Compatibility Of Divine Foreknowledge With Human Freedom Philosophy Essay

Compatibility Of Divine Foreknowledge With Human Freedom Philosophy Essay In this essay I will discuss Leibnizs position that divine foreknowledge of all events is compatible with human freedom and why it is that I agree with his position. To do so, I will first discuss Leibnizs position. Next, I will discuss what divine foreknowledge is and what human freedom is, so that it will be much easier to understand Leibnizs position. Following these descriptions I will provide Leibnizs conclusion and then show that his position is in fact correct due to the lack of contradiction between the two concepts that would have made divine foreknowledge and human freedom incompatible. Leibniz believes that divine foreknowledge, meaning Gods prior knowledge of every action, occurrence or event, is compatible with human freedom (Schlà ¶sser) which means that there is no contradiction between the two and that they go hand-in-hand. This mention of compatibility shows that Leibniz believes that divine foreknowledge works with human freedom and does not disrupt freedom in any manner. Before venturing on with Leibnizs position, it is best to first describe the two concepts in which Leibniz is considering which is Divine foreknowledge and human freedom. Divine foreknowledge is the knowledge of the world and everything within it which is preordained by a divine figure, which in this case is God (Schlà ¶sser). This concept of divine foreknowledge assumes that everything in the past and things in the future, that have not occurred yet, have already been seen and put in place by God. The concept of divine foreknowledge can be related to a priori truths (Leibniz 31) because the ability to know and see everything prior to its occurrence leaves no room for truth without all possible facts. What I mean by this is that, since God has created all and has the ability to see everything in that past, present and future, it is impossible for the truth/knowledge to be without factual backgrounds and is therefore a priori. Divine foreknowledge also follows the principle of contradiction which relates to all truths that concern possible or essences and the impossibility of a thing or its necessity (Leibniz 19). There is quite a difference in terms of human knowledge as human knowledge contains both a priori and non a priori truths. The reason for this is because humans do not possess the unlimited knowledge as divine foreknowledge does. This means that humans are incapable of knowing everything in the past, present and future which deems their knowledge very limited and cannot possess the ability to know everything with complete factual backing. There are truths in human knowledge which are a priori such as there is no effect without a cause (Leibniz 31) but there are also non a priori truths that humans are subject to such as, a hundred people on Earth, weigh the same as a hundred people in an unknown universe, which cannot be proved because this unknown universe has no factual backing to it to prove this claim, yet the truth/claim still exists. A good example of divine foreknowledge, given by Leibniz, is Julius Caesar and his rise to dictator and emperor of Rome (45). Leibniz writes that it is within Caesars notion, or natu re, as predetermined by God, that Caesar would overthrow the Roman Empire (45). Leibniz does not say that to do the opposite (i.e. not overthrow the Empire) would be impossible but seeing that it has been predetermined it is impossible (45). That may seem confusing, but what Leibniz means is that Caesar always had the choice to do the opposite but chose to overthrow the Empire, and the foreknowledge of this event is irrelevant in the choice that was made. Leibniz states that to find a connection between the subject, Caesar, and the predicate, his successful undertaking, he would in fact be showing that Caesars future dictatorship is grounded in his notion or nature (45), which is a predetermination of God but still is founded on free will as the decision to [cross] the Rubicon and [win] rather than [lose] at Pharsalus was based purely on reason and not cause (45). With this example, Leibniz is able to show not only how divine foreknowledge works, but also its connection and compatib ility with human freedom. Human freedom, as described by Leibniz, is any action that is committed purely out of personal views, beliefs, goals, et cetera (Schlà ¶sser). This action cannot be influenced by any other source outside of ones own self, else the action cannot be deemed as free (Schlà ¶sser). Also, it is merely reasons that guide us rather than the cause, which means we do things based primarily on a reason to do so instead of committing actions consistently for the same cause as everyone else, which is to say we were being controlled at every moment. Human freedom is different, in a sense, than that of divine freedom. Human freedom is limited purely by the person committing the action and his/her morals, beliefs and values (Schlà ¶sser) that back the action, while divine freedom is somewhat similar in its limits where the actions are limited purely by doing the right thing and not the wrong. Overall both freedoms are similar in that they are limited by some form of morality or belief, one of the only differences being that there is still the free will to choose ones action (Schlà ¶sser) over preordained divine freedom which is already set in stone. Therefore if free will is based primarily on ones own self and nothing else, then it is safe to assume, still, that Gods foreknowledge of these events is compatible. Leibniz has shown what it means to have free will and what divine foreknowledge is, as I have discussed. What must now be discussed is what makes divine knowledge so compatible with human freedom? At first, it seems as if God already knows whats going to happen before it even occurs, but then it couldnt be possible for humans to have free will as their every action had been preordained. However, this is not the case. It may be the case that God does has foreknowledge of every event, even prior to its creation, but