Introduction to Financial Mathematics :: essays research papers

Introduction to Financial Mathematics Table of Contents 1. Finite Probability Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2. Elements of Continuous Probability Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3. Differential Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Lecture Notes — MAP 5601 map5601LecNotes.tex i 8/27/2003 1. Finite Probability Spaces The toss of a coin or the roll of a die results in a finite number of possible outcomes. We represent these outcomes by a set of outcomes called a sample space. For a coin we might denote this sample space by {H, T} and for the die {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}. More generally any convenient symbols may be used to represent outcomes. Along with the sample space we also specify a probability function, or measure, of the likelihood of each outcome. If the coin is a fair coin, then heads and tails are equally likely. If we denote the probability measure by P, then we write P(H) = P(T) = 1 2 . Similarly, if each face of the die is equally likely we may write P(1) = P(2) = P(3) = P(4) = P(5) = P(6) = 1 6 . Defninition 1.1. A finite probability space is a pair ( , P) where is the sample space set and P is a probability measure: If = {!1, !2, . . . , !n}, then (i) 0 < P(!i)  1 for all i = 1, . . . , n (ii) n Pi=1 P(!i) = 1. In general, given a set of A, we denote the power set of A by P(A). By definition this is the set of all subsets of A. For example, if A = {1, 2}, then P(A) = {;, {1}, {2}, {1, 2}}.

Language Of Race Essay

(Review of Lawrence Blum, â€Å"I’m Not a Racist, But†¦Ã¢â‚¬ : The Moral Quandary of Race (Ithaca; Cornell University Press, 2002). Theory and Research in Education 1(3), pp. 267-281. ) Lawrence Blum’s book, â€Å"I’m Not a Racist, But†¦Ã¢â‚¬ : The Moral Quandary of Race, is excellent and thought-provoking. It is a model of moral philosophy done well, and, as importantly, done with a purpose. At no point does one wonder, as one does with all too much moral philosophy these days, â€Å"Why does this matter? † Blum makes it clear from the start why we should care about the language and concepts of race and racism, and he does a brilliant job of integrating careful philosophical analysis with contemporary examples, historical explication, and creative thought experiments. Blum’s purpose is basically two-fold: first, to fight against racism and racial injustice by proving that the notion of â€Å"race† is both descriptively false and morally inimical and replacing it with the more accurate and useful notion of â€Å"racialized group†; and second, to enable and promote productive dialogue about racism and racial inequality, especially between members of different racialized groups. He is explicit only about the second of these aims — as he comments in the preface and reiterates in similar terms throughout the book, â€Å"If we agree that racism is so important, don’t we need to know what it is? How can we talk intelligently, especially across racial lines, unless we do? † (p. viii) — but the first aim clearly determines the structure and content especially of the second half of the book. In both cases, Blum suggests that language is a key: we can both move forward in the fight against racial injustice and promote cross-racial dialogue about racism and other racial ills, he suggests, if we analyze and clarify what we mean by certain words that are often used too loosely (such as â€Å"racist† and â€Å"racial 2 discrimination†); recapture other terms that have inappropriately been divested of moral weight (such as â€Å"racial insensitivity† and â€Å"prejudice†); and abandon the language of â€Å"race† altogether because its history of use has made it inherently misleading. This is the primary thrust of the book. In this essay, I will question Blum’s emphasis on language and naming. I will suggest that disagreements about the racial language we use, such as about â€Å"what racism is,† are integral elements of the debate about race and racial injustice, rather than something that can and should be resolved ahead of time. Although Blum characterizes his analysis of racial language as being merely clarificatory, therefore, and designed to advance cross-racial dialogue from the outside, as it were, I will argue that instead he is doing something far different. At best, he is staking a partisan position within the debate itself; at worst, he is cutting it off from the start by building the answers to most of the important questions about racism and racial discrimination into his definitions. In addition to these methodological concerns, I also will query the practical results of implementing the linguistic shifts Blum proposes. I will argue, first, that implementation of â€Å"racialized group†-talk will be harder than Blum suggests (even among people who fully accept his arguments and are willing and even eager to abandon â€Å"race† in favor of â€Å"racialized group†), and second, that it is unlikely to have the social psychological effects Blum predicts. In both of these cases, I will consider teachers’ practices in implementing anti-racist curricula as an important test case, since teachers (along with parents and the media) play a crucial role in shaping the racial language and attitudes of the next generation. i Before I tackle these issues, however, a brief summary of (and a couple of quibbles with) â€Å"I’m Not a Racist, But†¦Ã¢â‚¬  are in order. 3 Blum establishes the moral and conceptual grounding for his project in his first and longest chapter, â€Å"‘Racism’: Its Core Meaning. † In this chapter, Blum provides a deft historical, moral, and conceptual analysis of â€Å"racist† and â€Å"racism. † He is concerned to construct a definition that preserves the strong moral opprobrium that attaches to â€Å"racism† while avoiding the â€Å"conceptual inflation,† â€Å"moral overload,† and â€Å"categorical drift† that have come to characterize the terms â€Å"racism† and â€Å"racist† — i. e. , the indiscriminate application of these terms to a wide variety of categories (such as motives, beliefs, acts, and people) encompassing any and all â€Å"racial ills† from bigotry to prejudice to racial discomfort, as well as even to non-racial ills such as discrimination based on age, religion, nationality, or physical appearance. By contrast, Blum limits the application of â€Å"racism† to things stemming specifically from antipathy and/or an inferiorizing attitude toward a racial group. He shows why antipathy and inferiorizing are both sufficient and necessary to his definition — for example, one may feel benevolent toward blacks in part because one feels superior to them, but feel antipathetic toward Asians because one assumes they are smarter than oneself; both attitudes would be properly classified as racist, and he argues persuasively that all other examples of racism could fit into one or both of these broad categories. Hence, Blum shows, although racism can be attributed to motives, acts, people, symbols, beliefs, images, epithets, remarks, attitudes, individuals, societies, and institutions (all categories that Blum discusses in detail), each attribution must be independently justified; one cannot just assume that a person who displays a racist symbol, for example, is a racist herself, or even that she necessarily has racist motives. In this respect, Blum is sensitive to the mitigating (although still morally suspect) issues of individual ignorance, unreflective adoption of social norms and