Are you a fan of Hatha Yoga? Many people who do 'yoga' aren't completely sure which type they do. This is your opportunity to research it, if you haven't yet! Many people say yoga is a very important relaxation technique, stress reducer, etc. Is it for you?

this week we are learning about language and cognitive development. Psychologists have been debating for quite some time about whether it is nature (heredity) or nurture (our environment) that influences our development and behavior.

Take a look at this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aNaMlSc3Ag&list=PLC6B610F325F65635 and share your perspectives on what you believe was most influential in your own development and behavior.

How do you define the following common rating errors: Leniency, central tendency, strictness, halo, proximity, contrast, recency, and infrequent observation?

1. What strategies should the team recommend to Dr. London?
2. How do you deal with parents who refuse to vaccinate their children?
3. As a public health official, should you promote vaccination compliance as a civic responsibility?
4. How do you manage a conflict among individual behavior, organizational behavior, and public health goals?

Be honest. Write about your ageist thoughts. In what ways do you view elderly people in general? Do you ever find yourself frustrated when you are behind them in line at the grocery store, or predicting someone who is driving poorly to be old? Do you think that ageism is a legitimate issue that needs to be addressed in society, or is it just a “politically correct” concern? How might such stereotyping affect those in late adulthood? At least 308 words.

Explain the following constitutional ideas.

1. The Pardon Power

2. Ennumerated Power

3. Impeachment and Conviction

4. Constitutional Amendment

5.How a bill becomes a law

Stage IV of Psychosocial Development, inside of Eric Erickson’s “Childhood in Society,” is slightly related to children’s academic failure. True or false with explanation

Before you read or reread this section in your text, make a list of all of the qualities and characteristics that attract you to someone. Be honest and do not censor yourself. After you have made your list, read what psychologists have discovered about what attracts people to one another. How are these things reflected in your list? Did you learn something about why it is you view others the way you do? Can you illustrate these factors with personal experiences with attraction? Is there any aspect of attraction that you did not realize influenced you? at least 308 words.

Explain and give your opinion about Madison’s idea of factions and how electing elite representatives can reduce the problem.

Is constructivism “all or nothing”? How can teachers employ some constructivist principles within other teaching practices?

Questions:

1. How does Andrew Carnegie justify the contrast between the wealthy and the working poor? Provide examples.
2. According to Carnegie, what is the "proper administration of wealth"?
3. Why would some people criticize Carnegie's proposals?

WEALTH

BY ANDREW CARNEGIE.

The problem of our age is the proper administration of wealth, so that the ties of brotherhood may still bind together the rich and poor in harmonious relationship. The conditions of human life have not only been changed, but revolutionized, within the past few hundred years. In former days there was little difference between the dwelling, dress, food, and environment of the chief and those of his retainers. The Indians are to-day where civilized man then was. When visiting the Sioux, I was led to the wigwam of the chief. It was just like the others in external appearance, and even within the difference was trifling between it and those of the poorest of his braves. The contrast between the palace of the millionaire and the cottage of the laborer with us to-day measures the change which has come with civilization. . . .

This change, however, is not to be deplored, but welcomed as highly beneficial. It is well, nay, essential for the progress of the race, that the houses of some should be homes for all that is highest and best in literature and the arts, and for all the refinements of civilization, rather than that none should be so. Much better this great irregularity than universal squalor. . .

The price which society pays for the law of competition, like the price it pays for cheap comforts and luxuries, is also great; but the advantage of this law are also greater still, for it is to this law that we owe our wonderful material development, which brings improved conditions in its train. But, whether the law be benign or not, we must say of it, as we say of the change in the conditions of men to which we have referred : It is here; we cannot evade it; no substitutes for it have been found; and while the law may be sometimes hard for the individual, it is best for the race, because it insures the survival of the fittest in every department. We accept and welcome therefore, as conditions to which we must accommodate ourselves, great inequality of environment, the concentration of business, industrial and commercial, in the hands of a few, and the law of competition between these, as being not only beneficial, but essential for the future progress of the race. .

We start, then, with a condition of affairs under which the best interests of the race are promoted, but which inevitably gives wealth to the few. Thus far, accepting conditions as they exist, the situation can be surveyed and pronounced good. The question then arises, --and, if the foregoing be correct, it is the only question with which we have to deal, --What is the proper mode of administering wealth after the laws upon which civilization is founded have thrown it into the hands of the few ?. . .

