In the article "China in the World: An Anthroplology of Confucius Institutes, Soft Power and Globalization", In the statement 'One teacher, for instance insists that her perspective on Marxism has to do with her upbringing in China, which provides different understanding of the concept'. please explain why Marxism provides different understanding of the concept to American students? (subject- Asia 100)

List and describe(in detail) three conditions under which eyewitnesses testimony is likely to be flawed or in error, and provide an original example of each to illustrate the effect on these on memory.

Here is another dilemma that could be presented to individuals to determine what their levels of moral reasoning might be (according to Kohlberg):

"Two young men, brothers, had got into serious trouble. They were secretly leaving town in a hurry and needed money. Karl, the older one, broke into a store and stole a thousand dollars. Bob, the younger one, went to a retired old man who was known to help people in town. He told the man that he was very sick and that he needed a thousand dollars to pay for an operation. Bob asked the old man to lend him the money and promised that he would pay him back when he recovered. Really Bob wasn't sick at all, and he had no intention of paying the man back. Although the old man didn't know Bob very well, he lent him the money. So Bob and Karl skipped town, each with a thousand dollars. Which is worse, stealing like Karl or cheating like Bob? Why is that worse?"

Explain the fundamental differences between the preconventional, conventional, and postconventional levels of moral reasoning? Provide examples of an answer someone might give at each level (you do not need to break it down by the six subcategories) to support your thinking.

what happens to teen brains that make it difficult for someone like Gary to weigh risk and reward

Problem Solving/Goal Setting Checkpoint

Provide an example of a time when you used the problem solving and decision making. What is the role of creativity in the problem solving process? What are three ways that you can increase your personal creativity?

Respond to the following in a essay:

Describe a time you encountered a problem that required you to use the problem solving and decision making steps on page 150 of the textbook. How did you solve the problem using the steps?

Discuss creativity and explain how it influences the problem solving process. Is creativity necessary to successfully solve problems? Why or why not?

Explain the role of critical thinking in the problem solving/creativity process.

List and describe three ways you can increase your personal creativity and/or critical thinking skills when solving problems.

Please bold the questions.

Thank you very much!

As the Civil War began, politicians and ordinary citizens in both the North and the South were supremely confident of victory. Why did Southerners believe they would triumph? Why were they wrong? Why did the North ultimately win the war?

What mechanisms are responsible for the maintenance and expression of Long Term Potentiation?

Is engaging in an eating disorder a "real life-style" choice? Why or why not?

Explain the basics of the cultural identity development process.

As part of his internship, Trey is working night intake at a psychiatric hospital in a medium-sized college town. It's been pretty quiet all evening until a little after 1 a.m. when he hears shouting in the outer hallway.

Trey looks at Lisa, his fellow student intern, who says, "What's going on out there?"

A moment later the doors burst open, and a young man, who looks about 18 years old, is escorted into the intake desk. He is agitated and has tears on his face, but he is not showing signs of violence or aggression, beyond the brief shouting he did out in the hallway.

He plunks himself down in the chair across from the intake desk and buries his face in his hands, rocking slightly and moaning. He has a slight body odor and is perspiring heavily.

"He's all yours," Lisa whispers.

Trey ignores her and moves quickly to the intake desk. Lisa runs off to find the supervising nurse, who has gone on break.

"Hey there," Trey says calmly, bending over to look into the patient's eyes. "I'm Trey. What's up?"

He is almost surprised when the patient stops rocking, sits up, and lowers his hands. "Hey," he says quietly. "I'm Matt, and this is hell, dude."

"Not quite," Trey smiles. "I'm here to help. Can you tell me what's happened?"

"I'm going all to pieces," Matt says, "little screws and bolts and debris flying off everywhere."

Trey says nothing; he just waits.

"I had kind of a breakdown in my dorm," Matt says. "I threw my laptop out the window."

"Ooh, that's rough. Bad night, huh?"

"Bad week, bad month, bad year, bad bad life. Bad badbadbadbadbadbadbad BA-A-A-AD."

"What happened?"

"Where you wanna start?"

In fits and starts, Matt conveys small clues that hint at his story.

Matt has always been a "nerd," he says, according to his older brothers. As a child, he often withdrew from playgroups at school to play on his own. In isolation, he has always managed to perform well academically, but in group work or group assignments, he has tended to resort to outbursts and a refusal to participate. He says he has always been awkward in social situations and has always found it hard to carry on "a good, rewarding conversation."