behaviors, and unconscious attitudes, any of which may cause an individual to appear but not to be racist, or alternatively to be racist in fact, but to have adopted these racist attitudes 4 subconsciously or even unconsciously. ii Finally, in this chapter Blum gives significant attention not just to racism’s definition but also to its particular moral character. He argues that racism is morally evil not just because it violates â€Å"general moral norms† such as equality, respect, and good will, but also because of its â€Å"integral tie† to historical â€Å"race-based systems of oppression† that were clearly evil. â€Å"‘ Racism’ draws its moral valence from this historical context in two ways. First, the mere fact that these historical systems were based on race provides some of that opprobrium, even if current instances of racism no longer take place in the direct context of, for example, segregation, apartheid, or slavery. . . . [S]econd . . . we continue to live with the legacy of those systems† (Blum 2002: 27-8). In chapter 2, Blum asks â€Å"Can Blacks Be Racist? † and answers in the affirmative. No matter what preconditions one places on racism (e. g. that it must be ideologically embedded, or combined with social power), Blum argues, there will be (and are) some black people (as well as members of other minority groups) who meet these criteria and hence must be judged to be racist. Insofar as the denial that blacks can be racist is motivated by a desire to highlight the inherent inequalities among different racist acts and beliefs, however, Blum would agree — and argues that — there are important â€Å"moral asymmetries† in racism. Because of such acts’ â€Å"historical resonance† (p. 44), â€Å"greater power to shame† due to minorities’ positional inferiority (p.46), reflection of on-going patterns and prevalence of racism (p. 48), and contribution to maintaining â€Å"systematic racial injustice† (p. 49), â€Å"Everything else being equal, greater moral opprobrium rightly attaches to racism by whites against people of color than the reverse. This is the most important moral asymmetry in racism† (pp. 43-4). Chapter 3 catalogues â€Å"Varieties of Racial Ills,† which are acts or attitudes that deserve some (often substantial) degree of moral condemnation but do not rise to the level of â€Å"racism† as 5 such. These include racial insensitivity, racial ignorance, racial discomfort, white privilege,exclusionary same-race socializing, and racialism (a term used here to mean â€Å"conferring too much, or inappropriate, importance on people’s racial identity† (p. 59), but which Blum confusingly reuses with a different meaning in chapters 5-9). Chapter 4 then moves into an extremely careful and thoughtful discussion of â€Å"Racial Discrimination and Color Blindness. † He deduces four reasons that discrimination may be wrong: â€Å"(1) it unfairly excludes a qualified individual on the basis of a characteristic irrelevant to the task for which selection is being made; (2) it is done out of prejudice; (3) the prejudice is pervasive and (for that or other reasons) stigmatizing; (4) the discrimination helps to sustain the group whose members are discriminated against in a subordinate position† (p. 89). Hence, he argues, the term â€Å"racial discrimination,† which automatically carries with it the implication of moral condemnation, should be confined â€Å"to forms of discrimination involving race that either stem from race-based prejudiced [sic] or that disadvantage an inferiorized or stigmatized group† (p. 95). In contrast, he argues, forms of racial differentiation that avoid the four pitfalls listed above may be tolerated or even embraced: for example, racial egalitarianism, which does rely to some extent on racial differentiation but not on discrimination as defined above, is preferable to color blindness. Chapters 5-7 form an undesignated second section of â€Å"I’m Not a Racist, But†¦Ã¢â‚¬ , focusing specifically on the concept, history, and science of â€Å"race† in order to debunk it. Blum analyzes the empirical outcomes of thinking in racial terms in chapter 5, â€Å"‘Race’: What We Mean and What We Think We Mean. † He identifies four moral dangers of racial thinking: (1) â€Å"a moral distance among those of different races — an intensified consciousness of a ‘we’ of one race counterposed to a ‘they’ of another† (p. 102); (2) the â€Å"imposition of false commonality on all those classified as members of the same race† (p. 103); (3) the suggestion of â€Å"an inescapable 6 ‘racial fate’† (p. 104); and (4) â€Å"associations of superiority and inferiority of value† (p. 104). These lead into chapter 6’s fascinating discussion of â€Å"‘Race’: A Brief History, with Moral Implications,† in which Blum shows the historical contingency and relatively recent vintage of racial thinking, at least in the West. (Although Blum’s language about race’s recent arrival on the scene is fairly global, his examples are almost entirely confined to ancient Greece and Rome, Europe, and North America; this leaves the reader a bit confused about the intended scope of his historical analysis and claims. ) Finally, chapter 7 boldly asks, â€Å"Do Races Exist? † and marshals a fair amount of scientific evidence (in conjunction with the historical evidence from chapter 6) to answer a resounding â€Å"no. † This outright rejection of race sets up the challenge he confronts in the final two chapters (and unstated third section) of the book: how simultaneously to rid ourselves of the inimical concept of â€Å"race† while still promoting the causes of racial justice and equality — causes which, as Blum showed in chapter 4, require for their achievement that we name and pay attention (as opposed to blind ourselves) to differences among racial groups. iii In chapter 8, â€Å"Racialized Groups and Social Constructions,† therefore, Blum proposes to replace the concept of â€Å"races† with â€Å"racialized groups,† arguing, â€Å"The term ‘racialized groups’ is preferable as a way of acknowledging that some groups have been created by being treated as if they were races, while also acknowledging that ‘race’ in its popular meaning is entirely false† (p. 160). Blum further justifies use of the term â€Å"racialized groups† in chapter 9, â€Å"Should We Try to Give Up Race? † He argues that racial justice and even a positive sense of racial identity can be promoted by â€Å"racialization†: â€Å"its recognition supplies a more accurate understanding of the character of the racialized social order, encourages a stronger recognition of commonalities of experience and of political and moral commitments across ‘racial’ lines, and, arguably, would in the long run be 7 more politically effective in mitigating racism and racial injustice than would a belief in the reality of race† (p. 170). But Blum recognizes that merely transforming our language is not enough; this act will not itself transform the unjust social structures that inform and shape our language: â€Å"In the real world, ridding ourselves of the myth of race can not be severed from the politically more challenging task of changing the structural relationships among racial groups† (p. 178). Hence, he concludes by implicitly urging a two-pronged approach to promoting racial justice and equality: altering our language, on the one hand, and engaging in direct social action (especially integrationism), on the other. Critique I find most of Blum’s arguments compelling taken on an individual basis. â€Å"I’m Not a Racist, But†¦Ã¢â‚¬  convinces me that the term