Exploring Free Will and Decision Making in Albert Camus The Guest Essa

Exploring Free Will and Decision Making in Albert Camus' short story "The Guest," In Albert Camus' short story "The Guest," Camus raises numerous philosophical questions. These are: does man have free will?, are an individual's decisions affected by what society demands, expects, neither, or both?, and finally, how does moral and social obligation affect decision making? Balducci brings the Arab to Daru's door, informing Daru that "I have an order to deliver the prisoner and I'm doing so," (90) thus freeing Balducci of the responsibility over wherever the Arab ultimately ended up. Balducci didn't want the responsibility of the Arab possibly escaping, and by doing only as was expressly required of him (delivering the Arab to Daru's door and giving the orders of the Arab's destination to Daru), he was also setting the story so that any decision Daru later took was an act of Daru's alone and was not directly dependent on any other decision another man had made prior. Balducci avoids the social obligation he's supposed to feel. He should follow through on the prisoner's handling, but he doesn't have to. Balducci knows this, and decides to avoid the effort and instead justifies his leaving the Arab there by simply following his orders and not reading between the lines of the order. Daru ended up accepting the Arab, both because the prisoner was delivered to him, and because he had a sense of responsibility to the French government (or society) to at least accept him, if not deliver him to the police in Tinguit (social obligation to not let him go free, justice must be served because if it wasn't, society would turn to chaos). Daru's orders were escort the Arab there for he was "expected at police headquarters" ... ...ome men think about decisions and some just react to their environment like a glorified plant? Do all men know they have free will and understand what that means? Daru gave a choice to the Arab, was that fair for the Arab (and society) or was it an egotistical action based on what Daru thought was right, fair or just? Why did the Arab's ultimate choice depress Daru, and why did neither Balducci or Daru want to be responsible for another man? In the end the Arab really is 'the dog' of society. No decision was ever his (from the perspective of the reader and Daru), but still, how do we know if Daru is different? By answering some philosophical questions through use of characters in a vacuum, Camus raises many more questions, which is the modus opernadi of the philosopher: not to find answers, but to ask questions that will eventually have the answers inherent in them.

