The Role Of Pleasure In The Happy Life

The Role Of Pleasure In The Happy Life Choose two philosophers covered so far and use their work to discuss the role of pleasure in the happy life.   I choose to pick Epicurus as one of the philosophers to be discussed because he is one of the most important figures in philosophy to be discussing on the topic of pleasure, it is interesting to discover just which category does Epicurus belong to. Was he just an ethical hedonist? Asserting merely that human actions ultimate purpose is to bring us happiness and that should be the only purpose or goal we serve or to achieve while adhering to doing good in the process .Or is he something else, something more profound? Epicurus is without a doubt, a hedonist, however he is somewhat of a different kind of hedonist, he draws a distinction between intense physical pleasure, and he also states that if one engages in intense physical debauchery too much, its going to end up hurting you. Epicurus promotes the idea of ataraxic that is: having the peace of mind, free from stress or turmoil, he proposes that physical indulgences in eating ,drinking, or sex orgies, can bring more negative consequences than pleasure, but mental pleasures, like listening to music, discussing philosophy with your friends etc, can last for as long as you want to with no negative consequences.For Epicurus, mental pleasure carries a greater pleasure and value than physical pleasure, he also further classifies active pleasure and passive pleasure. For example, you want to eat because you are hungry or drink because you are thirsty and then the passive pleasure, such as freedom from anxiety and pain. Epicurus thought passive pleasur e was more important than indulging in active pleasure, for example, a true epicurean delight would not be having an orgy, but instead researching scientific questions, perhaps. Epicurus concept of pleasure was twofold: in the opinion of researchers, Epicurus distinguished two kinds of pleasure- a static pleasure or a pleasure in a state of rest and a kinetic pleasure or a pleasure in motionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦an Epicurean by the name of Lucius Torquatus, gives a definition of two different kinds of pleasure, one of which suavitate aliqua naturam ipsam movet et iucundi-tate quadam percipitur sensibus, thus being a pleasure in motion, while the other, static pleasure, percipitur omni dolore detracto. Here Torquatus draws a distinction between two different states to either of which, in his opinion, the notion of pleasure can be applied firstly, a state presupposing active stimulation of pleasant sensations and secondly, a state negatively defined as the absence of pain and suffering. Epicurus referred to as kinetic those pleasures which accompany the process of satisfying ones desires and regarded as static pleasure the state experienced when the desires are sati sfied. In another place he gives a quotation from Epicurus about pleasures accompanying gustatory, auditory and visual sensations, and this time he regards these pleasures as pleasures in motion, speaking now about physical motions in the sensory organs. Besides, the traditional interpretation of kinetic pleasure contradicts Epicurus idea that it is impossible simultaneously to experience pleasure and pain; for example, if a man is feeling pleasure while satisfying his hunger, then, apparently, at the same moment pleasure has to be accompanied by pain from hunger that has not yet been fully satisfied. (Nikolsky, 2001) Epicurus believed we can all find a way to be happy, the problem is simply we are looking at the wrong place, unlike many philosophers, Epicurus idea of happiness actually sounds rather fun, he didnt think we should feel guilty about wanting to feel a pleasurable and enjoyable life, we seem to be thinking the key to happiness is really pretty easy, that is having a lot of money. But before we reach for our wallets, Epicurus wants us to stop and think.Epicurus was committed to a life of happiness, he likes sex, laughter and beauty but he points out that happiness is rather a tricky issue and a philosopher might help you find it than a credit card ever could. Epicurus was in favor of pleasure at all, short of many of his many Greek contemporaries, his philosophy became synonymous with a luxurious eating lifestyle. Epicurus said that pleasure was the most important thing in life, but if we analyze Epicurus we actually found that he lived simple, far from a luxurious life, having survived on breads and plain water as a way of life, Epicurus thought we dont really know what we need and so forth prey forth to many substitute desires, such as spending lavishly on a shopping spree. But often according to Epicurus, the key to pleasure comes pretty cheap, the first one is friendship, he stated that friendship is a major source of happiness, but in order to achieve that, one needs to live with his friends at all times, the second thing Epicurus thought we need is freedom, Epicurus left Athens with his friends and started a commune, according to Epicurus, we must free ourselves from the prison from everyday life politics, their lives were simple, but at least they enjoyed their freedom in their self-sufficient ways. The last ingredient is an analyzed life by which he meant a life in which we take time off to reflect on our worries, to analyze what was troubling us, our anxieties can be diminished if we give us time to think things through, and to do that ,we need to take a step back from the noisy commercial world. According to Epicurus, as long as you have enough money to sustain the basic sustenance, that is more than enough to have pleasure in a happy life, Epicurus states that even bread and water can confer the highest possible pleasure when they are brought to hungry lips. Obviously, Epicurus means by this the state of satiety, but he does not in any way separate it from pleasure from eating and drinking that leads to this state.