Test Dilemma Essay Example for Free

Test Dilemma Essay Q1) How would you characterize Timberland’s exercise of its corporate power in society? Is Timberland engaging multiple stakeholders in its business operations? If so, hw? Answer: I would characterize Timberland’s exercise of its corporate power in society as â€Å"Corporate Social Responsibility†. That is, timberland is being socially responsible towards society and it is acting in a way that enhances society. By exercising its power, Timberland is practicing the â€Å"iron law of responsibility† which says that in the long run, those who do not use power in ways that society considers responsible will tend to lose it. Moreover, by acting in the general public interest, Timberland is following the â€Å"Stewardship Principle† Yes, Timberland is engaging multiple stakeholders in its business operations, starting from Timberland’s management (CEO- Jeff Swartz) who is has managerial duties at Timberland and he is personally involved in the social activities sponsored by Timberland. Timberland’s employees are main stakeholders who in addition to their job tasks at Timberland are participating voluntarily in its social activities. The community service organization (City Year) is another stakeholder which is supported financially by Timberland. Non-profit organizations which benefit from the grants Timberland makes annually are also stakeholders for the company. Other communities and society members who benefit from Timberland’s community services activities are another set of stakeholders to Timberland. Q2) Has Timberland balanced its economic and social responsibilities through its various programs, such the Path to Service program and sustainability goals?  Are the company’s programs examples of enlightened self-interest? Answer: Yes Timberland has balanced its economic and social responsibilities through its programs. Timberland holds accountable for its stockholders and at the same time recognizes its responsibility towards society and environment through the programs it implemented. This is clear in the statement of Timberland CEO â€Å"†¦While we are absolutely accountable to our shareholders, we also recognize and accept our responsibility. The programs implemented by Timberland are examples of being â€Å"enlightened self-interest†. Timberland recognizes the long-term rewards to the company from its global involvement through an enhanced reputation, customer loyalty, employee satisfaction, and global community support. That is, it is Timberland’s self interest to provide true value to its customers, to help its employees to grow and to behave responsibly as a global corporate citizen. Q3) What impact do you think the current economic recession may have on Timberland social programs? Answer: Probably the social programs will continue; however, with less grants and donation amounts and more careful expenditures on sustainability issues environmental programs.  Please note: the case is old and from my reading on the internet, it was mentioned that Timberland continued to give money and service work to City Year during the financial trouble. Q4) How would you improve Timberland’s corporate social responsibility program? Answer: †¢Create a set of Key Performance Indicators through which CSR can be measured. For example, employees’ satisfaction could be one measure of how Timberland is acting towards its environment. Another measure could be the gas emissions from their factory to see how they are affecting environment†¦etc. Improve communications with stakeholders, as an example, awareness sessions could be held with stakeholders to explain the importance and benefits of corporate social responsibility. †¢Involve stakeholders in the social responsibility programs and listen to their opinions on how to make it better. †¢Improve communications with employees, explicitly explain separation between layoffs and City Year donations, Improve internal affairs †¢Involve in some social programs targeting developed countries in the Middle East especially those which have just undergone backlash es and needs assistance to recover.

The blowflies

The blowflies Background The insects that have been most extensively studied in relation to their forensic uses are the blowflies, members of the Calliphoridae fly family in particular their larvae because they are the insects most commonly associated with corpses. Blowflies are usually the first to colonise a body after death, often within hours. The larval stage is the main period in which blowflies face limited food resources, when the fully grown third instar larvae stop feeding; they usually migrate in search of a place to pupate. Because blowfly pupae can provide useful forensic evidence it is important to know where the pupae are likely to be located. Methodology This study was carried out to investigate a variety of factors affecting the pupation behaviour of two forensically important species of blowfly larvae of Calliphora vomitoria and Lucilia sericata in soil. The burrowing behaviour of both species was studied in the laboratory under controlled conditions. Larvae of both Calliphora vomitoria and Lucilia sericata were used in six experiments for each condition. Principle findings The main findings were that most of the biological factors had an effect on the burial behaviour in Larvae of Calliphora vomitoria and Lucilia sericata. 1. Introduction Calliphora vomitoria and Lucilia sericata are two forensically important species of blowflies since they can arrive within few minutes (Payne 1965) or even few seconds (DeJong 1995) following corpse exposure. Because of this, the age of the oldest blowflies gives the most accurate evidence of the post mortem interval (PMI). Many other species of fly, beetle and wasp are also associated with corpses resulting in a succession of insects arriving at the body, but as they tend to arrive after the blowflies, they are less useful in establishing a PMI.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Blowfly infestations of human bodies are a natural outcome of the flies role in the environment as primary decomposers. The larval infestations are an essential component of the natural recycling of organic matter and, on human bodies; they can provide vital evidence to the timing and cause of death. Adult blowflies are well adapted to sensing and locating the sources of odours of decay, eggs are usually laid in dark and moist places such as the eyes, mouth and open sores. The eggs then quickly hatch into first instar larvae which feed rapidly, and shed their skin twice to pass through second and third instars until they finish feeding, or once the food resource has become unavailable.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  After the fully grown third instar larvae stop feeding and show no further response towards food, depending on the species the larvae leave in search of a suitable place to pupate. They may move many meters before burrowing into the soil. The larva then contracts and the cuticle hardens and darkens to form the puparium, within which the pupa transforms into an adult fly. When the fly emerges, the empty puparial case is left behind as evidence of the blowflies development. However, there are many biological factors that affect the pupation behaviour of larvae in soil. These factors include temperature, soil moisture content, soil compaction, as well as the effect of pre burial and high density. All the mentioned factors need to be considered when determining a PMI, however for many of them, little information is available. Furthermore, there are several studies on the influence of temperature on the behaviour of burrowing in larvae of blowflies such as the one done by Gomes (2009). The study of larvae burying behaviour is important to improve understanding of one of the process during larval dispersion, and to try and understand the influence of biological variables on this behaviour   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The present study was conducted to investigate factors that influence the burial behaviour in post-feeding third instar blowfly larvae of Calliphora vomitoria and Lucilia sericata to evaluate if these two species have a different pupation pattern in the different treatments. 2. Materials and Methods C. vomitoria and L. sericata were collected; one thousand and sixty of each species in the final third instar stage were used for these experiments. The soil used was John Innes No 2 potting compost; all six experiments were carried out using the main materials mentioned. 2.1. Determination of normal burial depth and how this is affected by temperature Nine plastic containers were filled with soil to a depth of 24cm and were placed in an incubator so as to allow the soil to reach the temperatures required. Three of the containers had to reach 10 °C, the other three had to reach a temperature of 20 °C, and the remainder each at 28 °C. Fifteen larvae of Lucilia were then placed onto the soil surface of each of the containers; three at 10 °C, 20 °C and 28 °C. The same was done to the larvae of Calliphora, and the time of how long it took the larvae to burrow into the soil was observed, i.e., how long is it before the first and last larva burrows down. Similarly observations were made to see whether the larvae resurface and how if they do how soon. A total of eighteen containers were then covered with muslin cloth kept firmly in position by a rubber band and left for seven days. 2.2. Determination of the effect of moisture content Six plastic containers were filled with soil to a depth of 24cm, then 100ml of water was added to three of the containers and these were labelled as moist. 