Empirical Evidence of Drug Addiction - 799 Words

Empirical Evidence The study of addiction has included alcoholism and drug addiction for a long time. The recent obesity epidemic has brought food addiction as a serious concern even though it is still a controversial issue. It is difficult to accept the idea of food being an addiction. Addiction has been defined as† a primary, chronic disease involving brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry.†(Whitepaper) There are numerous studies and research that support the fact that over eating food can have the same effect on the brain as those addicted to drugs. One of the studies took place in the research laboratory in Princeton University by Professor Bart Hoebel. He experimented with rats overeating a sugar solution.†¦show more content†¦(Enders, Brandt, 2007) The U.S. Department of Energy s Brookhaven National Laboratory has researched the role that dopamine plays in drug addiction. â€Å"Addictive drugs increase the level of dopamine in the brain, and that addicts have fewer dopamine receptors than normal subjects.†(Gene Jack-Wang, 2003). The Scientists at Brookhaven have found that dopamine also plays the same role in obese people. They had two groups of ten people in the experiment, one group were obese and the other group was normal. They used a PET scan to show images of the brain to compare both groups. The results of this experiment showed that extremely obese individuals also had less dopamine receptors in their brains. (The Lancet,2003) A study at Yale University compared the similarities of drug addiction and food addiction. Dr. Gearhardt and her associates studied forty-eight woman of different weights and used surveys, experiments and imaging of the brain to compare the effect that the body and brain have with food comparing it to drug dependancy. When the subjects were shown an image of a milk shake it â€Å"it activated neural pathways in the brain similar to that of a cocaine addict shown a crack pipe.†(Gearhardt, 2011). Another similarity between the two is the tolerance built up in that it begins to take more of the substance to produce the same high as before. There is also an inability to stay away from theShow MoreRelatedPrescription Drug Abuse And Addiction : Past, Present And Future874 Words   |  4 PagesThis week I chose to further explore the article Prescription Drug Abuse and Addiction: Past, Present and Future: The Paradigm for an Epidemic written by P. B. Hall MD, D ABAM, AAMRO, Denzil Hawkinberry II, MD, DABA, Pam Moyers-Scott, PAC, MPAS, DFAAPA as more and more individuals are abusing and becoming addicted to prescription medications. The article provides a great amount of statistical data for the US but is primarily focused on the population in West Virginia where Governor Joe Manchin IIIRead MoreOpioids And The Prevalence Of Addiction And Overdose Essay1214 Words   |  5 Pagesare traumatic, devastating, and preventable. It is estimated that there are 128,000 people addicted to opioids in New Jersey (Stirling, 2015). Furthermore, many of those addicted to the drug heroin became so after being prescribed narcotic pain killers. This is because when the prescription runs out the addiction is still in place. Those addicted can find pills being sold illegally but they can cost up to 30 dollars a pill. Heroin, costing only 5 dollars a bag according to law enforcement officialsRead MoreAddiction : An Emergent Consequence Of Elementary Choic e Principles Essay1195 Words   |  5 PagesBibliographic Information Heyman, Gene M. 2013 Addiction: An Emergent Consequence of Elementary Choice Principles.Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 56 (5):428-445. Abstract The measurement of the research concerning addiction is regarded as a brain disease by researchers, physician, and informed societies; however, the extreme use of narcotics is projected as an individual’s choice. The choice theory suggest that drugs do not turn users into addicts, but the choice to keep usingRead MoreAddiction as a Disease: Addiction is a term that has traditionally been used to refer to1400 Words   |  6 PagesAddiction as a Disease: Addiction is a term that has traditionally been used to refer to psychiatric syndrome that is caused by illicit drug use. Actually, addition is the only psychiatric condition whose symptoms are regarded as an illegal activity. In most cases, this term is described on the basis of drug use, which is the main focus of many research and treatment programs. Generally, drug addiction has significant negative effects on individuals using the drug and those around them such asRead MoreAddiction Problems And The Field Of Addiction Treatment Essay920 Words   |  4 Pagesunderstand their clients with addiction problems and motivate them to change. This model is one of the most widely used models within the field of addiction treatment initially developed to describe the process of adopting any healthy behavior. Motivational interviewing shares much in common with the trans-theoretical or Stages of Change Model of behavior change. Although not universally endorsed, the trans-theoretical model holds that at any given time, a person is at a particular stage in relationRead MoreClassical or Operant Conditioning Essay1115 Words   |  5 Pagesconsider their use in explaining pathological behaviour and will be answered using empirical evidence. The earlier part of the essay will focus on the development of the classical conditioning paradigm and cover the following topics: the findings of Ivan Pavlov and the conditional reflex and the components of classical conditioning. The latter part of the essay