Level of Stress Among Call Centre Employees Essay Example for Free

Level of Stress Among Call Centre Employees Essay Level of Stress among Call Centre Employees Submission date: 8th January, 2008 Submitted By: Ayesha Khalid Ayesha Sarfaraz Nazool-e-Tabassum Saira Khan Mussaffa Butt Submitted to Dr. Farah Malik Associate Professor Department of Psychology Government College University Lahore Introduction Stress is used as a general label for a vast complex, interdisciplinary area of interest and study, much of which is health related. Most often stress is related to personal discomfort associated with an over demanding or distressing lifestyle situation (Adams Bromley, 1998) stress is a part of everyday life, we experience stress each day, although it is acknowledged that the degree of stress varies considerably depending on the complexity of the situation and availability of support. For some, the stress is manageable and work or home life is not affected. For others, however, the stress reaches a critical point where there may be a need for medical or psychiatric assistance (Weiten, 2001). The causes of stress can include any event or occurrence that a person considers a threat to his or her coping strategies or resources. Researchers generally agree that a certain degree of stress is a normal part of a living organisms response to the inevitable changes in its physical or social environment, and that positive, as well as negative, events can generate stress as well as negative occurrences (Frey, 2002). There can be innumerable stress factors since different individuals react differently to the same stress conditions. Extreme stress situations for an individual may prove to be mild for another, for yet another person the situations might not qualify as stressing at all. (http://www. lifepositive. com/stress. html). The fact that women report and exhibit higher level of psychological distress than men has been explained in three major ways. The methodological artifact explanation suggests that women are socialized to be more expressive and therefore will admit more emotional symptoms than men in response to the standard psychological stress (Frey, 2002). The stress exposure argument suggests that women face more stressor in general or more severe, persistent stressors than men. Whereas the vulnerability argument suggest that women lack coping resources such as high self esteem, a sense of mastery or appropriate coping strategies for handling the stressors to which they are exposed. Newman (1984 c. f. Eckenrode, 1991) suggested that women over report minor symptoms that inflate over all distress scores (Eller, 2000). Stress in humans in general results from interactions between persons and their environment that are perceived as straining or exceeding their adaptive capacities and threatening their well-being. The element of perception indicates that human stress responses reflect differences in personality, as well as differences in physical strength or general health (Frey, 2002). Stress is often termed as a twentieth century syndrome, born out of mans race towards modern progress and its ensuing complexities. For that matter, causes such as a simple flight delay to managing a teenage child at home can put you under stress. Listing the causes of stress is tricky yet replete with practical diversity (http://www. lifepositive. com/stress. html). General cause of stress include primarily, Threat; a perceived threat will lead a person to feel stressed. This can include physical threats, social threats, financial threat, and so on. Fear; Fear leads to imagined outcomes, which are the real source of stress. Uncertainty; When people are not certain, they are unable to predict, and hence feel they are not in control, and hence may feel fear or feel threatened by that which is causing the uncertainty (http://www. workstress. net/causes. htm). Apart from certain general causes another reason is cognitive dissonance; it is when there is a gap between what people do and what they think, then the outcome experience is cognitive dissonance, which is felt as stress.