500ml of water was added to each of the remainder and these were labelled as wet. The containers were then left for 40 minutes in order for the water to be absorbed, after which fifteen larvae of Lucilia were added into each of the six containers, three wet and three moist. The same was done to the larvae of Calliphora, and then the time of how long it took for the larvae to burrow into the soil was counted and all twelve containers were placed into an incubator at 20 °C. 2.3. Determination of the effect of pre-burial 1 cm of soil was added to the bottom of a plastic container, and fifteen larvae of Lucilia were added and covered with 10cm layer of soil, and this was replicated twice. Also 10cm layer of soil was added to the bottom of another container, and fifteen larvae of Lucilia were added but this time they were covered with 20cm layer of soil and this was replicated twice. The exact same was done to the larvae of Calliphora. After the larvae were buried to a depth of 10cm or 20cm, observations were made to check how long it took for the first maggot to reach the surface, and the number of larvae on the surface was counted at 15, 30, 45 and 60 minutes. All 12 containers were then placed in an incubator at 20 °C. 2.4. Determination of the effect of soil compaction Soil was compacted into six containers to a depth of 24cm, and then fifteen larvae of Lucilia were added to each of the three containers. Also fifteen larvae of Calliphora were added to the other three containers, and observations were made to check how long it took for the larvae to burrow into the soil, i.e., how long was it before the first and last larva were burrowed. All six containers were incubated at 20 °C and then left for seven days. 2.5. Determination of the effect of larval density Three plastic containers were filled with highly dense soil to a depth of 24cm, and 150 larvae of Lucilia were added to each container. The same was done to the larvae of Calliphora, and observations were then made to see how long it took for the first and last larvae to burrow down. All six containers were covered with muslin cloth kept firmly in position by a rubber band and incubated at 20 °C. 2.6. Determination of the distance moved by the post-feeding stage of C. vomitoria and L. sericata from their feeding site 500 post-feeding larvae of the two species were released on a grassland area on the Byrom Street Campus, Liverpool John Moore University, UK. After 7 days soil core samples were taken from the surrounding soil and were searched in order to locate the pupae.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  After the larvae pupated in all of the experiments, they were located and removed from the soil as follows: a line was drawn every 2cm on the side of all the containers up until a soil depth of 24cm using a permanent marker pen, after which the number of pupae found on the surface was counted and removed. Moreover, each 2cm layer of soil was then carefully removed using a spatula and placed onto a plastic sheet where it was thoroughly searched, and the number of all the pupae of all the containers of the five experiments was calculated. All five experiments were undertaken at a lab temperature of 20 °C. However, there are many biological factors that affect the pupation behaviour of larvae in soil. These factors include temperature, soil moisture content, soil compaction, as well as the effect of pre burial and high density. All the mentioned factors need to be considered when determining a PMI, however for many of them, little information is available. Furthermore, there are several studies on the influence of temperature on the behaviour of burrowing in larvae of blowflies such as the one done by Gomes (2009). The study of larvae burying behaviour is important to improve understanding of one of the process during larval dispersion, and to try and understand the influence of biological variables on this behaviour   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The present study was conducted to investigate factors that influence the burial behaviour in post-feeding third instar blowfly larvae of Calliphora vomitoria and Lucilia sericata to evaluate if these two species have a different pupation pattern in the different treatments. 2. Materials and Methods C. vomitoria and L. sericata were collected; one thousand and sixty of each species in the final third instar stage were used for these experiments. The soil used was John Innes No 2 potting compost; all six experiments were carried out using the main materials mentioned. 2.1. Determination of normal burial depth and how this is affected by temperature Nine plastic containers were filled with soil to a depth of 24cm and were placed in an incubator so as to allow the soil to reach the temperatures required. Three of the containers had to reach 10 °C, the other three had to reach a temperature of 20 °C, and the remainder each at 28 °C. Fifteen larvae of Lucilia were then placed onto the soil surface of each of the containers; three at 10 °C, 20 °C and 28 °C. The same was done to the larvae of Calliphora, and the time of how long it took the larvae to burrow into the soil was observed, i.e., how long is it before the first and last larva burrows down. Similarly observations were made to see whether the larvae resurface and how if they do how soon. A total of eighteen containers were then covered with muslin cloth kept firmly in position by a rubber band and left for seven days. 2.2. Determination of the effect of moisture content Six plastic containers were filled with soil to a depth of 24cm, then 100ml of water was added to three of the containers and these were labelled as moist. 500ml of water was added to each of the remainder and these were labelled as wet. The containers were then left for 40 minutes in order for the water to be absorbed, after which fifteen larvae of Lucilia were added into each of the six containers, three wet and three moist. The same was done to the larvae of Calliphora, and then the time of how long it took for the larvae to burrow into the soil was counted and all twelve containers were placed into an incubator at 20 °C. 2.3. Determination of the effect of pre-burial 1 cm of soil was added to the bottom of a plastic container, and fifteen larvae of Lucilia were added and covered with 10cm layer of soil, and this was replicated twice. Also 10cm layer of soil was added to the bottom of another container, and fifteen larvae of Lucilia were added but this time they were covered with 20cm layer of soil and this was replicated twice. The exact same was done to the larvae of Calliphora. After the larvae were buried to a depth of 10cm or 20cm, observations were made to check how long it took for the first maggot to reach the surface, and the number of larvae on the surface was counted at 15, 30, 45 and 60 minutes. All 12 containers were then placed in an incubator at 20 °C. 2.4. Determination of the effect of soil compaction Soil was compacted into six containers to a depth of 24cm, and then fifteen larvae of Lucilia were added to each of the three containers. Also fifteen larvae of Calliphora were added to the other three containers, and observations were made to check how long it took for the larvae to burrow into the soil, i.e., how long was it before the first and last larva were burrowed. All six containers were incubated at 20 °C and then left for seven days. 2.5. Determination of the effect of larval density Three plastic containers were filled with highly dense soil to a depth of 24cm, and 150 larvae of Lucilia were added to each container. The same was done to the larvae of Calliphora, and observations were then made to see how long it took for the first and last larvae to burrow down. All six containers were covered with muslin cloth kept firmly in position by a rubber band and incubated at 20 °C. 2.6. Determination of the distance moved by the post-feeding stage of C. vomitoria and L. sericata from their feeding site 500 post-feeding larvae of the two species were released on a grassland area on the Byrom Street Campus, Liverpool John Moore University, UK. After 7 days soil core samples were taken from the surrounding soil and were searched in order to locate the pupae.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  After the larvae pupated in all of the experiments, they were located and removed from the soil as follows: a line was drawn every 2cm on the side of all the containers up until a soil depth of 24cm using a permanent marker pen, after which the number of pupae found on the surface was counted and removed. Moreover, each 2cm layer of soil was then carefully removed using a spatula and placed onto a plastic sheet where it was thoroughly searched, and the number of all the pupae of all the containers of the five experiments was calculated. All five experiments were undertaken at a lab temperature of 20 °C. 3. Statistical Analysis The results were expressed as the mean and standard deviation (S.D). The Chi-Square test was performed to determine whether the observed frequency distribution differs significantly from the expected one. 4. Results discussion 4.1. Determination of normal burial depth and how this is affected by temperature The larvae of Calliphora vomitoria burrowed themselves deeper at a temperature of 10 °C to pupate, whereas the larvae of Lucilia sericata remained closer to the surface at the lower and higher temperatures used in this experiment. L.sericata shows normal distribution at 10 °C, however it stops burrowing at a depth of 14cm. In contrast, C.vomitoria continues to burrow to a depth of 24 but is not evenly distributed. The Chi square test was done for this experiment in order to see if there was a significant difference between the specific temperatures used as the graph didnt show clear differences. The results from the test showed that the distribution of C.vomitoria and L. sericata at a temp of 10 °C was significant ?2 (df 2) = 18.30 p>5.99, ?2 (df 2)= 17.85 p>5.99, also at a temperature of 20 °C for C.vomitoria it was found to be significant ?2 (df 2) = 6.49 p>5.99, and for L. Sericata ?2 (df 2) = 18.30 p>5.99 significant distribution. 