( Nikolsky, 2001) so if we are so easily satisfied, why arent we happy? The answer is seductions in which our goal to become happy and live a pleasurable life become influenced. When we are quickly lured by bright lights and fancy clothing, our desires are subconsciously detoured in our search for pleasure. Thus, the Epicurean view of the physical nature of pleasure as a whole varies little from that of other philosophers: in Epicurus opinion, pleasure is experienced when the atoms of a human body, acted upon by a certain force, find themselves in their proper places, i.e.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦when the organism attains its natural state under the effect of some influence. Epicurus links pleasure not only with the process but also with the result of restoration, i.e. with the natural state which the organism attains. (Nikolsky, 2001) Next, I would like to refer to a famous philosopher by the name of Aristotle as my second candidate. For Aristotle however, the idea of pleasure and happiness comes from what is considered favorable, what is considered as good. The concept of virtue comes into place here, and we must have these virtues in order to achieve eudaimonia which is the Greek word of happiness .For Aristotle, a prime criterion to living a happy or pleasurable life is to find out what are the ultimate goal or purpose, and thus the way to be happy. Aristotle proposes 3 points, it has to be self-sufficient, it has to be a final goal and it has to be attainable. In this case, one has to develop the virtues in order to achieve a happy life, virtues are themselves the means to an end. Aristotle clearly distinguishes himself from the hedonists when he claims that there is no such thing as undifferentiated pleasure. Pleasure cannot serve as the final goal of our actions because pleasure is not one thing, i.e., the word pleasure as applied to specific instances of pleasure is not univocal. Pleasures differ in nature just as the activities which they accompany differ in nature. The pleasure which we take in eating is simply the same kind of thing as the pleasure which we take in thinking. They are simply different kinds of pleasures and as such it seems that there can be no comparison between them as pleasures. Yet Aristotle clearly believes that such a comparison between different pleasures is possible. He speaks of contemplation as being the most pleasurable activity. But if Aristotles critique of hedonism rules out the possibility of saying that contemplation brings with it a greater amount of pleasure than does eating ( since these pleasures differ qualitatively a nd not quantitatively), what can he mean by saying that contemplation is the most pleasurable activity? (Gonzalez, 1991) According to Aristotle, our ultimate goal is happiness, that is our telos, and happiness is in itself the ultimate good, the ultimate thing we should strive for. In book 1 of Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle, he states that while happiness is self-sufficient in itself, there is varying degrees of happiness, if we indulge our senses in sensual pleasure, that is considered superficial and on the same level as animals, it is important to consider happiness as not as one brief moment but rather as a whole integral lifelong process. On a side note, Aristotle regards happiness as an activity rather as a state, in order to be happy and live well, one need to have the right virtues to incline towards a certain disposition, a certain lifestyle. In chapter 4 of book 10 Aristotle describes what constitutes a sensation which is most perfect or complete and therefore most pleasurable: there is a corresponding pleasure for every sensation and similarly for thought and contemplation: the most pleasurable activity will be the most complete and the most complete will be the one which takes place between a well-disposed subject and the best of those objects which are proper to it.Pleasure completes the activityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦The activity of sensation will be most complete when its subjective and objective conditions are the best possible. It is important to recognize that the superlative here implies the possibility of degrees in the completeness and pleasure of an activity. Aristotle is not claiming that an activity can be complete and pleasurable only if it satisfies certain conditions; he is instead claiming that these conditions must be satisfied in order for the activity to be most complete and most pleasurable. (Gonzalez, 199 1) For Aristotle, The question traces back to why we want to be happy, why we want to be virtuous? Why is happiness the ultimate telos? To illustrate, we spend our money on things