rebecca Balinski trans., Princeton Univ. Press 1995) (1987).
13. William A. Dunning, A History of Political Theories from Luther to Montesquieu (New York: Macmillan Co. 1905).
14. William T. Bluhm, Theories of the Political System; Classics of Political Thought & Modern Political Analysis (Englewood Cliffs, N.J, Prentice-Hall 2d ed 1971) (1965).

Articles:
1. Christopher J. Schmidt, Revitalizing the Quiet Ninth Amendment: Determining Unenumerated Rights and Eliminating Substantive Due Process, 32 U. Balt. L. Rev. 169 (2003).
2. David L. Wardle, Reason to Ratify: The Influence of John Lockes Religious Beliefs on the Creation and Adoption of the United States Constitution, 26 Seattle Univ. L. R. 291 (2002).
3. Nicholas L. Divita, John Lockes Theory of Government and Fundamental Constitutional Rights: A Proposal for Understanding, 84 W. Va. L. Rev. 848 (1984).
4. Noah Feldman, The Intellectual Origins of the Establishment Clause, 77 N.Y.U.L. Rev. 346 (2002).

Final Paper Assignment

The topic of this course is American Political Ideas. We have looked at different types of American political thought, including the founding fathers and founding values, American pragmatism, the civil rights movement, partisanship in contemporary politics, and identity politics. In this final paper I want you to analyze aspects of American political thought and present your ideas on the American style.

George Seferis suggested that there was no Greek style that artists should emulate and reproduce. That whatever work they produced, as Greeks, was inevitably Greek. By this logic, the political ideas produced by Americans are American. Bear this in mind as you present your analysis. You are free to refute this logic, but you must support your position.

Use a variety of course materials to demonstrate your perception of American political thought.

As part of this assignment you should identify at least one American political thinker that we have not discussed in class. You should consider:
Which school of American political thought this person might be associated with
What his or her ontological assumptions might be
What type of epistemology he or she engages

You should take a position on how the individual you select has influenced your own perspective on American political ideas.

Thus, the criteria for the paper are as follows:
Present a clear thesis statement stating your claim regarding the nature of American political ideas.
Present your view of the American political style. You should support this with evidence taken from course materials.
Identify a political thinker to discuss in more detail. Explain how this individual interacts with and has informed your view of American political ideas. Support this with evidence from course materials and supplementary evidence.
Conclude, reiterating your claim regarding American political ideas.


The paper must be in Times New Roman font, pt 12 with 1 inch margins. It must be double spaced, a minimum of six pages, and no longer than seven (approximately 1,750-2,000 words).

**********************

For your reference:

Ontology

This refers to the assumptions of a given theory (theorist). Ontology refers to the state of being, what is assumed to exist prior to theorizing.
For example:

Enlightenment thinkers assumed humans were rational self-interested individuals with inalienable rights to liberty, equality, and property. Thus, they can be said to have an individualist universalist ontology.

Pragmatists believe that reality and what we know is contingent on what we can observe in the circumstance. Thus, they can be said to have an instrumentalist ontology.



Epistemology

Epistemology refers to how we know what we know. It is often confused with methodology, which is a narrower term referring to the specific means of gathering information.
For example:

Enlightenment thinkers believed we could advance knowledge through observation, scientific reasoning, and experiment. Thus, they had a scientific empiricist epistemology.

Postmodern thinkers believe that we can only know things by determining what is meaningful in peoples lives. Thus, they have an interpretivist epistemology.

There are faxes for this order.

Customer is requesting that (hophead) completes this order.

*USE THE SOURCES THAT I STATE BELOW AND USE FOOTNOTES*

*THIS IS A HISTORIOGRAPHY ON SALLUST*

Section I: The historians life
A. Influences upon the historian
1. Education
2. Historical Events
B. Professional Career, positions held
Section II: His historical contributions
A. Predecessors
B. Major Contributions
C. Influence and successors
Section III: Analysis of one of the historians works
A. Theme and reason for writing
B. Its purpose and scope
C. Its influence
(For section III use: Sallust. The Jugurthine War/ The Conspiracy of Catiline. London: Penguin Books, 1963).

---Sources----

Books:

Earl, Donald C. The Political Thought of Sallust. Cambridge classical studies. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1966

Laistner, M.L.W. The Greater Roman Historians. University California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1963

Mellor, Ronald. The Roman Historians. Routledge London and New York, 1999

Sallust, and John Carew Rolfe. Sallust. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1965

Syme, Ronald. Sallust. Sather classical lectures, v. 33. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1964

Wistrand, Erik Karl Hilding. Sallust on Judicial Murders in Rome. A Philological and Historical Study. Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia, 24. Goteborg: Universitet, 1968

Articles:

Allen, Walter Jr. Sallusts Political Career. Studies in Philology Vol.51, No.1. January 1954. Pp. 1-14. JStor. Published by: University of North Carolina.

Earl, Donald C. The Early Career of Sallust. Historia: Zeitschrift fur Alte Gesechichte Vol. 15, No. 3. August 1966. Pp. 302-311, JStor. Published by: Franz Steiner Verlag.

Levene, D.S. Sallusts Jugurtha: An Historical Fragment. The Journal of Roman Studies. Vol. 82. 1992. Pp. 53-70. JStor. Published by: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies.

Newspaper article:

Surveying 2,500 Years of Historians
Newspaper article; The Washington Times, August 3, 2008.

Topic: Is peace possible for this world?

Answer the question by applying theories of following thinker
- Thucydidies
- Aristotole
- Machiavelli
- Hugo Grotius
- Kant
- Thommas Hobbes

1100 long with easy understaning English. (Do not use uncommon words and complex structures)

You have to use only my source
Here

International Relations in Political Thought: Texts from the Ancient Greeks to the First World War Chris Brown (Editor), Terry Nardin (Editor), Nicholas Rengger (Editor) Cambridge University Press, 2002
34-82 257-269 325-340 428-456

Focus on

- Machiavelli
- Hugo Grotius
- Kant
- Thommas Hobbes

Description of jobs
I want you to discuss the topic about perpetual peace. Is it possible in the world argumentatively. You have you state your position FOR or Against and refute the idea that against to your view. (using oppositite point of view to counter)

Submit in time

The title of the essay is 'Did Mill place any limits on his notion of liberty?' Cited works in should include, John Stuart Mill's own, 'Utilitarianism' (1861) and 'On Liberty' (1859). Other works cited should be: J. Gray's, 'John Stuart Mill: the crisis of liberalism', in B. Redhead's 'Political Thought from Plato to Nato (1984), I. Hampsher Monk's, 'History of Modern Political Thought', chap. 8, J.C. Rees's, 'John Staurts Mill's On Liberty' (1985), C. Ten's, 'Mill on Liberty' (1994). The essay should flow freely and there should be no small headings throughout the text, all quotations (2-3) should be footnoted and not longer than two lines, everything extracted from other litterature should be put in quotation marks and footnoted.

= 5 questions. 1 page per question. questions:

1. Wollstonecraft wrote a Vindication of the Rights of Man to defend the ideas of the French Revolution which were being attacked by Edmund Burke. What exactly were these ideas, how were they distinctively modern, and how were they expounded by Rousseau? Why did Wollstonecraft find it necessary to write A Vindication of the Rights of Women?

2.Both Burke and Rousseau criticize Liberal political thought, yet they do so from oppopsite ideological positions. Discuss each theorists reasons for being disenchanted with the rise of Liberalism, and what each would prefer to see replace it.

3. "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." What did Marx mean by this statement? In answering this question, make sure you discuss how the bourgeoisie has played a most revolutionary role. Why does Marx believe the new revolutionary agent is the proletariat, and what does he view as its goal?

4. Discuss Marx's theory of alienation and exploitation. How does Marx explain that the workers are the actual source of capital, and that the bourgeoisie appropriates he proletariat's labor, rendering them less valuable than the commodities they produce? Do you agree with Marx's theory of alienation under capitalism? Why or why not?

5. Discuss Marx's critique of religion. Why does this have such deep political implications for him? That is, why does Marx think that freedom from religion is part of human emancipation?

*Use Footnotes and Bibliography*
* This paper is supposed to be in my point of view mainly using the primary source for information and only using the secondary sources as a support to my arguement.*

Section 1: The Historians life (Sallust), including an analysis of the historical and intellectual movements.
A. Influences upon the historian
1. Education
2. Historical Events
B. Professional career, positions held

Section 2: The Historians historical Contributions
A. Predecessors
B. Major contributions
C. Influence and Successors

Section 3: Analysis of one or more of the historians works (this will be done through his own book which is cited below).
A. Theme and reason for writing
B. Its Purpose and scope
C. Its influence

The primary source we are supposed to use is Sallust's own book:

Sallust. The Jugurthine War/ The Conspiracy of Catiline. London: Penguin Books, 1963.

If you have trouble finding this book i will gladly send you my copy. As far as the other sources go, I am supposed to use them to support my arguement and not use their opinions of Sallust.

Here is a list of the other sources:

Earl, Donald C. The Political Thought of Sallust. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1966.

Kraus, Christina Shuttleworth, and A. J. Woodman. Latin Historians. Greece & Rome, no. 27. Oxford: Published for the Classical Association [by] Oxford University Press, 1997.

Laistner, M.L.W. The Greater Roman Historians. Berkeley: University California Press, 1963.

Mellor, Ronald. The Roman Historians. London: Routledge, 1999.

Syme, Ronald. Sallust. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1964.

The Topic:

Robert B. Reich and Ayn Rand differ substantively as to what obligations a citizen has to the community and to the various individual members of that that community. Nevertheless, both RAND AND REICH belong to the LIBERAL tradition.