4.2. Determination of the effect of moisture content The two species of larvae burrowed themselves up until a depth of 10cm; remained close to the surface to pupate in wet and moist soil conditions. However, the number of pupae of C.vomitoria was high in wet soil. In contrast, the number of pupae of L.sericata was high in moist soil. 4.3. Determination of the effect of pre-burial 4.4. Determination of the effect of soil compaction It is clear from the results that biological factors studied have a significant effect on the burying behaviour of the two species of larvae studied in this experiment. The rate of development of all insects is directly dependent on the ambient conditions, mainly temperature. Between upper and lower thresholds, which vary between species, the higher the temperature, the faster the insects will develop; the lower the temperature, the slower they will develop. If the ambient temperatures during the period of development are known, then the minimum PMI can be determined. Temperature affected the burrowing behaviour of larvae prior to pupation (Fig.1). At low temperatures, the metabolic rate may be markedly reduced and this could result in greater body weight and a tendency to burrow deeper in order to escape low temperatures (Grassberger and Reiter 2002) 5. Acknowledgement I would like to thank Dr Alan Gun for supporting the research reported by providing the data and equipment. I would also like to thank Dr Jeri Bird for his assistance in the data analysis. Thanks also to my lab partners and colleagues for their help and support. 6. References Clark, K., Evans, L. Wall, R. (2006) Growth rates of the blowfly Lucilia sericata on different body tissues. Forensic Science International 156, 145-149 DeJong GD. An Annotated Checklist of the Calliphoridae (Diptera) Of Colorado, With Notes on Carrion Associations and ForensicImportance. Journal of Kansas Entomological Society, 1995; 67(4): 378-385. Gomes,L., Gomes, G., Von Zuben, C.L. (2007) the influence of temperature on the behaviour of burrowing larvae of blowflies,Chrysomya albiceps and Lucilia cuprina, under controlled conditions. Journal of insect science.9, 1536-2442 Gomes, L., Sanches, M.R. Von Zuben, C.J. (2004) Dispersal and Burial Behaviour in Larvae of Chrysomya megacephala and Chrysomya albiceps (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Journal of insect behaviour 18, 282-292 Grassberger, M. Reiter, C. (2002) Effect of temperature of development of the forensically important holarctic blow fly Protophormia terraenovae (Robineau-Desvoidy) (Diptera: Calliphordae). Forensic Science international 128, 177-182 Gunn, A. (2009) Essential Forensic Biology. 2nd edition, Wiley 214-251 Payne JA. A Summer Carrion Study of the Baby Pig Sus scrofa Linnaeus.Ecology, 1965; 46 (5): 592-602. Singh, D., Bala, M. (2009) the effect of starvation on the larval behaviour of two forensically important species of blow flies (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Forensic Science international 193, 118-121 Tullis K and Goff ML. Arthropod Succession in Exposed Carrion in tropical Rainforest on Ohau Island, Hawaii. Journal ofMedical Entomology, 1987; 24: 332-339. Wooldridge, J., Scrase, L., Wall, L. (2007) Flight activity of the blowflies, Calliphora vomitoria and Lucilia sericata, in the dark. Forensic Science International 172, 94-97 Cleveland Museum of Natural History, Blow fly life cycle. Available: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/visibleproofs//education/entomology/blow_fly_life_cycle.pdf Accessed 09/01/2010

Ethnomethodology In Sociological Analysis

Ethnomethodology In Sociological Analysis Ethnomethodology is the study of the ways in which ordinary people construct a stable social world through everyday utterances and actions is now a major component of all sociology and linguistics courses. The tag was invented by Harold Garfinkel, the American sociologist, who put down the basics of ethnomethodology as a hypothesis, and as an awkward assessment of all conservative sociology. Elucidating on the genesis of the term, he proposes that ethno appeared to refer, in one way or another, to the accessibility to an associate of reasonable acquaintance of his social order as rational information of the whatever. In this paper, we focus more narrowly on this specific theory of ethnomethodology and how more specifically it is important in the aspects of personal and post-modernist perspective on contemporary sociological analysis. We will determine how and to what extent this theory is really convincing as well as adopt a critical stance towards it. There are two central ideas in ethnomethodology: indexicality and reflexivity. The fundamental initiative of indexicality is that the connotation of an expression or remark is reliant on its framework of how it will be utilized. In other words, the learning of what a statement implies relies on some consideration of the circumstance on which the declaration is used. The particulars of the relations in which the contributors are affianced are brought up in ethnomethodology. On the other hand, reflexivity refers to the actuality that our common sense of regulation is an outcome of speaking procedures: it is formed in conversations. Garfinkel Harold (1917) is the initiator of the ethnomethodology field of research. Ethnomethodology is a hypothesis that illustrates the assortment of procedures that people use to comprehend, and make their way throughout, daily existence. One of the behaviors that individuals make good judgment of their lives and relations to others is in the course of reporting observations. These are the different ways in which individuals substantiate or make good judgment of their measures to themselves and others. Ethnomethodologists dispute that descriptions are spontaneous, which implies that by presenting descriptions of ourselves to others, we as well transform the circumstances and the likelihood for communication in that state of affairs. Ethnomethodologists have furthermore used violation experiments to comprehend the manner that individuals put up social authenticity. In these lessons, ethnomethodologists get involved in actions that infringe the undervalued suppositions of daily life , and observe to notice how other communal actors refurbish or recreate the violation in the societal structure. These lessons demonstrate how people regulate their daily lives and how they deal with confrontations to that daily arrangement. Moreover, Garfinkel has revealed how the apparently ordinary grouping of sex is socially assembled. In his interrogation with Agnes, Garfinkel discovered that sexual category is a societal achievement that entails continuous consideration to the ordinary observations that permit individuals be judged as male or female (Janet, 199, pp.102). An ethnomethodological advance observes and evaluates social relations through endorsed behavior, what individuals do in social accomplishment and dealings. It is related to the perception of figurative interactionism, even though it centers most of its attention on the actions themselves and how they are carried out in specific frameworks, rather than taking into account how community actors create implication and understanding in relations. Authors in the ethnomethodological perception seem to be undisturbed with the philosophic emphasizing of social dealings or in increasing a comprehensive hypothetical composition that can enlighten on all features of social relations and the foundations and configurations that materialize from it. Rather, they evaluate social relations in specific circumstances and frameworks, trying to illustrate and comprehend the techniques, measures, and concerns that community actors apply in implementing social relations. For the ethnomethodologist, societ al connections must not be measured as coherent or ridiculous, or dependent on error, rather societal relations is a pack of reasonable measures people utilize to cope with circumstances and frameworks where there is some suppleness for societal attainment and possibly some ambiguity regarding the behavior and upshot of social achievement (Goffman, 1976). Similar to interactionist viewpoint, ethnomethodologists think of these daily relations, and the actions implicated in them, as containing a reliability or steadiness so they structure what sociologists call foundations and formations. These arrangements and outlines are constantly dynamically created through interface amid public actors, even though not automatically in a cognizant approach or as an outcome of intentionally allowing for implication and elucidation. Rather, communal actors are held responsible for their measures in the encounters that transpire in precise circumstances and framework. This implies that social action in a context is an actively produced accomplishment (Cohen, p. 90). The ethnomethodological point of view put emphasis on a communal interface that has a prudence of its own and the manner is one of achievement making good judgment out of circumstances and retorting in an answerable approach. Specifically, this social demeanor is not only devotion to a pa rticular outline of prudence forced by universal customs, positions, institutions, and arrangements of the social order. Ethnomethodology may perhaps be more a technique responsible for sociological approaches, unlike hypothetical ones. Here, sociologists are to position themselves far from the universal perceptive of community actors, circumstances, and social interactions, and observe the universally acknowledged perceptive that public actors have taken on and, at least absolutely, acknowledged as they keep on social relations and social interactions. It