which we fancy to get pleasure, it all boils down that all our daily activities focus on one and only one purpose, that is to be happy .But happiness itself is a rather intriguing and complex concept, and Aristotle states only through exercising our rational soul, through a life of contemplation as our activity, can happiness be found, and that is what distinguishes us from the animals. In Book 10 of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle further goes into depth why he thinks contemplation is the ultimate rational answer to pleasure and happiness. The way Aristotle sees things is different, for example, when you encounter an object or entity, would you consider it in aspect of its purpose, or its functions or the process that the object undergoes? Aristotle views everything as telos, he believes everything serve some kind of telos or purpose, he thinks the telos of a plant is to keep growing from the intake of nutrition, the telos of life, so what distinguishes us from plants and animals is in our ultimate telos to contemplate and behave accordingly, to employ the rational faculty of the soul, and this in turn consists of the study of modern day philosophy, as an example. The pleasures involved in the activities are more proper to them than the desires; for the latter are separated both in time and in nature, while the former are close to the activities, and so hard to distinguish from them that it admits of dispute whether the activity is not the same as pleasure. (Manser ,1960)

Marketing and Deli Depot Essay

1. Executive Summary A. Major findings We have using quantitative and qualitative methods, doing descriptive statistics and hypothesis testing research for Deli Depot. In this time, we’ve 200 Deli Depot customers to doing the questionnaire. In the questionnaire design, we’ve doing 18 hypothesis testing. Combine with questionnaire and other research result, we have finding the following problems. What factors are the customer would consider to buying food and beverage in Deli Depot chain of fast food restaurant? The research result had reflecting that the competent employees, fast service and excellent food quality factors they would be consider. The customer percentages are 28.5% (competent employees), 24% (fast service) and 46.5% (excellent food quality). How about customers think the Deli Depot performance? In the questionnaire design, x1-4 are about Deli Depot friendly employees, competitive prices, excellent food quality. X8-9 are asking customer recommend and satisfied. In the questionnaire, customers must to answer their suitable marks. X1-4 scale are 1-10, x8-9 scale are 1-7. Research result had reflecting that many customers are circle in the middle marks. 22.5% customers are circle 4 in x1(friendly employees), 31% customers are circle 3 in x2(competitive price), 31.5% customers are circle 4 in x4(excellent food quality), 27% customer are circle 4(scale1-7) in x8(recommend) and 26% customers are circle 4(scale1-7) in x9(satisfied) but there have eleven error (missing data). However, customers are most disagree is about Deli Depot in wide variety of food. 24.5% customers are circle 2(scale 1-10)in x5(wide variety of food). Besides, 46.5% customers are answer 6(scale1-6, 6 is most important) in x15(excellent food quality) and not important is x14(competent employees), 5% customers are answer 6 (scale 1-6, 6 is most important) in x14(competent employees). Overall, customers think Deli Depot chain of fast food restaurant can satisfied their needs, and employees have provide friendly, excellent food quality and service for them. But Deli Depot should provide more new food and choice for customers to choose and need continue to providing excellent food quality for customers because customers are emphasis on their choice, service and food quality, they expected they have more food choice in Deli Depot. B.) Major recommendations We should remember that human resource is important and rare resource In hospitality industry so we must emphasis employee’s needs and wants. Helped them work-life balance and developed training program for them. Besides, Deli Depot need continue to doing retail store assessment (RQA) and Quality control(QA) for maintain their restaurant good environment, service and food quality. Secondly, Deli Depot can try to change the new logo and uniform, let customers feeling fresh. The new uniform design for employees can let customers feel more friendly because Deli Depot’s new uniform will using fresh color, such as red, pink, orange, yellow. Excluding the store manager and management, other’s employee no need to have a tie because new employees image are give the relax, fresh, friendly and happy for the customer. Third, customer are concern their choice on menu. Deli Depot can developed diversity of their product. Beside of set, Deli Depot may provide more soup, main course, dessert and drink for customer. Deli Depot may develop Chinese, Western, Japanese, Korean, East Asia, France and Europe food and beverage in their breakfast, lunch, afternoon tea and dinner menu. However, Deli Depot should try to doing new promotion in every month/season. Such as provide Chinese, British, France breakfast; Western braked rice, Chinese fried rice, East Asia noodles and Korean snacks at lunch time; Japanese, East Asia, France and Europe dishes and snacks at afternoon tea time; Combine with different country dishes, soup, dessert and drink at dinner. Thirdly, Deli Depot may provide A menu (Cheaper menu and more choice) in Monday to Thursday, B menu (Deluxe menu and less choice) in Friday dinner, Saturday, Sunday and Public holiday. Moreover, Deli Depot may plus their new promotion with their basic menu. Such as customer may selecting their lunch set in A menu, cashier may promote restaurant new promotion in special promotion menu and up-sell the soup, upgrade to soup with puff, special drink and deluxe dessert (such as Molten Chocolate Cake with Ice-cream). Given more choice for customers, let they can select more food and drinks and increasing restaurant sales. 