Adress the assertion with following questions

1. To what extent do both Rand and Reich relfect the core values of Liberalism as spelled out in "Liberalism" by John Hollowell (the reading is provided at the end of these specification). and to what extent do both embrace what Soros calls "THe Open Society"?

2. What are their views as to the obligation one has to the community and to the individual members of the community?

3. What assumptions about human nature and the role of the state are found in Reich and Rand?

**The thesis paragraph should paraphrase the arguement developed in the essay and should be a response to the topic.

**Imagination and going beyond what is told is needed. THe material must be synethesized into a coherent arguement that supports the thesis handle contrary arguements.

The readings:

I'LL BE SHORT by Robert B. Reich

CAPITALISM:THE UNKNOWN IDEAL by Ayn Rand

Liberalism by John Hallowell provided Now

LIBERALISM
The word Liberal did not come into use until early in the nineteenth century and it was not until around 1839 that the Whig Party in Great Britain came to be referred to as the Liberal Party. But liberalism as a political philosophy finds classic expression in the writings of Hugo Grotius and John Locke and it was a modified version of this philosophy which was adopted as the program of the English Liberal Party. Liberalism defies succinct definition and rather than attempting to express its tenets within the framework of a brief formula we shall rather seek to identify it by enumerating the attributes which distinguish itLiberalism is characterized by the following beliefs:
1)A belief in the absolute value of human personality and the spiritual equality of all individuals.
2)A belief in the autonomy of individual will.
3)A belief in the essential rationality and goodness of man.
4)A belief in the existence of certain inalienable rights peculiar to individuals by virtue of their humanity. They are commonly spoken of as the natural rights to life, liberty, and property.
5)A belief that the state comes into existence by mutual consent for the sole purpose of preserving and protecting these rights.
6)A belief that the relationship between the state and individuals is a contractual one and that when the terms of the contract are violated individuals have not only the right but the responsibility to revolt and establish a new government.
7)A belief that social control is best secured by law rather than command. The law is conceived as being at once the product of individual will and the embodiment of reason. The law alone can command and restrain the individual and government under the law is the liberal ideal.
8)A belief that the government that governs least governs best. The government is conceived as having primarily negative functions, the protection of the individual in his rights and freedom in order that he may be free to follow dictates of conscience, and the laws of nature.



9)A belief in individual freedom in all spheres of life (political, economic, social, intellectual and religious). Freedom is conceived as freedom from all authority that is capable of acting capriciously or arbitrarily, freedom to act in accordance with the dictates of right reason.i.e., with the dictates of natural law as it is revealed to men through natural reason.
10)A belief in the existence of a transcendental order of truth which is accessible to mans natural reason and capable of evoking a moral response. It is an order requiring both individual thought and will for its realization, i.e., it is a potential ordre requiring individual thought and will for its translation into actuality. Through his autonomous reason and in the light of his conscience the individual avoids anarchy by translating the principles of this natural order into practice. The choice between order and anarchy revolves upon the individual and more partciularly, upon individual conscience. Thus conscience is the keystone of the liberal doctrine.

Not all of these beliefs are peculiar to liberalism and many of them have a long heritage in the history of Western civilization. The beliefs, for example, in the absolute moral worth of the individual, in the spiritual equality of individuals, and in the essential rationality of a man are a hertitage from the Middle Ages and have their roots deep in Christian and Greek thought. The ideal of individual freedom under the impersonal rule of law is not a peculiarly modern or liberal ideal. It has a long heritage in Western political thought extending at least as far back as the Stoics in ancient Greece if not even further into the past

by Hallowell

The main topic is Jeremy Bentham, and the title of the essay is 'How does Bentham's principle of utility inform his notion of political freedom?' There should be at least 5 works cited in the bibliography including: Bentham's own, 'A Fragment of Government', esp. chap. 1-2. J.R. Dinwiddy's, 'Bentham' (1989), I Hampsher Monk's, 'History of Modern Political Thought' (1992), D.G. Long's, 'Bentham on Liberty' (1977), W. Thomas's, 'The Philosophical Radicals' (1979), chap. 1. The essay should flow well, and there should be no small headings within the text. There should be at least 2-3 quotes, however not longer than 2 lines each, all quotes and works cited should be footnoted.

I am requesting Poilu if available or a good political science essay writer.



Address the following questions only: 1.Why and how does Locke defend toleration as a political good? 2.How dohobbes, Locke, and Rousseau describe the state of nature? How do their different accounts of the state of nature lead to different political outcomes? 3.What does Benjamin Barber find in Rousseau that leads him to a defense of what he calls "strong democracy"? What are the strenghths and weaknesses of this vision of democracy in your view?

Please use only these sources-1. A Letter Concerning Toleration by John Locke www.constitution.org/jl/tolerati.htm
2.Leviathon by Hobbes 3.Two Treatises of Civil Government by Locke 4.Discourse on the Origins and Foundations of Inequality Among Men by Rousseau 5.The Social Contract 6.Strong Democracy by Benjamin BARBER and 7.Modern Political Thought Readings from Machiavelli to Nietzsche by David Wootton @ 1996 Harkott Publishing Co.

Wootton Text (Locke 303-309) Locke "Two Treatises of Civil Gov't" pp.310-327, 334-330. Chpts 8-13 & 28-29 Rousseau pp.397-403 "Discourse on the Origins and Foundations of Inequality Among Men pp. 404-431
Rousseau "The Social Contract" pp. 464-473, 476-477, 527-528(chapt. 7)
*** Include citations in parentheses. For Example, you might say: Rousseau writes that inequality is hardly observable in the state of nature"(431). For the purposes this essay because all direct sources are from the Wootton reader, just be sure to have the author and page number clearly indicated. With Locke's letter refer to this as
LETTER when you cite it- as an electronic source it's subject to certain specific citation guidelines, but you do not need to be that formal in this setting.
There are faxes for this order. Someone help us outand take this order. Its for a good customer.

How did English politics influence Hobbes's political thinking? What impact has The Leviathan had on modern political theory? Define the term "social contract". How did Hobbes and Locke develop the term in their political thought and how did it diverge?

The Topic

The essay should address the topic below.

Thomas More, the Catholic, Machiavelli, the critic of the Catholic Church of his day, and John Calvin, the Protestant, share a belief that religion is a great social glue and a great support for the state. Thomas More and John Calvin however understand that religion constrains as well as supports the rulers. It is that understanding that prompts More and Calvin to stress the importance of limiting arbitrary use of power by the state.

-Define important terms.
-Determine the role of religion in the political thought of the three theorists.
-Consider how religion can both constrain and support the state.
-Discuss what unites and what divides the three theorists.
-Note the republican-like commitment to the common good in the work of each theorist and discuss the strategy each theorist uses to enforce that commitment.

*The thesis paragraph should paraphrase the argument developed in your essay and should be a response to the topic.

The essay should present and defend the thesis stated in the first paragraph. The relevant references of the essay should be limited the readings. Evidence and arguments from those sources should be used to develop and illustrate the argument of the thesis.

-I consider how well you have synthesized this material into a coherent argument that supports the thesis and how well have handled contrary arguments.

-element of imagination: can you go beyond what we have read and said in class?
-------------------------------------------------
Here is how you will site the sources.
examples: (person, page numbner) (More, 23) (Calvin, 120), ect..


The books needed for the sources are:

1. The Prince and the Discourses by Niccolo Machiavelli--interdoction by Max Lerner. its published by random house inc.

2. UTOPIA by Thomas More

3. Conversion and Call to Geneva by John Calvin...I will email this one to you. I will also put it below just in case.

JOHN CALVIN
Conversion and Call to
Geneva
The great reformer John Calvin was less open and articulate about his own personal spiritual development than was Luther, who wore his heart on his sleeve. This very reticence about speaking of himself makes all the more precious the account of his own conversion and call to Geneva which he included almost incidentally in the Author's Preface to his Commentary on the Book of Psalms, dated July 22, 1557.
[Just] as he [King David] was taken from the sheepfold and elevated to the rank of supreme authority, so God having taken me from my originally obscure and humble condition has reckoned me worthy of being invested with the honorable office of a preacher and minister of the gospel. When I was as yet a very little boy, my father had destined me for the study of theology. But afterwards, when he considered that the legal profession commonly raised those who followed it to wealth, this prospect induced him suddenly to change his purpose. Thus it came to pass that I was withdrawn from the study of philosophy and was put to the study of law. To this pursuit I endeavored faithfully to apply myself, in obedience to the will of my father; but God, by the secret guidance of His providence, at length gave a different direction to my course. And first, since I was too obstinately devoted to the superstitions of popery to be easily extricated from so profound an abyss of mire, God by a sudden conversion subdued and brought my mind to a teachable frame, which was more hardened in such matters than might have been expected from one at my early period of life. Having thus received some taste and knowledge of true godliness, I was immediately inflamed with so intense a desire to make progress therein, that although I did not altogether leave off other studies, I yet pursued them with less ardor.
I was quite surprised to find that before a year had elapsed, all who had any desire after purer doctrine were continually coming to me to learn, although I myself was as yet but a mere novice and tyro. Being of a disposition somewhat unpolished and bashful, which led me always to love the shade and retirement, I then began to seek some secluded corner where I might be withdrawn from the public view; but so far from being able to accomplish the object of my desire, all my retreats were like public schools. In short, whilst my one great object was to live in seclusion without being known, God so led me about through different turnings and changes that He never permitted me to rest in any place, until, in spite of my natural disposition, He brought me forth to public notice. Leaving my native country, France, I in fact retired to Germany expressly for the purpose of being able there to enjoy in some obscure corner the repose which I had always desired, and which had been so long denied me. But lo! whilst I lay hidden at Basle and known only to a few people, many faithful and holy persons were burnt alive in France; and the report of these burnings having reached foreign nations, they excited the strongest disapprobation among a great part of the Germans, whose indignation was kindled against the authors of such tyranny. In order to allay this indignation, certain wicked and lying pamphlets were circulated, stating that none were treated with such cruelty but Anabaptists and seditious persons, who by their perverse ravings and false opinions were overthrowing not only religion but also civil order. Observing that the object which these instruments of the court aimed at by their disguises was not only that the disgrace of shedding so much innocent blood might remain buried under false charges and calumnies which they brought against the holy martyrs after their death, but also that afterwards they might be able to proceed to the utmost extremity in murdering the poor saints without exciting compassion towards them in the breasts of any, it appeared to me that unless I opposed them to the utmost of my ability, my silence could not be vindicated from the charge of cowardice and treachery. This was the consideration which induced me to publish my Institutes of the Christian Religion. My objects were, first, to prove that these reports were false and calumnious, and thus to vindicate my brethren, whose death was precious in the sight of the Lord; and next, that as the same cruelties might very soon after be exercised against many unhappy individuals, foreign nations might be touched with at least some compassion towards them and solicitude about them. When it was then published, it was not that copious and labored work which it now is, but only a small treatise containing a summary of the principal truths of the Christian religion; and it was published with no other design than that men might know what was the faith held by those whom I saw basely and wickedly defamed by those flagitious and perfidious flatterers. That my object was not to acquire fame appeared from [the fact] that immediately afterwards I left Basle, and particularly from the fact that nobody there knew that I was the author.
Wherever else I have gone, I have taken care to conceal that I was the author of that performance; and I had resolved to continue in the same privacy and obscurity until at length William Farel detained me at Geneva, not so much by counsel and exhortation as by a dreadful imprecation, which I felt to be as if God had from heaven laid His mighty hand upon me to arrest me. As the most direct road to Strassburg, to which I then intended to retire, was shut up by the wars, I had resolved to pass quickly by Geneva, without staying longer than a single night in that city. A little before this, popery had been driven from it by the exertions of the excellent person whom I have named, and Peter Viret; but matters were not yet brought to a settled state, and the city was divided into unholy and dangerous factions. Then an individual who now basely apostatized and returned to the papists discovered me and made me known to others. Upon this, Farel, who burned with an extraordinary zeal to advance the gospel, immediately strained every nerve to detain me. And after having learned that my heart was set upon devoting myself to private studies, for which I wished to keep myself free from other pursuits, and finding that he gained nothing by entreaties, he proceeded to utter an imprecation that God would curse my retirement and the tranquility of the studies which I sought, if I should withdraw and refuse to give assistance when the necessity was so urgent. By this imprecation I was so stricken with terror that I desisted from the journey which I had undertaken; but sensible of my natural bashfulness and timidity, I would not bring myself under obligation to discharge any particular office. After that, four months had scarcely elapsed when, on the one hand, the Anabaptists began to assail us, and on the other, a certain wicked apostate,... secretly supported by the influence of some of the magistrates of the city, was thus enabled to give us a great deal of trouble. At the same time, a succession of dissentions fell out in the city which strangely afflicted us. Being, as I acknowledge, naturally of a timid, soft and pusillanimous disposition, I was compelled to encounter these violent tempests as part of my early training; and although I did not sink under them, yet I was not sustained by such greatness of mind as not to rejoice more than it became me when, in consequence of certain commotions, I was banished from Geneva.
By this means set at liberty and loosed from the tie of my vocation, I resolved to live in a private station, free from the burden and cares of any public charge, when that most excellent servant of Christ, Martin Bucer [reformer in Strassburg], employing a similar kind of remonstrance and protestation as that to which Farel had recourse before, drew me back to a new station. Alarmed by the example of Jonas which he set before me, I still continued in the work of teaching. And although I always continued like myself, studiously avoiding celebrity, yet I was carried, I know not how, as it were by force to the Imperial assemblies, where, willing or unwilling, I was under the necessity of appearing before the eyes of many. Afterwards, when the Lord having compassion on this city had allayed the hurtful agitations and broils which prevailed in it, and by His wonderful power had defeated both the wicked counsels and the sanguinary attempts of the disturbers of the Republic, necessity was imposed upon me of returning to my former charge, contrary to my desire and inclination. The welfare of this church, it is true, lay so near my heart that for its sake I would not have hesitated to lay down my life; but my timidity nevertheless suggested to me many reasons for excusing myself from again willingly taking upon my shoulders so heavy a burden. At length, however, a solemn and conscientious regard to my duty prevailed with me to consent to return to the flock from which I had been torn; but with what grief, tears, great anxiety and distress I did this, the Lord is my best witness; and many godly persons who would have wished to see me delivered from this painful state, had it not been that which I feared and which made me give my consent, prevented them and shut their mouths.
The Geneva Confession
Soon after Calvin's arrival in Geneva, William Farel with Calvin's collaboration prepared the Confession of Faith as a summary of central Christian doctrine. It was written in 1536, the same year in which the first edition of Calvin's Institutes was published, and it followed the same plan as Calvin's major work. The basic Reformation principle that the source of all Christian teaching must be the Word of God is emphasized in the very first paragraph, where the sola scriptura principle is insisted upon. The Confession serves as a neat summary of Calvin's doctrinal views.
Confession of Faith
which all the citizens and inhabitants of Geneva and the subjects of the country must promise to keep and hold (1536)
1. The Word of God
First we affirm that we desire to follow Scripture alone as rule of faith and religion, without mixing it with any other thing which might be devised by the opinion of men apart from the Word of God, and without wishing to accept for our spiritual government any other doctrine than what is conveyed to us by the same Word without addition or diminution, according to the command of our Lord.
2. One Only God
Following, then, the lines laid down in the Holy Scriptures, we acknowledge that there is one only God, Whom we are both to worship and serve, and in Whom we are to put all our confidence and hope; having this assurance, that in Him alone is contained all wisdom, power, justice, goodness and pity. And since He is spirit, He is to be served in spirit and in truth. Therefore we think it an abomination to put our confidence or hope in any created thing; to worship anything else than Him, whether angels or any other creatures; and to recognize any other Saviour of our souls than Him alone, whether saints or men living upon earth; and likewise to offer the service which ought to be rendered to Him in external ceremonies or carnal observances, as if He took pleasure in such things; or to make an image to represent His divinity or any other image for adoration.
3. The Law Of God Alike For All
Because there is one only Lord and Master who has dominion over our consciences, and because His will is the only principle of all justice, we confess all our life ought to be ruled in accordance with the commandments of His holy law in which is contained all perfection of justice, and that we ought to have no other rule of good and just living, nor invent other good works to supplement it than those which are there contained, as follows: Exodus 20: "I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee," and so on.
4. Natural Man
We acknowledge man by nature to be blind, darkened in understanding, and full of corruption and perversity of heart, so that of himself he has no power to be able to comprehend the true knowledge of God as is proper, [nor] to apply himself to good works. But on the contrary, if he is left by God to what he is by nature, he is only able to live in ignorance and to be abandoned to all iniquity. Hence he has need to be illumined by God, so that he come to the right knowledge of his salvation, and thus... be redirected in his affections and reformed to the obedience of the righteousness of God.
5. Man By Himself Lost
Since man is naturally (as has been said) deprived and destitute in himself of all the light of God and of all righteousness, we acknowledge that by himself he can only expect the wrath and malediction of God, and hence that he must look outside himself for the means of his salvation.
6. Salvation in Jesus
We confess that it is Jesus Christ who is given to us by the Father, in order that in Him we should recover all of which in ourselves we are deficient. Now all that Jesus Christ has done and suffered for our redemption we veritably hold without any doubt, as it is contained in the creed which is recited in the Church, that is to say: "I believe in God the Father Almighty," and so on.
7. Righteousness in Jesus
Therefore we acknowledge the things which are consequently given to us by God in Jesus Christ: first, that being in our own nature enemies of God and subjects of His wrath and judgment, we are reconciled with Him and received again in grace through the intercession of Jesus Christ, so that by His righteousness and guiltlessness we have remission of our sins, and by the shedding of His blood we are cleansed from all our stains.
8. Regeneration In Jesus
Second, we acknowledge that by His Spirit we are regenerated into a new spiritual nature. That is to say that the evil desires of our flesh are mortified by grace, so that they rule us no longer. On the contrary, our will is rendered conformable to God's will, to follow in His way and to seek what is pleasing to Him. Therefore we are by Him delivered from the servitude of sin, under whose power we were of ourselves held captive, and by this deliverance we are made capable and able to do good works and not otherwise.
9. Remission Of Sins Always Necessary For The Faithful
Finally, we acknowledge that this regeneration is so effected in us that, until we slough off this mortal body, there remains always in us much imperfection and infirmity, so that we always remain poor and wretched sinners in the presence of God. And, however much we ought day by day to increase and grow in God's righteousness, there will never be plentitude or perfection while we live here. Thus we always have need of the mercy of God to obtain the remission of our faults and offenses. And so we ought always to look for our righteousness in Jesus Christ and not at all in ourselves, and in Him be confident and assured, putting no faith in our works.