will cover: the fear response, how phobias and addictions can be attributed to conditional reflex paradigm. Additionally, will briefly describeRead MoreMontoyaW Conceptualizingaddictionpaper1080 Words   |  5 Pagesï » ¿ Conceptualizing Addiction Paper Montoya Williams BSHS/455 November 4, 2014 Carla Malewicz Conceptualizing Addiction Paper Introduction For many years, individuals have battled substance abuse and addiction. My position comes from hearing about it, having seeing results from it, and reading about it, also developing my own thoughts about addiction. Weil and Rosen (1993) believe that a drug use (and addiction) results from humans longing for a sense of completeness and wholeness, and searchingRead MoreMedical Journal Article: Addictions as Real Physical Disease1838 Words   |  7 Pagesof concern has been the debate between those that believe that the conceptualization of a disease should be free from social influences/values versus those that state that the criteria use to define a disease, especially psychiatric disease like addiction, are a result of social definitions/values (e.g., Szasz, 2008). In general, most health professionals agree that the determination of what is or is not labeled as a disease should be free of value judgments and social influences and should rest onRead MoreThe Pharmacological Treatmen ts For Opiates, Drugs, And Drugs1977 Words   |  8 Pagesalcohol in relation to addiction relief and prevention will be critically evaluated. This will be accomplished through an investigation of the respective substances and their current treatment’s methods and levels of success, such as the use of Substitution Therapy, agonist and antagonist treatments, and preventative drugs. Furthermore, the generation of directions for future research and treatments will be performed, particularly assessing the potentiality for remedying addiction through substance-tailoredRead MoreEssay on Alcohol vs Marijuana1537 Words   |  7 Pages(kinds) of drugs. Despite the well-known consequences of drug addiction, millions of people constantly consume different legal and illegal drugs. Affecting peoples mind and changing their behavior, drugs become one of the most threatening factors of social risk, resulting in increasing rates of mortality, aggressive and criminal behavior, and dissoluti on of social ties. This paper is devoted to comparison of social science outcome characteristics for two of the most commonly used drugs in the groups

Disraelis’ Reputaion and Promises Free Essays

string(179) " the case of the Merchant Shipping Act the initiative was left with the owners of the ship who were never personally in danger abroad the ships and profited from the overloading\." To establish whether this statement is true, the promises and reputation of Disraeli must first be identified. In his speeches in 1872 at Crystal Palace and in Manchester†s Free Trade Hall, Disraeli once again showed his skills as an orator. He laid out three basic aims or policies that he wanted to pursue, should he get in power. We will write a custom essay sample on Disraelis’ Reputaion and Promises or any similar topic only for you Order Now These were; to conserve the institutions in Britain, uphold British interests abroad and to improve the standard of life for the general population and especially the working classes. Disraeli had also created a reputation for himself with the 1867 Reform Act. He had successfully destroyed the liberal party and due to the nature of the act, extending the franchise by a considerable number, had acquired a reputation for being more open minded about matters of reform, even though the act was mainly passed through necessity, because the act would be passed and it was just a question about which party would do it. He had also tried successfully to establish the Conservative Party as the nationalistic party in the government, the one that would uphold British interest abroad and repair the damage that he claimed that Gladstone was causing. The Alabama arbitration and the dealings that Gladstone had with Russia over the situation in the Black Sea were perfect opportunities for Disraeli to show how Gladstone was destroying Britain†s Empire by his weakness in his dealings with other major powers. This meant that when Disraeli cam into power he had to act upon his criticisms of Gladstone as he had condemned the way that Gladstone had put his faith so strongly in arbitration rather than in action and the way that Gladstone was more concerned about the way that the negotiations were carried out rather than the end result. The only way that Disraeli could fulfil his promises about the welfare and conditions of the people and conserving the institutions was by bringing about various social reforms. In his famous speeches in 1872 he promised the people that he would improve the standard of their lives and give them â€Å"air light and water†. To an extent it would be fair to say that he achieved this although some of the acts that were meant to do this were not very effective at all. The Factory Legislations in 1874, 1875 and 1878 were major steps in Disraeli achieving what he had promised. These were some of his more effective acts because they were compulsory and the consequence of this was that it had a further reaching effect than a large number of the acts that Disraeli passed. In this respect it is very similar to the Public Health Act in 1875 because this also had aspects of it that were compulsory, for example the local councils were compelled to employ a Ministry of Health. The fact that acts like these were compulsory and not permissive is what makes them more