not only asks the sociologist to establish and evaluate what precisely these are and how they have progressed in terms of development, but also raise issues or assess critically these, to increase the likelihood of whether these are publicly appropriate and just, as well as to reflect on substitutes. A feminist approach can be associated to the approach by taking into account the realities of womens nature, needs, role, and place in society and how systems of ideas constructed in past interactions and sustained by present ongoing interactions (Wallac e and Wolf, p. 241). A feminist issues proper feminine positions and errands in stipulations of nurturing, socialization mothering as well as the personal field. These approaches may possibly be helpful to those in other circumstances where they are inferior deprived, tribal/racial factions and homosexual persons. Moreover, they guide the sociologist to doubt the place the persons dwell in and reconsider the undervalued postulations of their state of affairs. In this judgment, it may perhaps be critical, resourceful, and probably liberating. Harold Garfinkel, an American sociologist, largely developed ethnomethodology in the early 1960s. Ethnomethodology refers to the learning of the habits in which persons make good judgment of their communal planet. It is different from additional sociological viewpoints in one exceedingly imperative admiration. Functionalists, Marxists and Symbolic Integrationists are all markedly different from each other, but they nevertheless assume that the social world is basically orderly, i.e. that patterns of behavior and relations in the general public are standard and methodical rather than unsystematic and frenzied. They respectively define these regularities thus: Functionalists consider it as the upshot of assessment agreement in the public, which guarantees that behavior matches with commonly acknowledged standards. Marxists perceive it as a consequence of the inferiority of one rank to another, it is uncertain and open to interruption by insurgency but all the same it is present. Moreov er, interactionists vary from these inclusive-viewpoints in that they perceive order not so much as an attribute of the public structure but as something that is fashioned and reshaped daily in the diversity of interface conditions; it is discussed an outcome of the procedures of description, elucidation and concession which comprises social contact. Organization is nonetheless still supposed to be a purposeful element of community life. Ethnomethodologists, in contrast to this, begin with the assumption that social order is mere illusion. Social life merely appears to be orderly but is, in reality, potentially chaotic. Societal array is created in the mentalities of communal actors as the social order tackles the character as a sequence of intelligence imitations and incidents which one is required to in one way or another categorize into a coherent pattern. Garfinkels concept of indexicality implies that individuals make good judgment of a comment, signal or a specific action by indicating the framework in which it transpires; to be precise they register it to precise conditions. We make sense of a situation according to the context in which we find ourselves, looking for clues as to what the situation is supposed to be. This leads us to accept the situation as authentic. If a fellow student walks into your room in halls wearing a stethoscope and a white coat, you will be aware that he/she is not a doctor but maybe going to a fancy-dress party. However, if someone you do not know approaches you at a hospital in similar garb, you might be very likely to assume that they are a member of the medical profession (Garfinkel, 1967). The technique most favored by ethnomethodologists (particularly Garfinkel) is to momentarily interrupt the planet which its inhabitants undervalue and observe how they respond. The motive of this is to depict background suppositions that have been acknowledged as authenticity in due course. In one of his research tests, Garfinkel requested students to conduct themselves as if they were guests in their individual abodes, and document the bewildered responses of their parents as they put effort to understand the unexpected interference of the usually familiar association with their children. Ethnomethodology leans on disregarding information conveyed through communication, focusing solely on how the communication was executed. This is because the attitude of ethnomethodology advocates that all implications are, and can merely eternally be, one-sided and that the single purposeful common realism is the actuality of universally understood communication techniques. Ethnomethodologys reliance upon a kind of relativism is often used to criticize it. In taking this relativist stance, ethnomethodology leaves itself unable to make moral judgments about meanings and therefore it is largely unable to undertake problems like discrimination and authority. Nevertheless, it can be disputed that ethnomethodology is not purely relativistic because it obviously has to provide at least some rules for itself in order to work. The ethnomethodologist must make, and rely upon the assumption that others will appreciate the significance of his or her effort, in a similar approach that you might read and understand these words on the paper. I am discussing something and trying to be non-judgmental about it, but no doubt it does contain my own values. Ethnomethodologists might argue then, that the only thing which humans are really good at is the production of order out of chaos. All other human capacities, such as moral judgment, would be seen as merely subjective and having no truth. Ethnomethodology is certainly interesting as an analysis of how persons make good judgment of the globe as a social place, and how we construct a reality from the minimal amount of information available to us. It shares its investigative attitude with symbolic interactionism. It was mainly developed by Garfinkel. It has its roots in the phenomenology of Schutz and the writings of Talcott Parsons who was Garfinkels teacher at Harvard University (Farganis, 2000). Development of Ethnomethodology One of the achievements of ethnomethodological effort has been its exhibition of the significant penalties for both community presumption and study that flows from the fundamental spot of indexicality. What ethnomethodology presents is a replica of thoughtfulness which relies on intelligence being recuperated from speech in context via a variety of techniques of logic creation. (Heritage, 1984) Talcott Parsons Parsons had been attempting to link the three separate elements of personality, culture and the social system. Although society is largely systematic, individuals also clearly make choices about particular courses of action. What forces, Parsons asked, actually give a social structure to the choices that people make; when those same structural forces must necessarily be rooted in those actions resulting from those choices? The structural forces must transcend the action; and Parsons called these emergent properties, of which the most important are normative value commitments or the shared commitments that each of us has regarding social propriety in particular contexts. Because we share them, we are motivated to comply with perceived social requirements. And we do so because we are morally motivated to do so. This is Talcott Parsons answer to the question of how order comes about; it involves motivated compliance to the normative order. Parsons helps us to understand how a social system of action is derived from the orderliness of stability, rationality and predictability (James, 1994). Alfred Schutz Garfinkels perspective also derived from the phenomenological thinking of Alfred Schutz, for whom the system was an insufficient answer. He believed that the concept of action must instead be derived from the position of the actor in his/her daily experiences of life. He said that thinking of things from the objective perspective of a systems approach, although apparently highly suited to a scientific sociology, ignores the subjective position of the actor and transforms his/her perspective into that of the sociologist. Rather than analyzing what the actor might understand of a situation, sociologists would transpose these explanations into idealized sociological versions of what had actually happened which fitted and thus maintained the system. If one takes Parsons view, the whole concept of the actors view is lost. For Schutz, the world is an interpretive reality in which any particular action might have more than one meaning for the actor. A meaning is revisable as a perspective in the intersubjective space that exists between actors. In other words, although we experience the world through an individual consciousness, we understand that the experience of it is not entirely personal and unique. It is taken for granted by each of us that others see and mean much the same things as one. Everyday life is thus taken for granted as a largely objective phenomenon; yet we also take for granted the subjective position one has of it from ones own particular and unique perspective. The social world is a given, which existed before one came along. Other than when we are stepping back and taking a philosophical stance towards it, it is impossible to constantly subject its reality to question. Schutz suggests then, that our common sense appreciation of experience is constituted by typifications (rather lik e scripts or schemata in social psychology) which refer to what one finds to be a regularity, or typical event, object or action. These regularities make us accept the everyday world as mundane or everyday! (James, 1990) Language is a kind of iconography or library of such typifications which we have inherited in the process of our socialization. When we explain others actions to ourselves we again typify their reasons and intentions: Well he would behave that way because hes a or she clearly intends to etc. These attributions of cause or intention are quite a routine because we intuitively know the type of person we are seeing/speaking with etc. We hold the world in common with others which stresses for Schutz the importance of the reciprocity of perspectives; even where there is a difference of viewpoint it is socially organized an airline pilot is expected to know more about flying than I do!