Interpersonal Communication Essay

In the healthiest of environments, people advance from ‘relationship’ to ‘engaged’ status because two people have mutually acknowledged each other, have common understandings, and act with the other person’s concerns in mind. A relationship, be it for marriage, friends or business, requires a domain of actions and an assessment that your partner is worth trust because they act with the intention to take care and not betray shared concerns. One of those elements is the interpersonal communication between the people in the relationship. When communicating effectively, there is a behavioral coordination that results from the coupling between two people in such a way that the relationship can limit the drift of day-to-day life, and move with effective communication practices that will address fundamental concerns. The bedrock of effective interpersonal communication is to first know who ‘you’ are. Review and understanding of your self-concept, self-image, self-esteem, and personality will allow for greater spaces for possibility to understand the same elements of your partner. Interpersonal communication involves both verbal and nonverbal communication and both of these communication types can be expressed in a variety of different ways. One aspect to clearly understand is that communication is complex because it involves two or more people to be in a dance of coordinated action that will take care of concerns and/or fulfill the narrative of the future. Communication is also continuous; to be most effective in the domain of interpersonal communication there is a requirement of recurrence, recursion  and reciprocation. Communication is also dynamic in that the action requires the embodiment of practices that allow you to transform between public, private and behavioral queues with your significant other. Equally important to remember is the misconception that communication cannot transform interpretation. Languaging is a linguistic coordination of linguistic coordination’s, a domain of descriptions of descriptions that refer back to themselves for meaning. Our classroom text asserts that we cannot exactly repeat something we have said in the past. Even if our words are the same – the tome of voice and other characteristics such as posturing and tone will differ- and the listener will also have a different impression (sole, K. 2011). Communication is also irreversible in that we cannot take back our words once spoken. This is why it is very important to be conscious of what you are saying in moments of anger when you might say something that you may later regret. The harmonious combination of two different points of view can certainly be viewed as a barrier to effective interpersonal communication because balance between the two is not always achieved. Common communication problems in relationships are assessed as: 1) Silence or refusal to speak; 2) giving into the other person at a cost of self or the relationship (also known as placating); and 3) psychological requests or reports – which is essentially the announcement of a feeling, emotion, or state of being without any commitment to act from the assessment produced an/or speaking without regard for the truth to fulfill a concealed agenda. Let’s face it – the silent treatment is more often than not a way of inflicting pain on the other person, or to get them as angry or disappointed as you are. Either way, there are no good outcomes possible for effectiveness to be achieved. Giving in to your significant others demands can defuse a negative situation, however, over the long term you can loose who your ‘self’ is and the foundation of the relationship can begin to become eroded. Visions of virtues, what is a good life, beliefs, and what is important for being taken care of can be lost subconsciously without you even knowing it when you give into placating. The last of the three barriers mentioned is psychological warfare. This could be sabotage born out of feelings of resignation, despair, boredom, resentment, distrust, confusion, being overwhelmed, and skepticism. It is important to try and be a third party observer of your moods because they color your outlook about your relationship and the world over extended periods of time. Moments of perturbation should be discussed with your partner in the moment or soon after so that bottled up aggression does not have the opportunity to morph into something much worse in the future such as ‘playing games’. As reviewed in chapter three of our classroom text, what you perceive in the world depends on what you pay attention to (Sole, K. 2011). With acceptance of this assertion then it is easier to understand how you organize and interpret what you perceive, and the framework of your emotions take place. Always remember that emotions are specific ungrounded assessments that live in our bodies for only a short period of time as feelings and thoughts. The perception of your partner may differ from your own; in fact, it most likely does because you both have had two different journeys throughout life from birth to the present moment. It is important to remember that emotions are the result of perturbations of our nervous system and provide automatic and ungrounded assessments about the world because as reviewed earlier, our individual ‘worlds’ are made up of only what we are paying attention to. Some emotions are inherited genetically and some are learned. Emotions though, only tell us how we ‘feel’; not the ‘truth’. With this in mind we can begin to understand then to be careful to know the difference between stating a ‘truth’ to our partner and making an ‘assertion’. With interpersonal relationships it is important to be aware of our emotions and how they affect the people around us, including our significant others. Non-verbal communication is defined as communication of a message without words, which means that it encompasses a wide range of vocal and visual signs and behaviors (Sole, K. 2011). Throughout your relationship you will  express yourself not only with your voice or with a pen, but also with eyes, facial expressions and body posturing. When listening to your significant other it is recommended to be aware of your body posture; the technical term for this is called kinesics. For example, sometimes there is no greater expression of affection for someone than the embrace of a hug or putting your arm around them (Burgoon, Buller, Woodall, 1996). As time goes on most partners begin to pick up on what the other is thinking without even speaking through non-verbal communication habits. For example, my fiancà ©e figured out that whenever I rub my eye with my index finger by putting pressure in corner of eye, I am in a mood of frustration or anger; and I never realized I did that till she pointed it out to me! Emotional Intelligence, also known as EI, is a reference to the capacity that someone has to understand, communicate, and manage emotions; and further the ability to understand and respond to the feelings of others (Sole, K. 2011). This is an especially powerful element to successful relationships because it expands the different possibilities for thinking and actions that a couple can take throughout a lifetime together. EI is a reference that someone has a background of listening taking place where future possibilities are being listened to, even while declarations for thinking or acting have taken, or are taking place. Take the various moods of yourself and your significant other for example. The understanding of moods can help in managing conflicts with one another. Moods color a persons point of view about life for periods of time and have body postures associated with it. If you see your significant other standing with their arms crossed and eyebrows bent while eyes are starring at you like daggers, then you may not need them to say that they are frustrated because you can interpret that with your level of emotional intelligence. A submission from my own meandering experience on like is to recognize the difference between the things you can, and the things you cannot change in life. Do your best to let go of negative thoughts and change negative interpretations. If your significant other is not able to spend a lot of time with you because of the amount of time you work for example, then  instead of ‘getting down’ on it be thankful that you get to end the day with him or her, and that they are ambitious instead of lazy. Another broad suggestion that does not encompass a specific situation would be to stay away from â€Å"I† statements. Our text for the class uses a great example for this. Instead of â€Å"you make me so angry sometimes† TRY: â€Å"I am so angry with you sometimes†. It shows that you are taking ownership for your own emotions and are describing a behavior instead of simply acting on it without thinking the situation through. CLOSING: The bedrock of effective interpersonal communication is to first know who ‘you’ are. Review and understanding of your self-concept, self-image, self-esteem, and personality will allow for greater spaces for possibility to understand the same elements of your partner. References Bower, B. (2010, November). Shared talking styles herald new and lasting romance. U.S. News & World Report, 1. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global on July 22, 2011. Document ID:2223940991 NARA SCHOENBERG. (2011, February 6). Can we talk? Researcher talks about the role of communication in marriages. Houston Chronicle,p. 7. Retrieved July 28, 2011, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 2260839481). Nathan Miczo, Chris Segrin, & Lisa E Allspach. (2001). Relationship between nonverbal sensitivity, encoding, and relational satisfaction. Communication Reports, 14(1), 39-48. Retrieved July 25, 2011, from Research Library. (Document ID: 72022836). Preston, P. (2005). Nonverbal communication: Do you reallynsay what you mean? Journal of Healthcare Management, 50(2), 83-6. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global. Document ID: 814698921 Sole, K. (2011). Making connections: Understanding interpersonal communication. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc. (https://content.ashford.edu)