2. Introduction A. Background (of the case) The background information of Deli Depot expose that it is a chain of fast food restaurants that position itself as â€Å"quality home-style food†. The restaurant locations are: two in the CBD and five in major shopping centers. The trade include breakfast〠lunch and evening , but the different location to target various customers to implementing effective trade strategies. Dependent on the latest sales and profit figures for the 2009 , the data of Annual Financial Performance and Quarterly Financial Performance 2008-09 indicated that it has a downward trend and it is performing poorly. The CEO is pointing the marketing expenses had risen over the past five years from $400,000 in 2004 to $1m in 2009 , and a series of elements lead to the CEO has tabled the notion of closing the newest outlet. The CMO think that the negatively affect the entire network. Whilst the CEO agreed with her comment he explained that unless the figures can be reversed the Board will demand the outlet’s closure, no matter what her arguments are. He instructed her to commission market research to uncover the public’s opinion on Deli Depot and demonstrate that the outlet has a future. B. Purpose (of this report) The purpose of this report is to uncover the public’s opinion on Deli Depot , Deli Depot will to improve quality of every aspect dependent on the marketing research report and expect the Deli Depot’s newest outlet can continue operation. C. Format (of this report) About the format of this report that, our group members have followed the requirements of our task to write this business report. Firstly, the executive summary, it including two key aspect to represent that what is our report’s major findings and major recommendations. Secondly, to wrote an introduction of this report, it including three aspects. First aspect is to describe that what is the background of the case, second aspect is to identify the purpose of this report and third aspect is to establish the format of this report. Thirdly, this report is a marketing research report, so we have made deeper marketing analysis, the market analysis have two aspects to conduct. A part is a strategic marketing analysis, it can be divided financial performance and the marketing program, B part is a customer analysis that is based on descriptive statistics and hypothesis testing. Fourthly, marketing response include recommended strategies and recommendation for cover aspects of the marketing research plan. Fifthly, it’s appendices of report. 3. Marketing Analysis A. Strategic marketing analysis According to the financial performance, Marketing expenses have risen over the past five years from $400,000 in 2004 to $1m in 2009. But the Net Profit has Continues to decline, from $400,000 in 2005 to $100,000 in 2009. This reflected that Deli Depot have not done enough in market and lack of a comprehensive marketing strategy to meet their targeted customer’s needs. Because in the marketing program, they only focus on how to promote their product to customers but ignored an important feature of the guests, fresh. Many customers like to try new thing and they hope can be more choice and expect have a surprise for them. In addition, they don’t have a Loyalty program to detain regular customers. It is related to establishing a good relationship with customers. In marketing strategy, first, Deli Depot must to create of new foods on a regular basis to attract customers and to increase their fresh. And then introduction of different types of food such as fried food, desserts and health food for customers to choose. Second, they must develop a loyalty program in order to increase the loyalty, such as point plan, offered a free gift or coupon to customers when they reach a certain fraction. They also can introduce Lunch special discount and package to boost customer numbers. In the other areas, use some of the more brightly colored such as yellow, cyan, orange to re-modified and creates a happy and comfortable atmosphere to customers. B1. Descriptive statistics In the questionnaire design, X1-6 are about Deli Depot performance includes friendly employees, competitive prices, excellent food quality, fast service. X8-9 are about customer recommend and satisfied. In the questionnaire, customers have to answer their suitable marks. X1-6 scales are 1-10, X8-9 scale are 1-7. It would describe the results in three dimensions satisfied, normal and dissatisfied. According to the statistical analysis reflects that 28.5% customers are circle 7 in X3 (competent employees). The research result reflects that Customers are most satisfied with the competency of staff and think that employees can meet their general needs. 