what allows for human freedom to exist is that it is the person who commits the action at that point and time (Schlà ¶sser). God may have pre-existing knowledge of what you are going to do, but God does not control your actions every step of the way. It is still the person who makes the choice based on their own reason (Schlà ¶sser). Unlike a machine (Schlà ¶sser), humans have the option to choose a different path regardless of divine foreknowledge. This can be seen in t he world everyday with overbearing amounts of sin. These sins were also predetermined but not prevented by God (Schlà ¶sser), because if all foreseen sinful acts were prevented than there would be no existing human freedom and therefore divine foreknowledge would, instead, not be compatible with human freedom as the two concepts would create a contradiction. That being said, since there is sin in the world, it means that God has allowed for humans to make their own decisions based on their own reasons, beliefs, nature, et cetera, which means that human freedom does exist, even when the event at hand had been foreseen by God. Therefore, Leibniz can conclude that divine foreknowledge is in fact compatible with human freedom. I am in complete agreement with Leibnizs position on human freedom and divine foreknowledge. Leibnizs concept of divine foreknowledge not interfering with human freedom appears to be sound in its explanation. There would be more issues concerning freedom if divine foreknowledge had any effect directly on human decision in real-time. This means that as the decision to act is being made, a divine being is there to bend our choices to the right decision (i.e. a puppeteer). If this is the case then there would not be any free will in existence because, as Leibniz notes in his explanation of free will, our will is being governed by some external force (Schlà ¶sser). Therefore the action committed is not a free choice but a controlled one. I believe Leibniz is correct in saying that divine foreknowledge is not a problem for human freedom because this knowledge of all events is predetermined long before the existence of such events and therefore has no direct effect on human freedom to cho ose between the right and wrong decision. There is another way to look at this scenario that may better solidify Leibnizs claims (other than the Caesar example). To stray away from divinity for a moment, lets say that there is an ordinary man who can see into the future. This man has a vision that a teenage thug is going to steal a purse from a store in downtown Toronto. Moments later a teenager walks into a purse store. At this very moment, the teenager has the choice to do the right thing and rather purchase a purse or leave the store empty handed. The other option is to do the wrong thing and steal the purse. This choice is what determines the existence of free will. The teenager chooses to steal the purse for her own reasoning and leaves the store. I will now pose the following question: is the mans ability to foresee this theft a disruption of the existence of this teenagers freedom? The answer is simply, no. This vision, or foreknowledge, is simply an ability to foresee other humans making their choices to do good and bad things and not the ability to command or change a persons mind to choose right over wrong, as this would disrupt human freedom. This example provides a well-rounded and more up to date explanation of Leibnizs claim. The only difference would be that the man with visions could choose to stop the person from doing what is wrong, which is a little different from God, who has known about all events prior to their creation but will not interfere with free will. To make the example a little more satisfying, we can say that the time between the vision and the action is mere milliseconds, so that no disruption will be provided to intervene with free will. All-in-all the mere fact that God allows for sin to occur and that he is all knowing shows that this divine figure does not wish to intervene in human free will and change the outcomes. Just like the man with the visions, God has foreseen a humans every action but what God sees is free will in action as the person chooses to commit right and wrong actions. By no means does foreseeing an event occur, grant that that something or someone is being controlled. If it were the case that foreseen actions were tampered with, then human freedom would not exist. The same can be said for the man with visions. If the man decided to assist those people he foresaw in charging their ways to the right decision (not taking into account the very minute time gap put in place between vision and action) he would also be interfering with another persons free will, but at the same time is making use of his freedom of choice in order to help this person. This means that the man must implement his free will in order to do the right thing (although it can be argued whether interfering with another persons free will can in fact be considered the right thing to do). Therefore this example shows that the mere foreknowledge of an event does not mean that it contradicts free will, which means that div ine foreknowledge is in fact compatible with human freedom and also that Leibniz is correct. In conclusion, I have discussed Leibnizs position, that divine foreknowledge of all events is compatible with human freedom, by providing an explanation of what divine foreknowledge is and what it means to have free will in accordance with Leibniz. I then grouped the two concepts and explained why Leibniz thought they were compatible and then provided Leibnizs example of Julius Caesar and divine foreknowledge to show this. I then concluded this essay with why I agree with Leibnizs position and provided an example of my own, regarding a man who has visions of the future, to provide a better understanding of Leibnizs position without the use of divine characters. After careful consideration of Leibnizs position and reasoning I have concluded that Leibniz is correct in his position and divine foreknowledge poses no contradiction to human freedom and is indeed compatible with it.