successful than the others. While other acts would appear to conform to Disraeli†s claims that he was fulfilling his promises, upon closer inspection they did not have much effect upon the lives of the workingman. The Friendly Societies Act in 1875 was another act that could be used to support the statement that Disraeli†s was a government that lived up to its promises. The societies were formed as a kind of self-help organization and Disraeli†s government supported this, which indicates that he was trying to live up the promise that he would improve conditions for the working classes. The Labour Legislation and the amendment of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act in 1875 were other legislations that lived up to the promises of Disraeli, because they both attempted to change the law in order to make it more fair and even for the workers so that they could negotiate on equal grounds as the employer and to ensure that the laws were equal for both parties involved. The Enclosure of Commons Act in 1876 was an act that showed Disraeli trying to fulfil his promise that he would provide enjoyment of â€Å"air light and water. † However convincing these acts may seem to be in arguing that Disraeli lived up to his promises it must be recognised that there were a great many acts that he passed that were either totally ineffectual or would work in principle but not in practice. The River Pollution Prevention Act in 1876 was a totally ineffectual act. In principle it was supposed to prevent the factory owners who were polluting the rivers from doing so but in practice the pollution of the rivers continued and the act did not stop pollution. This is one of many examples of Disraeli†s government attempting to fulfil the promises that Disraeli made, but in the end passing an ineffectual act that simply does not achieve half as much as was promised. While these acts may have set a precedent to other acts in the future, they do not achieve very much at the time. Other acts like the Sale of Food and Drugs Act in 1875 show how that while the act looks to be a major act, it is only a permissive act that gives the power of change to the local councils who have men on their board who own the shops that are going to lose revenue if they are no longer allowed to adulterate the food or Drugs that they sell. As it was not in their interests, and as it was an enabling act, they simply did not bother to put anything into practice. There was a similar situation with the Merchant Shipping Act and the Artisans Dwelling Act in 1876 and 1875. These two were both permissive instead of compulsory, and both gave the power to change to those who would not benefit and may well lose out if they put the laws into practice. In the case of the Merchant Shipping Act the initiative was left with the owners of the ship who were never personally in danger abroad the ships and profited from the overloading. You read "Disraelis’ Reputaion and Promises" in category "Papers" Again, in the Artisans Dwellings Act it was the councils decision whether to build houses or not, and to do this would require a raise in taxes for the rest of the constituency, and so the council may lose the next election so would not do anything. To illustrate this, by 1881, only ten out of 87 towns would take any action under the act. The Education Act in 1876 was not a very successful act either because it did nothing to ensure that the laws would be carried out until 1891 so there was a high level of truancy and children still worked when they should not, so although it added to the growing improvement of the education system, it did not really change anything significantly. The foreign policy that Disraeli followed between 1874 and 1880 was one that certainly appeared to be consistent with the reputation that Disraeli had acquired. It was very aggressive and he appeared to be fulfilling promises that he had made in 1872. His severe criticism of Gladstone†s weaknesses on foreign policy was one factor that formed peoples expectations that he would act upon the criticisms and that his foreign policy would be constructed so as to protect British interests abroad. Disraeli lived up to his reputation and promises in his foreign policy more than he did at home with his domestic policies. However it was not as he had promised to the people. He had promised to uphold British interests abroad, and to a certain extent he did, but there were events that he could not control and certain concessions that had to make to foreign powers that diminished the influence and threatened the power that Britain held abroad. The problems with Russia were a prime example where he had to concede and let Russia have a fleet in the Black sea even though this was against the interests of Britain. He could not realistically deliver all that he promised, as there would be times like these where he had to make concessions. On the other hand it must be said that Disraeli managed to fulfil the majority of his promises and reputation in regards to his foreign policy, even if at times he did not mean to. In a lot of his speeches a lot of what he said was rhetoric, but when men like Frere and Lytton took him at face value, and started wars with the Afghans and with the Zulus and started wars in order to preserve the British interests in those particular areas, they put action to his words. Even if Disraeli did not actually want these wars, which he did not, the two wars were both in keeping with the reputation that he had gained for being a very aggressive imperialist, even if these wars did work to his detriment. The Congress of Berlin was one of the high points