Reading and Writing Essay Example for Free

Reading and Writing Essay Learning how to read back in 1970 is quite different from learning how to read in the world we live in today. Learning to read was somewhat difficult for me as a child. We didnt have the fancy reading tools back in the day, such as: Hooked on Phonics or Phonemic Awareness. Looking back over my life, I can remember when I was in the first grade, about six or seven years old and I brought home my first report card. On my report card my teacher pointed out an area of weakness in reading. I can still hear my father saying â€Å"Susie are you having trouble reading? † I would respond as any typical six year old child would do by shrugging my shoulders and saying â€Å"I dont know. † My father was a concerned parent and wanted to help his child. He didnt want to see me struggle in school nor did he want to see me fall behind. My father was determined he was going to help me improve my reading skills and by doing so my reading grade would improve also. So therefore, my father set up a strategy plan. Every evening after school my father and I would sit down at the dinner table and work on improving my reading skills. His first step was to see if I could sound out all the letters of the alphabet. Once he realized I was able to sound out all letters in the alphabet, his next step was to determine if I could sound out all the vowels: long, short and house top vowels too. The third step was to begin sounding out small words such as: the, cat, red, run, ran, like etc. Once I began to get comfortable reading on my own while my father prepared dinner for my two brothers and I, he would have me to sit at the dinner table and read aloud to him fifteen minutes each day. Eventually with with all the hard work and dedication my reading skills gradually improved. After all, they say practice makes perfect. As I grew older I started enjoying reading much more than I ever realized. I had to find out what type of books and magazines I enjoyed reading. In other words, I had to find my reading niche. I enjoy reading books like Mama, How Stella got her Grove Back, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, A Day Late and a Dollar Short by Terry McMillan. Reading can be very enjoyable, relaxing and mind stimulating as well. Reading exercises our brain. One can self improve while gaining experience from other people by reading. Reading is knowledge and power. Reading teaches children about the world around them. Reading develops a child’s imagination. Now that I have returned to college, reading and writing is a common part of everyday life. Every semester I have had several different assignments that required reading and writing skills. I have had to do an essay, public speaking presentations which involved reading and writing. Reading is very important because one can explore themselves to new things. One can also self improve while gaining experience from other people. Reading can be used for connecting your brain and it can also boost ones imagination and creativity. Reading exercises ones brain. Many factors play a vital role in a child’s growth and development. Reading develops a child’s imagination. Children who read do better at school. Reading relaxes the body and calms the mind. Reading is a great source of entertainment. This is an important point because these days we seem to have forgotten how to relax and especially how to be silent. In almost everything we do reading and writing is a vital part of our everyday lives.