Summer of Love

The Summer of Love The 1960s was a decade of political and social upheaval. The counterculture, which was what the decade was called, became disappointed with all the restrictions and conventions of the straight society. The Summer of Love did not occur until 1967, but the decade was inspired by the Bohemian spirit which was already present in the 1950s; known as the Beat generation. The counterculture gained significant influence in liberal cities such as Berkley and San Francisco. In 1967, Scott McKenzie released his song San Francisco and with this song came rumors of a huge love-in in the summer.This is what fueled the Summer of Love. Leaders of the counterculture in the Haight-Ashbury district were anxious to start planning an event that would fit in with the Summer of Love hype. Their hope was that musicians and other artists would just naturally travel over to the Haight-Ashbury. The Summer of Love would not have been the same without the usage of LSD and marijuana, free love, and the all famous rock and roll music. Drugs seemed to be the way of life for the hippies; they were using all kinds of drugs throughout the decade but the two drugs that were most associated with the Summer of Love were LSD and Marijuana.To the hippies they used the term â€Å"dope† instead of â€Å"drugs† because dope was good; but drugs included both good and bad substances. Miller stated, â€Å"Substances that were perceived as expanding consciousness were good; things which made the user dumb were bad† (Miller 2). Another drug that was used in the Summer of Love was marijuana. It was not as huge as LSD, but it was still used throughout the decade. Marijuana was first introduced in America during the Jazz Age and became one of the central fixtures of the 1960s counterculture.Baugess wrote, â€Å"It was intrinsic to the jazz music scene; many musicians used marijuana for its perceived ability to boost creativity and as a way to find relief from racial oppr ession† (Baugess 400). It grew popular among the blacks and was used to basically boost your creativity. It later became very popular to the beatniks, in which they would later change the meaning of the drug, a way to deepen intellectual understanding and used to rebel against the society. The hippies would use it for the pleasurable side effects, but also to heal the body and soul. Smoking marijuana was an act of rebellion against puritanical Americans.It was known to expand the mind, just like LSD did. Not only did hippies use the drug, but it was also consumed by the political radicals and Vietnam soldiers. Marijuana was grown in plenty in Vietnam and supplied soldiers with a mass of relief from the experience of war. Marijuana left a huge impact on the counterculture; it had a connection to music, musicians like Bob Dylan, Bob Marley, and others would write songs that reflected the centrality of it. The main drug that would be known throughout the Summer of Love and most r ecognizable to the decade would be LSD.This would later be known on the street as â€Å"acid† which was a hallucinogenic drug able to induce altered mental states in its users. LSD was created in a Swiss pharmaceutical laboratory in the 1930s and discovered in 1938 by Swiss chemist, Albert Hoffman. In the decades before, it was used as a treatment drug and alcohol addiction. Miller wrote, â€Å"Also in the Cold War struggles with the Soviet Union (the Central Intelligence Agency monitored early LSD research closely, seeing the chemical as a potential tool for espionage or perhaps for disabling a large enemy population)† (Miller 4).On April 19, 1943, Albert Hoffman synthesized another batch of LSD-25 and created a version that would be able to dissolve in water and had pleasant hallucinations. Later, he had perfect recall of the hallucinations saying that his mind was conscious throughout the experiment. It was created for three main purposes; it was fun, revolutionary, and good for the body and soul. Miller stated, The belief of the hippie was â€Å"If it feels good, then do it so long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else† (Miller 5).Not only was it fun but it also led to the hippies arguing, that it was time for a social revolution, which made it revolutionary because not only did they argue but it would also affect the larger society. The hippies had to learn to tolerate their deviant behaviors. As a West Coast hip author concluded in 1969, â€Å"The government is right in its stand on drugs. They are a definite threat to society†¦Drugs†¦must be ruthlessly suppressed lest the people feel too good† (Miller 5). With all this being said LSD was also a tool that was good for the body and soul which would provide healing and insight.In 1960, Timothy Leary, a Harvard psychology professor, tried LSD and soon would become so enthused by its potential that he lost his job. Timothy Leary described his first trip as the â€Å"mos t shattering experience of my life,† for it â€Å"flipped my consciousness into a dance of energy, where nothing existed except the whirring vibrations and each illusory form was simply a different frequency† (Anderson 259). By 1966, he became a huge star who would advise young adults to take LSD to expand their minds.They accepted his advice and the hippies clung into Leary’s phrase, â€Å"turn on, tune in, and drop out. † The phrase is broken