More handpicked essays just for you.
The Challenges affecting Community Development
Critiques on community development
The importance of community development
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The Challenges affecting Community Development
There are many communities in this world, with some that function rather well, and some that do very poorly at this. There are many varying factors that go into the reasoning for this. Communities all over have different ways of achieving success, one of which is the way some look at the self sacrifice of individuals. Though some communities are able to achieve some degree of success without individual sacrifice, it is those who use it that are able to prosper to the larger extent. Compromise is one of the largest parts of being able to achieve success in a community through individual sacrifice, and being able to compromise is only possible when an individual obtains the willingness to do so. Compromising is considered one of the best, is not the best way of seizing an argument, and there are many arguments that are present in all communities. When an argument reaches the point where neither party will give, it can be best to compromise so that each side is able to gain something, while still sacrificing something for the greater good. Though compromise is a nearly …show more content…
Some may be in the mindset of each individual having as much freedom as they want, in most circumstances, and not having to sacrifice anything unnecessary if they so choose to do so. In doing this, there are some communities who have been able to utilize this system and attain success, though it is not the best way to do so. Though using this method could potentially help some communities, it will indubitably hinder the success in most other places, as giving someone freedom can be a very good thing, allowing them to make decisions for themself, giving one too much freedom is more often than not a very bad thing, which can lead to the downfall of a place and the people around
The definition of a compromise is an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions. The conflict of compromising is that is shows the weakness in a leader. If a leader does not show compromise ever, they are bound to fail one time or another. When leaders do show compromise in certain situations, they tend to be more successful. In “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar,” by William Shakespeare, it is necessary for leaders to compromise in order to succeed.
A compromise is when two or more parties in disagreement reach an agreement that does not give all sides exactly what they want, but enough of what they want so that they can be happy. Compromise is the best possible solution to a conflict however it does not always work. One needs only to look at situations such as the Bosnia-Herzegovina to see that. During the events prior to the American Civil War, many different compromises were made in an attempt to impede the growing disagreements. However this merely prolonged the inevitable. The differences between North and South were far to great and compromise did not stand a chance at preventing the impending conflict. This was most clearly shown in the ways in which the three main compromises, the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act, failed.
In a world where compromise is part of our daily experience, there is something to be
People should benefit from freedom, equality and justice. Absolute freedom is sometimes very dangerous and may destroy the basic principles of the society. A lot of people believe that freedom means doing whatever you want, whenever you want.
The socialistic idea of compromise has always been a part of human history. To achieve mutual goals, to end conflict, to pursue happiness, there has always seemed to be a need to agree on terms that equally benefit both parties. Ayn Rand, the creator of the philosophy of Objectivism and author of the philosophical novel, The Fountainhead views compromise differently than it is traditionally defined by society. Society says that compromise is generally a settlement of a dispute by both sides making concessions, and Rand affirms this ideal, only however in situations “ only in regard to concretes, or particulars, implementing a mutually accepted basic principle, that one may compromise.” Basically, the only compromises that are “moral” by her definition, are those that are rational. This poses a question to the reader- What system of morality does Rand follow? To answer this, it’s best to define what a compromise is, according to the author. According to Rand, a true compromise is not about subjecting oneself to a level of inferiority. Rand says “ Accepting a lesser job than one had wanted is not a “compromise.” Taking orders from one’s employer on how to do the work which one is hired is not a “compromise.” Instead, compromise has more to do with not backing
Loss of Freedom in The Giver The Giver, a book written by Lois Lowry, questioned my ideas, thoughts and beliefs. The novel describes an ideal society, in which everything is supposed to be perfect, with all life’s problems solved. It is all about being happy with what the people have and not questioning their lifestyles because they did not know the difference between good and bad. The people are denied of their preferable way of life without their knowledge of how the real world is supposed to be. In the I can. However, the citizens of this society are not able to control their life; for example their choice of clothing, choice of loving and having feelings, or choice of family members. From all existing creatures, we humans differ because we are able to use our brain to make decisions. In the novel, the people of the given society have authority figures that show them how to live their life. “Katya, became a Nine and removed her hair ribbons and got her bicycle” (P The rules start with small things like what age one starts to ride a bike, which age group wears certain types of jackets, the clothing one wears each day, and even what to eat. In the real world, we humans make similar decisions for ourselves without thinking about it. People need guidance in their life to the right way of living but not a book of instructions. Many of us live each day dreaming of our future family and all the happiness we may get from that. I cannot imagine how it feels not to have freedom to feel and love. “Jonas, she said with a smile, the feeling you described as wanting? It was your the opposite sex. Beginning from early age, children are controlled not to feel or appreciate his/her opposite sex. The adults are made to take the pills to annihilate their sexual desires. When the children grow up and become adults, more decisions are made for them. When one is old enough to get married, the superior power chooses a mate for the person and is wedded. This is when I question the meaning of marriage. a future together, not a partnership that you deal with like a business. Although many cultures have different say in this sacred ceremony, most have similar ideas. To many people, love is affection based on admiration or common interests and warm attachment, enthusiasm or devotion. How can one live happy in life without the experience of such feelings? These individuals in the novel did not know better, if they knew how good it is to feel love or even know a good taste when it is good, then they would not be happy with the way of life in their community. “J What if they were allowed to choose their own mate?