Pre Existing Strategies For Youth Offending

Pre Existing Strategies For Youth Offending For over a decade Labours three successive administrations from 1997 to 2010 has left the youth justice system in a state of near permanent reform. With almost two decades prior to 1997 in opposition Labour had the opportunity to implement ready-made polices on criminal justice which started with the youth justice system by adopting a root and branch reform agenda.  [2]  This paper will critically review the policies pursued by Governments over the past fourteen years to address the social causes of crime amongst young people. The primary question this paper will ask is whether these policies have made a difference to either crime figures or recidivism amongst juveniles. The paper will initially begin by discussing the pre-existing strategies on youth crime employed before the last fourteen years which is crucial to critically reviewing the laws development over the past fourteen years. The second part of this paper will focus on the strategies employed to deal with the social ca uses of youth crime. The final section of the paper will draw the paper together by discussing the impact of the strategies employed by the various Governments to deal and manage youth justice offending by examining their impact upon youth offending. Pre-Existing Strategies for Youth Offending: Much of the twentieth-century juvenile justice system was characterised by a double taxonomy which can be best described as punishment and welfare.  [3]  The last fifty years have seen a bewildering complexity of shifts in the approach of the police, courts and various governmental agencies established to respond to youth offending and the social causes of crime.  [4]  It has been a dissected mix of governmental policies that alternate between punitive punishment and a welfare or care approach. The literature presents the 1960s as a high point in the development of welfarism in the youth justice system with a shift away from penal punishment to family councils and family courts to deal with juvenile offending and the surrounding social causes of youth crime.  [5]   The coming to power of the Conservative government in the 1970s brought a shift back to punitive punishment for youth offenders with an increasing use of juvenile courts with custodial sentences rising from 3000 in 1970 to over 7000 in 1978.  [6]  Alongside this shift towards a strong sharp punishment of youth offending in England and Wales, Scotland sought to introduce an alternative approach with the introduction of the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968. An underlying feature of this approach to youth offending were welfare tribunals which used lay people such as social workers, teachers and family representatives in coming together to manage youth offending in a collaborative way to tackle both the wider social causes of youth offending and the individual offence under consideration. Pratt argues that there were four major sets of criticisms of the welfare model of youth justice: firstly the treatment-orientated interventions were perceived to be ineffective.  [7]  Secondly, evidence suggested that care could become more coercive than punishment. Thirdly, professional expertise of the members of the tribunals was less important than it was perceived to be, in that members were serving with little experience of juvenile offending. Fourthly, the care model of justice was alleged to be ineffective at dealing with youth delinquency. The election of the Conservative government during the 1980s with a law and order agenda produced a mixed approach to youth offending yet again.  [8]  The 1980s brought an introduction of a multi-agency approach to youth offending and the social causes of crime, with an increased use of formal and informal cautioning of youth offenders which distinguished first offenders from repeat offenders. A distinctive feature of this approac h to youth offending was the introduction of the concept of corporatism into the youth justice system which allowed a system to produce efficient, effective justice that worked.  [9]  The focus was on delivering a youth justice framework that worked efficiently delivering value for money for the government using cheaper alternatives than the court system. The youth justice model of the 1980s enjoined the 1990s with a marriage of punitive sentencing of repeat offenders with an incoherent cautioning system for first time youth offenders which the police patrolled without any consistency.  [10]   New Labour, New Youth Justice Police? It is arguable that, amongst other issues, Labour won its first general election under the banner of its tough talk on criminal justice issues.  [11]  By taking a mixed approach between retributive justice and restorative justice Labour sought to increase the States control, regulation and mangerialism of criminal behaviour and the social causes surrounding crime.  [12]   Labour sought to formulate its youth justice policies around a development of pre-existing philosophies of restorative justice values and practice including responsibility, restoration and reintegration, which would draw upon the experience of the existing framework.  [13]  Labour presented a Third way to deal with law and order which centred upon tackling the youth crime which were premised upon making young people take responsibility for crime through the concepts of responsibility, restoration and reintegration.  [14]  The centre piece of reform manifested itself in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 which have sought to bring restorative elements and values on a formal platform within youth justice.  [15]  In essence the statutory framework represented a clear attempt at modernising youth justice based on empirical evidence.  [16]   The reform advanced by Labour to deal with the social causes of youth offending effectively represented a new youth justice system composed of a Youth Justice Board (YJB) at national level and a multi-agency Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) at local level to administer the youth justice framework.  [17]  This multi-level and multi-agency approach to youth justice redefined the architecture of the youth justice apparatus by reconfiguring the lines of power, management and responsibility.  [18]  In addition to redefining the youth justice apparatus within the criminal justice system, Labour adopted a twin track approach with a perpetual stream of legislative reform focused on reformulating the punishment framework within criminal justice. The main stay of the reforms was provided in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which established the Youth Justice Board, Youth Offending Teams and for a restructuring of the non-custodial penalties available to the Youth Court, other reforms included: anti-social behaviour orders (ASBO) and action plans, to reparation orders and parenting orders.  [19]  For offenders under 18, the system of police cautioning was replaced with a new system of reprimand and warnings, to allow young offenders to have the opportunity of at least one reprimand and one final warning prior to prosecution.  [20]   Newburn argues that the new reforms implemented sought to allow restorative values where possible within youth justice through the development of restorative cautioning, action plans and reparation orders.  [21]  The action plan represented an attempt to allow youth offenders to begin a short intensive programme of community intervention combining punishment, rehabilitation and reparation to change the offending behaviour and prevent further crime.  [22]  Although Labour sought to redraw the criminal justice agenda many of the reforms introduced echoed and resembled the multi-agency approach of the 1980s.  [23]  The crucial difference between this fresh attempt at reform was that part of the multi-agency approach this time was not to divert but rather to intervene and become involved in the process.  [24]  A central driving force in Labours restorative reforms was the influence of communitarian thinking, particularly with the introduction of reparation orders and rest orative cautioning.  [25]  The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 placed local authorities with the responsibility of formulating and implementing annual youth justice plans which dealt with the social causes of crime amongst other priorities. Gelsthorpe and Morris argue that the reforms introduced will allow restorative processes to occupy a marginal place within criminal justice until contradictory values and practices of blaming and punishing are given significantly less emphasis and restorative values and practices are given significantly more emphasis.  [26]  A potential flaw of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 presented in the literature is that significant elements inherent in the reforms are premised on the basis of proportionality which is characteristic of punitive punishment. Wasik identifies that the reparation order is subjected to the normal requirements of proportionality which is linked to the retributive justice value of responsibility of the offender for the crime.  [27]  The central concern among advocates of restorative justice is that this model will not operate with the full potential of restorative justice values and principles which could over time gradually become more punitive than restorat ive in nature. Much of the debate throughout the literature focuses on the various elements of the reforms which can be considered to have restorative ideals.  [28]  The most significant reform was the introduction of Referral Orders as part of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999. Dignan and Marsh argue that Referral Orders are potentially one of the most radical aspects of the entire youth justice reform agenda where the court can divert the young offender away from the courts system to deal with the offending behaviour through restorative approaches.  [29]  Crawford and Newburn argue that the reforms implemented by Labour were heavily influenced by the what works paradigm and the language of risk factors.  [30]   Conclusion: Goldson argues that Labour introduced an unprecedented corpus of youth justice legislation both in terms of reach and volume.  [31]  Fergusson argues that the approach to youth offending became a melting pot of contradictions, ideals and ideologies where a hybrid model emerges which encompasses a dissected mix of restorative and retributive values.  [32]  Fergusson correctly identifies that the way governments present policy rhetorically, how they codify it legally, and how those policies are played out in practice are critically different facets of the policy process in the management of crime.  [33]   Successive governments have responded to the social causes of youth crime in various ways throughout the last five decades, in particular the latest strategy employed a double edged sword which leans heavily on punitive punishment for adult offenders with a more welfarist approach in dealing with youth offenders.  [34]  Restorative justice undoubtedly represents one of the most significant developments in criminal justice and criminological practice and thinking over the past two decades.  [35]  It is arguably the social movement for criminal justice reform of the 1990s and into the new millennium.  [36]   Empirical evidence emanating from America, Australia and New Zealand indicate that where the use of restorative justice is prevalent for young offenders, there has been success at reducing youth offending rates and a reduction in repeat offending resulting in greater effectiveness at dealing with youth crime and the social causes of crime.  [37]   The net effect of these new policies aimed at the reduction of youth crime and tackling the social causes of crime represent a more integrated approach by the state to manage youth offending rates. The policies acknowledge the failures of the previous strategies of strict punitive punishment as a deterrent for further offences. The approach of incorporating restorative values, although arguable only at the fringes of the youth justice system, represents a more inclusive justice system which takes into account mechanisms to address the social causes of youth offending.