â€Å"racism† should be reserved for race-related, morally egregious beliefs/motives/acts/etc. , that there’s a wide range of racial ills, that pursuit of racial equality does not amount to racial discrimination, that â€Å"race† is a morally inimical concept, and that â€Å"racialized group† better captures the historical genesis and conceptual construction we call â€Å"race. † I am not convinced, however, that these arguments taken together satisfy the central articulated aim of the book: namely, to promote cross-racial dialogue about race. This is not, as I’ve said, because I question his reasoning or his conclusions; rather, I question whether his method, of using substantive moral philosophy, is consonant with this aim. First, some reminders about Blum’s stated aim. As I noted at the beginning of this essay, Blum asks in the preface of â€Å"I’m Not a Racist, But†¦Ã¢â‚¬ , â€Å"If we agree that racism is so important, don’t we need to know what it is? How can we talk intelligently, especially across racial lines, unless we do? . . . . We need to clarify what racism is, to find a basis in history and current use 8 for fixing a definition† (p. viii). He reiterates this concern at the beginning of chapter 2: â€Å"My goal of an adequate account of racism is entirely antithetical to race-based attachment to definitions of ‘racism. ’ I am seeking an account that will facilitate communication between groups about the character, forms and extent of racism (and other race-related ills). For that we need some agreement on what racism is, and from there we can attempt to settle differences about its extent† (p. 35). Blum’s aim is clearly to establish a baseline for discussion — to foster productive communication by providing moral and conceptual clarification and then to get out of the way in order to allow the now â€Å"intelligent† and â€Å"facilitated† debate to proceed on its own. This is an admirable goal, but I don’t think that â€Å"I’m Not a Racist, But†¦Ã¢â‚¬  achieves it — nor do I think that it could achieve it in its current form. This is so for a few reasons. First, it is misleading to suggest that moral philosophy is necessary to fix a definition of â€Å"racism. † So long as there’s an agreement, or at least mutual comprehension among the interlocutors, as to what each person means in using various terms, then that is sufficient to promote dialogue. For example, if all people accepted that only whites could be racist, then â€Å"cross-racial dialogue† could proceed on that basis; there’s no reason that Blum’s definition of racism (which asserts that all people can be racist) is necessary to promote dialogue. Of course, one of Blum’s implicit points is that there isn’t agreement about what racism is, and that such agreement, or even mutual clarification and comprehension, is very unlikely to arise on its own. Rather than revealing a troubling weakness or gap in the discussion, however, this reveal instead the essential nature of the debate about race and racism: namely, that debating the meaning of these terms is part and parcel of debating the things themselves. In other words, fixing a definition is not a neutral act. It is a partisan act. This is because much of the dispute about racism is bound up in how one defines the problem. If individuals unintentionally benefit 9 from the legacy of racism (e. g.via â€Å"white privilege†), are they morally responsible in some way? Is it racially discriminatory for an association serving mostly Latino youth to try to hire mostly Latino staff? Is it racist for a small business owner to hire people she â€Å"feels comfortable† with, if it turns out she tends to feel comfortable only with people from her own racialized group, since that’s among whom she grew up? These questions lie at the heart of the â€Å"conversation about race†; they cannot and should not be settled ahead of time. Thus, Blum’s second methodological mistake is to think that setting a neutral baseline for discussion is even possible. Blum’s approach is inevitably partisan — simply in trying to clarify meanings, he takes stances on a number of controversial issues — and hence he is within rather than above the fray. This is perfectly appropriate — taking and defending particular stances about how we ought to live our lives is what moral philosophy is, or at least should be, about — but it is not what Blum professes to be doing. Furthermore, Blum’s approach is at least partly opposed to his stated aim of promoting cross-racial dialogue about race and racism, insofar as to the extent that readers accept Blum’s positions as given, their avenues for debate about race and racism will be cut off rather than expanded. I hope (and expect) instead that readers will be drawn to engage with and debate the arguments themselves, as any good work of social and moral philosophy should inspire people to do; they do not, however, provide a neutral starting point for others’ conversations. iv My concerns about the match between Blum’s stated objective and the content of his book are irrelevant to my assessment of his arguments or his conclusions, most of which I think are generally on target. I do wonder, however, about the concrete, â€Å"on the ground† implications of his conclusions, especially but not solely for those responsible for educating the next generation. I will address two especially pressing questions: (1) How would one use the 10 language of â€Å"racialized groups† in a way that was clearly distinct from using the language of race, especially in institutional contexts? (2) Is there convincing psychological evidence to support Blum’s claims about the results of redescribing social and identity groups? For example, is there convincing evidence that thinking of oneself as being a member of a socially constructed racialized group has more positive psychological effects than thinking of oneself as a member of a biologically-determined race? These questions raise issues that are significant for assessing the practical import of Blum’s arguments in general; they are also crucial for determining how his conclusions would alter anti-racist curricula and pedagogy in the classroom, which presumably will be central to the realization of Blum’s moral philosophy. First, Blum’s claim that we can combat racism (at least to some extent) by altering our language about race has moral purchase only if there is some way to â€Å"operationalize† — and especially to institutionalize — this linguistic adjustment. Blum seems to acknowledge this, and to be optimistic about its potential: â€Å"Appreciating the difference between race and racialization, and at the same time attempting to do justice to the unreality of race and the reality of racism, may point us toward new ways of thinking and new forms of institutional practice† (p. 166). He gives one (and only one) example of how one might adopt â€Å"new forms of institutional practice† in relation to the Census, which is a key tool for tracking racial patterns and disparities in society — but also hence for seeming to legitimate racial categorization. In response to this dilemma, Blum suggests, â€Å"Were the federal government to encourage a broad understanding that the purposes for which the Census is now explicitly used do not require a commitment to the existence of races in any form, but only to racialized groups, the legitimate discrimination- monitoring function of Census racial categories could be severed from any implication of racialism† (p. 167). But then frustratingly, Blum gives no specifics