down into three simple segments; â€Å"Turn on† meant to go within yourself. â€Å"Tune in† meant to interact accordingly with the world around you. â€Å"Drop out† meant self-determination and a discovery of one's abnormality. Ken Kesey studied at the University of Oregon and then would enroll into a graduate creative writing program at Stanford University in 1959, which would spark his interest in the San Francisco counterculture.As Ken Kesey would work night shifts at the hospital he had acce ss to the drugs and would perform controlled experiments on himself. LSD was only available through pharmaceutical company, Sandoz in New York. Sinclair wrote, â€Å"Using his homemade laboratory in Berkley; a student named Augustus Owsley Stanley III manufactured what he claimed to be enough LSD for a million and half doses† (Sinclair 200). They became widely known and soon fell to Leary. Owsley would soon become the Pranksters’ chemist, supplying the active ingredient fro Kesey’s organized events called acid tests.These acid tests soon became advertised events in public halls. In January 1966, two thousand people attended one at San Francisco’s Fillmore Auditorium and the Warlocks (now the Grateful Dead), provided the music and Kesey wired the place with speakers, cameras, and TV screens for them to replay. Leary would become one of the most famous countercultural figures in this era along with Ken Kesey. LSD was a huge part of the spiritual and music s cene of the Summer of Love.There was one church which was Tim Leary’s League for Spiritual Discovery; he wanted to keep his religion pure and aloof from social structures. He described it as evading the law, â€Å"We’re not a religion in the sense of the Methodist Church seeking adherents. We’re a religion in the basic primeval sense of a tribe living together and centered around shared spiritual goals† (Miller 8). Many believed that it spoke of as a sacrament, as Miller stated, â€Å"A sacrament is a covenant between man and God and also any ritual that corporately grows out of that covenant to express it more fully.It can be bread and wine, peyote or mushrooms, cup of tea, LSD, the tobacco used in the sacred pipe whatever is put into the body to connect the world outside with the world within† (Miller 11). This was common a sentiment. Not only was LSD for individual experiences but it was also for religious communities. For example, William C. Sh epherd observed LSD as being a â€Å"sense of social ‘belongingness’† (Miller 13). Which it provided a new basis for group intimacy, and helped maintain and further the intimacy.Some believed there were bad effects of LSD on the people. The bad effects that LSD had on Summer of Love is that people would drink without knowing knowledge of the chemical, but Kesey said he never dosed anyone without their notice. Another was it was used as a means of social control. The ones that loved dope loved its psychic staff of life and the few that did not were not influential at all. Sex was used for the physical pleasure saying free people should be able to express their sexuality as they please. As stated by Miller, â€Å"Sex was fun. Sex was healthy.And this hip approach to sex helped revolutionize attitudes and practices in the nation as a whole† (Miller 25). There were some who saw liberated sexuality as having a larger significance meaning as sacramental sex. Som e felt that sex was best within a context of love and concern for the partner. So for a new sexual ethic, some poised absolute freedom meaning that sex out of love could be better then casual sex. Dope and sex went hand in hand because as stated before dope was good because it enhanced your sexual experience. Dope would help people expand their sexual horizons.As Miller stated, â€Å"Timothy Leary summed up the dope/sex connection: the key energy in our revolution is erotic†¦The sexual revolution is not just part of the atmosphere of freedom that is generating with the kids†¦and central issue of the psychedelic experienced is erotic exhilaration† (Miller 37). Throughout the 1960s, music served as an integral part of the counterculture movement. It was seen to embrace an alternative lifestyle from previous generations and also to protest against war and oppression. Hippies would organize outdoor music festivals across America.The music was based around the reminders of the 60s and the outrage toward the Vietnam War. Some of this popular music represented a direct protest of the war and also reflect the desire for peace and love. Rock and roll was just as important as dope and sex were. Rock music was what the hippies lived and breathed and was the most important musical form. Even though it was based around rock, Miller stated, â€Å"Folk music was the music of the cultural rebellion until around 1966, when the Beatles began to take on mythic significance as interpreters of the culture, new specifically hip rock bands† (Miller 42).Some of the earliest acid rock bands are the Grateful Dead, the Jimi Hendrix Experience, Country Joe and the Fish, Big Brother, and Janis Joplin. There were many festivals that took place in the 1960s like Woodstock which was in 1969, but it was not as organized and peaceful as the Monterey Pop Festival. The Monterey Pop Festival was one of the biggest events of its time and it helped launch the careers of seve ral major rock artists, including