"And I'm freakin' clumsy. Klutzy. A klutz," he says, looking everywhere but at Trey. "I'm the opposite of an athlete, the opposite of my brothers."

Although his speech is frequently eccentric, Matt manages to convey a very brief picture of how, because of his withdrawal, negative thoughts, and social awkwardness, people tend to leave him on his own, both at large extended family gatherings or social functions in his family's community and place of worship.

In his senior year of high school, Matt's grades and SAT scores gained him entrance to a leading Midwest university-despite his disruptive problems.

Matt had been looking forward to going away to school, hoping that part of his problems "fitting in" had to do with his family's "obscenely proper prominence" in the community, and his older brothers' "super-dude images, which," he says, "I will never live up to."

"At the same time," he says during intake, "I was also pretty nervous, pretty stressed, pretty freaked out, pretty freaky."

In his first week of college, Matt found orientation week "disorienting," he jokes with a slight smile. "Orientation disoriented me. It dissed me. I got dissed. There were people everywhere, like climbing-the-walls-and-on-top-of-you everywhere."

Except when Trey first initiated a conversation, Matt, for the most part, has worked to avoid eye contact and continually bounces his left leg nervously. He is gripping the arms of his chair and looks as if he's about to fly right out of it.

"My roommate is a jock," he says. "Jocular jock. Oh, Jocularity, wouldn't you know they'd put me with a jocular-not-so-very-jocular-jock. They plan that stuff, you know. Just to keep me from escaping, from making a fresh start. Guy's a jerk, and now, here I am." He grins and expands his arms, gesturing the psychiatric ward around him.

"And now here I am, just 8 weeks into my first semester away from home, and I've just been admitted for totally breaking down, shooting laptop missiles from the second freakin' floor. They win."

1. If Matt is truly suspected of having newly diagnosed or recent-onset schizophrenia, should Trey be letting the conversation focus so much on Matt's childhood? Where might intake or assessment be best focused?
2. Based on this initial phase of Matt's intake interview alone, what symptoms are already suggested in his behavior that would be significant in terms of potential psychosis or schizophrenia?

what is Nganga's purpose in Multicultural Curriculum in Rural Early Childhood Programs

Taylor’s “Libertarianism”

                                                                           THE THEORY OF AGENCY

What is Taylor’s concept of agent causation?

Does it accurately reflect what people take themselves to be doing when they perform action?

Why or why not?

(24) The only conception of action that accords with our data is one according to which men— and perhaps some other things too—are sometimes, but of course not always, self-determining beings; that is, beings which are sometimes the causes of their own behavior. In the case of an action that is free, it must be such that it is caused by the agent who performs it, but such that no antecedent conditions were sufficient for his performing just that action. In the case of an action that is both free and rational, it must be such that the agent who performed it did so for some reason, but this reason cannot have been the cause of it.

(25) Now this conception fits what men take themselves to be; namely, beings who act, or who are agents, rather than things that are merely acted upon, and whose behavior is simply the causal consequence of conditions which they have not wrought. When I believe that I have done something, I do believe that it was I who caused it to be done, I who made something happen, and not merely something within me, such as one of my own subjective states, which is not identical with myself. If I believe that something not identical with myself was the cause of my behavior—some event wholly external to myself, for instance, or even one internal to myself, such as a nerve impulse, volition, or whatnot—then I cannot regard that behavior as being an act of mine, unless I further believe that I was the cause of that external or internal event. My pulse, for example, is caused and regulated by certain conditions existing within me, and not by myself. I do not, accordingly, regard this activity of my body as my action, and would be no more tempted to do so if I became suddenly conscious within myself of those conditions or impulses that produce it. This behavior with which I have nothing to do, behavior that is not within my immediate control, behavior that is not only not free activity, but not even the activity of an agent to begin with; it is nothing but a mechanical reflex. Had I never learned that my very life depends on this pulse beat, I would regard it with complete indifference, as something foreign to me, like the oscillations of a clock pendulum that I idly contemplate.