of Disraeli†s foreign policy because in this he managed to rebuild Britain†s reputation as a major imperial power, which adds to the evidence that he did live up to the reputation that he had acquired, and he made secret agreements with the Turks, Russians and Austria-Hungary in order to preserve British interest in that area. The purchase of the Suez Canal shares in 1875 was another one of Disraeli’s best judgements because for years on from then it was one of the biggest trade routes in the world and Britain†s involvement in it was a major asset to Britain†s power as an imperial nation. One side of Disraeli†s foreign policy that cannot be ignored is the fact that Disraeli took massive risks in his policy and could have got Britain involved in a war with Russia without nay powerful allies and with an obsolete navy, and also agreed to defend one of Turkeys frontiers without the resources to do so. The fact that was lucky and managed to steer clear of any problems is a credit to Disraeli as it would have been very easy for him to make a very costly mistake. Though Disraeli passed a large number of reforms for his time, he still managed to fulfil his final promise of his 1872 speeches and conserve the institutions. The institutions that he meant were the aristocracy, like the rich landowners and the Anglican Church. While someone like Gladstone was a fanatical Anglican, Disraeli was only really interested in it to keep everyone else happy. It has been argued that acts like the Education Acts sole intention was to prevent the board schools which were more financially popular with the working or lower classes from getting too much of a hold on the education system because most wanted the Anglican churches from being the dominant force in education and the board schools were not. During his period in rule, he did not do anything that was actively conserving the constitutions, he simply avoided doing anything that would offend or threaten the institutions. It would be fair to say in conclusion that while Disraeli fulfilled some of the promises that he made, he did not do so with all of them. His domestic policy is a hard one to say whether he achieved accomplishment of the aims that he laid down in 1872. He certainly tried to do so, as the number of acts that he passed, and the nature of them indicate that they were probably passed with the interests of the people that it would effect, in mind. However there are some opinions that argue that all of the acts passed in Disraeli†s era were in reaction to public opinion at the time. While this is not totally fair to Disraeli, there is a lot of evidence pointing to this being a major contributing factor to the decision. In the case of the Education Act the other politicians were mainly or all Anglican and so wanted to conserve the churches hold over education, in the 1876 Merchant Shipping Act, the reason was predominantly to pacify the people who worked on the docks and Samuel Plimsoll as he was getting particularly worked up over the issue. However far it is possible to give credit to these ideas, it would be unfair to Disraeli to say that he tried to passed acts solely to pacify public demand it is much more likely to be that he was more genuine in his actions than that. However, the did not live up to all of the promises that he made, he may have set a precedent for governments before him in what their duties were to the people, but to the majority of the people of the time he did not have the ability to pass anything that would significantly change their lives. This was due to a number of limiting factors, like a hostile cabinet and a general public that were already sick of reform after a great reforming ministry from Gladstone. In his foreign policy in upholding the interests of the British Empire Disraeli fared a little better. He did not make any disastrous decisions in terms of upholding British interests abroad, although his attitude to problems got him into trouble at home, and did not make any major concessions to foreign powers. His diplomacy in Turkey in 1878 probably saved the Turkish Empire and he was aggressive to an extent that nearly got him into trouble. He certainly lived up to his reputation and promises in his foreign policy, although certain reckless comments landed him in trouble. Overall I think that Disraeli†s government did not live up to the promises that Disraeli made in 1872 and although his foreign policy was very similar to what people would expect and so lived up to his reputation, he did not deliver on the domestic front. The reasons for this were not solely attributable to Disraeli, but the fact remains that he did not deliver what he promised, and if anything the situation worsened with the depression even though this was not his fault. Disraeli tried hard to deliver what he promised but the government, the budget and the attitude of the people, who were not overly enthusiastic to more reforms, limited him in what he was able to do. How to cite Disraelis’ Reputaion and Promises, Papers Disraelis’ Reputaion and Promises Free Essays string(179) " the case of the Merchant Shipping Act the initiative was left with the owners of the ship who were never personally in danger abroad the ships and profited from the overloading\." To establish whether this statement is true, the promises and reputation of Disraeli must first be identified. In his speeches in 1872 at Crystal Palace and in Manchester†s Free Trade Hall, Disraeli once again showed his skills as an orator. He laid out three basic aims or policies that he wanted to pursue, should he get in power. We will write a custom essay sample on Disraelis’ Reputaion and Promises or any similar topic only for you Order Now These were; to conserve the institutions in Britain, uphold British interests abroad and to improve the standard of life for the general population and especially the working classes. Disraeli had also created a reputation for himself with the 1867 Reform Act. He had successfully destroyed the liberal party and due to the nature of the act, extending the franchise by a considerable number, had acquired a reputation for being more open minded about matters of reform, even though the act was mainly passed through necessity, because the act would be passed and it was just a question about which party would do it. He had also tried successfully to establish the Conservative Party as the nationalistic party in the government, the one that would uphold British interest abroad and repair the damage that he claimed that Gladstone was causing. The Alabama arbitration and the dealings that Gladstone had with Russia over the situation in the Black Sea were perfect opportunities for Disraeli to show how Gladstone was destroying Britain†s Empire by his weakness in his dealings with other major powers. This meant that when Disraeli cam into power he had to act upon his criticisms of Gladstone as he had condemned the way that Gladstone had put his faith so strongly in arbitration rather than in action and the way that Gladstone was more concerned about the way that the negotiations were carried out rather than the end result. The only way that Disraeli could fulfil his promises about the welfare and conditions of the people and conserving the institutions was by bringing about various social reforms. In his famous speeches in 1872 he promised the people that he would improve the standard of their lives and give them â€Å"air light and water†. To an extent it would be fair to say that he achieved this although some of the acts that were meant to do this were not very effective at all. The Factory Legislations in 1874, 1875 and 1878 were major steps in Disraeli achieving what he had promised. These were some of his more effective acts because they were compulsory and the consequence of this was that it had a further reaching effect than a large number of the acts that Disraeli passed. In this respect it is very similar to the Public Health Act in 1875 because this also had aspects of it that were compulsory, for example the local councils were compelled to employ a Ministry of Health. The fact that acts like these were compulsory and not permissive is what makes them more successful than the others. While other acts would appear to conform to Disraeli†s claims that he was fulfilling his promises, upon closer inspection they did not have much effect upon the lives of the workingman. The Friendly Societies Act in 1875 was another act that could be used to support the statement that Disraeli†s was a government that lived up to its promises. The societies were formed as a kind of self-help organization and Disraeli†s government supported this, which indicates that he was trying to live up the promise that he would improve conditions for the working classes. The Labour Legislation and the amendment of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act in 1875 were other legislations that lived up to the promises of Disraeli, because they both attempted to change the law in order to make it more fair and even for the workers so that they could negotiate on equal grounds as the employer and to ensure that the laws were equal for both parties involved. The Enclosure of Commons Act in 1876 was an act that showed Disraeli trying to fulfil his promise that he would provide enjoyment of â€Å"air light and water. † However convincing these acts may seem to be in arguing that Disraeli lived up to his promises it must be recognised that there were a great many acts that he passed that were either totally ineffectual or would work in principle but not in practice. The River Pollution Prevention Act in 1876 was a totally ineffectual act. In principle it was supposed to prevent the factory owners who were polluting the rivers from doing so but in practice the pollution of the rivers continued and the act did not stop pollution. This is one of many examples of Disraeli†s government attempting to fulfil the promises that Disraeli made, but in the end passing an ineffectual act that simply does not achieve half as much as was promised. While these acts may have set a precedent to other acts in the future, they do not achieve very much at the time. Other acts like the Sale of Food and Drugs Act in 1875 show how that while the act looks to be a major act, it is only a permissive act that gives the power of change to the local councils who have men on their board who own the shops that are going to lose revenue if they are no longer allowed to adulterate the food or Drugs that they sell. As it was not in their interests, and as it was an enabling act, they simply did not bother to put anything into practice. There was a similar situation with the Merchant Shipping Act and the Artisans Dwelling Act in 1876 and 1875. These two were both permissive instead of compulsory, and both gave the power to change to those who would not benefit and may well lose out if they put the laws into practice. In the case of the Merchant Shipping Act the initiative was left with the owners of the ship who were never personally in danger abroad the ships and profited from the overloading. You read "Disraelis’ Reputaion and Promises" in category "Papers" Again, in the Artisans Dwellings Act it was the councils decision whether to build houses or not, and to do