10. All Our Good In The Grace Of God
In order that all glory and praise be rendered to God (as is His due), and that we be able to have true peace and rest of conscience, we understand and confess that we receive all benefits from God, as said above, by His clemency and pity, without any consideration of our worthiness or the merit of our works, to which is due no other retribution than eternal confusion. None the less our Saviour in His goodness, having received us into the communion of His son Jesus, regards the works that we have done in faith as pleasing and agreeable; not that they merit it at all, but because, not imputing any of the imperfection that is there, He acknowledges in them nothing but what proceeds from His Spirit.
11. Faith
We confess that the entrance which we have to the great treasures and riches of the goodness of God that is vouchsafed to us is by faith; inasmuch as, in certain confidence and assurance of heart, we believe in the promises of the gospel, and receive Jesus Christ as He is offered to us by the Father and described to us by the Word of God.
12. Invocation Of God Only And Intercession Of Christ
As we have declared that we have confidence and hope for salvation and all good only in God through Jesus Christ, so we confess that we ought to invoke Him in all necessities in the name of Jesus Christ, who is our mediator and advocate with Him and has access to Him. Likewise we ought to acknowledge that all good things come from Him alone, and to give thanks to Him for them. On the other hand, we reject the intercession of the saints as a superstition invented by men contrary to Scripture, for the reason that it proceeds from mistrust of the sufficiency of the intercession of Jesus Christ.
13. Prayer Intelligible
Moreover since prayer is nothing but hypocrisy and fantasy unless it proceed from the interior affections of the heart, we believe that all prayers ought to be made with clear understanding. And for this reason, we hold the prayer of our Lord to show fittingly what we ought to ask of Him: "Our Father which art in heaven,... but deliver us from evil. Amen."
14. Sacraments
We believe that the sacraments which our Lord has ordained in His Church are to be regarded as exercises of faith for us, both for fortifying and confirming it in the promises of God and for witnessing before men. Of them there are in the Christian Church only two which are instituted by the authority of our Saviour; baptism and the supper of our Lord; for what is held within the realm of the pope concerning seven sacraments, we condemn as fable and lie.
15. Baptism
Baptism is an external sign by which our Lord testifies that He desires to receive us for His children, as members of His Son Jesus. Hence in it there is represented to us the cleansing from sin which we have in the blood of Jesus Christ, the mortification of our flesh which we have by His death that we may live in Him by His Spirit. Now since our children belong to such an alliance with our Lord, we are certain that the external sign is rightly applied to them.
16. The Holy Supper
The supper of our Lord is a sign by which under bread and wine He represents the true spiritual communion which we have in His body and blood. And we acknowledge that according to His ordinance it ought to be distributed in the company of the faithful, in order that all those who wish to have Jesus for their life be partakers of it. Inasmuch as the mass of the pope was a reprobate and diabolical ordinance subverting the mystery of the holy supper, we declare that it is execrable to us, an idolatry condemned by God; for so much is it itself regarded as a sacrifice for the redemption of souls that the bread is in it taken and adored as God. Besides there are other execrable blasphemies and superstitions implied here, and the abuse of the Word of God which is taken in vain without profit or edification.
17. Human Traditions
The ordinances that are necessary for the internal discipline of the Church, and [that] belong solely to the maintenance of peace, honesty and good order in the assembly of Christians, we do not hold to be human traditions at all, inasmuch as they are comprised under the general command of Paul, where he desires that all be done among them decently and in order. But all laws and regulations made binding on conscience which obliged the faithful to things not commanded by God, or [which] establish another service of God than which he demands, thus tending to destroy Christian liberty, we condemn as perverse doctrines of Satan, in view of our Lord's declaration that He is honored in vain by doctrines that are the commandment of men. It is in this estimation that we hold pilgrimages, monasteries, distinctions of foods, prohibition of marriage, confessions and other like things.
18. The Church
While there is one only Church of Jesus Christ, we always acknowledge that necessity requires companies of the faithful to be distributed in different places. Of these assemblies each one is called Church. But inasmuch as all companies do not assemble in the name of our Lord, but rather to blaspheme and pollute Him by their sacrilegious deeds, we believe that the proper mark by which rightly to discern the Church of Jesus Christ is that His holy gospel be purely and faithfully preached, proclaimed, heard and kept; that his sacraments be properly administered, even if there be some imperfections and faults as there always will be among men. On the other hand, where the gospel is not declared, heard and received, there we do not acknowledge the form of the Church. Hence the churches governed by the ordinances of the pope are rather synagogues of the devil than Christian churches.
19. Excommunication
Because there are always some who hold God and His Word in contempt, who take account of neither injunction, exhortation nor remonstrance, thus requiring greater chastisement, we hold the discipline of excommunication to be a thing holy and salutary among the faithful, since truly it was instituted by our Lord with good reason. This is in order that the wicked should not by their damnable conduct corrupt the good and dishonor our Lord, and that though proud they may turn to penitence. Therefore we believe that it is expedient according to the ordinance of God that all manifest idolaters, blasphemers, murderers, thieves, lewd persons, false witnesses, sedition mongers, quarrelers, those guilty of defamation or assault, drunkards, dissolute livers when they have been duly admonished and if they do not make amendment, be separated from the communion of the faithful until their repentance is known.
20. Ministers Of The Word
We recognize no other pastors in the church than faithful pastors of the Word of God, feeding the sheep of Jesus Christ on the one hand with instruction, admonition, consolation, exhortation, deprecation; and on the other resisting all false doctrines and deceptions of the devil, without mixing with the pure doctrine of the Scriptures their dreams or their foolish imaginings. To these we accord no other power or authority but to conduct, rule and govern the people of God committed to them by the same Word, in which they have power to command, defend, promise and warn, and without which they neither can nor ought to attempt anything. As we receive the true ministers of the Word of God as messengers and ambassadors of God, it is necessary to listen to them as to Him Himsef, and we hold their ministry to be a commission from God necessary in the church. On the other hand we hold that all seductive and false prophets, who abandon the purity of the gospel and deviate to their own inventions, ought not at all to be suffered or maintained; who are not the pastors they pretend, but rather, like ravening wolves, ought to be hunted and ejected from the people of God.
21. Magistrates
We hold the supremacy and dominion of kings and princes as also of other magistrates and officers to be a holy thing and a good ordinance of God. And since in performing their office they serve God and follow a Christian vocation, whether in defending the afflicted and innocent, or in correcting and punishing the malice of the perverse, we on our part also ought to accord them honor and reverence, to render respect and subservience, to execute their commands, to bear the charges they impose on us so far as we are able without offence to God. In sum, we ought to regard them as vicars and lieutenants of God, whom one cannot resist without resisting God himself; and their office as a sacred commission from God which has been given them so that they may rule and govern us. Hence we hold that all Christians are bound to pray God for the prosperity of the superiors and lords of the country where they live, to obey the statutes and ordinances which do not contravene the commandments of God, to promote welfare, peace and public good, endeavoring to sustain the honor of those over them and the peace of the people, without contriving or attempting anything to inspire trouble or dissension. On the other hand we declare that all those who conduct themselves unfaithfully towards their superiors, and have not a right concern for the public good of the country where they live, demonstrate thereby their infidelity towards God.
Institutes of the Christian Religion
Calvin was one of the most prolific authors in the history of the Church, comparable in productivity to Augustine, Aquinas, and Luther. To know Calvin well requires extensive reading in his sermons, treatises, letters, and especially his Biblical commentaries. And yet in a special sense Calvin was a man of one book; his remarkable Institutes of the Christian Religion is a systematic presentation of Christian theology which he constantly improved and enlarged from the first edition in 1536 to the last edition which left his hand in the late summer of 1559. He was a young man of twenty-six when he dedicated the first edition to King Francis I of France with a plea for understanding and defense against the persecutors of the French evangelicals. The second edition of 1539 was twice the size of the first; and the final edition, from which the following excerpts are translated, was twice the size of its immediate predecessor. This huge eighth edition was based upon a masterful knowledge of the Scriptures and the Church fathers. The three subjects represented here have not been selected because they are central to the theological heart of the work: for that the student must read on the knowledge of God, in the person and work of Christ, on justification, and on the church. They are chosen rather because of contemporary historical interest in the impact of Calvin's teaching on predestination, vocation, and civil government upon western culture.
Necessity and Beneficial Effect of the Doctrine of Election; Danger of Curiosity
In actual fact, the covenant of life is not preached equally among all men, and among those to whom it is preached it does not gain the same acceptance either constantly or in equal degree. In this diversity the wonderful depth of God's judgement is made known. For there is no doubt that this variety also serves the decision of God's eternal election. If it is plain that it comes to pass by God's bidding that salvation is freely offered to some while others are barred from access to it, at once great and difficult questions spring up, explicable only when reverent minds regard as settled what they may suitable hold concerning election and predestination. A baffling question this seems to many. For they think nothing more inconsistent than that out of the common multitude of men some should be predestined to salvation, others to destruction. But how mistakenly they entangle themselves will become clear in the following discussion. Besides, in the very darkness that frightens them not only is the usefulness of this doctrine made known but also its very sweet fruit. We shall never be clearly persuaded, as we ought to be, that our salvation flows from the wellspring of God's free mercy until we come to know His eternal election, which illumines God's grace by this contrast: that He does not indiscriminately adopt all into the hope of salvation but gives to some what He denies to others.
How much the ignorance of this principle detracts from God's glory, how much it takes away from true humility, is well known. Yet Paul denies that this which needs so much to be known can be known unless God, utterly disregarding works, chooses those whom He has decreed within Himself. "At the present time," he says, "a remnant has been saved according to the election of grace. But if it is by grace, it is no more of works; otherwise grace would no more be grace. But if it is of works, it is no more of grace; otherwise work would not be work" [Roman. 11:5-6]. If to make it clear that our salvation comes about solely from God's mere generosity we must be called back to the course of election, those who wish to get rid of all this are obscuring as maliciously as they can what ought to have been gloriously and vociferously proclaimed, and they tear humility up by the very roots. Paul clearly testifies that when the salvation of a remnant of the people is ascribed to the election of grace, then only is it acknowledged that God of His mere good pleasure preserves whom He will, and moreover that He pays no reward, since He can owe none.
They who shut the gates that no one may dare seek a taste of this doctrine wrong men no less than God. For neither will anything else suffice to make us humble as we ought to be nor shall we otherwise sincerely feel how much we are obliged to God. And as Christ teaches, here is our only ground for firmness and confidence: in order to free us of all fear and render us victorious amid so many dangers, snares and mortal struggles, He promises that whatever the Father has entrusted into His keeping will be safe [John 10:28-29]. From this we infer that all those who do not know that they are God's own will be miserable through constant fear. Hence those, who by being blind to the three benefits we have noted would wish the foundation of our salvation to be removed from our midst, very badly serve the interests of themselves and of all other believers. How is it that the Church becomes manifest to us from this, when, as Bernard rightly teaches, "it could not otherwise be found or recognized among creatures, since it lies marvelously hidden... both within the bosom of a blessed predestination and within the mass of miserable condemnation"?
But before I enter into the matter itself, I need to mention by way of preface two kinds of men.