Willingness of US to go to war :: essays research papers

What I am going to talk about tonight affects all of us. Not just us sitting in this classroom, but it affects everyone on this world. Whether you’re in the U.N. or live in North Korea. America†¦ and their willingness to go to war, for the preservation of their economy and their security. Now, this talk is not anti-American, I have American relatives and I don’t hate them. But what I do hate is this free world democracy spiel which the government are always belching out about. How is America a free democracy with free pres when the country’s inhabitants are so Ill-informed about the rest of the world! The media vilifies the Arab states e.g. Iran, Iraq, Syria even when it was America who installed the dictatorships in the first place for fear of single Islamic entity forming, and they support Israel who are in the process of genocide against Palestinians. The media scares people into thinking that they could be attacked at any moment – even people in rural areas with no landmarks of significance are quaking in their boots for fear of the bearded turban wearing Islamist blowing up their Wal-mart or something! The average American is so scared and ill-informed that they even voted George W. Bush into power for a second term even though there is sufficient evidence to prove that his first victory was fixed. Disenfranchised African Americans, people without criminal records, honest, hard working people were denied their vote. Is this racism The Bush Administration has perfected the art of the fear and consumption tactic. Americans, for fear of their lives from the evil Arab, or the manic ethnic minority (as influenced by shows like cops and world’s scariest police chases) will arm themselves to the teeth and even join the army to fight overseas for what they are brainwashed to believe is liberation. Iraq – Saddam was indeed a brutal dictator, but bombarding a densely populated area with missiles is not the way to remove a man from power. What kill the victims and the killer will follow? Weapons of mass destruction – If there were any at all, wouldn’t you have thought the US would have been able to track them down anyway? I mean where else would Iraq get WMD’s from? Iran? The same Iran they were in a million plus casualty war with in the 80’s? America is the world’s largest economy, generates  ¾ of the world’s turnover, produces the most weapons of mass destruction and has the biggest army in the world.