about how the Census could 11 do this. Would Blum hope for a statement of disavowal of race? If so, where? Just in the preamble (which already includes a â€Å"baby step† in that direction (see p. 227, fn. 11)), which nobody reads? Or in the census itself, which seems impractical since it is intentionally kept as short as possible in order to maximize response rates? Instead of a statement of disavowal, the Census could replace â€Å"What is this person’s race? † (the question currently asked) with â€Å"What is this person’s racialized group? †, and then use quotation marks (or â€Å"scare quotes†) around terms such as â€Å"black,† â€Å"Spanish/Latino/Hispanic† (which is currently kept separate from the â€Å"race† question), and â€Å"white† to reinforce their constructed status. This is also unsatisfactory, however, for two reasons. First, â€Å"racialized group† will likely be either greeted with confusion or treated as a synonym of â€Å"race,† especially in the absence of an explanation of the term; in the latter case, it is likely to end up acquiring the separatist, hierarchical, and essentialist connotations or â€Å"race† (just like â€Å"disabled† and even â€Å"differently abled† acquired those of the maligned term â€Å"handicapped† they were designed to replace). Second, many of the choices given are not (yet) â€Å"racialized groups,† at least not in the United States, but are nationalities: Samoan, Filipino, Native Hawaiian, Asian Indian, Japanese. Should these terms all be in scare quotes? I would think not — but then how would one deal with the presence of scare quotes some places and their absence others? One could add â€Å"nationality and/or ethnicity† to the â€Å"racialized group† question, and then surround everything with quotation marks — but this then gets cumbersome, to say the least, and is likely to raise other dilemmas. As the Census example shows, institutionalizing â€Å"racialized group† language is hard in print, particularly when it comes to naming and labeling the racialized groups themselves (â€Å"black,† â€Å"white,† â€Å"Vietnamese,† â€Å"Native American†). It is substantially harder in conversation, 12 such as in the oral give-and-take of a classroom. Consider Ellen, a teacher of ten and eleven year-olds, who is eager to incorporate anti-racist education into her teaching. Ellen reads â€Å"I’m Not a Racist, But†¦Ã¢â‚¬  over the winter holiday and then sits down to revise her January lesson plans, which include a unit on non-violent protest designed both to fit into the school’s conflict resolution initiative and to lead up to the celebration of Martin Luther King, Jr. ’s birthday. As she reads over her plans, she quickly inserts a mini-lesson on â€Å"racialized group† at the beginning of the unit and converts â€Å"race† to â€Å"racialized group† throughout the unit. She adds in a two-day lesson called â€Å"What is Racism? †, and develops an interactive group activity for near the end of the unit designed to help students decide when it’s okay to refer to or take someone’s racialized group membership into account and when it’s not. Reviewing her social studies lessons on Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr. , and the March on Washington, D. C. , she is pleased. She also thinks her English lesson on an excerpt of King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail will prove challenging but inspiring to her students. But then Ellen suddenly gets worried. Throughout her lessons are references to blacks, whites, Indians, British, Hindus, Christians, Jews. Which of these are racialized groups and which are not? How can she help her students figure out the difference? How can she talk about â€Å"blacks† and â€Å"whites† to her class without her students falling back into racial thinking? She can hand-signal scare quotes each time, but will that just turn into a joke among the students? And which groups would she use the hand signals for? All of these concerns are predicated on the conclusion that language matters — that it influences how we think, reason, behave, and interact with one another. This brings us to my second question about implications of Blum’s conclusions: is there social psychological evidence in favor of them? Throughout the book, Blum clearly operates on the assumption that if people recognize the socially constructed, rather than biologically inherent, nature of racialized groups, 13 then they will better be able to fight against the â€Å"hierarchical† and â€Å"inegalitarian† (p. 107) assumptions inherent in racial thinking. This is partly because racial identity then becomes in some way a matter of choice. â€Å"Whether a group is racialized is a matter of its treatment by the larger society. Whether the group takes on a self-identity as a race is a different matter† (p. 148). In recognizing their racialized treatment, rather than believing themselves defined by an immutable racial identity, individuals who are members of racialized groups can decide how to respond. Will they embrace their racialized identity, as those do who proudly join the Asian- American club, volunteer with La Raza, or wear t-shirts proclaiming â€Å"It’s a BLACK thing — you wouldn’t understand† or â€Å"Hot Latina Mama†? Will they reject it, declaring â€Å"that’s not who I am† and/or trying to assimilate? Or will they try to subvert it in some way, say by reclaiming the term â€Å"nigger† (or â€Å"queer† in the [non-racial] case of gays) and defiantly using it as a term of affection for others inside the group? By choosing the extent and nature of their racial identities, Blum seems implicitly to be arguing, individuals and groups are empowered; whether they choose to appropriate, reject, or subvert the characterizations thrust upon them by racializing others, the very act of choosing liberates them from the racialist (and racist) assumptions of innate difference, inferiority, and/or stigma. Two substantial bodies of work in social psychology, however, cast serious doubt on this claim. The first is system justification theory — the theory that â€Å"psychological processes contribut[e] to the preservation of existing social arrangements even at the expense of personal and group interest† (Jost and Banaji 1994: 1). The second is the notion of â€Å"stereotype threat† — the idea that in certain situations (those posing â€Å"stereotype threat†), members of stigmatized groups worry about confirming a negative stereotype about their group through their performance on a task, and then, precisely because of this anxiety, end up performing worse on 14 the task than they otherwise would (and than others do) — thus paradoxically performing true to negative stereotype (see Steele and Aronson 1995; Steele 1997). I will address each in turn. According to system justification theory, people implicitly support the status quo, including hierarchy differences between low- and high-status groups, even when they are members of low-status groups, and even when they reject the distinctions on a conscious level. Thus, in studies done under both â€Å"authentic† and experimental conditions, women ask for lower wages than men do for the same work (or they work 25 percent longer than men if offered the same wage (Cite forthcoming)); individuals rate even initially unwanted outcomes (such as tuition increases, or a member of the opposing political party winning an election) more desirable the more likely they are to occur (Kay et al.2002); And they rationalize the legitimacy of existing inequalities (e. g. , if told that graduates of University