( James, 1990) In everyday life, one attends to the ongoing, practical process of living as events occur and attending to what is most relevant at this moment according to ones interests and purposes. Indeed, unless one is disturbed by a strong contestation of ones viewpoint, one will simply accept what is happening in the way it happens. Scientists, or more particularly sociologists, Schutz argues, do not do this; they stand back and analyze from an extremely diverse viewpoint from that of the performer. They produce concepts which refer to human actions as if they were fixed quantities (which they arent) and employ second degree constructs from the first degree construct of the actors actual, lived experiences. Thus, for Schutz, sociology had been making sense of events which already had sense for the actors (James, 1990). Our understandings of social situations are constructed from within according to Garfinkel. This means that the core elements of social order its order and intelligibility are products of the activity itself . This situation is particular to this moment, to these participants and is what Garkinkel refers to as locally produced by its participants. This does not however mean that any of us merely does whatever we like; we are bound by rules based on the social reality of the situation a practical reality. But it is very important to understand that Garfinkel stresses this reality being conceived as consisting only in actors understandings i.e. their understanding of social features as fixed, typical, required etc. is the only thing that makes them appear to be objective. We act on the basis of such understandings and thus produce our activities as social ones. They thus fit the context in which we find ourselves. There two suggestions of ethnomethodologists: to treat social settings as practically accomplished and to treat members of the action as practical enquirers. The social setting is thus, not out there, but is an ongoing accomplishment achieved through interaction; a product, a process and a practical accomplishment (Denzin, 1993). We may then perceive the world as a constraint, feel we must do things (like be polite) even though we would sometimes wish not to. It is unimportant here whether an action is morally right; Garfinkel isnt interested in what we construct, but in how we construct it. What actually happens is identical to how it is perceived and recognized by the actor. In the formulations or ways in which we describe an event, we are inseparably connected with that event we are the event! Describing, referring and naming are practical actions within that setting. Every time we speak and act we are engaged in the reciprocal consequences that we elicit from other actors who are also present. There is therefore no distinction here between an event and the description of that event by someone in the setting. One would generally produce actions in the setting which make clear to those present (in the course of the activity) what is going on; not make excuses and repairs after the event. What someone says is what they actually mean. When we give a reason for something, thats actually why we did what we did. The social world is orderly because we constantly make sense of contingencies and particularities as knowable, understandable entities. Ethnomethodologists engage in conversational analysis which demonstrates how conversational organization involves structures which are context sensitive. Through these we engage in conversations which are quite specific to their local context. The machinery is general, but its local uses and particular outcomes are specific. For instance: Whats your name sunshine? Dave You own this place? Yeah Conversation Analysis Appreciative the character of discussion analysis would be made simpler if it is thought as an improvement of ethnomethodology which has tagged along the insights concerning the reflexive and indexical character of achievement and use them particularly to informal relations. The apprehension with indexicality is here apparent in an alarm with how utterances recount to the spoken progressions to which they fit in; and the anxiety with reflexivity materializes in the secure concentration paid to the sort of interactional vocation utterances and entire successions achieve. Schegloff Emanuel, Gail Jefferson and Sacks Harvey, who have been mainly intimately linked to budding conversational study, also assumed the common ethnomethodological proposal that relations is systematically based. Therefore, in researching on conversation they began with the supposition that what is spoken is not the approach it is unintentionally, that structures of words are not uneven and complete make-dos, but are premeditated in their element to be receptive to their chronological framework and to their function in communication (Sacks, 1992; Sacks et al., 1974). A discussion methodical viewpoint on realistic conversation will begin by bearing in mind its part in proceedings which are, consecutively, rooted in series. Hence before we carry on with the subject of particulars we will require something of a parenthesis on the interface successions in which they transpire. The Critics According to ethnomethodologists, conventional sociologists are constructing a sense of social order in the same way as a layperson: namely, meanings are regarded as substantive and unproblematic. Consequently they are taken for granted. By contrast, ethnomethodologists argue that the proper task of sociology is to sort out the interpretive rules by means of which we establish our sense of order, rather than engage in reflexively establishing that sense. In this way, conventional sociology becomes an object of study for ethnomethodology, in the same way as any other human social activity is an object of study. Thus, Garfinkels book contains both an essay on coding answers to sociological interviews and an essay on trans-sexuality, the activities sharing an equal status as ways of producing social reality (Wallace, 1995). A common criticism of ethnomethodology is that it does not tell us anything very important. By definition, the big political and social issues of the day are beyond its scope, since the concern is with how we constitute this world, rather than what we constitute it as being. It is argued that the rules it draws out are also comparatively low level and merely tell us what we already know. It denies the constraints of social life upon the actor. It suggests that sociologists can do little more than report an actors version of a situation. These are based on misunderstandings of ethnomethodology and tend to come from sociologists with a very different perspective. They amount to saying that it doesnt look at things in the right way! It is microscopic and trivial; this also suggests bias. The ethnos clearly do have a defensible justification for their perspective- ethnos study the actors methods of construction, but simultaneously employ those methods of construction. It is itself an organized social activity which is practically accomplished i.e. the problem of radical reflexivity: the study of the study of the study! The answer they give is that this infinite regress is an acceptable critique but it isnt their problem; its a philosophical issue. It does not reflect negatively on their theoretical perspective (Sacks, 1992). Conclusion Ethnomethodology facilitates us to move beyond simple announcements of the appeal of processual anthropology to its concrete practice. Garfinkels methods of ethnomethodological breakdown authorize a spotlight on moments of crisis in conversation. It is such an instant that the negotiation of meaning is clearest and hence conversational analysis can be employed as an influential analytical instrument of processual anthropology. In stipulations of the associations connecting ethnomethodology and other sociological viewpoints, and involving the ethnomethodological design and its subjects of enquiry, this is conceivably an added foundationalist and productive progress than is occasionally accredited (Sacks, 1974). According to Dennis (2004), Lynch argues convincingly for the cross-fertilization of ethnomethodology and the sociology of methodical or rather scientific awareness to elucidate the procedural and epistemological practicalities of the common sciences. Lynch posits an epistemolo gical and practical break, situated about Garfinkels abandonment of Schutzs commencement of systematic processes. However, Garfinkels afterward works are disputed to be advanced to their previous, protoethnomethodological, equivalents to the point that they no longer break on Schutzs inconsistent and scientistic emergence to methodological inflexibility. Although ethnomethodological work continues, it is neither as prominent, nor as controversial as hitherto. On the other hand, a modified version of some of its insights is now almost taken-for-granted: there is, for example, a much wider recognition among sociologists of the problematic nature of meaning and of the way in which our talk does contribute to the creation of our social reality. Meanwhile, ethnomethodology has become a relatively prosperous alternative discipline, with its own conferences, journals, and centers of excellence.