Altruism regards the individual life as something one may be required to sacrifice for the sake of
The dynamic of a win-lose bargaining situation can cause negotiations to be exceedingly tense and volatile because only one side will gain at the end of these type of negotiations. This makes the concept of distributed bargaining controversial. Michael Wheeler, the author of the article, Three cheers for teaching distributive bargaining, discusses how many professors at an Academy of Management conference disapproved of distributive bargaining negotiation tactics. Wheeler explains, a huge majority of the attendees disapproved of exposing their impressionable pupils to the reality that in some negotiations, more for one party means less for the other” (Wheeler, 2012). The reluctance to teach the distributive bargaining tactic may be due to the fact that most teachings on negotiation skills are centered around the notion of all parties coming out of a deal with something they want.
In conclusion, the theory of principled negotiation is very impressive, although it at times seems to be simplistic and meant for an ideal world. Nevertheless, it allows all sides of the conflict to be examined through the broadening of options. It allows disputants to maintain any relationship that they had before the conflict and negotiation. Overall, principled negotiation is meant to lead to satisfactory results for both sides, creating a win-win situation for all.
Indeed, the pioneer aviator and author Anne Morrow Lindbergh puts it best when she says, “to give without any reward, or any notice, has a special quality of its own” In Charles Dickens’s A Tale of two Cities, Dickens shows the inherent goodness of his characters. By exemplifying various acts of sacrifice, he demonstrates that the character’s gifts ultimately bring about great change, often changes that facilitate the revival of their loved ones. The very first signs of sacrifice are noted in the opening scenes of the book. Dickens writes of a “fated revolution” by metaphorically comparing the woodsman and the forester to the creation of the guillotine.
People perpetrate seemingly selfless acts almost daily. You see it all over the news; the man who saved that woman from a burning building, the mother who sacrificed herself to protect her children from the bomb blast. But how benevolent are these actions? Are these so-called “heroes” really sacrificing themselves to help others? Until recently, it was the common belief that altruism, or selfless and unconditional kindness, was limited primarily to the human race. However, within the last century, the works of several scientists, most prominently George Price, have provided substantial evidence concluding that altruism is nothing more than a survival technique, one that can be calculated with a simple equation.
Negotiating styles are grouped into five types; Competing, Collaborating, Comprising, Avoidance, and Accommodating (Colburn, 2010). Even though it is possible to exhibit different parts of the five types of negation styles in different situations, can see that my tendencies seem to default to, Compromise and Accommodating. In reviewing the course work and reviewing my answers for Questionnaire 1 and 5, I find that the data reflects the same assumption. The accommodating profile is one where relationship perseveration is everything and giving what the other side wants is the route to winning people over. Accommodators are well liked by their colleagues and opposite party negotiators (Colburn, 2010). When analyzing my accommodating tenancy in negations, I find often it is easier to give into the demands when they are within a reasonable range. I often consider it the part of providing a high level of customer service. It has been my experience that continued delaying and not coming to an agreement in a topic will only shorten the window in which you will have to meet the request since. The cons to this style are by accommodating highly competitive styles the accommodator can give up to much ground in the process. “Giving away value too easily too early can signal to your negotiation counterpart that you've very deep pockets, and your gift is just a taster of bigger and better gifts to come”. The other negations type I default to is compromising. Compromising “often involves splitting the difference; usually resulting in an end position of about half way between both parties’ opening positions” (Colburn, 2010). In the absence of a good rationale or balanced exchanged concessions, half way betwee...
Commitment to community is a requirement for contemporary Americans and vital to its survival. “Love thy neighbor as thyself” is the unselfish act of sharing: from a cup of sugar to a wealth of information to the guardianship of all children involved and the protection of every individual in that said community. Whether that community consists of the “Classic Neighborhood, those with a common set of goals, or those who share a common identity” the thread that holds this matrix together is always woven into the shared identity as well as responsibility of all involved. (Redmond, 2010). A community cannot continue to exist through the will of withdrawn individuals who arms only embrace themselves and have no involvement whatsoever with neighbors one door away.
Individualism is rampant in our world. More and more people are concerned with what they want, when they want it and how they want it. They put blinders on and go about their work, convinced that “looking out for number one” is the only way to succeed and find happiness. If everyone were to adopt this way of thinking and living, the world would become violently competitive, gloomy, and callous. However, if we open our lives and give service to those less fortunate than ourselves, we allow our hearts to receive immeasurable happiness. There are countless members of society, who make service and ultimately self-sacrifice a part of their everyday lives. One of the greatest examples the world has of a self-sacrificing person is Mother Teresa. She said, “In this life we cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love… It is not the magnitude of our actions but the amount of love that is put into them that matters.” Doctors Without Borders is a powerful humanitarian organization that was most recently volunteering in Haiti. Part of their mission statement reads, “…We unite direct medical care with a commitment to bearing witness and speaking out against the underlying causes of suffering. Our aid workers and staff protest violations of humanitarian law on behalf of populations who have no voice, and bring the concerns of their patients to public forums…” These are just two mainstream examples of people and organizations that live and work for others, to improve the quality of their lives.
I believe in this world we must give up something in the exchange of getting something better. Sacrificing is essential for the solution of everyday problem. Modern American families are surprised at first that a simple principle like sacrifice provided solution to all their problems. We don’t value sacrifice as much as we value self-care. Sacrifice is doing something against your own inclination in order to please someone you love or not doing something that you’d like to do in order to please someone you love. It may seem costly at times, but sacrifice is a gift with many rewards.