Janis Joplin, Country Joe and the Fish, Otis Redding, and others.Sinclair said, â€Å"Monterey has come to be viewed by many as the seminal rock festival of the early hippie era† (Sinclair 210). It was a festival that took place over a three-day period that started on June 16 through June 18, 1967, in Monterey, California, at the Monterey Fairgrounds. There were more than 30 acts lined up, 90,000 attendees, and perfect weather. They had a projection room, shops and booths, and Owsley supplied a new batch of LSD which was called Monterey Purple. The organizers wanted to create an atmosphere that produced the â€Å"peace and love† ideas that was popular in the music and to be taken seriously.This was the first major festival of the rock era, and it went down in history as the most peaceful and well-organized event of its time. It was also significant in that it offered a number of acts that would soon become famous in America. For three days they all lived together and out of all this they did not have any major problems that came up; the Monterey Pop Festival was the high point of the 1967 Summer of Love. Baugess stated, â€Å"Filmmaker D. A. Pennebaker recorded the event and produced a very popular documentary that brought the music and personalities of the festival into theaters across America† (Bauges 439).There were a lot of the acts who refused to get filmed but Janis Joplin’s manager talked her and her group into being filmed and soon a star would be born. One in particular was Janis Joplin. Janis Joplin was the most important female singer of the counterculture. Whether she meant to or not her rebellious example expanded artistic and professional possibilities for women. Baugess wrote, â€Å"The hippie scene of 1967 provided the perfect context for Joplin’s rebelliousness, talent, and unique charisma to flourish, and Big Brother became one of the favorite Haight-Ashbury bands† (B augess 328).Their appearance at the Monterey Pop Festival opened doors for them, but especially for Joplin, she became the star, to where she was signed by Columbia Records as a result of her appearance at the festival making it her first major performance. Her emergence as a famous symbol of the â€Å"youth culture† put pressure on her band so she left Big Brother and went on to pursue her own music. She goes down in history as a huge iconic figure of rock-and-roll music, along with Jim Morrison of The Doors and others.Another huge singer of the counterculture and a big part of the Monterey Pop Festival was Joseph McDonald soon to be known as â€Å"Country Joe and the Fish. † He was born on New Year’s Day in 1942 and was named after the Soviet dictator, Joseph Stalin. He would spend most of his time playing music in different bands. Baugess wrote, â€Å"His songwriting became the center of a group that manifested, variously, as a songwriter’s workshop, a magazine, a protest group, a jug band, and finally a rock band called Country Joe and the Fish† (Baugess 411).At first the band only consisted of McDonald and the guitarist, Barry Melton, which was â€Å"the Fish,† and then they would add other musicians if needed. The formation of the band was because of Joe’s enterprising spirit and his spirit of protest. Their first record, â€Å"I Feel Like I’m Fixin’ to Die Rag,† was a satirical song about the Vietnam War which Joe self-produced and would go down in history as one of the most recognizable songs of the antiwar movement. His music was captured by the college campuses and 1965; they performed at the Berkley campus.Later in 1966, they acquired a manager, Ed Denson, and from that point they focused on becoming a folk-rock band. Their manager, Denson, created the band’s name which was referred to communist politics. For example, â€Å"Country Joe† was the popular word at the ti me of World War II for Joseph Stalin and â€Å"the Fish† refers to Mao Zedong’s saying â€Å"that likens communist revolutionaries to fish who swim in a sea of peasants† (Baugess 411). The band changed over the years but McDonald stayed lead vocals and Melton stayed as lead guitar.They grew popular among Berkley and San Francisco and also still remained regulars on college campuses. In December 1966, they signed a recording contract with Vanguard Records and their first two records were on Billboard’s album charts for two years. When they performed on stage, their performance included a light show that was on a screen so they could create a psychedelic experience. In the summer of 1967, they toured the East Coast and in 1968, toured Europe and also released a third album. Their fourth album was released a year later, 1969.The song â€Å"Fixin’-to-Die-Rag† really became popular after they starred in two musical events, Monterey Pop Festival i n 1967 and Woodstock in 1969. Soon after the song became the anthem of the anti-Vietnam War movement. â€Å"Fixin’-to-Die-Rag† had black humor and sarcasm and the chorus mocked the war’s justification and voiced coldness about it. So, before they played their trademark song, they would spell out an F-I-S-H cheer, but instead in summer of 1968, their cheer had â€Å"U-C-K† because they were provoking the antiwar movement’s rebelliousness of convention.Their edgy style disaffected the mainstream. By 1970, Joe and Barry took on solo careers. Joe kept on playing at large antiwar presentations. Country Joe mixed together