Human curiosity renders the discussion of predestination, already somewhat difficult of itself, very confusing and even dangerous. No restraints can hold it back from wandering in forbidden bypaths and thrusting upward to the heights. If allowed, it will leave no secret to God that it will not search out and unravel. Since we see so many on all sides rushing into this audacity and impudence, among them certain men not otherwise bad, they should in due season be reminded of the measure of their duty in this regard.
First, then, let them remember that when they inquire into predestination they are penetrating the sacred precincts of divine wisdom. If anyone with carefree assurance breaks into this place, he will not succeed in satisfying his curiosity and he will enter a labyrinth from which he can find no exit. For it is not right for man unrestrainedly to search out things that the Lord has willed to b hid in Himself, and to unfold from eternity itself the sublimest wisdom, which He would have us revere but not understand that through this also He should fill us with wonder. He has set forth by His Word the secrets of His will that He has decided to reveal to us. These He decided to reveal insofar as He foresaw that they would concern us and benefit us.
Doctrine of Predestination to be Sought in Scripture Only
"We have entered the pathway of faith," says Augustine. "Let us hold steadfastly to it. It leads us to the King's chamber, in which are hid all the treasures of knowledge and wisdom. For the Lord Christ Himself did not bear a grudge against His great and most select disciples when He said: 'I have... many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now' [John 16:12]. We must walk, we must advance, we must grow, that our hearts may be capable of those things which we cannot yet grasp. But if the Last Day finds us advancing, there we shall learn what we could not learn here. If this thought prevails with us, that the Word of the Lord is the sole way that can lead us in our search for all that it is lawful to hold concerning Him, and is the sole light to illumine our vision of all that we should see of Him, it will readily keep and restrain us from all rashness. For we shall know [that] the moment we exceed the bounds of the Word our course is outside the pathway and in darkness, and that there we must repeatedly wander, slip and stumble. Let this, therefore, [be] first of all before our eyes: to seek any other knowledge of predestination than what the Word of God discloses is not less insane than if one should purpose to walk in a pathless waste [cf. Job 12:24], or to see in darkness. And let us not be ashamed to be ignorant of something in this matter, wherein there is a certain learned ignorance. Rather, let us willingly refrain from inquiring into a kind of knowledge, the ardent desire for which is both foolish and dangerous, nay, even deadly. But if a wanton curiosity agitates us, we shall always do well to oppose to it this restraining thought; just as too much honey is not good, so for the curious the investigation of glory is not turned into glory [Prov. 25:27}. For there is good reason for us to be deterred from this insolence which can only plunge us into ruin....
Summary Survey of the Doctrine of Election
As Scripture, then, clearly shows, we say that God once established by His eternal and unchangeable plan those whom He long before determined once for all to receive into salvation, and those whom, on the other hand, he would devote to destruction. We assert that, with respect to the elect, this plan was founded upon His freely given mercy, without regard to human worth; but by His just and irreprehensible but incomprehensible judgment He has barred the door of life to those whom He has given over to damnation. Now among the elect we regard the call as a testimony of election. Then we hold justification another sign of its manifestation, until they come into the glory in which the fulfillment of that election lies. But as the Lord seals His elect by call and justification, so, by shutting off the reprobate from knowledge of His name or from the sanctification of His Spirit, he, as it were, reveals by these marks what sort of judgment awaits them. Here I shall pass over many fictions that stupid men have invented to overthrow predestination. They need no refutation, for as soon as they are brought forth they abundantly prove their own falsity. I shall pause only over those which either are being argued by the learned or may raise difficulty for the simple, or which impiety speciously sets forth in order to assail God's righteousness.
How We Must Use The Present Life And Its Helps
1. Double Danger: Mistaken Strictness and Mistaken Laxity
By such elementary instruction, Scripture at the same time duly informs us what is the right use of earthly benefits a matter not to be neglected in the ordering of our life. For if we are to live, we have also to use those helps necessary for living. And we also cannot avoid those things which seem to serve delight more than necessity. Therefore we must hold to a measure so as to use them with a clear conscience, whether for necessity or for delight. By His work the Lord lays down this measure when He teaches that the present life is for his people as a pilgrimage on which they are hastening toward the heavenly kingdom [Lev. 25:23; I Chron. 29:15; Ps. 39:13; 119:19; Heb. 11:8-10, 13-16; 13:14; I Peter 2:11]. If we must simply pass through this world, there is no doubt we ought to use its good things insofar as they help rather than hinder our course. Thus Paul rightly persuades us to use this world as if not using it; and to buy goods with the same attitude as one sells them [I Cor. 7:30-31].
But because this topic is a slippery one and slopes on both sides into error, let us try to plant our feet where we may safely stand. There were some otherwise good and holy men who when they say intemperance and wantonness, when not severely restrained, ever raging with unbridled excess, desired to correct this dangerous evil. This one plan occurred to them: they allowed man to use physical goods insofar as necessity required. A godly counsel indeed, but they were far too severe. For they would fetter consciences more tightly than does the Word of the Lord a very dangerous thing. Now to them necessity means to abstain from all things that they could do without; thus, according to them, it would scarcely be permitted to add any food at all to plain bread and water. And others are even more severe. We are told of Crates the Theban that he cast all his goods into the sea; for he thought that unless they were destroyed, they would destroy him.
But many today, while they seek an excuse for the intemperance of the flesh in its use of external things, and while they would meanwhile pave the road to licentious indulgence, take for granted what I do not at all concede to them: that this freedom is not to be restrained by any limitation, but to be left to every man's conscience to use as far as seems lawful to him. Certainly I admit that consciences neither ought to nor can be bound here to definite and precise legal formulas; but inasmuch as Scripture gives general rules for lawful use, we ought surely to limit our use in accordance with them.
2. The Main Principle
Let this be our principle: that the use of God's gifts is not wrongly directly when it is referred to that end to which the Author Himself created and destined them for us, since he created them for our good, not for our ruin. Accordingly, no one will hold to a straighter path than he who diligently looks to this end. Now if we ponder to what end God created food, we shall find that He meant not only to provide for necessity but also for delight and good cheer. Thus the purpose of clothing, apart from necessity, was comeliness and decency. In grasses, trees and fruits, apart from their various uses there is beauty of appearance and pleasantness of odor [cf. Gen. 2:9]. For if this were not true, the prophet would not have reckoned them among the benefits of God, "that wine gladdens the heart of man, that oil makes his face shine" [Ps. 104:15]. Scripture would not have reminded us repeatedly, in commending His kindness, that He gave all such things to men. And the natural qualities themselves of things demonstrate sufficiently to what end and extent we may enjoy them. Has the Lord clothed the flowers with the great beauty that greets our eyes, the sweetness of smell that is wafted upon our nostrils, and yet will it be unlawful for our eyes to be affected by the beauty, or our sense of smell by the sweetness of that odor? What? Did He not so distinguish colors as to make some more lovely than others? What? Did He not endow gold and silver, ivory and marble, with a loveliness that renders them more precious than other metals or stones? Did He not, in short, render many things attractive to us, apart from their necessary use?
3. A Look At The Giver Of The Gift Prevents Narrow-Mindedness And Immoderaton
Away, then, with that inhuman philosophy which, while conceding only a necessary use of creatures, not only malignantly deprives us of the lawful fruit of God's beneficence but cannot be practiced unless it robs a man of all his senses and degrades him to a block.
But no less diligently, on the other hand, we must resist the lust of the flesh, which, unless it is kept in order, overflows without measure. And it has, as I have said, its own advocated, who under the pretext of the freedom conceded permit everything to it. First, one bridle is put upon it if it be determined that all things were created for us that we might recognize the Author and give thanks for His kindness toward us. Where is your thanksgiving if you so gorge yourself with banqueting or wine that you either become stupid or are rendered useless for the duties of piety and of your calling? Where is your recognition of God if your flesh, boiling over with excessive abundance [of] vile lust, infects the mind with its impurity so that you cannot discern anything that is right and honorable? Where is our gratefulness toward God for our clothing if in the sumptuousness of our apparel we both admire ourselves and despise others, if with its elegance and glitter we prepare ourselves for shameless conduct? Where is our recognition of God if our minds be fixed upon the splendor of our apparel? For many so enslave all their senses to delights that the mind lies overwhelmed. Many are so delighted with marble, gold and pictures that they become marble; they turn, as it were, into metals and are like painted figures. The small of the kitchen or the sweetness of its odors so stupefies others that they are unable to smell anything spiritual. The same thing is also to be seen in other matters. Therefore, clearly, leave to abuse God's gifts must be somewhat curbed, and Paul's rule is confirmed: that we should "make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires: [Rom. 13:14}, for if we yield too much to these, they boil up without measure or control.
4. Aspiration To Eternal Life Also Determines Aright Our Outward Conduct Of Life
But there is no surer or more direct course than that which we receive from contempt of the present life and meditation upon heavenly immortality. For from this two rules follow: those who use this world should be so affected as if they did not use it; those who marry, as if they did not marry; those who buy, as if they did not buy, just as Paul enjoins [I Cor. 7:29-31]. The other rule is that they should know how to bear poverty peaceable and patiently, as well as to bear abundance moderately. He who bids you use this world as if you used it not destroys not only the intemperance of gluttony in food and drink, and excessive indulgence at table, in buildings and clothing, ambition, pride, arrogance and overfastidiousness, but also all care and inclination that either diverts or hinders you from thought of the heavenly life and zeal to cultivate the soul. Long ago Cato truly said: "There is great care about dress, but great carelessness about virtue." To use the old proverb: those who are much occupied with the care of the body are for the most part careless about their own souls. Therefore, even though the freedom of believers in external matters is not to be restricted to a fixed formula, yet it is surely subject to this law: to indulge oneself as little as possible; but, on the contrary, with unflagging effort of mind to insist upon cutting off all show of superfluous wealth, not to mention licentiousness, and diligently to guard against turning helps into hindrances.
5. Frugality, Earthly Possessions Held In Trust
The second rule will be: they who have narrow and slender resources should know how to go without things patiently, lest they be troubled by an immoderate desire for them. If they keep this rule of moderation, they will make considerable progress in the Lord's school. So, too, they who have not progressed, in some degree at least, in this respect have scarcely anything to prove them disciples of Christ. For besides the fact that most other vices accompany the desire for earthly things, he who bears poverty impatiently also when in prosperity commonly betrays the contrary disease. This is my point: he who is ashamed of mean clothing will boast of costly clothing; he who, not content with a slender meal is troubled by the desire for a more elegant one, will also intemperately abuse those elegances if they fall to his lot. He who will bear reluctantly and with a troubled mind his deprivation and humble condition, if he be advanced to honors will by no means abstain from arrogance. To this end, then, let all those for whom the pursuit of piety is not a pretense strive to learn, by the apostle's example, how to be filled and to hunger, to abound and to suffer want [Phil. 4:12].
Besides, Scripture has a third rule with which to regulate the use of earthly things. Of it we said something when we discussed the precepts of love. It decrees that all those things were so given to us by the kindness of God and so destined for our benefit that they are, as it were, entrusted to us, and we must one day render account of them. Thus, therefore, we must so arrange it that this saying may continually resound in our ears: "Render account of your stewardship" [Luke 16:2]. At the same time let us remember by whom such reckoning is required: namely, Him Who has greatly commended abstinence, sobriety, frugality and moderation; and has also abominated excess, pride, ostentation and vanity; Who approves no other distribution of good things than one joined with love; Who has already condemned with His own lips all delights that draw man's spirit away from chastity and purity, or befog his mind.
6. The Lord's Calling A Basis Of Our Way Of Life