B earn more on average than University A graduates, University A students will rate University B students as being smarter and better writers than they; if told the opposite, however, then University A students will express the opposite prejudice and rate themselves higher (cite forthcoming)). Even individuals who explicitly articulate egalitarian beliefs tend to demonstrate moderate to strong implicit attitudinal biases toward higher-status groups (whites, young people, men); this is true regardless of the individual’s own group membership(s) (Greenwald and Banaji 1995; Banaji 2001). In other words, individuals internalize prejudice, discrimination, racism, and/or oppression (Jost and Banaji 1994; Jost et al. 2002; Kay et al. 2002). â€Å"[M]embers of disadvantaged groups internalize negative stereotypes and evaluations of their own group, to at least some degree† (Jost et. al. 2002: 598). Thus, even if people know that they are members of a group that is treated (merely) as if â€Å"there were inherent and immutable differences between them; as if certain somatic characteristics marked the presence of significant characteristics of mind, emotion, and 15 character; and as if some were of greater worth than others† (Blum 2002: 147), they are still likely to believe, subconsciously at least, that these are accurate assessments of their group membership. It takes a great deal of inner strength to stand up to stigma, discrimination, and prejudice. Even those who consciously reject racialist presumptions may respond differently subconsciously. This may be because of internalized oppression, as discussed above. But it may also be a result of rational adjustments in motivation or expectations. Knowing that one â€Å"is discriminated against, stigmatized, or inherits a history of racial† disadvantage (p. 177) may very well (and rationally) lead one to adopt a presumption of disadvantage — a belief that one’s effort will not be rewarded because of on-going discrimination and racism, and hence a reduction in effort, motivation, and/or aspirations. There is clear evidence of both effort reduction (Stone 2002) and aspiration reduction even among people who consciously reject stereotypes, such as women who profess a liking for mathematics (Nosek et al. 2002). This lowering of expectations is clearly compounded if individuals accept, whether implicitly or explicitly, the idea that they really are inferior in some way (as system justification theory suggests). Furthermore, as Claude Steele’s acclaimed work on â€Å"stereotype threat† shows, there are significant psychological and performative costs even simply in knowing that one is a member of a group that is perceived in a negative light. For example, research over the past few years has consistently shown that black students do worse on verbal tests if told the test is a measure of ability than they do if they are told the test is non-diagnostic (Steele 1997); the same is true for women’s performance on math tests (Keller 2002). Similarly, white students do worse than controls on tests of athletic skills if told that the their performance will indicate their â€Å"natural athletic ability,† but black students do worse if told their performance indicates their â€Å"sports 16 intelligence† (Stone, et. al. 1999). This response to â€Å"stereotype threat† is evident even among very young children (ages six to ten): children above seven years old demonstrate high levels of stereotype consciousness (awareness of others’ stereotypes about various groups), and children who are members of stigmatized groups perform worse when they think they are being measured along stereotypic lines than they do on the exact same test when their stereotype awareness (and hence sense of stereotype threat) is not activated (McKown 2002). These results pose a serious challenge, I believe, to Blum’s claims about the practical import of his moral philosophy. Although it is true that this research has all been done under conditions of â€Å"race† rather than â€Å"racialized groups† being salient (insofar as â€Å"racialized groups† has not become a popular or widespread term), it strikes me as being highly unl.   

The Discovery Of The Delta Mariner - 2096 Words

On the night of January 26, 2012 at approximately 2001 hours central time, the vessel M/V Delta Mariner collided with the Eggner’s Ferry Bridge near Aurora, Kentucky. She was a roll on/ roll off vessel which at the time of the accident, was carrying NASA booster cores for the Atlas V rocket. The Delta Mariner was 286.8 ft. long and measured 82 ft. across. At her tallest point at the moment of impact, she measured to be 53.43 ft. With the height of span B, the main navigation span, being 57 feet high, the Delta Mariner would have had 3.57 feet of clearance from her highest point to the lowest point of navigation span B. Instead of transiting under this span, her intended route, she transited under span E which was approximately 7.43 feet too short for the Delta Mariner, an 11 foot difference. If the bridge team at the time not relied on the contract pilot’s incorrect guidance, and used the available navigation tools such as the ECS (electronic charting system), she would have navigated under the correct span and avoided the collision with Eggner’s Ferry Bridge (National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB], 2013). Foss Maritime Company was the owner and operator of the Delta Mariner at the time of the accident. Being known for a safe working environment, they implemented regulations within its fleet that are not required among vessels navigating inland waters. Among these regulations are hiring contract pilots to be a part of the watch to aid the navigation of their vesselsShow MoreRelatedThe National Transportation Safety Board and Aviation Safety Essay2461 Words   |  10 Pagesits limited investigative resources to those accidents that will generate the most safety benefits. Not all aviation accidents are investigated by the Board, however all aviation accidents are required to be reported to the NTSB within 48 hours of discovery. Specific to aviation, the Board’s investigative response is limited primarily to the following scenario s: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;All accidents involving 49 CFR Parts 121 and 135 air carriers; nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Accidents involvingRead MoreRevolutionary Changes in the Atlantic World, 1750–185010951 Words   |  44 Pagesother goods. 3.The most successful new export was palm oil that was exported to British manufacturers of soap, candles, and lubricants. The increased export of palm oil altered the social structure of coastal trading communities of the Niger Delta, as is demonstrated in the career of the canoe slave Jaja who became a wealthy palm oil trader in the 1870s. 4.The suppression of the salve trade also helped to spread Western cultural influencesRead MoreProject Mgmt296381 Words   |  1186 Pagesprocess: You picked out a set based on price and feel. Today, there are golf clubs for tall players and short players, clubs for players who tend to slice the ball and clubs for those who hook the ball, high-tech clubs with the latest metallurgic discovery guaranteed to add distance, and so forth. Project management is critical both to development of customized products and services and to sustaining lucrative relationships with customers. 12 Chapter 1 Modern Project Management SNAPSHOT FROM

How Miller Presents Joe Keller as a Tragic Hero in All My...