satire, irreverence, and political commitment. Another popular musician of the counterculture was the Jimi Hendrix Experience. He joined the Army at 17 and after being discharged in the early 1960s; he joined the Isly Brothers and Little Richard and performed on â€Å"chitin’ circuit. † He left them in 1966 for the emergen t countercultural rock and roll of the East Village.Here he performed as Jimmy James and the Blue Flames; he then agreed to go to England where the Jimi Hendrix Experience was formed. On bass was Noel Redding, drums was played by Mitch Mitchell and Hendrix mashed together some influences from the blues like B. B. King and others. Curtis Mayfield was the guitarist and â€Å"Hendrix incorporated the style of English guitar emanating from the likes of Cream, the Who, and Jeff Beck† (Baugess 292). His group became hugely popular and was recommended by Paul McCartney of the Beatles, helped the Jimi Hendrix Experience a spot in the Monterey Pop Festival in June 1967.From the exposure of the festival it gave the band four years of stardom and they released three records; â€Å"Are You experienced? (1967), Axis: Bold as Love (1967), and the double LP Electric Ladyland (1968)† ( Baugess 292). Hendrix was set aside from the other rock groups because of the use of transcended rac e the â€Å"white† world of rock and â€Å"black† world of blues and rhythm. Baugess stated, â€Å"While Hendrix’s management coded the combination of African American musical traditions and psychedelia as â€Å"white† in the press, his work entered the R Billboard charts† (Baugess 292). He died on September 18, 1970 of drug complications.

The Battle Of The War On Serbia - 1427 Words

On July 28 of 1914, a small spark ignited the greatest conflict man-kind had ever seen. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of the Austrian-Hungarian duel monarchy that led to it. It was an event that changed borders, destroyed countries, and ended the lives of millions of people. On that day, Austria-Hungary officially declared war on Serbia as an act of revenge, though had ambitions to take control of Serbian lands. This small event would have big consequences, not only on the nations involved in the war, but on the people of those nations who had to sacrifice so much. During the period immediately following the declaration of war on Serbia, the quality of a person’s life began to drop very rapidly. Pre-industrial warfare is difficult to endure, but when weapons are so deadly that they have the ability to kill thousands in a day, the new warfare is unbearable. Though some in the aftermath of the war would claim that a sense of patriotism or racial superiority drove people to support the war, it is very clear that the general population of the time were overwhelmingly opposed to the start and continuation of the fighting. It was the propaganda of governments that pushed people into supporting the war, though once the devastation was understood, that positivity morphed into terror. After Austria-Hungary had declared war on Serbia, Russia, an ally of Serbia, declared war on Austria-Hungary. Austria-Hungary, however, anticipated this beforehand and had asked theShow MoreRelatedImpacts of First World War1341 Words   |  6 PagesGreat War started, it influenced the entire world policy and economy. Millions of people died and equal number of people became homeless. Big empires of 20th century fell apart and new small national countries were established. We can say that WWI caused a really big disaster, especially for country which was participant. But there are similarities and differences how it did effect. On different countries in the same wa y war had different influence. The example for that is Germany and Serbia. ï‚šPolitic Read MoreA Brief Overview of World War I817 Words   |  4 PagesWORLD WAR 1 The World War 1 conflict began in 1914 to 1918. It started as a nearby European war between Austria-Hungary and Serbia on July 28th 1914. It transformed into a general European struggle by declaration of the following nations known as the Allies and the Associated Powers; Great britain, France, Russia, Italy and the United states. These nations defied the coalition(central powers). The assassination at Sarajevo in bosnia immediately caused the war between Austria-Hungary and SerbiaRead MoreWorld War I Was The Rise Of Nationalism And Imperialism990 Words   |  4 PagesWorld war I had three main causes and the first was the rise of nationalism and imperialism. During the 100-year period of peace, nationalism became popular among the European countries. This lead to the creation of a new power, such as Germany, who began to looking for land in the sun, which caused growing tension in Europe. The spread of nationalism lead to the build up of military strength around Europe and encourag ed public support for the military. There was an arms race between France, RussiaRead MoreA War Does Not Require Weapons1567 Words   |  7 Pages4C 7/July 2015 A War does not Require Weapons In between the timeline of World War One and World War Two, political leaders, states, and nations were fighting against each other with and without the usage of weapons. The ideology of great philosophers, and raising leaders, such as: Herbert Spencer, Leon Trotsky, Joseph Stalin, Great Britain, and Russia brought civil wars and battles during the small timeframe between