(26) Now this conception of activity, and of an agent who is the cause of it, involves two rather strange metaphysical notions that are never applied elsewhere in nature. The first is that of a self or person—for example, a man—who is not merely a collection of things or events, but a substance and a self-moving being. For on this view it is a man himself, and not merely some

part of him or something within him, that is the cause of his own activity. Now we certainly do not know that a man is anything more than an assemblage of physical things and processes,

which act in accordance with those laws that describe the behavior of all other physical things and processes. Even though a man is a living being, of enormous complexity, there is nothing,

apart from the requirements of this theory, to suggest that his behavior is so radically different in its origin from that of other physical objects, or that an understanding of it must be sought in

some metaphysical realm wholly different from that appropriate to the understanding of non- living things. Second, this conception of activity involves an extraordinary conception of

causation, according to which an agent, which is a substance and not an event, can nevertheless be the cause of an event. Indeed, if he is a free agent then he can, on this conception, cause an event to occur—namely, some act of his own—without anything else causing him to do so. This means that an agent is sometimes a cause, without being an antecedent sufficient condition; for if I affirm that I am the cause of some act of mine, then I am plainly not saying that my very existence is sufficient for its occurrence, which would be absurd. If I say that my hand causes my pencil to move, then I am saying that the motion of my hand is, under the other conditions then prevailing, sufficient for the motion of the pencil. But if I then say that I cause my hand to move, I am not saying anything remotely like this, and surely not that the motion of my self is sufficient for the motion of my arm and hand, since these are the only things about me that are moving.

(27) This conception of the causation of events by beings or substances that are not events is, in fact, so different from the usual philosophical conception of a cause that it should not even bear the same name, for "being a cause" ordinarily just means "being an antecedent sufficient condition or set of conditions." Instead, then, of speaking of agents as causing their own acts, it would perhaps be better to use another word entirely, and say, for instance, that they originate them, initiate them, or simply that they perform them. Now this is on the face of it a dubious

conception of what a man is. Yet it is consistent with our data, reflecting the presuppositions of deliberation, and appears to be the only conception that is consistent with them, as determinism and simple indeterminism are not. The theory of agency avoids the absurdities of simple indeterminism by conceding that human behavior is caused, while at the same time avoiding the difficulties of determinism by denying that every chain of causes and effects is infinite. Some such causal chains, on this view, have beginnings, and they begin with agents themselves. Moreover, if we are to suppose that it is sometimes up to me what I do, and understand this in a sense which is not consistent with determinism, we must suppose that I am an agent or a being who initiates his own actions, sometimes under conditions which do not determine what action he shall perform. Deliberation becomes, on this view, something that is not only possible but quite rational, for it does make sense to deliberate about activity that is truly my own and that depends in its outcome upon me as its author, and not merely upon something more or less esoteric that is supposed to be intimately associated with me, such as my thoughts, volitions, choices, or whatnot.

(28) One can hardly affirm such a theory of agency with complete comfort, however, and wholly without embarrassment, for the conception of men and their powers which is involved in it is

strange indeed, if not positively mysterious. In fact, one can hardly be blamed here for simply denying our data outright, rather than embracing this theory to which they do most certainly

point. Our data—to the effect that men do sometimes deliberate before acting, and that when they do, they presuppose among other things that it is up to them what they are going to do—rest upon nothing more than fairly common consent. These data might simply be illusions. It might in fact be that no man ever deliberates, but only imagines that he does, that from pure conceit he supposes himself to be the master of his behavior and the author of his acts. Spinoza has suggested that if a stone, having been thrown into the air, were suddenly to become conscious, it would suppose itself to be the source of its own motion, being then conscious of what it was doing but not aware of the real cause of its behavior. Certainly men are sometimes mistaken in believing that they are behaving as a result of choice deliberately arrived at. A man might, for example, easily imagine that his embarking upon matrimony is the result of the most careful and rational deliberation, when in fact the causes, perfectly sufficient for that behavior, might be of an entirely physiological, unconscious origin. If it is sometimes false that we deliberate and then act as the result of a decision deliberately arrived at, even when we suppose it to be true, it might always be false. No one seems able, as we have noted, to describe deliberation without metaphors, and the conception of a thing's being "within one's power" or "up to him" seems to defy analysis or definition altogether, if taken in a sense which the theory of agency appears to require.

(29) These are, then, dubitable conceptions, despite their being so well implanted in the common sense of mankind. Indeed, when we turn to the theory of fatalism, we shall find formidable metaphysical considerations which appear to rule them out altogether. Perhaps here, as elsewhere in metaphysics, we should be content with discovering difficulties, with seeing what is and what is not consistent with such convictions as we happen to have, and then drawing such satisfaction as we can from the realization that, no matter where we begin, the world is mysterious and the men who try to understand it are even more so. This realization can, with some justification, make one feel wise, even in the full realization of his ignorance.

1. Discuss group diversity issues

2. Within the context of group, discuss Confidentiality and its limits.

3.List and discuss the many factors that make up group leadership.