this would require a raise in taxes for the rest of the constituency, and so the council may lose the next election so would not do anything. To illustrate this, by 1881, only ten out of 87 towns would take any action under the act. The Education Act in 1876 was not a very successful act either because it did nothing to ensure that the laws would be carried out until 1891 so there was a high level of truancy and children still worked when they should not, so although it added to the growing improvement of the education system, it did not really change anything significantly. The foreign policy that Disraeli followed between 1874 and 1880 was one that certainly appeared to be consistent with the reputation that Disraeli had acquired. It was very aggressive and he appeared to be fulfilling promises that he had made in 1872. His severe criticism of Gladstone†s weaknesses on foreign policy was one factor that formed peoples expectations that he would act upon the criticisms and that his foreign policy would be constructed so as to protect British interests abroad. Disraeli lived up to his reputation and promises in his foreign policy more than he did at home with his domestic policies. However it was not as he had promised to the people. He had promised to uphold British interests abroad, and to a certain extent he did, but there were events that he could not control and certain concessions that had to make to foreign powers that diminished the influence and threatened the power that Britain held abroad. The problems with Russia were a prime example where he had to concede and let Russia have a fleet in the Black sea even though this was against the interests of Britain. He could not realistically deliver all that he promised, as there would be times like these where he had to make concessions. On the other hand it must be said that Disraeli managed to fulfil the majority of his promises and reputation in regards to his foreign policy, even if at times he did not mean to. In a lot of his speeches a lot of what he said was rhetoric, but when men like Frere and Lytton took him at face value, and started wars with the Afghans and with the Zulus and started wars in order to preserve the British interests in those particular areas, they put action to his words. Even if Disraeli did not actually want these wars, which he did not, the two wars were both in keeping with the reputation that he had gained for being a very aggressive imperialist, even if these wars did work to his detriment. The Congress of Berlin was one of the high points of Disraeli†s foreign policy because in this he managed to rebuild Britain†s reputation as a major imperial power, which adds to the evidence that he did live up to the reputation that he had acquired, and he made secret agreements with the Turks, Russians and Austria-Hungary in order to preserve British interest in that area. The purchase of the Suez Canal shares in 1875 was another one of Disraeli’s best judgements because for years on from then it was one of the biggest trade routes in the world and Britain†s involvement in it was a major asset to Britain†s power as an imperial nation. One side of Disraeli†s foreign policy that cannot be ignored is the fact that Disraeli took massive risks in his policy and could have got Britain involved in a war with Russia without nay powerful allies and with an obsolete navy, and also agreed to defend one of Turkeys frontiers without the resources to do so. The fact that was lucky and managed to steer clear of any problems is a credit to Disraeli as it would have been very easy for him to make a very costly mistake. Though Disraeli passed a large number of reforms for his time, he still managed to fulfil his final promise of his 1872 speeches and conserve the institutions. The institutions that he meant were the aristocracy, like the rich landowners and the Anglican Church. While someone like Gladstone was a fanatical Anglican, Disraeli was only really interested in it to keep everyone else happy. It has been argued that acts like the Education Acts sole intention was to prevent the board schools which were more financially popular with the working or lower classes from getting too much of a hold on the education system because most wanted the Anglican churches from being the dominant force in education and the board schools were not. During his period in rule, he did not do anything that was actively conserving the constitutions, he simply avoided doing anything that would offend or threaten the institutions. It would be fair to say in conclusion that while Disraeli fulfilled some of the promises that he made, he did not do so with all of them. His domestic policy is a hard one to say whether he achieved accomplishment of the aims that he laid down in 1872. He certainly tried to do so, as the number of acts that he passed, and the nature of them indicate that they were probably passed with the interests of the people that it would effect, in mind. However there are some opinions that argue that all of the acts passed in Disraeli†s era were in reaction to public opinion at the time. While this is not totally fair to Disraeli, there is a lot of evidence pointing to this being a major contributing factor to the decision. In the case of the Education Act the other politicians were mainly or all Anglican and so wanted to conserve the churches hold over education, in the 1876 Merchant Shipping Act, the reason was predominantly to pacify the people who worked on the docks and Samuel Plimsoll as he was getting particularly worked up over the issue. However far it is possible to give credit to these ideas, it would