Differences Between the Disease Model and the Harm Reduction Model Free Essay Example, 1500 words

Disease Model Treatment Implications A lasting total abstinence from all psychoactive substances is perceived to be the only acceptable treatment goal. The disease model also considers confrontational and coercive tactics as essential to break through denial. Disease model views successful recovery as requiring acceptance of the disease, hopelessness, and submit to a higher power (McCrady & Epstein, 1999). Harm Reduction Model Harm reduction infers a model that aids clients control their drinking and drug use. The model does not pay attention to the notion of addiction as a disease but addresses the consequences of high risk behavior, such as substance abuse. The model does not promote total abstinence; rather, it promotes changes in behavior that will minimize harm to the individual who chose high risk behavior. Similarly, the model with its empowerment emphasis perceives consumers as both a teacher and a learner and desists from the use of labels and forced dichotomies. Harm reduction model encompasses a set of practical strategies that minimize negative consequences flowing from drug use and incorporates a continuum of strategies from safer use to managed use and abstinence. We will write a custom essay sample on Differences Between the Disease Model and the Harm Reduction Model or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/pageorder now Harm reduction strategies pursue substance abusers â€Å"where they are at, † addressing the conditions of use, as well as the use itself. The approach matches recovery to any positive change, whereby recovery is a process in which the consumer outlines the tempo and parameters of that process (Marlatt & Witkiewitz, 2002). However, harm reduction is not tacit consent to drug use, anti-abstinence, or a â€Å"Trojan horse† for drug legalization. Principles of Harm Reduction The approach accommodates user’s decision to use. In addition, the approach allows drug users to be treated with dignity. The model allows the drug user to take responsibility for his or her behavior. Furthermore, drug users have a voice on a broad array of issues, especially those affecting them directly. In the model, there are no pre- defined outcomes with the aim of reducing harm rather than consumption. Differences between the Disease Model and the Harm Reduction Model Harm reduction model accommodates that drug use is a reality, and pursues to minimize  harmful effects, instead of simply ignoring or condemning drug users. The model understands drug use as an intricate, multifaceted phenomenon embracing a spectrum of behaviors from dependence to abstinence, and accommodates the view that some ways of drug use are concisely safer than others.