How Miller Presents Joe Keller as a Tragic Hero in All My Sons Joe Keller is a man who loves and values his family very much. Like most Americans he has given everything so he can have the big house, the fancy car and the bulging wallet. He has given everything so he can have the American Dream. Unfortunately for Keller, everything isnt as perfect as it seems. All My Sons is a very tragic play. It shows how a man can sacrifice everything including the honour of his name to make his family prosperous. This struggle for wealth and material goods involves Keller doing an awful crime because he wants his family to be wealthy. This is the cause of Kellers downfall. In All My Sons Miller examines the morality of a man who†¦show more content†¦Because hes my son Im his father and hes my son, and if theres something bigger than that Ill put a bullet in my head!. Although this shows Kellers irresponsibility towards society it also shows Kellers devotion to his family. Keller obviously believes that family is the most important thing in the world. This little speech of Kellers is also very ironic because at the end of the play Keller does actually put a bullet in his head when he finds out there is something bigger than family. The audience will see this speech of Kellers as a warning that Keller will probably end up putting a bullet in his head. This will unsettle the audience and that is exactly what Miller intended to do by hinting in Kellers speech what will happen to him in the end. Chris, unlike his father, does not believe that family is the most important thing in the world. He thinks that the society in which you live is just as important as your family. Chris proves to the audience that he feels this way on page 117 when he says, Its wrong to pity a man like that. Father or no father, theres only one way to look at him. He knowingly shipped out parts that would crash an airplane. Here the audience sees how Chris doesnt try to justify what Keller has done just because hes his son. The audience sees that Chris treatsShow MoreRelatedArthur Miller and His Theater of Mirrors. Reflections on the Persuasiveness of Miller’s Multiple Portrays of American Society2367 Words   |  10 Pages Throughout his career as playwright, Arthur Miller portrayed critically some of the so-called ideals of the American society. Within his numerous plays and short stories, his characters reflect over and over the multilayered American dream, its implications and consequences; the author unveils the ignored ties human beings have with their pasts, demonstrating with his characters that we cannot escape from it but learn from our failures and triumphs. And this is one is one of the major points inRead MoreDeveloping Management Skills404131 Words   |  1617 Pagessources and reproduced, with permission, in this textbook appear on appropriate page within text. Copyright  © 2011, 2007, 2005, 2002, 1998 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Prentice Hall, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458. All rights reserved. Manufactured in the United States of America. This publication is protected by Copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in anyRead MoreProject Mgmt296381 Words   |  1186 PagesState University PROJECT MANAGEMENT: THE MANAGERIAL PROCESS Published by McGraw-Hill/Irwin, a business unit of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1221 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10020. Copyright  © 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written consent of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., including, but not limited

Philosophical Analysis of the Matrix - 793 Words

REACTION PAPER IN PHILOSOPHY (THE MATRIX MOVIE) In life, we have two choices: to accept the painful reality of the real world, and to believe the illusion of a perfect world. This was evident in the movie The Matrix (1999). The characters in the film, especially the main character Neo, have to choose to live in ignorance in what one believes to be reality; or to awake to the truth that what one sees as reality is an illusion. Oftentimes, I prefer to believe in wonderful ideas, the fantasy world, the happy ever after in fairytales. I dream of being in that world, being one with the hero/heroine who can make a difference in the world, who can save the world. Yet, we would never be like that. We don’t have supernatural powers to save the†¦show more content†¦You wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe (ignorance of illusion). You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes (acceptance of reality).† According to Wikipedia, the red pill and its opposite, the blue pill, are pop culture symbols representing the choice between the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue) and embracing the sometimes painful truth of reality (red). If I were Neo, I would choose the same pill. Reality would be very painful, but everyone should experience that. I guess that would complete us as humans, since these experiences shape us as humans and make usShow MoreRelatedThe Mind Machine, By Robert Nozick1558 Words   |  7 PagesWhat is real? While this may seem like a simple question at first glance, within a few minutes of analysis, many would not be able to answer. Those that do answer would provide an answer lacking of argument or philosophical reasoning. The greatest minds in philosophy and science alike have not been able to answer this existential question. While there may be no true answer, there are many theories on reality and what it truly means to exist. Arguments and theories spanning throug h time by the voicesRead MoreAnalysis of Film The Matrix Essay1575 Words   |  7 PagesAnalysis of Film The Matrix The Matrix, released at Easter in 1999, is both a piece of cinematic entertainment and a film portraying religious and philosophical allegories. The Matrix can therefore be viewed from two different perspectives; purely as an action film or instead on a deeper level, exploring the more insidious values hidden in the plot. As a piece of cinematic entertainment, the Matrix was a very successful film release. It contains fight scenes, chaseRead MoreThe Matrix ( 1999, Lana And Lilly Wachowski Essay1531 Words   |  7 PagesThe Matrix (1999, Lana and Lilly Wachowski) is an action filled, futuristic view of what the world would be like if artificial intelligence were to take over. The movie covers many of the issues associated with the human experience, such as gender equality, figuring out what is real versus what is an illusion created by society, and finding and then defining one’s faith. Much like every person in the world today the characters in The Matrix struggle with finding their faith, whether it be faithRead More Philosophical And Ideological Perspectives In Education Essay examples784 Words   |  4 Pages Philosophical And Ideological Perspectives In Education Introduction The Second Edition of Philosophical and Ideological Perspectives in Education continue to examine the major schools of philosophy of education through the systems approac h. It also considers the relationship of education to major ideologies such as Liberalism, Conservativism, and Marxism. It analyzes the impact of philosophy and ideology on educational theory and practice by examining such theories as Essentialism, PerennialismRead MoreA Mixed Methods Portrait Of Urban Instrumental Music Essay751 Words   |  4 Pagesparticipants for the interviews/observations were four specific educators from the CPS, which included two inexperienced teachers and two experienced teachers. 6. What data were collected? (If historical, list the primary and secondary sources. If philosophical, list the premises) The researcher used three phases to collect data for this study. Phase 1 of the study was a small focus group of instrumental music educators from the Chicago Public Schools. The focus group served to guide the creation of theRead MoreA Mixed Methods Portrait Of Urban Instrumental Music751 Words   |  4 Pagesparticipants for the interviews/observations were four specific educators from the CPS, which included two inexperienced teachers and two experienced teachers. 6. What data were collected? (If historical, list the primary and secondary sources. If philosophical, list the premises) The researcher used three phases to collect data for this study. Phase 1 of the study was a small focus group of instrumental music educators from the Chicago Public Schools. The focus group served to guide the creation of theRead MoreHistorical Developments in Philosophy Essay1189 Words   |  5 PagesUniversity of Phoenix Material Philosophy Matrix | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Read MoreAnalysis Of Irigaray In The Allegory Of The Cave756 Words   |  4 PagesAllegory of the Cave,† Luce Irigaray implements a feminist critique of his work; thus, exposing its aid in the patriarchy, while essentially providing a viable response to the male-oriented exclusion of women from advancing through philosophical thought. Throughout her analysis of Plato, Irigaray is wary of the assumptions plagued when reading Plato and gives further reason for pause and patience in regard to this blatant acceptance of Plato’s system of ideas ( Bova, 14 October 2017). Her initial objectiveRead MoreThe And Of The Cave1314 Words   |  6 Pagespoint with his cave allegory explained in Lecture I: Plato (Lecture I: Plato, 2015, Dr. Jung-Yeup Kim). Human beings live in a cave in which they are prisoners. In order to be set free and to leave this cave, it is primordial for them to use mental analysis, in order words their reason. However, they might risk imprisoning themselves in a blinding logic by over reasoning and over rationalizing. Hence, it is necessary to understand how the use of reason permits individuals to escape from the cave. ARead MoreCartesian and Platonic Philosophical Themes in The Matrix Essay2065 Words   |  9 Pages This essay will examine the philosophical questions raised in the movie The Matrix. It will step through how the questions from the movie directly relate to both skepticism and the mind-body problem, and further how similarly those problems look to concepts raised by both Descartes’ and Plato’s philosophies. It will attempt to show that many of the questions raised in the movie are metaphor for concepts from each philosopher’s works, and why those concepts are important in relation