Essay --

Before I explain and talk about why a ball goes farther when hit with an aluminum bat, I would like to present and explain some vocabulary concept and words. A collision, transfers momentum or kinetic energy from one object to another object. There are two types of collisions, elastic collision and inelastic collision. An elastic collision is a collision that occurs when two objects bounce apart when they collide; the total kinetic energy in the system is the same before and after the collision. For example, elastic collision occurs when equally massive balls move in the same direction; in this case momentum is transferred from one ball to another ball. And an inelastic collision is a collision that occurs when two objects collide and do not bounce away from each other; the collision changes the total kinetic energy in a closed system. For example, inelastic collision occurs when two cars crash and join themselves into one; the objects stick together after colliding. In inelastic c ollision all that happened is the loss of some kinetic energy, objects don not necessarily need to stick together in an inelastic collision. Whether a collision is an elastic collision or inelastic collision momentum would always be the same before and/or after the collision as long as you have a close system. According to Asif Shakur, Chair of Physics and Engineering at Salisbury State University, explains, â€Å"Aluminum is a hard material. It doesn't have a lot of "give." In other words, aluminum is highly elastic. Therefore, very little of the ball's initial kinetic energy (the energy associated with motion) is used up in permanently deforming the aluminum. Indeed, the aluminum springs back quickly and the ball retains much of its initial energy. In co... ...reased the animosity between the two players† (Russell). The point of all of this is that Piazza’s bat broke; professional players typically go through a lot of bats during a baseball season. In conclusion, there are a various numbers of reasons why a ball go farther when hit with an aluminum bat; such as, aluminum bat can be swung faster, aluminum bats have the trampoline effect, aluminum bats have winder sweet spots, and aluminum bats don’t break. A ball goes farther when hit with aluminum bat because of the fact that the bat is very lightweight and have a large 'sweet spot' in which to hit the ball. In order to have a ball with a high speed, in other words, lots of kinetic energy, the collision has to an elastic collision. Aluminum bats can be swung faster because the barrel of an aluminum bat is empty; the distribution of mass along the length of a metal bat.

Biography of Edgar Allan Poe Essay -- Edgar Allan Poe Writers Literatu

Biography of Edgar Allan Poe Edgar Allan Poe is a man who is considered to be a true American genius of our time, and by many, the personification of death. His works have been collected and celebrated for over a hundred years from this day. He was a man who’s dreary horror tales captured and frightened the minds of millions. Poe differed from most other acclaimed writers though. The readers of his work do not admire him because they fall in love with his characters or because his writing touches their hearts. On the contrary, his readers admire him because he managed to change reality for them. Edgar Allan Poe’s skill was developed in his subject matter of death and its horrid truths. Poe’s tales centered away from the life of a man and towards the effects of death on a man, whether it be his own or that of another. Poe was adept at creating an atmosphere of suspense with the minimum use of words and dramatic effects1. Poe’s best known works include such masterpieces as Annabel Lee, The Raven, The Fall of the House of Usher, The Mask of the Red Death, The Murders of the Rue Morgue, and many others. Each and every one of these titles, among others, share one common trait that is more than evident, they all deal with death. When these tittles monopolize the attention, it is only natural that the central body of Poe’s work should seen to be a tissue of nightmares.2 How is it that a subject that is so repulsive to mankind can at the same time attract so many people? Perhaps it wasn’t the subject, but the skill with which it was written that lured people to it. Fish are lured to a deadly hook, but the bait makes it beautiful. In this same manner, people are mesmerized by the beauty and genius of Poe’s work. The better question is, what is it that drove Poe to become so obsessed with death? Why is it that he portrayed his genius through this topic? The only true way to answer these questions is through a deep analysis of not only Poe’s works, but his life and his mind. As stated earlier, one of his most acclaimed works is Annabel Lee. It is indeed a love tale. A poem written for his beautiful Annabel Lee. It speaks of the strong and unbreakable love that existed between them. This appears to be a happy enough topic, except for one significant fact. This Annabel Lee is dead.3 According to Poe, her death was caused by the angels who were jealous of th... ...to make them afraid of sleep for fear of their nightmares. His talent was certainly not appreciated in his time. He gave us much and received pathetically little in return, for he was all his life a starveling poet and a miserably paid writer for ephemeral magazines. It is a final irony that his letters and manuscripts have become the most valuable of all American writers.34 Regardless of what caused his obsession with death, he managed to create tales that will remain on the earth for as long as man exists. Poe is the genius that young children are taught of. He is an icon that America can always claim as her own. Whether Poe wrote of death because of depression, disease, personal losses, insanity, or simply because he may have been the only man bold enough to face the one thing that everyone fears, he interlaced it into his tales to provide us with horror, sorrow, and entertainment. Since his death, he has become appreciated and celebrated. His tales are taught in grade school. His works have been made for theater and film. His genius is preached to anyone who studies the English language.35 From a sad life and a troubled mind flourished a name that will remain in history.