world wars. Before we go into depth on the one 30-year war, we begin with theRead MoreWorld War I And The Great War1249 Words   |  5 PagesWhenever you come across World War I, don’t you ever deeply think about how it all started? Who would have known that just 2 pulls of a trigger could have triggered a demoralizing World War? World War I, also known as â€Å"The Great War,† was a war that primarily took place in Europe. It officially started on the 28th of July in 1914 and it unexpectedly lasted until the 11th of November in 1918 (about 4 years). The most predominant countries that fought in thi s war include Great Britain, France, RussiaRead MoreUnit 5 Exam : World War I1315 Words   |  6 PagesUnit 5 Exam: World War 1 Lesson 1: Alliances The unconditional support from alliances can be blamed to cause World War I. The nature of the alliances is laid out in the alliance document. The alliances stipulated assistance and contribution of the signing parties in the event of conflict. It can extend from money or logistic sponsorship, similar to the supply of materials or weapons, to military activation and a statement about war. Partnerships might likewise contain currency components, forRead MoreAustralia s Involvement During The War1473 Words   |  6 PagesINTRODUCTION World War 1, or the â€Å"Great War† as many referred to it, is considered to be one of the worst and deadliest conflicts in history of earth. During a stretch of four long years, more than 9 million soldiers and 7 million civilians were killed, as well as resulting in crippling war debts that reached 6.6 billion. France, Germany, Britain and Italy were considered the Central Powers of the war, despite multiple other countries participating. This report will cover the main aspects of Australia’sRead MoreWorld War One Research Paper1564 Words   |  7 PagesTawann Gudger World War One Research Paper Caputo/Lenkey 12/12/15 World War One The Triple Alliance was a military alliance between Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy formed on March 20th 1882. Each country promised support in the event of attack. Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the heir of the throne of Austria-Hungary; he hoped that his sympathy for the Slavs would easeRead MoreWas World War 1 Inevitable?1737 Words   |  7 PagesThe First World War has established an unforgettable memoir in the history books. World War 1 was a massacre of human life and an important event that determined the present state of the modern world. Yes, World War 1 was inevitable. The foundation of the causes of World War 1 can be traced back to several factors that were building up international tension to the ultimate result of war. In the 1900s, the European countries were extremely competitive in extending their influence around the worldRead MoreNationalism and the Origins of World War One910 Words   |  4 PagesAustria and Serbia. The force of Nationalism influenced this conflict between Serbia and Austria due to the nationalistic views of the Serbian people. The conflict that occurred on the 28th June 1914 was the assassination of the Austrian Archduke, Franz Ferdinand. While he and his wife were visiting Bosnia, they were both shot dead by Serbian nationalist, Gavrilo Princip, On this day nationalism was running high through Serbian and Bosnian people, as it was the anniversary of the Battle of Kossovo

Solution Focused Therapy ( Sft ) - 848 Words

Solution-focused therapy (SFT) is one among the many therapeutic approaches, which has its own benefits. First, it is refreshing as it focuses on human potential and growth by the therapist tapping into a client’s strengths and training them to use those strengths to cope (McCarthy Archer, 2013). Second, the client is viewed as possessing the skills and capabilities, therefore, the therapist must take a step back, and not want to â€Å"fix† a client, rather assist by shifting the direction from the problem to their strengths (McCarthy Archer, 2013). Third, SFT is of short duration lasting about 5 sessions, almost as much as other therapeutic sessions (McCarthy Archer, 2013). Fourth, SFT is constantly changing and evolving, to personalize and individualize each session to each client, thus making it a great approach for clients of various multicultural backgrounds (McCarthy Archer, 2013). Lastly, SFT can be beneficial to individuals that may need motivation, or a ch eerleader/supporter. Through techniques which include â€Å"seeking exceptions to problems, mind mapping, accepting ownership of successes, cheerleading, scaling, overcoming obstacles to success, and constructing a counselor developed message that summarizes a counseling session for the client† (Fulthorp, 2015, p. 266). Freud has been quite influential in the mental health field and initialized groundbreaking thoughts, theories, and approaches that initially inspired many psychoanalysts, who would later add to hisShow MoreRelatedSolution Focused Therapy ( Sft )1614 Words   |  7 Pagesthose clients. Solution-focused therapy (SFT) is one of those approaches. Examined are the treatment approach of SFT, the theory associated, evidence to support the treatment, the effectiveness with youth and culturally diverse clients, and the limitation of the approach. SFT treatment approach can be used with an individual and or families. The treatment emphasizes the strengths