22.5% customers are circle 4 in X1 (friendly employees), 31.5% customers are circle 4.30 in x4 (excellent food quality), 24% customers are circle 6 in X6 (fast service), 27% customer are circle 4(scale1-7) in x8(recommend) and 26% customers are circle 4(scale1-7) in x9(satisfied) but there is eleven errors. In these results had reflecting that many customers are circle in the middle marks and it is represent that they tend to medium for the performance of Deli Depot. However, customers are most dissatisfaction is about Deli Depot in competitive price and wide variety of food, had 31% customers are circle 3 in x2(competitive price) and 24.5% customers are circle 2(scale 1-10) in x5(wide variety of food). These results point out that the product prices are set too high for many customers. About wide variety of food, too few types of food in the restaurant and make them feel bored as well as to lack of novelty in the result. Many customers believe that excellent food quality is the most important factor when they selecting a fast food-restaurant to eat at. 46.5% customers are answer 6(scale1-6, 6 is most important) in x15(excellent food quality). From the result, we can see that customers focus on qualitative for a restaurant because it is related to their confident and loyalty. On the contrary, they think that the least important factor is competent employees in research result, 5% customers are answer 6 (scale 1-6, 6 is most important) in x14(competent employees). B2. Hypothesis testing In hypothesis question x1-18, we discover there is a significant relationship with variables between x4(Excellent Food Quality, scales are 1-10) and X15(Excellent Food Quality, scale1-6, 6 is most important). In the result, customers consider that the quality of food is the most important, the average scores up to 5.16. But customers for the evaluation of the quality of food in Deli Depot average scores are 4.30. These reflect that customers are respect for the qualitative of food and the Deli Depot had not reached customers expect the criterion and influence customer the desire of customers to patronize. Besides, there are a certain relationships between the quality of food and recommend. As a restaurant provides a high quality of product to customers, this is not only bringing a good experience to customers and also establishing the confidence for the restaurant. They will recommend it to people around when the restaurant obtain their trust. In the reason, customers will recommend it to others is dependents on the quality. In hypothesis question x8(scale1-7, 7 is definitely recommend) about the possibility of recommend Deli Depot to a friend of the average scores are 4.32 and the quality of food is tend to low. This means that the quality of food is low and unable to obtain their confidence and enable to affect the desire they have recommended to others. 4. Marketing Response Conclusion From the research, we can see customers mostly focus on the degree of employees’ attitude in service, the prices, and the food quality and the level of variety food but not the place or the environment of the restaurant. In customers’ point of view, Deli Depot got the competent and friendly employees which can provide food in a proper time period kindly, and excellent food quality. Also, it got competitive prices in the Food and Beverages Industry. Although the Deli Depot customers are satisfied about the employees, prices and the food quality, they are dissatisfied about the food variety in Deli Depot. They think that it only offer a few choice for them choosing the food from the menu. Recommendation As the result of customers, Deli Depot got the competent and friendly employees, excellent food quality which can provide food in a proper time period kindly and competitive prices which is acceptable. So that, Deli Depot should retain the existing employees, also maintain the style and culture of serving customers. Besides, Deli Depot need continue to doing retail store assessment (RQA) and Quality control (QA) for maintain their restaurant good environment, service and food quality. The reason of doing all of these is to satisfied Deli Depot customers’ needs and attracting more customers spend in Deli Depot. However, as Deli Depot is also concerned about the level of variety food and dissatisfied Deli Depot current menu, we think that Deli Depot can just allocate its resources on creating several kinds of food for the customers. For examples, it may add more special dishes driven from Asian, such as Indian, Chinese, Thailand, Korean and etc. These special variety of food can bring new perceive to the Deli Depot customers. Moreover, for increasing the level of variety of food within Deli Depot, we suggest that it provide some festival promotion food and environment for the customers. It probably could include some countries oriented festival, like Chinese New Year. During the festival month, it can provide some gifts, more food or only change the name of existing food related to the festival. Such as, Deli Depot distribute to each customers a red packet and free trial of Steamed Turnip Cake for each table, and also make all the dishes name in some meaningful explanations to make the customers feeling fresh and special between having