be unfair to Disraeli to say that he tried to passed acts solely to pacify public demand it is much more likely to be that he was more genuine in his actions than that. However, the did not live up to all of the promises that he made, he may have set a precedent for governments before him in what their duties were to the people, but to the majority of the people of the time he did not have the ability to pass anything that would significantly change their lives. This was due to a number of limiting factors, like a hostile cabinet and a general public that were already sick of reform after a great reforming ministry from Gladstone. In his foreign policy in upholding the interests of the British Empire Disraeli fared a little better. He did not make any disastrous decisions in terms of upholding British interests abroad, although his attitude to problems got him into trouble at home, and did not make any major concessions to foreign powers. His diplomacy in Turkey in 1878 probably saved the Turkish Empire and he was aggressive to an extent that nearly got him into trouble. He certainly lived up to his reputation and promises in his foreign policy, although certain reckless comments landed him in trouble. Overall I think that Disraeli†s government did not live up to the promises that Disraeli made in 1872 and although his foreign policy was very similar to what people would expect and so lived up to his reputation, he did not deliver on the domestic front. The reasons for this were not solely attributable to Disraeli, but the fact remains that he did not deliver what he promised, and if anything the situation worsened with the depression even though this was not his fault. Disraeli tried hard to deliver what he promised but the government, the budget and the attitude of the people, who were not overly enthusiastic to more reforms, limited him in what he was able to do. How to cite Disraelis’ Reputaion and Promises, Papers

Gender Equality in Business Complex

Question: Discuss about the Gender Equality in Business Complex. Answer: Introduction Gender equality in a workplace has always been a major problem for the business organizations. This concept is not only complex but also difficult to implement for several reasons. In order to understand the concept of gender equality, the chapter focuses on the theories and concepts of gender segregation in business organization and the associated ideologies of gender equality (Hacker 2017). With the help of these theories and concepts it will be discussed how employed workers, men and women are treated, in a workplace. The chapter includes an examination of Marxist and radical feminist theory (Agenor and Canuto 2015). Then a critical analysis on dual system theory is also described in this study. Following this, the post-structuralist theory is also mentioned here. What is Gender equality? Gender equality in a workplace can be accomplished when all the employees are able to access and enjoy the similar rewards, possessions and opportunities regardless of gender. According to Van der Vleuten (2016), the main purpose of gender equality is to accomplish largely equal outcomes for women and men, not essentially outcomes that are precisely the same for all. In a workplace where there is gender equality, employers will provide equivalent pay for work of equivalent value (Williamson and Baird 2014). It is expected that in an equal workplace, there will not be any barrier for the women and they will be able to participate equally in every operations like men (Sobering et al. 2014). In todays competitive business scenario, it is highly important to implement gender equality in a workplace. If there is gender equality in a workplace then productivity and economic growth of the organization will be enhanced. Besides, it will also help the business companies to attract talent and retain its current employees. Theories and Concepts of Gender equality Marxist theory focuses to analyze the impact of capitalist system on the isolation of the workforce. This theory argues that women encompass a reserve army of labor. According to Pateman and Grosz (2013), women are expected to enter into a paid job when there is a shortage of male labors. However it is also true that they are asked to leave formal employment when they are no longer required. The theory of Marxist questions the traditional notion of developing surplus value by signifying how gender inequalities are subjugated by capitalists to accomplish their bigger economic benefit. This theory also states that the conflict between workforce and capita is the main reason behind inequality in business organizations. However, Sturgeon (2016) criticized this theory and stated that class conflict is the only reason behind gender isolation where Marxist theory putting more emphasis on strategies of employers. He said that Marxist theory is trying to exhibit that employers are continuousl y using the strategies of using cheap labor and strategies to discourage worker resistance which is the primary reason behind gender discrimination. It is the only reason radical feminism has strictly criticized this theory. Radical feminist theory Radical feminists deeply believe that men are benefitted from their workplaces as a prevailing amount of task is completed by women in their families. People who believe in this theory also believe that this gender division of labor is the root of patriarchal social relations that provides men with social advantages in terms of employment. They also argue that patriarchy enforces the lower status of women both communally and economically. However, Meyers (2014) challenged