Reforms to Improve the Australian Agriculture-Free-Samples for Student

Question: Discuss about the Reforms to Improve the Australian Agriculture. Answer: Introduction Many people in Australian Rural areas are dependent on agriculture for their living; this is the primary source of income. According to Gray, Oss-Emer and Sheng (2014) agriculture can be argued to play an important role in poverty elimination; even without some other income, the agricultural produce enables survival in the rural areas. Despite being a source of food, many people are employed in this sector. In the traditional period, agriculture was so underdeveloped owing to the lack of knowledge and skills. However, currently there is much development in this sector since the advancements in technology. Globalization has had much contribution in this sectors total productivity growth. New methods of production have been introduced, better animal breeds and crops that are adaptable to different climates have been invented. The government should ensure that it offer proper protection and assistance to the Australian farmers (Sanderson, 2016 and Dfat.gov.au, 2017). The article analysi s will help create an awareness of the important reforms that are driving agricultural growth to the most farmers who are not yet informed. The government will also be able to determine whether the policy reforms are actually driving growth and may consider the recommendations drawn as the additional important ways in which better results may be stimulated. Analysis The concern of the Australian government on it agricultural development led to the plan on Farm Management Deposits and tax reforms. This article was referring to these reforms as the white papers vision and was said to have been given a rating of 8 out of 10 by the National Farmers' Federation (NFF). Simon Talbot was the Chief executive of the NFF and pointed out that farmers would be happy with receiving the announcement of these reforms (Vidot, 2015). Farmers had for long requested for these reforms so as to improve their accessibility and flexibility. The article noted that the maximum FMD for a farmer was $ 400,000 and was expected to double to $ 800,000 the following year (Ato.gov.au, 2016). These FMDs were to have a very important role of reducing the farmers interest costs as it would facilitate the offsetting of the bank loans. The annual saving for the farmers according to the government was projected to be $ 150 million (Mcmahon and Cardwell, 2015). The government also not ed that there would be no loss of tax concessions or the farmers who are affected by drought in accessing the FMDs. Peter Tuohey the president of Victorian Farmers' Federation (VFF) supported this idea by calling it fantastic. Fiona Simson the president of NSW Farmers' Association noted that this was an important innovation that would help the farmers survive during the drought season (Business.gov.au, 2017). MS Fiona also noted that drought-hit farmers should continue being given concessional loans of which structure was to be revised. The other reform proposed in the white paper vision is that of the need for crop insurance. Farmers suffer from losses that arise during the drought season. These risks mostly face those young farmers who are not in a position to put a risk cover on their crops for drought. Multi-peril crop insurance is common overseas but absent in Australia. It is an insurance program that helps in insuring the crops failure which may be brought about by drought, storm or hail. It is meant to help farmers recover the cost of the important inputs they spend on putting the crops on the ground. Finally, the article talked about the welcoming of extra spending by the government on biosecurity improvement, trade, Research and Development (RD), and dams construction. Simon Talbot noted that increased RD would help the government in achieving the objectives quickly. He also noted that RD should go to branding, marketing and accessing Asia. NFF also pointed out the need for five agricultural counselors to be appointed from overseas in addition to extra spending on biosecurity. The government also proposed to build Dams according to the information provided by VFF; dams would help in storage of large water volumes that would be used for irrigation. The improvement in the terms of trade has resulted in improved factor productivity. Fig: Australian terms of trade and factor productivity Source: Xia, Zhao and Valle (2017) The easing of terms of trade has led to a rise in total factor productivity which is essential for Australian agriculture. Recommendation I would recommend the government to invest more on areas that would improve the farmers knowledge so as to be able to raise their productivity. Some small scale farmers lack sufficient knowledge and resources to boost their productivity. The government should come up with a program to recognize and help the small scale farmers. The market for Australia farm produce also plays an important role in the production level; the government should ensure that there is a wide market for the farmers produce. This could be by easing the terms of trade between Australia and other nations. Most importantly this should be on the exportation side. The importation of farm produce should be tied up to tighter tariffs so as to discourage such a trade. In this paper, there are many proposed reforms and recommendations made by different people, the government should therefore consider such important and do an analysis of the impact they would have on improving the Australian agriculture. Conclusion Agriculture has played an important role in the growth of the Australian economy. Many reforms have been implemented that has created an initiative for increasing production. If the imposed and the proposed reforms are put into work and they perform well, Australia is projected to be among the leading producer and exporters of farm produce. Many farmers who are not aware of the existence or the importance of the FMD will benefit much from this paper. Automation has led to the availability of cheap and fast labor. It is through the many reforms implemented in this sector that development was made possible. The government has recognized the benefits of agriculture to an economy and has formulated many strategies to improve its productivity. More reforms are on the way. Bibliography Ato.gov.au. (2016). Farm management deposits scheme. [Online] Available at: https://www.ato.gov.au/business/primary-producers/managing-varying-income/farm-management-deposits-scheme/ [Accessed 17 Aug. 2017]. Business.gov.au. (2017). Farm Management Deposits Scheme. [Online] Available at: https://www.business.gov.au/assistance/farm-management-deposits-scheme [Accessed 17 Aug. 2017]. Dfat.gov.au. (2017). Advancing Agriculture Reform in the EU and Australia. [Online] Available at: https://dfat.gov.au/geo/europe/european-union/Documents/advancing_agriculture.pdf [Accessed 17 Aug. 2017]. Gray, E., Oss-Emer, M. and Sheng, Y. (2014). Australian Agricultural Productivity Growth: past reforms and future opportunities, ABARES research report 14.2, Canberra, February. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/tad/events/Mr.%20Merrilees_Agricultural%20productivity%20growth%20reforms%20opportunities.pdf [Accessed 17 Aug. 2017]. Mcmahon, A. and Cardwell, N. (2015). Research handbook on EU agriculture law. Cheltenham [u.a.], Edward Elgar. Sanderson, F. (2016). Agricultural protectionism in the industrialized world. 1st ed. Routledge. Vidot, A. (2015). Farmers approve of White Paper vision. [Online] ABC Rural. Available at: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-04/farmers-welcome-agriculture-white-paper/6595250 [Accessed 17 Aug. 2017]. Xia, C., Zhao, S. and Valle, H. (2017). Agricultural productivity estimates. [Online] Agriculture.gov.au. Available at: https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/productivity/agricultural-productivity-estimates#drivers-of-agricultural-productivity--growth [Accessed 17 Aug. 2017]. Zhou, Z. (2013). Developing successful agriculture: an Australian case study. Wallingford, UK, CABI.