Finally, this point is to be noted: the Lord bids each one of us in all life's actions to look to His calling. For He knows with what great restlessness human nature flames, with what fickleness it is borne hither and thither, how its ambition longs to embrace various things at once. Therefore, lest through our stupidity and rashness everything be turned topsy-turvy. He has appointed duties for every man in his particular way of life. And that no one may thoughtlessly transgress his limits. He has named these various kinds of living "callings." Therefore each individual has his own kind of living assigned to him by the Lord as a sort of sentry post so that he may not heedlessly wander about throughout life. Now so necessary is this distinction that all our actions are judged in His sight by it, often indeed far otherwise than in the judgment of human and philosophical reason. No deed is considered more noble, even among philosophers, than to free one's country from tyranny. Yet a private citizen who lays his hand upon a tyrant is openly condemned by the heavenly judge [I Sam. 24:7, 11; 26:9]. But I will not delay to list examples. It is enough if we know that the Lord's calling is in everything the beginning and foundation of well-doing. And if there is anyone who will not direct himself to it, he will never hold to the straight path in his duties. Perhaps sometimes he could contrive something laudable in appearance; but whatever it may be in the eyes of men, it will be rejected before God's throne. Besides, there will be no harmony among the several parts of his life. Accordingly, your life will then be best ordered when it is directed to this goal. For no one, impelled by his own rashness, will attempt more than his calling will permit, because he will know that it is not lawful to exceed its bounds. A man of obscure station will lead a private life ungrudgingly so as not to leave the rank in which he has been placed by God. Again, it will be no slight relief from cares, labors, troubles and other burdens for a man to know that God is his guide in all these things. The magistrate will discharge his functions more willingly; the head of the household will confine himself to his duty; each man will bear and swallow the discomforts, vexations, weariness and anxieties in his way of life when he has been persuaded that the burden was laid upon him by God. From this will arise also a singular consolation: that no task will be so sordid and base, provided you obey your calling in it, that it will not shine and be reckoned very precious in God's sight.
Civil Government
1. Differences Between Spiritual And Civil Government
Now, since we have established above that man is under a two-fold government, and since we have elsewhere discussed at sufficient length the kind that resides in the soul or inner man and pertains to eternal life, this is the place to say something also about the other kind, which pertains only to the establishment of civil justice and outward morality.
For although this topic seems by nature alien to the spiritual doctrine of faith which I have undertaken to discuss, what follows will show that I am right in joining them, in fact that necessity compels me to do so. This is especially true since, from one side, insane and barbarous men furiously strive to overturn this divinely established order; while, on the other side, the flatterers of princes, immoderately praising their power, do not hesitate to set them against the rule of God himself. Unless both these evils are checked, purity of faith will perish. Besides, it is of no slight importance to us to know how lovingly God has provided in this respect for mankind, that greater zeal for piety may flourish in us to attest our gratefulness.
First, before we enter into the matter itself, we must keep in mind that distinction which we previously laid down so that we do no (as commonly happens) unwisely mingle these two, which have a completely different nature. For certain men, when they hear that the gospel promises a freedom that acknowledges no king and no magistrate among men, but looks to Christ alone, think that they cannot benefit by their freedom so long as they see any power set up over them. They therefore think that nothing will be safe unless the whole world is reshaped to a new form, where there are neither courts, nor laws, nor magistrates, nor anything which in their opinion restricts their freedom. But whoever knows how to distinguish between body and soul, between this present fleeting life and that future eternal life, will without difficulty know that Christ's spiritual kingdom and the civil jurisdiction are things completely distinct. Since, then, it is a Jewish vanity to seek and enclose Christ's kingdom within the elements of this world, let us rather ponder that what Scripture clearly teaches is a spiritual fruit which we gather from Christ's grace; and let us remember to keep within its own limits all that freedom which is promised and offered to us in Him. For why is it that the same apostle who bids us stand and not submit to the "yoke of bondage" [Gal. 5:1] elsewhere forbids slaves to be anxious about their state [I Cor. 7:21], unless it be that spiritual freedom can perfectly well exist along with civil bondage? These statements of His must also be taken in the same sense: In the kingdom of God "there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither male nor female, neither slave nor free" [Gal. 3:28; order changed]. And again, "there is not Jew nor Greek, uncircumcised and circumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, freeman; but Christ is all in all" [Cor. 3:11]. By these statements He means that it makes no difference what your condition among men may be or under what nation's laws you live, since the kingdom of Christ does not at all consist in these things.
2. The Two "Governments" Are Not Antithetical
Yet this distinction does not lead us to consider the whole nature of government a thing polluted, which has nothing to do with Christian men. That is what, indeed, certain fanatics who delight in unbridled license shout and boast: after we have died through Christ to the elements of this world [Col. 2:20], are transported to God's kingdom and sit among heavenly beings, it is a thing unworthy of us and set far beneath our excellence to be occupied with those vile and worldly cares which have to do with business foreign to a Christian man. To what purpose, they ask, are there laws without trials and tribunals? But what has a Christian man to do with trials themselves? Indeed, if it is not lawful to kill, why do we have laws and trials? But as we have just now pointed out that this kind of government is distinct from that spiritual and inward kingdom of Christ, so we must know that they are not at variance. For spiritual government, indeed, is already initiating in us upon earth certain beginnings of the heavenly kingdom, and in this mortal and fleeting life affords a certain forecast of an immortal and incorruptible blessedness. Yet civil government has as its appointed end, so long as we live among men, to cherish and protect the outward worship of God, to defend sound doctrine of piety and the position of the church, to adjust our life to the society of men, to form our social behavior to civil righteousness, to reconcile us with one another and to promote general peace and tranquility. All of this I admit to be superfluous if God's kingdom, such as it is now among us, wipes out the present life. But if it is God's will that we go as pilgrims upon the earth while we aspire to the true fatherland, and if the pilgrimage requires such helps, those who take these from man deprive him of his very humanity. Our adversaries claim that there ought to be such great perfection in the church of God that its government should suffice for law. But they stupidly imagine such a perfection as can never be found in a community of men. For since the insolence of evil men is so great, their wickedness so stubborn, that it can scarcely be restrained by extremely severe laws, what do we expect them to do if they see that their depravity can go scot-free when no power can force them to cease from doing evil?
3. The Chief Tasks And Burdens Of Civil Government
But there will be a more appropriate place to speak of the practice of civil government. Now we only wish it to be understood that to think of doing away with it is outrageous barbarity. Its function among men is no less than that of bread, water, sun and air; indeed, its place of honor is far more excellent. For it does not merely see to it, as all these serve to do, that men breathe, eat, drink and are kept warm, even though it surely embraces all these activities when it provides for their living together. It does not, I repeat, look to this only, but also prevents idolatry, sacrilege against God's name, blasphemies against His truth and other public offenses against religion from arising and spreading among the people; it prevents the public peace from being disturbed; it provides that each man may keep his property safe and sound; that men may carry on blameless intercourse among themselves; that honesty and modesty may be preserved among men. In short, it provides that a public manifestation of religion may exist among Christians and that humanity be maintained among men. Let no man be disturbed that I now commit to civil government the duty of rightly establishing religion, which I seem above to have put outside of human decision. For when I approve of a civil administration that aims to prevent the true religion which is contained in God's law from being openly and with public sacrilege violated and defiled with impunity, I do not here, any more than before, allow men to make laws according to their own decision concerning religion and the worship of God.
But my readers, assisted by the very clarity of the arrangement, will better understand what is to be thought of the whole subject of civil government if we discuss its parts separately. These are three: the magistrate, who is the protector and guardian of the laws; the laws according to which he governs; the people, who are governed by the laws and obey the magistrate.
Let us, then, first look at the office of the magistrate, noting whether it is a lawful calling approved of God; the nature of the office; the extent of its power; then, with what laws a Christian government ought to be governed; and finally, howthe laws benefit the people, and what obedience is owed to the magistrate....
31. Constitutional Defenders Of The People's Freedom
But however these deeds of men are judged in themselves, still the Lord accomplished His work through them alike when He broke the bloody scepters of arrogant kings and when He overturned intolerable governments. Let the princes hear and be afraid.
But we must, in the meantime, be very careful not to despise or violate that authority of magistrates, full of venerable majesty, which God has established by the weightiest decrees, even though it may reside with the most unworthy men who defile it as much as they can with their own wickedness. For, if the correction of unbridled despotism is the Lord's to avenge, let us not at once think that it is entrusted to us, to whom no command has been given except to obey and suffer.
I am speaking all the while of private individuals. For if there are now any magistrates of the people, appointed to restrain the willfulness of kings (as in ancient times the ephors were set against the Spartan kings, or the tribunes of the people against the Roman consuls, or the demarchs against the senate of the Athenians; and perhaps, as things now are, such power as the three estates exercise in every realm when they hold their chief assemblies), I am so far from forbidding them to withstand, in accordance with their duty, the fierce licentiousness of kings, that, if they wink at kings who violently fall upon and assault the lowly common folk, I declare that their dissimulation involves nefarious perfidy, because they dishonestly betray the freedom of the people, of which they know that they have been appointed protectors by God's ordinance.
32. Obedience To Man Must Not Become Disobedience To God
But in that obedience which we have shown to be due the authority of rulers, we are always to make this exception; indeed, to observe it as primary, that such obedience is never to lead us away from obedience to Him to Whose will the desires of all kings ought to be subject, to Whose decrees all their commands ought to yield, to Whose majesty their scepters ought to be submitted. And how absurd would it be that in satisfying men you should incur the displeasure of Him for whose sake you obey men themselves! The Lord, therefore, is the King of Kings, Who, when He has opened His sacred mouth, must alone be heard, before all and above all men; next to him we are subject to those men who are in authority over us, but only in Him, If they command anything against Him, let it go unesteemed. And here let us not be concerned about all that dignity which the magistrates possess; for no harm is done to it when it is humbled before that singular and truly supreme power of God.
On this consideration, Daniel denies that he has committed any offense against the king when he has not obeyed his impious edict [Dan. 6:22-23]. For the king had exceeded his limits, and had not only been a wrongdoer against men, but, in lifting up his horns against God, had himself abrogated his power. Conversely, the Israelites are condemned because they were too obedient to the wicked proclamation of the king [Hos. 5:13]. For when Jeroboam molded the golden calves, they, to please him, forsook God's temple and turned to new superstitions [I Kings 12:30]. With the same readiness, their descendants complied with the decrees of their kings. The prophet sharply reproaches them for embracing the king's edicts [Hos. 5:11]. Far, indeed, is the pretense of modesty from deserving praise, a false modesty with which the court flatterers cloak themselves and deceive the simple, while they deny that it is lawful for them to refuse anything imposed by their kings. As if God had made over His right to mortal men, giving them the rule over mankind! Or as if earthly power were diminished when it is subjected to its Author, in Whose presence even the heavenly powers tremble as suppliants! I know with what great and present peril this constancy is menaced, because kings bear defiance with the greatest displeasure, whose "wrath is a messenger of death," says Solomon [Prov. 16:14}. But since this edict has been proclaimed by the heavenly herald, Peter "We must obey God rather than men" [Acts 5:29] let us comfort ourselves with the thought that we are rendering that obedience which the Lord requires when we suffer anything rather than turn aside from piety. And that our courage may not grow faint, Paul pricks us with another goad: That we have been redeemed by Christ at so great a price as our redemption cost Him, so that we should not enslave ourselves to the wicked desires of men much less be subject to their impiety [I Cor. 7:23].
God Be Praised