Discipline and Management Essay

Included in this essay is a comparison between discipline and management also behavior and misbehavior. Beginning the essay is a short definition and a short word picture of discipline, management, behavior and misbehavior. Next is a comparison of how each are different, similar, related. Discipline is described in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary as first being â€Å"punishment† or then further down states it is â€Å"training that corrects, molds, or perfects the mental faculties or moral character. † In our text book, Building Classroom Discipline, C. M. Charles states that discipline in the classroom is â€Å"Teachers’ efforts to maintain classroom decorum and secure student’ cooperation and exercising self-control. † Discipline should not be thought of as punishment but instead a learning road of self-control. Discipline is a person’s ability to conduct appropriately or a short word picture could be[pic]. With in the classroom, management is a written plan of action so that class runs smooth. Webster dictionary describes management as â€Å"conducting or supervising of something†. Management is the process of controlling and discipline is the act once management has failed. Management and discipline are interrelated and work together to for a common plan and a smooth ran class. If there was no [pic] (management) designed the discipline would not work. Webster’s dictionary states that behavior is â€Å"the manner of conducting oneself†. Behavior described in our text book Building Classroom Discipline â€Å"is the totality of one’s physical and mental activities. † Behavior is everything that we do whether good or bad. One word that best describes this is[pic]. Misbehavior is considered as a person’s actions â€Å"that disrupt teaching, interfere with learning, demean others, or otherwise violate the moral codes of society. † (C. M. Charles 2008 p13) In Webster’s dictionary they describe misbehavior as â€Å"a bad manner of conducting one self. † Both of the terms are related however [pic] (misbehavior) is the disruption of behavior as a whole. Behavior is the bigger picture and misbehavior is a smaller unit within behavior. The two are interrelated and you can not have one with out the other. With the appropriate action taken in advance misbehavior could be minimized. There are different types of misbehavior and some are more serious than others but none of the less takes away from instruction. This is why it is very important to have a discipline plan devised. In the above essay is a comparison between discipline and management also behavior and misbehavior. Beginning the essay is a short definition and a short word picture of discipline, management, behavior and misbehavior. Next is a comparison of how each are different, similar, related. To complete this essay is a short description of why it is important to have a discipline plan.

Gulf Coast Motor

This course includes a challenging Course Project due in Week 6. Because of this, you will need to spend additional time and effort throughout the course to work on your project rather than wait until Week 6. The subject of the project may be based on any Case from any chapter assigned in this course. Examples are Case 10. 3- Montgomery v. English on page 175 and Case 14. 2- Page v. Gulf Coast Motors on page 111. Choose the case you wish to research and then do the following: Read and understand the case. Show your Analysis and Reasoning and make it clear you understand the material.Be sure to use the concepts of the course to show your reasoning. Summarize the situation. Dedicate at least one heading to each following outline topic: ? Parties [Identify the plaintiff and the defendant and tell something about them. ] Facts [Summarize those facts critical to the outcome of the case. ] Procedure [Who brought the appeal? What was the outcome in the lower court(s)? ] Issue [Note the cent ral question or questions on which the case turns. ] Holding [How did the court resolve the issue(s)? Who won? ] Reasoning [Explain the logic that supported the court's decision. Case Questions [Be sure to address and thoroughly answer each and every case question and each part of each question. ] Conclusion [This should summarize the key aspects of the decision and also your recommendations on the court's ruling. ] Include citations on the slides and a reference page with your sources. Use APA style citations and references. Do significant research outside of the book and demonstrate that you have in a very obvious way. This refers to research beyond the legal research. This involves something about the parties or other interesting related area.Show something you have discovered about the case, parties, or other important element from your own research. Be sure this is obvious and adds value beyond the legal reasoning of the case. PAGE v. GULF COAST MOTORS Mary R. PAGE v. GULF COAS T MOTORS. 2030401. — December 30, 2004 David Vaughn, Daphne, for appellant. James Rebarchak of Miller, Hamilton, Snider & Odom, L. L. C. , Mobile, for appellee. Parties: [Identify the plaintiff and the defendant and tell something about them. ] Gulf Coast Motors sued Glenn and Mary Page to recover money lent at various times to Glenn. Mary asserted the affirmative defenses of the lack of consideration and the Statute of Frauds. Facts: [Summarize those facts critical to the outcome of the case. ] On August 29, 2003, the case was tried by the court without a jury. ? The trial court heard ore tenus testimony from Mary, Glenn, and representatives of Gulf Coast Motors. ? After the trial, the parties submitted briefs on the application of the Statute of Frauds as to the claims asserted against Mary. On November 7, 2003, the trial court entered a judgment in the amount of $23,020 in favor of Gulf Coast Motors and against both Glenn and Mary.On December 8, 2003, Mary filed a motion t o alter, amend, or vacate the judgment based on the Statute of Frauds. ? That motion was denied on December 9, 2003. ? On January 20, 2004, Mary filed a notice of appeal to this court. ? Glenn did not appeal. Glenn had a long-term friendship with Jerry Sellers, one of the owners of Gulf Coast Motors. ? In or around 1993, Glenn began borrowing money from Gulf Coast Motors on a recurring basis. ? The parties agree that Glenn borrowed money from Gulf Coast Motors and that he â€Å"had a gambling problem,† but there is no evidence as to what Glenn used the loan proceeds for. ? In its brief to this court, Gulf Coast Motors fails to cite to any evidence indicating that Mary derived an economic benefit from the proceeds of any of the loans to Glenn. The loan process was informal. ? Gulf Coast Motors set up a one-page ledger to record Glenn's loans. ? The ledger sheet showed the debits and credits, and it contained the following statement at the bottom, signed by Glenn: ? â€Å"I ag ree to pay Jerry Sellers[2 ] as above with waiver of all exemptions. † ? Mary did not sign the ledger sheet, and her name does not appear thereon.At various times between October 2000 and October 2002, Glenn borrowed money from Gulf Coast Motors. ? According to Gulf Coast Motors's bookkeeper, Glenn â€Å"would come in and borrow money from [Gulf Coast Motors] and set up a payment plan, get cash, then sometimes he'd come in and he would want [Sellers] to cash a check for him and, hold the check. † ? At various times, Glenn made payments, typically in amounts of $300 or $600, to apply toward the balance of his account. ? The parties do not dispute that Glenn was indebted to Gulf Coast Motors.Sellers testified that he became concerned about Glenn's debt in 2002 and that he asked Mary to guaranty Glenn's debt. ? According to Sellers, Mary agreed to make sure that Gulf Coast Motors was paid if they would â€Å"work with us. † ? Sellers testified as follows: â€Å"I c alled [Mary] on the telephone. ? Mary, Glenn is up here wanting me to cash another check and, you know, he's got a big bill already run up here and he tells me when y'all harvest your timber ? you're going to pay off all this account† â€Å"And, ah, [Mary] said, well, I'm gonna pay it. ? I promise you that we'll pay this off. Just work with us until we can sell our timber. ? I promise you you won't lose a dime. ? You'll be paid just as soon as we get the money. † Sellers testified that he modified Glenn's payment terms and made additional advances based on Mary's assurances that she would make payment. ? Sellers testified: â€Å"She said, Well, if you will redo those just put them in a payment where we can pay five of six hundred dollars a month we'll do that until we sell our timber. ? And based on her promise that she would make sure it was paid, I did that for her because Glenn does not have anything in his name. ?