this concept to describe the contemporary disadvantaged position of women in the labor force. As mentioned by Moghadam (2015), stated that the biological verdict of this concept in its conventional form must be criticized that implies that only males exercise patriarchy. Similarly other scholars also criticized this concept as it only refers to an explicit historical form of domestic relationship where gender discrimination in workplaces is much more complex (Meyers 2014). On the other hand, this concept also cannot explain other aspects of oppression and discrimination such as race, ethnicity and religion. Dual system theory Number of scholars has argued that Marxist theory and Radica feminist theory are not enough to explain the status of women in workplaces. Thus, it was proposed to connect these two theories in order to develop a progressive socialist feminist theory of capitalist patriarchy (Coleman 2015). This new theory which is Dual system theory describes the dual role of capitalist system and patriarchy in producing and supporting gender inequality in workplaces. According to Thompson (2016), Marxist theory ignores the roles of patriarchy in excluding women from employment on social and historical justification. On the other hand, radical theory fails to describe the role of capitalist system in exploiting gender inequalities that are present in the workplace. Post-structuralist theory This theory was developed based on a number of studies that were carried out on gender discrimination at work. This theory states that gender discrimination has an archaic focus on the dualistic variance between males and females (Hamilton 2014). It also says that gender subjectivity is the best way to conceptualize the multifaceted nature of gender inequality in workplaces. This concept of gender subjectivity is described as the skewed experience of being a man or a woman (Little 2016). This post-structuralist theory criticizes the structural analysis of gender inequality. Followers of this theory states that structural analysis tends to ignore the number of dissimilar experiences of women and men in the workplace. The believers of this theory tried to emphasize the altering gender roles of a small number of flourishing women within employment contexts. However, while doing this, they absolutely ignored the fact that most of the women remain inhibited to lower levels employment clas s when compared to their male counterparts. According to Coleman (2015), this concept has some challenges as it entirely ignores the preservation and imitation of inequality and unfairness at workplace experienced by most female workers. Gaps in Literature After reviewing the available literature including theories and concepts related to gender inequality in workplace, it is seen that there is no in depth analysis in it. It is already mentioned that gender equality in workplace is a complex problem and it has a number of views and reasons. Therefore, to understand the current situation related to the topic, it is important to hear from female employees who are working in various business industries. In one line, empirical research is significant to understand the concept and situation of the problem gender equality. None of these literatures had any empirical research in it. Besides, none of these theories are able to provide any solution to the problem. Conclusion In the end, it can be conclude that gender inequality is present in the society and in the workplace from a long time. Several theories are models are there to describe the problem and to describe the root of the problem. However, all of those theories are immensely criticized and therefore, it can be said that none of those theories are authentic. As a result, no proper solution there to deal with the problems related to gender inequality. Therefore, it is important to conduct an empirical research to find out exact problems related to gender equality. Once the major problems are found, it would be easy to develop proper solutions. References Agenor, P.R. and Canuto, O., 2015. Gender equality and economic growth in Brazil: a long-run analysis.Journal of Macroeconomics,43, pp.155-172. Coleman, G., 2015. Gender, power and post-structuralism in corporate citizenship.Globalization and Corporate Citizenship: The Alternative Gaze: A Collection of Seminal Essays, p.224. Hacker, S., 2017.Pleasure, power and technology: Some tales of gender, engineering, and the cooperative workplace(Vol. 5). Routledge. Hamilton, E., 2014. Entrepreneurial narrative identity and gender: a double epistemological shift.Journal of Small Business Management,52(4), pp.703-712. Little, J., 2016. Gender and Entrepreneurship.Routledge International Handbook of Rural Studies, p.357. Meyers, D.T., 2014.Feminist social thought: A reader. Routledge. Moghadam, V., 2015. Gender and globalization: female labor and women's mobilization.journal of world-systems research,5(2), pp.366-389. Pateman, C. and Grosz, E., 2013.Feminist challenges: Social and political theory. Routledge. Sobering, K., Thomas, J. and Williams, C.L., 2014. Gender In/equality in Worker?owned Businesses.Sociology Compass,8(11), pp.1242-1255. Sturgeon, N., 2016.Ecofeminist natures: Race, gender, feminist theory and political action. Routledge. Thompson, N., 2016.Anti-discriminatory practice: Equality, diversity and social justice. Palgrave Macmillan. Van der Vleuten, A., 2016.The price of gender equality: Member states and governance in the European Union. Routledge. Williamson, S. and Baird, M., 2014. Gender equality bargaining: Developing theory and practice.Journal of Industrial Relations,56(2), pp.155-169.