There are faxes for this order.

1-Write a brief essay describing how each of the 16 reference disciplines provides support for and inform IS/IT practice.

AA: Behavioral Science

What are the Behavioral Sciences?

Our most narrowly focused discipline, Psychology, studies the human mind, thought and cognition; the development of the self through the life span; and the relation of the individual to the group. Sociology continues the discussion, with its focus on group behaviors and social institutions. Anthropology takes the widest possible focus, incorporating the entire scope of humanity through time and across the world.

AB: Computer Science

Computer Science AB includes all the topics of Computer Science A, as well as a more formal and a more in-depth study of algorithms, data structures, and data abstraction. For example, binary trees are studied in Computer Science AB but not in Computer Science A. The use of recursive data structures and dynamically allocated structures is fundamental to Computer Science AB.


AC: Decision Theory

Statistics.
the theory of making decisions based on assigning probabilities to various factors and assigning numerical consequences to the outcome.

AD: Information Theory

Information theory or communication theory, mathematical theory formulated principally by the American scientist Claude E. Shannon to explain aspects and problems of information and communication. While the theory is not specific in all respects, it proves the existence of optimum coding schemes without showing how to find them. For example, it succeeds remarkably in outlining the engineering requirements of communication systems and the limitations of such systems.
In information theory, the term information is used in a special sense; it is a measure of the freedom of choice with which a message is selected from the set of all possible messages. Information is thus distinct from meaning, since it is entirely possible for a string of nonsense words and a meaningful sentence to be equivalent with respect to information content.


AE: Organizational Theory

Is a learning organization "like a living organism, consisting of empowered, motivated employees, living in a clearly perceived symbiosis, sharing the feeling of a common destiny and profit, striving towards jointly defined goals, anxious to use every opportunity to learn from situations, processes and competition in order to adapt harmoniously to the changes in their environment and to improve continuously their own and their company?s competitive performance" (Otala 1995, p. 163)? Or is it an aspiration often viewed cynically by staff who don?t believe the rhetoric is sincere (Garratt 1999)? Does it offer individuals liberation and empowerment to maximize their full potential as innovative, intelligent workers (Fenwick 1995)? Or is it a tool that can turn into a weapon (Marsick and Watkins 1999)? This Myths and Realities examines different views of the learning organization, both in theory and in practice.

Cullen (1999) dates the current popularity of the learning organization from Peter Senge and his five disciplines characterizing learning organizations (personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, team learning, and systems thinking). The learning organization can be described as "an organizational culture in which individual development is a priority, outmoded and erroneous ways of thinking are actively identified and corrected, and the purpose and vision of the organization are clearly understood and supported by all its members. Within this framework, the application of systems thinking enables people to see how the organization really works; to form a plan; and to work together openly, in teams, to achieve that plan" (Worrell 1995, p. 352). That characterization of the learning organization has powerful intuitive appeal and promise (Fenwick 1995).

AF: Management Theory



AG: Language Theories

language, systematic communication by vocal symbols. It is a universal characteristic of the human species. Nothing is known of its origin, although scientists have identified a gene that clearly contributes to the human ability to use language. Scientists generally hold that it has been so long in use that the length of time writing is known to have existed (7,900 years at most) is short by comparison. Just as languages spoken now by peoples of the simplest cultures are as subtle and as intricate as those of the peoples of more complex civilizations, similarly the forms of languages known (or hypothetically reconstructed) from the earliest records show no trace of being more ?primitive? than their modern forms.

AH: Systems Theory


AI: Research

Ai Research is a leading artificial intelligence research project. At Ai, we're creating a new form of life. Our expanding web site is an essential part of the emerging global discussion about artificial intelligence. On this website, we showcase the state of the art in patterm-matching conversational machines, demonstrated by Alan, and in reinforcement learning algorithms, demonstrated by HAL. Use our forums, original papers, online labs, demos and links to explore what's happening both at Ai (the project) and in AI (the field).