Standardized Testing and Teacher Cheating Essay -- High-Stakes Standard

In the contemporary American education system high-stakes standardized testing has resulted in a focus on extensive test preparation, as well as a large increase in the numbers of teachers cheating by alternating their students' test scores. Both these phenomena are a direct consequence of the incentives and punishments directly linked to standardized test results. Many teachers have taken acceptable measures in improving their students’ scores, such as simply â€Å"teaching to the test†, and taking class time to teach test taking techniques and procedures often resulting in a significant loss in time for other important standards and benchmarks that are not tested on. Taking a deontologist stance, one would propose that the teachers are merely acting from their duty to help their students succeed, and that if the standardized test is a true reflection of the material a student should have mastered, â€Å"teaching to the test† exactly the course a teacher should take. With the implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 teachers are â€Å"implicitly encouraged to reallocate classroom time, because it only requires testing in reading and math in seven grades and science in three† (Phelps) and taking any other form of action would result in failure for the students and the instructor. One can argue that teac hing to the test can easily be squashed by changing and rotating test topics between all of the benchmarks and standards teachers are ethically obligated to teach; however, this arises the question, do administrators and educators really want to stop this well adapted to process? This phenomenon places a utilitarian at a conflict of short term versus long term effects and benefits. When focusing on the short term benefits, a utili... ...2011): 38+. Literature Resource Center. Web. 19 Nov. 2013. Smolin, Andrea, and Jennifer Clayton. "Standardized Testing: How Prepared Are We?." Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership. 12(4). (2009): 29-36. Web. 21 Nov. 2013. Wiliam, Dylan. "Standardized Testing and School Accountability." Educational Psychologist. 45(2). (2010): 107-122. Web. 21 Nov. 2013. Farah, Yara N. "Through Another's Eyes." Gifted Child Today 36.3 (2013): 209-212. Professional Development Collection. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. Was, Christopher A. "Standardized Testing: NOT The Root Of All Evil." Psyccritiques 54.23 (2009): PsycCRITIQUES. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. Jacob, Brian, and Steven Levitt. "Rotten Apples: An Investigation of the Prevalence and Predictors of Teacher Cheating." Oxford University Press. 118.3 (2003): 843-877. Web. 20 Nov. 2013. .

Aborted Aspirations in Pat Barkers Regeneration Essay -- Pat Barker R

Aborted Aspirations in Pat Barker's Regeneration Pat Barker's riveting World War I novel Regeneration brilliantly exemplifies the effectiveness of fiction united with historical facts. While men aspired to gain glory from war and become heroes, Regeneration poignantly points out that not all of war was glorious. Rather, young soldiers found their aspirations prematurely aborted due to their bitter war experiences. The horrible mental and physical sicknesses, which plagued a number of soldiers, caused many men to withdraw from the battlefield. Feelings of guilt and shame haunted many soldiers as they found themselves removed from the heat of war. Men, however, were not the only individuals to experience such feelings during a time of historical upheaval. Women, too, found themselves at war at the dawn of a feminine revolution. One of the most contentious topics of the time was the practice of abortion, which comes to attention in chapter 17 on pages 202 and 203 of Barker's novel. Through Baker's ground-breaking novel, we learn how m en and women alike discovered that in life, not all aspirations are realized; in fact, in times of conflict, women and men both face desperate situations, which have no definite solutions. Illustrated in Barker's novel by a young woman named Betty, and many broken soldiers, society's harsh judgments worsen the difficult circumstances already at hand. As men engaged in war overseas, women gained many opportunities in their every day life. New employment opportunities became attainable to women. In women's health, many new medical practices were conventionalized as well. One of the most pivotal medical advancements of the time was the commercialization of birth control ("Marie Stopes"). However, n... ...omen did or did not abort their unborn child varied, it can be inferred that social disgrace would result from whatever choice was made. The decisions we make today, can create life-long repercussions. Regeneration poignantly points out that not all is fair in war, or life. Works Cited "Abortion: In Law, History & Religion." Childbirth By Choice Trust. May 1995. 26 April 2004. <http://www.cbctrust.com/abortion.html> Barker, Pat. Regeneration. New York: Plume, 2003. Horden, Anthony. Legal Abortion: The English Experience. New York: Pergamon Press, 1971. "Marie Stopes." Spartacus. 7 December 2001. 26 April 2004. <http://www.spartacus .schoolnet.co.uk/Wstopes.htm> Raffel, Brian, Monica Borgone, Michael D'Ambrosio and Rebecca Heydon. "Abortion Around the World." 1999. 30 April 2004. <http://apdude0.tripod.com/abortionaroundtheworld/index.html>