Working Mothers free essay sample

Working Mothers Carrie Grubb Axia College of University of Phoenix Working Mothers In previous generations, women had one role to accomplish; to care for their children. As mothers, women were required to play the role of June Cleaver. Mothers need to care for the children and keep the home in smooth working order. After many protests, women wanted to empower their equal rights, and become career women. Thanks to women’s perseverance, today women are able to work, and be just as qualified as men in their careers. Yet, there is still the debate over whether mothers should work, or be stay-at- home mothers. There are obvious disadvantages to children having a working mother, but there are not so obvious advantages. Working mothers tend to teach their children independence, curiosity, and ambition. While the disadvantages often come from society’s pressures that a working mother’s career may be more important than her family. We will write a custom essay sample on Working Mothers or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page How do mothers choose what works best for their family? Working mothers who choose to work outside the home offer advantages and disadvantages to their families. Working mothers have several advantages to their families. Mothers teach their children independence, curiosity, and ambition. The value of independence is taught from the mother’s own life and expecting her children to take on more responsibility themselves. Independence is often a challenge, but when successful, independence is an accomplishment. Curiosity comes from the children seeing that their mothers have value in society, and not how she drives the mini van around town. Curiosity also allows children to see their mother’s accomplishments beyond inside the home. Ambition comes from the gifts mothers give to their children about how to live their lives to the fullest potential. Ambition is contagious and children need a role model to encourage their dreams. Working mother’s additional advantage is providing additional income for their families. The extra money working mothers make is very beneficial to their families. The United States Department of Labor statistics in 2008 stated that 71. 4% of all women with children under the age of 18 works. What is her family receiving from this income? They are getting groceries and the mortgage payment made. In a household where both parents work, the average income is $78,000, $34,000 thousand dollars more than a household where only the father works. The additional income helps provide an added boost into middle class. This extra income helps provide further education and opportunities to the children (US Census Bureau, 2009). Working mothers often differ on what the ideal working situation for children. Some mothers say working full-time suits their family fine. While other mothers say that a mother working part-time is ideal for children. Of course, there are other mothers who say they choose not work at all. Judgments’ about the impact of working mothers from society are strongly related to the beliefs about what is best for the children (Pew Research Center, 2009). What Working Situation Would Be Ideal for Mothers? Considering all the information presented, what would be the ideal situation for mothers- working full-time, working part-time, or not working at all? {draw:frame} Figure 2. A statistic bar graph of the ideal situation for mothers. Note: From a Pew survey from Pew Research Center Report, 2007. Working mothers also have a disadvantage, to their families, working outside the home. Most of the time society pressures mothers to believe a career is more important than family. Experts often say society should support mothers who choose to stay home and raise their children instead of abandoning their children to daycares. Often the thought of a mother, who sends their children to daycare, becomes stricken with guilt, and bad feelings. Where do theses feelings come from? The feelings often come from the mother’s themselves, conjuring up thoughts of abandoning their children for most of the day. We see the media playing up part of this guilt by not showing negative daycare results out of fear of offending working mothers. There are many debates over the focus of the added daycare expense. Children are often only put into daycare to help assist the working mother. In return, this adds more pressure to the mother, because daycare is an added expense. In the old days men worked while the wives stayed at home. This helped to eliminate the added expense of daycare. Now mothers want to work and choose to use daycare. The question is if the family can afford the daycare expense. Some of the mothers who work, their salaries pay just the daycare expense. Their wages are not helping their families; the extra wages are just breaking even. If mothers choose to work, they have to decide if the family can basically live on one income. Furthermore, there is the issue about the addition of a working mother’s income, what happens if the parents divorce, the husband passes away, or the husband becomes injured, and he can not work? The working mother can be beneficial. If a mother has a career, and a solid financial income, it can secure that the mother, and her family will be more financially stable. With the possible loss of the main income source, this can be devastating to the mother, and her children. The mother would have to worry more about the lack of income instead of making the choice of sending her children to daycare. In fact studies have shown that children who attend daycare are more successful in socializing as they get older. The atmosphere that they receive from multiply children in daycare creates a better social setting than staying home with mom. Though the mother may offer social insight, the different personalities of the children in daycare can prepare them for future social settings. When mothers work the lack of parental guidance not only affects smaller children, but also older children. Studies have shown that the lack of parental guidance contributes to troubled teens. When mothers work, children have about three hours of unsupervised attention a day. These hours that a mother is gone, leads to bad behavior. Bad behavior can lead to drugs and alcohol. Working mothers do have a disadvantage to their families. In addition to the thought that they lack social skills, and parental guidance, there have been issues of guilt from mothers. Critics have stated that mothers often feel they will miss milestones of their children’s lives. Actually there are many milestones a mother can experience as the child gets older. Mothers need to understand that it is not important to witness every first, but to witness what they have eventually accomplished. Socialization is not the lack of parental guidance; it is just the facts of life. There is another side of the debate of working mothers or stay-home mothers. If mothers choose to work full-time, she can not fulfill her duties as a mother. Mothers may be accused of being selfish and unloving to her children. In fact, it is the opposite. A mother who chooses to work shows her children they can accomplish anything under any circumstance. On the other hand, stay-at-home mothers are stereotyped as being uneducated and wealthy enough to stay-at-home. Like the working mother, a stay-at-home mother can be intelligent, and motivated; they just do it from inside their homes. There are many mothers who are better mothers than those stay-at-home mothers. Just as there is stay-at-home mothers who are better than the mothers who choose to work. Each mother has her own disadvantages as well as advantages. With the challenges mothers face, they have to balance work and life learning. Mothers are finding creative time to spend with their children and still work. What works best for their children? Mother opinions vary on what is the best solution for their children. The issue will be an ongoing battle between mothers who work and those who do not. Below is a chart of statistics for mothers working full-time, part-time, and those who choose not to work. What is the ideal situation for children? {draw:frame} Note: From Pew Research Center,_ A Social and Demographic Trends Report, _2007. How do mothers choose what works best for their family? Do mothers stay home and tend to the children? Or do mothers work to add income to their families? There are clear reasons why each mother makes the decision that suits her family. Why make any judgment about a working mother’s choice? There are advantages and disadvantages to everyday life situations. Each mother chooses to make the right decision on what works best for their families.