meal in Deli Depot and other fast food restaurant. On the other hand, if Deli Depot really wants to change the image from stable and common food is providing to stylish and variety food providing fast food restaurant. They should try to change the logo and uniform, especially the color of both in order to make the customers feel fresh and changeable. The new uniform could use bright color, such as red, pink, and orange so that it can attract the focus of the customers and make them feel warm from the Deli Depot employees. Of course, the key men like the store manager don’t need to do so. All of these approach are focus on changing the concept and perception of customers for Deli Depot. However, Deli Depot should maintain its advantages from other restaurant as a priority, such as keeping the excellent food quality, retain the existing employees in order to keep the competent and friendly employees, also maintain the style and culture of serving customers which provide food in a proper time period kindly, so are the competitive prices.

The United States Supreme Court and Public Opinion

The United States Supreme Court is a unique American institution. It is unique because, unlike the individuals serving in the executive and the legislative branches of government, the nine justices serving at the highest level of the United States Supreme Court are insulated in significant ways from the public they are sworn to serve. Most significantly, the justices are provided lifetime terms following nomination and confirmation. Unlike presidents or members of Congress, for example, the justices do not have to endure initial public elections or prepare for reelection campaigns.In effect, in many ways, the members of the United States Supreme Court are insulated from the public that they serve in extraordinary and unique ways. This very insulation, in turn, has generated fierce debates among legal scholars, political scholars, and historians regarding the proper characterization of the relationship between the United States Supreme Court and public opinion and the consequences of different characterizations.This essay will argue that the justices of the United States Supreme Court are not nearly as isolated as conventional wisdom and scholarship too frequently assume, that public opinion affects the justices in a myriad of deeply significant ways, and that adopting a majoritarian model better explains the United States Supreme Court as well as better serving important public policy objectives.In order to support the argument that majoritarian framework is the preferable model, this essay will explain why analytical frameworks are especially important in this context, the consequences of the different approaches, and why a majoritarian approach is the better framework for analyzing and discussing the relationship between the United States Supreme Court and public opinion. B. Why Analytical Frameworks MatterThis debate is particularly important because these justices, serving for life terms, are elevated to the United States Supreme Court as a result of politi cal decisions rather than intellectual merit or the possession of a neutrally objective judicial philosophy. Indeed, it is commonly agreed by scholars that Judges and scholars perpetuate the myth of merit. The reality, however, is that every appointment is political.Merit competes with other political considerations, like personal and ideological compatibility, with the forces of support or opposition in Congress and the White House, and with demands for representative appointments on the bases of geography, religion, race, gender, and ethnicity. (O'Brien 33) It is this political connection that makes the relationship between the United States Supreme Court and the American citizenry such an important issue.This is because certain assumptions may encourage special interests to pursue political appointments to the Supreme Court in an effort to circumvent public opinion. For those whom subscribe to the countermajoritarian school of thought, which holds that the Supreme Court is largel y immune to public opinion and hardly influenced by public opinion, the belief is that once a nominated justice is confirmed that he or she will be able to issue rulings unhindered by the pressures of public opinion (Davis 4).As a result, this approach encourages deeply political appointments because there is a belief that minority interests can be advanced or otherwise protected by a public institution shielded from public opinion; this, in turn, encourages potential justices to refrain from expressing their intellect or their opinions honestly in order to minimize political problems.One scholar has described this dumbing down of a candidate’s merits thusly: â€Å"A fictive discourse of appointments has thus emerged: a nominee's advocates make his case in the ideologically neutral language of merit, as if the candidate's views had no bearing on his selection,† (Greenberg, n. p. ) That prospective justices of the United States Supreme Court are compelled to engage in a â€Å"fictive discourse† is both disturbing and contrary to the American ideal of open and free discourse.The confirmation battle involving Robert Bork was illustrative of this type of political battle; indeed, rather than focusing on Bork’s intellectual abilities or merits the confirmation hearings