A Defense Of Ethical Relativism Essay

Ethical Relativism Introduction   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Ethical relativism is the stance that there are no moral codes, no moral wrongs or right. Right or wrong is based on social customs. Ethical relativism implies that people’s morals are dynamic, subject to times and environment. Ethical relativism accommodates and enables the presence of many different cultures and practices. It offers people the freedom to adapt and practice their socialized ethics and cultures. This means that there is no static culture or ethics. Morals are dependent on the society preferences, technology, logic, emotions, experience and rules among other factors. Morality is very vital since it holds the society together. The rationale of this paper is to explain the effect of ethical relativism on the morality bond that brings the society together.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In ethics, the notion that nothing is objectively wrong or right and that the definition of right or wrong relies on the existing perception of culture, an individual or history. The existence of morality is not relative to individuality. Thus some of the relativists’ arguments are invalid. Ethical relativism is a knotty theory since there are various differences within cultures. People’s preferences may not for all time be ethically correct choices. Thus what is culturally acceptable might not always be morally right. Ethical relativism by definition is a premise that maintains that there are no generally accepted ethical codes. Ethical relativism is usually affected the disagreement between right and wrong due to social and personal ethical relativism as well as the natural law premise (Lukes, 2008).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Personal ethical relativism holds that different people have diverse moral beliefs. Social ethical relativism holds that different societies have distinct code of ethics. On the other hand, the natural law presumes that there is a general set of moral values that opposes ethical relativism, however it is faulty. Ruth Benedict believes that morals are defined by culture. Benedict also proposes that normal is a variant of the concept of good. According to Benedict, behavior will depend on what the general culture that is accepted by the society. On contrary, Christina Hoff Sommers proposes that there are some human qualities that are not relative to place, time, situation or circumstance. Ruth and Sommers have different propositions on ethics. Descriptive ethical relativism states that ethical beliefs and judgments are the expressions of the moral attitudes and outlook of individual persons (Lukes, 2008).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   I faintly agree with Christina Sommers since people have their own personal set of moral values. For example, an individual may belief that it is morally wrong to have sex on the first date. Another person might not have any issue with sex in any context. Someone else might not believe in sex before marriage, or maybe not at all. In order to judge these views as right or wrong, moral standards are very crucial. However, there is no general set of ethical codes which can be used to judge the views. This example proves differences in ethical virtues between people and hence signifies ethical relativism. There are flaws in ethical relativism because it does not mean that everyone accept to a notion simply because one group in the society find a given action to be acceptable. What is publicly acceptable is extensively variable. If moral standards do not go beyond social principles, no action would be regarded as right or wrong (Arrington, 1983 ).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   I totally agree with Benedict that rules of the society serve as a standard. Ethical relativism considers how other cultures tolerate other cultures. Ethical relativism brings societies together because it allows for great variance in regard of what is seen as good or bad. Ethical relativism elaborates how one action can be regarded as correct in one culture, but wrong in the other (â€Å"Ethical Relativism†, 2014). All rudiments of the culture are put into consideration when determining whether an action is wrong or right. Ethical relativism confuses the reforms to be carried out considering what is being done currently. People are forced to tolerate some actions that might be unbearable if there are no socially accepted habits. I disagree with Sommers since human behaviors depend on the time, place, situation or circumstance. Morality, ethical standards and the position of wrong or right are based on culture and hence subject to i ndividual preferences. Social institutions are very vital since they are richly endowed with customs, norms and manner of thinking. Appropriate management of the school-community culture will ensure that it will influence the young children in the society based on the attitudes and dispositions they acquire at school. Though moral relativism have been widely criticized for being pernicious, incoherent and sophomoric, but it is a plausible doctrine and it has significant influence on how people live, interact and organize the society (Lukes, 2008).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Morals fluctuate across place and time. Children learn values when they are growing, even before they can reason efficiently. Moral relativism is linked to emotional attitudes since values are acquired through emotional conditioning. People decide the position of an action by examining their feelings. Emotions are very necessary in making moral judgments. Ethics and morality shape personality. The capacity to determine whether a practice is correct or immoral develops from life and the environment that people are exposed to. Society and family are the first exposure where moral system is created. Benedict view social institutions as communities with common virtues and practices that have become sophisticated patterns of practices and ideas. Benedict arguments reveal how diverse cultures employ different moral principles in an endeavor to survive as a culture. Benedict is more correct in her analysis regarding the differences among cultures . There are some features of cultures that are not based on any universal moral standards. There is no general rule that moral cultures must abide to a given code to survive, and that the cultures that do not follow a code are not moral (â€Å"Ethical Relativism†, 2014).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Benedict states that morality differs in all societies and is a suitable term for socially accepted habits. Opponents of ethical relativism argue that, if ethical relativism is right, there can be no general construction for resolving ethical dispute or for realizing agreement on ethical issues among affiliates of different societies. Many ethicists oppose ethical relativism since they argue that although moral practices in the community differ, the values underlying those actions remain unchanged. Societies might deviate in their application of the elementary moral ideologies, but they agree on the principles. It can be argued that some ethical beliefs are culturally relative whereas others are not. Some practices such as customs concerning dressing mode may depend on local traditions, while other practices such as political repression or slavery might be determined by general ethical standards and judged incorrect regardless the various other differences that persist among cultures (Arrington, 1983).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The notion that some cultural practices are relative does not mean that all moral practices are relative. Ethical relativism may also be criticized on the basis of its effect to personal ethical values. It may be argued that if morals entirely depend on social norms, it follows that if a certain society believes in racial practices, its members must admit to racism as morally right. Members of a given community have different opinions regarding a given practice. Ethical relativism believes that culture is the standard to examine whether a practice is right or wrong. Ethical relativism might be criticized, but it helps people to acknowledge that communities have different moral values and that these beliefs are subject to culture. Ethical relativism also encourage people to explore reasons as to why communities have differing beliefs, and also challenge people to scrutinize their reasons for the beliefs and values they support. Benedictâ₠¬â„¢s argument about how morality is relative is sound. Benedict uses an example of Kwakiutl society regarding murder. Kwakiutl practice of murder is intolerable in the modern society, but it was acceptable in Kwakiutl. Kwakiutl cannot be judged for their acts because they that was a social norm when one of their relatives died. Today such practice would be regarded as murder and is unlawful and a crime that is absolutely penalized by the society and the law (â€Å"Ethical Relativism†, 2014).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Benedict concludes that â€Å"moral relativism is the correct view of moral principles† which imply that right or wrong is determined by culture and environmental events. For instance people might accept capital punishment and oppose abortion. Capital punishment is regarded as wrong and hence punished with death. On contrary, opposing abortion is like denying women their freedom of their body. According to Benedict, regardless of the consequences behind an abortion, if the society opposes it implies that abortion is morally wrong hence it will maintain the truth worth of moral relativism. The notion that abortion is wrong is due to the fact that people’s behaviors are shaped by their history, culture and environment. Therefore the right worth of their ethics relies on what is more rational to social structures. On the other hand if people believe that capital punishment is a way of attaining justice, they will consider it mor ally right. Morals are shared amongst people and the community, and it is seen as a normalcy condition of morals (Lukes, 2008).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In conclusion, I agree with Benedict argument of ethical relativism where she holds that people change their opinions and principles depending on the majority rule. I agree that morals vary with time, culture and environment. However, I do not agree that any practice is morally right or wrong depending on the majority. Benedict adds that the conception of the normal is accurately a variant of the notion of good. Behaviors will depend on the cultural norms. Ethical relativism allows a wide variety of practices and cultures. It will enable people to adapt morally as technology, culture and knowledge change in society. This is an excellent and a type of relativism. Ethical relativism faces the challenge because people find it hard to adapt to new morals, new ideas and their own culture. The word is increasingly becoming culturally diverse thus making people find it hard to accept something different. Culture is a standard for assessing the po sition of a practice, whether it is right or wrong. References Arrington, R. L. (1983). A Defense Of Ethical Relativism. Metaphilosophy, 14(3-4), 225-239. Ethical Relativism. (n.d.). CARM. Retrieved September 22, 2014, from http://carm.org/ethical-relativism Lukes, S. (2008). Moral relativism. New York: Picador. Source document