and sources of resiliency that a client or family has to promote positive change (Hook, 2014). The therapy enables theRead MoreSolution Focused Therapy And Experiential Therapy1937 Words   |  8 Pages This term paper is about solution-focused therapy and experiential therapy. In solution-focused therapy, the therapy does not emphasize the problem at all; it stresses and highlights the solution. The client is the expert and not the therapist. The experiential approach is often used to facilitate meaningful changes in individuals. SFBT is a short-term goal focused therapeutic approach which directs clients to focus on developing solutions, rather than on dwelling on problems. The theoretical frameworkRead MoreAssessment And Evaluation Of Family Therapy1761 Words   |  8 PagesThe objective of this paper is to provide the assessment and evaluation of family therapy as it pertains to the therapeutic approach of Solution-Focused Therapy. The given information underlines the pertinent resources related to individual and family therapy and the application of SFT techniques. This paper examines the presenting problem while directing the family from the problem to the solution. Background information of the family Latoya and Cortez are both in their earlyRead MoreSocial Workers Use Theory Of Direct Practice1520 Words   |  7 Pagesabout this theory. The practice theory solution-focused therapy developed by Shazer and Berg will be applied to Lucy (Dolan, 2015). SFT focuses on solutions not the problems. It aims to help clients achieve their desired outcomes by ‘co-constructing and evoking’ solutions to their problems (O’Connell, 2005). It is classified goal orientated as it targets chosen outcomes of therapy rather than focusing on the issues or symptoms which has brought Lucy to therapy. This technique highlights present andRead MoreThe Area Of Knowledge : Marriage And Family1332 Words   |  6 Pagesstudy in the area of marriage and family therapy. Using your case study, describe how practitioners in each model would approach the assessment and treatment of the family. Structural therapy Systemic therapy Solution focused therapy. Based on your analysis, select the approach which you believe would be most effective for the family and explain your reasons for your choice. Introduction In marriage and family therapy, many varied approaches and therapies are available to therapists. The followingRead More1.Provide A Brief Overview Of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy1462 Words   |  6 Pages1. Provide a brief overview of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Your definition should include key concepts/assumptions of CBT as well as the therapeutic process (e.g., structure, therapist role, client role). Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is a mixture of both Cognitive Therapy (CT), which deals with a person’s thoughts and Behavioral Therapy (BT), which concentrates on an individual’s overt or outside personality. According to Barbara P. Early and Melissa D. Grady, CT specializes in theRead MoreWorking With Community College Students812 Words   |  4 Pagesconstructivist theory in the combine use of solution focused and narrative therapy in servicing such a diverse group of students. Constructivist theory as a whole is applicable with addressing diverse issues surrounding culture, gender, and social context that influence career choices that are unique to a client when compared with others. Through a recent article titled the â€Å"Use of Constructivist Approach in Higher Education: An Instructors’ Observation†, focused on the constructivist approach being usedRead MoreA Single System Research Design854 Words   |  4 Pages, 2010).Solution focused ther apy (SFT) is competency-based and resource-based model, focusing on the patients strengths and past and future successes, as opposed to stressing on the problems or past faults (SFBTA, 2013). This method of therapy is best for this particular patient due to the lack of knowledge of therapy, the distrust of behavior health specialist and the stigma that is brought into the session (Uebelacker, et al., 2012; Vega, et al., 2010; Dwight-Johnon et al., 2010). SFT has evidenceRead MoreThe Theory Used For This Particular Family1196 Words   |  5 Pagesregular therapy sessions difficult for everyone. If that is the case, they may benefit from a brief, solution-focused treatment during which the therapist will work with the family to examine alternatives/solutions to their presenting problems as opposed to the underlying root(s) of the issue (Trepper, et al., n.d.). While this modality is not ideal, it would at least provide them with an opportunity to amplify their strengths and resourc es, which will assist them towards finding a solution to theirRead MoreStudying Family Systems Theories Over The Past Two Semesters2239 Words   |  9 PagesThe methods that I related to the most are Solution-Focused and Strategic Therapy. Both techniques focus on the client’s strengths and not the pathology of the problem. MRI strategic practices and techniques influenced the creators of Solution-Focused Therapy, Steve De Shazer, and his colleagues. Both approaches have the ability to address family and individual problems in a brief time frame. MRI delivers a comprehensive coverage of theory while SFT delivers a comprehensive coverage of approach