There are but three modes in which surplus wealth can be disposed of. It call be left to the families of the decedents; or it can be bequeathed for public purposes; or, finally, it can be administered during their lives by its possessors. Under the first and second modes most of the wealth of the world that has reached the few has hitherto been applied. Let us in turn consider each of these modes. The first is the most injudicious. In monarchical countries, the estates and the greatest portion of the wealth are left to the first son, that the vanity of the parent may be gratified by the thought that his name and title are to descend to succeeding generations unimpaired. The condition of this class in Europe to-day teaches the futility of such hopes or ambitions. The successors have become impoverished through their follies or from the fall in the value of land. . . .

As to the second mode, that of leaving wealth at death for public uses, it may be said that this is only a means for the disposal of wealth, provided a man is content to wait until he is dead before it becomes of much good in the world. Knowledge of the results of legacies bequeathed is not calculated to inspire the brightest hopes of much posthumous good being accomplished. The cases are not few in which the real object sought by the testator is not attained, nor are they few in which his real wishes are thwarted. In many cases the bequests are so used as to become only monuments of his folly . . .

There remains, then, only one mode of using great fortunes; but in this we have the true antidote for the temporary unequal distribution of wealth, the reconciliation of the rich and the poor--a reign of harmony--another ideal, differing, indeed, from that of the Communist in requiring only the further evolution of existing conditions, not the total overthrow of our civilization. It is founded upon the present most intense individualism, and the race is projected to put it in practice by degree whenever it pleases. Under its sway we shall have an ideal state, in which the surplus wealth of the few will become, in the best sense the property of the many, because administered for the common good, and this wealth, passing through the hands of the few, can be made a much more potent force for the elevation of our race than if it had been distributed in small sums to the people themselves. . .

This, then, is held to be the duty of the man of Wealth: First, to set an example of modest, unostentatious living, shunning display or extravagance; to provide moderately for the legitimate wants of those dependent upon him; and after doing so to consider all surplus revenues which come to him simply as trust funds, which he is called upon to administer, and strictly bound as a matter of duty to administer in the manner which, in his judgment, is best calculated to produce the most beneficial results for the community--the man of wealth thus becoming the mere agent and trustee for his poorer brethren, bringing to their service his superior wisdom, experience and ability to administer, doing for them better than they would or could do for themselves.. . .

In bestowing charity, the main consideration should be to help those who will help themselves; to provide part of the means by which those who desire to improve may do so; to give those who desire to use the aids by which they may rise; to assist, but rarely or never to do all. Neither the individual nor the race is improved by alms-giving. Those worthy of assistance, except in rare cases, seldom require assistance. The really valuable men of the race never do, except in cases of accident or sudden change. Everyone has, of course, cases of individuals brought to his own knowledge where temporary assistance can do genuine good, and these he will not overlook. But the amount which can be wisely given by the individual for individuals is necessarily limited by his lack of knowledge of the circumstances connected with each. He is the only true reformer who is as careful and as anxious not to aid the unworthy as he is to aid the worthy, and, perhaps, even more so, for in alms-giving more injury is probably done by rewarding vice than by relieving virtue. . .

Thus is the problem of Rich and Poor to be solved. The laws of accumulation will be left free ; the laws of distribution free. Individualism will continue, but the millionaire will be but a trustee for the poor; intrusted for a season with a great part of the increased wealth of the community, but administering it for the community far better than it could or would have done for itself. The best minds will thus have reached a stage in the development of the race iii which it is clearly seen that there is no mode of disposing of surplus wealth creditable to thoughtful and earnest men into whose hands it flows save by using it year by year for the general good. This day already dawns. But a little while, and although, without incurring the pity of their fellows, men may die sharers in great business enterprises from which their capital cannot be or has not been withdrawn, and is left chiefly at death for public uses, yet the man who dies leaving behind many millions of available wealth, which was his to administer during life, will pass away " unwept, unhonored, and unsung," no matter to what uses he leaves the dross which he cannot take with him. Of such as these the public verdict will then be : "The man who dies thus rich dies disgraced."

Such, in my opinion, is the true Gospel concerning Wealth, obedience to which is destined some day to solve the problem of the Rich and the Poor, and to bring ' Peace on earth, among men Good-Will."

As you go through your daily activities, look for examples of people engaged in conflict. You are looking for a conflict to analyze.

• Choose one conflict.

• You may not be a part of the conflict. (Nor may you start it!)

• It must be between two adults. (Children use different rules than adults)

Write a one to two page reaction paper to the conflict. It should answer these three questions:

1. What happened? Describe the chain of events.

2. How was the conflict resolved? Explain the conflict management strategies used.

3. What could the participants have done differently to achieve a better outcome?

Did you view conflict as a negative factor in a relationship? Were you surprised to discover that there were positive aspects to conflict? Why do you think most people view conflict as a negative? What can we do to make the positives of conflict work for us in our relationships?