â€Å"And the only assurance I could go forward on was Miss Mary. And she promised me faithfully that I would be paid in full everything was owed and all she wanted me to do was work with them until they could sell their timber. † Mary denied that she had promised to pay any of Glenn's debt, and she denied that Sellers had asked her to pay Glenn's debt. ? Mary testified that she never received any money from Sellers or Gulf Coast Motors, and she denied that she had received any economic benefit from moneys lent by Gulf Coast Motors to Glenn. She testified that, if she had been asked, she would have advised Sellers not to lend money to Glenn. ?Because the trial court heard ore tenus evidence, the trial court's findings of fact are given a presumption of correctness, and we will not reverse the trial court's judgment based on those findings of fact â€Å"unless it is clearly erroneous, without supporting evidence, manifestly unjust, or against the great weight of the evidence. † ? Odom v. Hull, 658 So. 2d 442, 444 (Ala. 1 995). ? Where, however, the issue is the application of law to the facts, the presumption of correctness has no application and our review is de novo. Brown v. City of Huntsville, 891 So. 2d 295 (Ala. 2004); ? Ex parte Board of Zoning Adjustment of Mobile, 636 So. 2d 415 (Ala. 1994). Our disposition of this case turns on the proper application of the Statute of Frauds. ? Specifically,  §? 8-9-2, Ala. Code 1975, provides, in pertinent part: â€Å"In the following cases, every agreement is void unless such agreement or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration is in writing and subscribed by the party to be charged therewith or some other person by him thereunto lawfully authorized in writing: â€Å"? â€Å"(3)?Every special promise to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another; â€Å"? â€Å"(7)? Every agreement or commitment to lend money, delay or forebear repayment thereof or to modify the provisions of such an agreement or commitment except f or consumer loans with a principal amount financed less than $25,000. † Issue: [Who brought the appeal? What was the outcome in the lower court(s)? ] A promise to pay the debt of another is barred by the Statute of Frauds unless it is in writing. ? It is not disputed that Mary did not sign a note, guaranty, or any other writing promising to pay any part of Glenn's debts. Therefore, if the purported agreement to pay Glenn's debt is within the Statute of Frauds, Mary is not liable even if the trial court found Sellers's testimony to be credible. ? Mary's alleged oral promises are not enforceable under the Statute of Frauds. Gulf Coast Motors makes three arguments in this appeal. ?First, it argues that Mary's obligations were original promises to pay, rather than guaranty or collateral agreements, and thus were not within the Statute of Frauds. ? The Alabama Supreme Court has defined â€Å"original† and â€Å"collateral† agreements as follows: â€Å"? Collateralâ⠂¬â„¢ agreements are those in which the object of the promise is to become the guarantor of another's debt; ? these are within the statute and must be in writing to be enforceable. ?‘Original’ agreements are those in which the effect of the promise is to pay the debt of another, but the object of the promise is to promote some purpose of the promisor. † Fendley v. Dozier Hardware Co. , 449 So. 2d 1236, 1238 (Ala. 1984) (citations omitted). ? See also Lawler v. Cook Oil Co. , 640 So. 2d 950, 951 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994). In this case, Mary's alleged agreement was to guaranty payment of Glenn's debt. ? Much of the credit had already been extended to Glenn when Mary allegedly made her oral promises to guaranty payment. Moreover, there is no suggestion in the record as to any economic purpose that Mary would advance by repayment of Glenn's debt, and there is no evidence indicating that Mary received any economic benefit from the loans to Glenn. ? See Lankford v. Rucker, 396 So. 2d 105 (Ala. Civ. App. 1981). ? We conclude that the issue presented involves an alleged guaranty, or â€Å"collateral,† agreement, not an â€Å"original† agreement. ?Second, Gulf Coast Motors argues that Ala.Code 1975,  §? 8-9-2(7), exempts from its application agreements or commitments to lend money in cases of â€Å"consumer loans with a principal amount financed less than $25,000. †  §? 8-9-2(7). ? This argument fails because  §? 8-9-2(7) applies to â€Å"commitments to lend money, not to repay money that has been borrowed. † ? Carter v. Holland, 825 So. 2d 832, 836 (Ala. Civ. App. 2001). ? See Rozell v. Childers, 888 So. 2d 1244 (Ala. Civ. App. 2004). ? Mary's purported guaranty is not an agreement to lend money, and it is therefore not governed by  §? -9-2(7). ? Moreover, a transaction is covered by the Statute of Frauds if it comes within any of the subsections of  §? 8-9-2. ? Because Mary's purported guaranty was covered by  §? 8-9-2(3), it is irrelevant that it is excluded from the scope of another subsection of the statute. ?Third, Gulf Coast Motors argues, in reliance upon Nelson Realty Co. v. Darling Shop of Birmingham, Inc. , 267 Ala. 301, 101 So. 2d 78 (1957), that Mary committed fraud in the procurement of the loans and that the Statute of Frauds therefore does not bar recovery. This argument is without merit because the Alabama Supreme Court recently held that â€Å"an oral promise that is void by operation of the Statute of Frauds will not support an action against the promisor for promissory fraud. † ? Bruce v. Cole, 854 So. 2d 47, 58 (Ala. 2003). ? To allow a promissory-fraud claim in such circumstances would cause the Statute of Frauds to become meaningless. ? Therefore, under Bruce, the promissory-fraud claim is barred because the underlying promise is barred by the Statute of Frauds. Holding: [How did the court resolve the issue(s)? Who won? ]Based on the foregoing, we conclude that M ary's alleged promises to guaranty or repay Glenn's debts were within the Statute of Frauds and, therefore, were not enforceable. ? Therefore, we reverse the trial court's judgment, and we remand the cause for the trial court to enter a judgment in Mary's favor on all claims. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Reasoning: [Explain the logic that supported the court's decision. ] Case Questions: [Be sure to address and thoroughly answer each and every case question and each part of each question. ] Critical Legal Thinking What is a guaranty contract? Explain.Business Ethics Did Glenn act ethically in this case? Would Mary have acted unethically if she had actually orally guaranteed to repay her husband’s debts and then raised the Statute of Frauds to prevent enforcement of the oral promises? Contemporary Business Are guaranty contracts often used in business? Can you think of a situation in which a guaranty contract would be required? Conclusion: [This should summarize the key aspects of t he decision and also your recommendations on the court's ruling. ] FOOTNOTES 1. ?When the loans were being made, Glenn was not working and had no assets in his own name. Mary has significant assets in her own name. 2. ?The parties do not discuss the discrepancy between the promise to pay Sellers and Gulf Coast Motors's claim to be the obligee. ? We note that Gulf Coast Motors is referred to in the record both as a corporation and as â€Å"Jerry Sellers d/b/a Gulf Coast Motors. † 3. ?Sellers testified that he â€Å"refinanced [Glenn] per [Mary's] request and put all the old other checks in with the other account and redid it at $600 a month. † MURDOCK, Judge. YATES, P. J. , and CRAWLEY and THOMPSON, JJ. , concur. PITTMAN, J. , recuses himself.?