AJ: Social Science

social science, term for any or all of the branches of study that deal with humans in their social relations. Often these studies are referred to in the plural as the social sciences. Although human social behavior has been studied since antiquity, the modern social sciences as disciplines rooted in the scientific method date only from the 18th cent. Enlightenment. Interest at first centered on economics, but by the 19th cent. separate disciplines had been developed in anthropology, political science, psychology, and sociology. The 19th cent. was characterized by the development of wide-ranging theories (e.g., the work of Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, and Herbert Spencer). Developments in the 20th cent. have moved in these directions: the improvement and increased use of quantitative methods and statistical techniques; increased use of the empirical method, as opposed to general theorizing; and the direct practical application of social science knowledge. Social science departments are now firmly established in universities, and social scientists are increasingly called upon to advise industries and governments for future planning.

AK: Management Science


AL: Artificial Intelligence

Grid computing is emerging as key enabling infrastructure for science. A key challenge for distributed computation over the Grid is the synthesis on-demand of end-toend scientific applications of unprecedented scale that draw from pools of specialized scientific components to derive elaborate new results. In this paper, we outline the technical issues that need to be addressed in order to meet this challenge, including usability, robustness, and scale. We describe Pegasus, a system to generate executable grid workflows given a high-level specification of desired results. Pegasus uses Artificial Intelligence planning techniques to compose valid end-to-end workflows, and has been used in several scientific applications. We also outline our design for a more distributed and knowledge-rich architecture.

artificial intelligence (AI), the use of computers to model the behavioral aspects of human reasoning and learning. Research in AI is concentrated in some half-dozen areas. In problem solving, one must proceed from a beginning (the initial state) to the end (the goal state) via a limited number of steps; AI here involves an attempt to model the reasoning process in solving a problem, such as the proof of a theorem in Euclidean geometry. In game theory (see games, theory of), the computer must choose among a number of possible ?next? moves to select the one that optimizes its probability of winning; this type of choice is analogous to that of a chess player selecting the next move in response to an opponent's move. In pattern recognition, shapes, forms, or configurations of data must be identified and isolated from a larger group; the process here is similar to that used by a doctor in classifying medical problems on the basis of symptoms. Natural language processing is an analysis of current or colloquial language usage without the sometimes misleading effect of formal grammars; it is an attempt to model the learning process of a translator faced with the phrase ?throw mama from the train a kiss.? Cybernetics is the analysis of the communication and control processes of biological organisms and their relationship to mechanical and electrical systems; this study could ultimately lead to the development of ?thinking? robots (see robotics). Machine learning occurs when a computer improves its performance of a task on the basis of its programmed application of AI principles to its past performance of that task.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the study of computer systems and devices that simulate or operate in a way that is usually associates with human intelligence, such as learning, reasoning, intelligent processing, understanding symbolic information and pattern recognition, and producing knowledge. Although AI is commonly viewed as a branch of computer science, AI is multi-disciplinary because it combines several branches of learning including algorithms, heuristics, databases, artificial languages, natural language processing, and theoretical computer science. It also has close ties with psychology, cognitive psychology, neuroscience, biology, mathematical logic, system studies, business intelligence, and knowledge management.


AM: Economic Theory



AN: Ergonomics

What is ergonomics? Most people have heard of ergonomics and think it is something to do with seating or with the design of car controls and instruments. It is...but it is much more! Ergonomics is the application of scientific information concerning humans to the design of objects, systems and environment for human use. Ergonomics comes into everything which involves people. Work systems, sports and leisure, health and safety should all embody ergonomics principles if well designed.



AO: Political Science

political science, the study of government and political processes, institutions, and behavior. Government and politics have been studied and commented on since the time of the ancient Greeks. However, it is only with the general systematization of the social sciences in the last 100 years that political science has emerged as a separate definable area of study. Political science is commonly divided into a number of subfields, the most prominent being political theory, national government, comparative government, international relations, and special areas shared with other social sciences such as sociology, psychology, and economics. In practice, these subfields overlap. Political theory encompasses the following related areas: the study of the history of political thought; the examination of questions of justice and morality in the context of the relationships between individuals, society, and government; and the formulation of conceptual approaches and models in order to understand more fully political and governmental processes. The study of national government focuses on the political system of the researcher's particular country, including the legal and constitutional arrangements and institutions; the interaction of various levels of government, other social and political groups, and the individual; and proposals for improving governmental structure and policy. Comparative government covers many of the same subjects but from the perspective of parallel political behavior in several countries, regions, or time periods. International relations deals both with the more traditional areas of study, such as international law, diplomacy, political economy, international organizations, and other forms of contact between nation states, and with the development of general, scientific models of international political systems. None of the political science subfields can be clearly separated. All of them, for example, deal with questions closely associated with political theory. Valuable and sophisticated discussions of almost all the areas of political science, including the areas now generally classified under such titles as political sociology, can be found throughout intellectual history as far back as Plato and Aristotle. Through the centuries, the questions of political science have been discussed in contexts varying with the changing perspectives of the time. During the Middle Ages, for example, the major concerns revolved around the problem of where the state stood in relation to man and his God. Karl Marx, on the other hand, viewed political questions in the context of society's economic structure. Modern political science stresses the importance of using political concepts and models that are subject to empirical validation and that may be employed in solving practical political problems.

AP: Psychology

psychology, science or study of the thought processes and behavior of humans and other animals in their interaction with the environment. Psychologists study processes of sense perception, thinking, learning, cognition, emotions and motivations, personality, abnormal behavior, interactions between individuals, and interactions with the environment. The field is closely allied with such disciplines as anthropology and sociology in its concerns with social and environmental influences on behavior; physics in its treatment of vision, hearing, and touch; and biology in the study of the physiological basis of behavior. In its earliest speculative period, psychological study was chiefly embodied in philosophical and theological discussions of the soul.

Hello, I was referred to you from someone who use your service and was pleased. I need for this company to write International Relations Political Thought paper. I need for the writer not to be a student in highschool or college but someone who is inform about the topic and who can write on a doctoral level. The is a political thought paper but within this the majority of the paper will be coming from a personal opinion point of view. Please use your personal opinion throughout the paper but also support the facts that you use with documentation if needed. I need for this paper to flow and be coherent dont contradict yourself in the paper make sure all ideas flows with the questions that will be posed in the question below. No contractons in the sentences, a VERY STRONG INTRODUCTION and CONCLUSION, and be very detail in the paper. Again this a personal thought paper so personal opinion is much needed but if need to use sources please use properly and cite properly. Below is the topic and the questions that needs to amswered:


Topic:
On Tuesday, November 2, 2004 constitutional amendments were passed in several states which effectively defined marriage as a union between man and woman. What is the basis for the overwhelming passage of these amendments in each of the states in which they were offered? Is the passage of these amendments as sign of American religious and/or politcal fundamentalism? Why or Why not? What does the passage of these amendments mean for gays as a minority group? Does it effectively relegate them to the status of second-class citizens? Why or Why not?

Draw a positive or negative comaprisons between the thesis at hand and other material you have read, suggest historical cases which either support or refute the central thesis of the topic, critique the assumptions underlying the thesis, question the logic by which conclusions are drawn, point out contradiction in the argument; and/or consider policy implications which follow from the argument but are not spelled out specifically. This a personal thought paper so a refenece page is not required but you can cite sources as needed. Please be consistent in thought without any contradictions in the paper(especially in the conclusion). Personal thought is required and needed.


Answer all questions that needs to answer. Again, this paper needs to be writen on a doctoral level NO EXCEPTIONS!!!It can not be late. If you do not understand the question at hand please feel free to e-mail ASAP so we can repair this problem. Thanks.

"mike", "scipiobronze", or "writergrrl101", or likewise competent writer that is available that will PLEASE, NOT USE ANY OTHER SOURCES THAN THE ISBN's SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED, thank you!~ ;)

Essay will clearly and separately answer each question below in four different parts, 1.) 2.) 3.) 4.)

Each portion of the four part essay to be approximately 500 words. Essay can only draw on the readings listed, the brief notes provided, and reflect close attention to the study guide provided.

1. What are the different conceptions of knowledge that inform Hobbess and Aristotles respective accounts of politics? Be specific about questions of individualism, virtue, and justice. In Bellahs terms, what kind of politics would they support? How are they related to Bellahs views on the relationship between social science and social life?

2. What are Hobbess and Aristotles respective views of human nature? How do they view the relationship between reason and passion? What is the function of the political system in managing that relationship?

3. What are Hobbess and Aristotles respective accounts of the relationship between the citizen and the political system? Between one citizen and the next? What kinds of behavior does each believe the political system should encourage or cultivate? Hint, think about Hobbess account of the Laws of Nature and Aristotles account of virtue.

4. Hobbes and Machiavelli both believe that the study and the practice of politics needs to be divorced from traditional moral and religious understandings. Why is that the case for each? What account of how to approach politics does each offer? How are they different? Where are the similarities?

***ABSOLUTELY THESE SPECIFIC ISBN's FOR THESE SPECIFIC TRANSLATORS/PUBLISHERS***

Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics (Terence Irwin: Translator, Introduction) ISBN: 9780872204645

Hobbes: Leviathan: Revised Student Edition (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought) ISBN: 9780521567978

Machiavelli: The Prince (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought) ISBN: 9780521342407

Bellah et al: Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life (With a New Preface) ISBN: 9780520254190

***PLEASE, ABSOLUTELY NO OUTSIDE SOURCES WHATSOEVER. THE ONLY REFERENCES ARE TO BE THE FOUR BOOKS SPECIFICALLY DETAILED ABOVE (AMONG BRIEF NOTES PROVIDED, AND STUDY GUIDE PROVIDED.) PLEASE, AND THANK YOU!!! :)***
There are faxes for this order.