devolved into perhaps the most contentious confirmation battle in modern history. Indeed, as one leading scholar of the Bork proceedings has noted, highlighting the aforementioned dangers associated with the countermajoritarian framework,Because few knowledgeable observers questioned Judge Bork's professional qualifications, opposition to Bork quickly focused on his judicial philosophy. The focus on ideology raised a crucial issue as to whether it was proper for the Senate to reject for ideological reasons an otherwise qualified nominee. (Vieira, and Gross vii)On the other hand, for those whom subscribe to the majoritarian school of thought, an increasingly influential app roach to the relationship between the United States Supreme Court and public opinion, the belief is that the justices are not only not insulated from public opinion but that public opinion affects the justices intimately in terms of the types of cases they choose to decide each year (O'Brien 165), what legal justifications that justices choose to rely on when deciding particularly contentious cases (Waltenburg, and Swinford 242), and whether to uphold or overturn longstanding legal precedents (Norrander, and Wilcox 707).Such assumptions, that public opinion does matter and that it matters significantly, have several significant implications if they are true. First, selecting politics over merit when deciding whom to nominate to the United States Supreme Court may be overrated; more specifically, justices will ultimately be more sensitive to public opinion than the political alliances that earned them the nomination in the first place.They will, after all, be freed of the need to sus tain the political alliances after confirmation as a result of their lifetime tenure whereas they will always be judged by public opinion. A case in point was the Republican nomination of Warren Burger. He was known to have been a conservative with a strict construction approach to the interpretation of the United States Constitution. In short, from a countermajoritarian point of view, Burger had seemed an extraordinarily safe political choice for the United States Supreme Court.The reality, however, was that as the 15th Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Burger began to rule in ways that shocked his initial supporters. Rather than shunning public opinion, as his supporters wanted on issues such as race, he has since become known as one of the more activist Chief Judges in the history of the United States Supreme Court. The countermajoritarian school of thought cannot account for such a shift in judicial behavior, and this is a major flaw in this particular analytical framework.Burger is much better understood, as is the United States Supreme Court more generally, by employing a majoritarian framework that accounts for public opinion in addition to underlying political alliances or political philosophies. Second, if these assumptions are true, then public opinion matters. That means that studying the United States Supreme Court in isolation, rather than in conjunction with other related social factors such as public opinion, is a flawed approach.The better analytical framework is the majoritarian approach which, though a minority approach, accomplishes two important objectives. Initially, by accounting for and analyzing more carefully the relationship between public opinion and the United States Supreme Court, courts like Burger’s can be better understood and better explained; in addition, the majoritarian approach legitimizes public opinion as a part of the national debate with respect to legal issues of public interest rather than confi ning these issues to nine distant justices in a mysterious ivory tower.If one of the main functions of the justices is to safeguard the legitimacy of the American constitution, a document conceived of and designed to protect the public generally, then sound policy demands public participation and influence. There are two main questions to be resolved. First, does the countermajoritarian or the majoritarian framework better explain how the United States Supreme Court functions? Second, and related to the first issue, which model better contributes to the legitimacy of the United States Supreme Court and its legal decisions.C. Main Questions 1. Countermajoritarian or Majoritarian: A Threshold Issue Although the United States Supreme Court is one of the most heavily studied American institutions, there remain significant differences of opinion regarding the nature of the relationship between the Supreme Court and public opinion. One of the more fundamental debates among legal scholars, political scientists, and historians centers on whether the United States Supreme Court is in essence a countermajoritarian institution or a majoritarian institution.This debate has important implications. Those that believe that the countermajoritarian model best characterizes the actual function and operation of the United States Supreme Court also tend to view the Supreme Court as being largely insulated from public opinion; on the other hand those that believe that the majoritarian framework best characterizes the Supreme Court tend to believe that public opinion, to some extant, affects the function, operations, and the ultimate legal decisions of the Supreme Court.How one resolves this debate, therefore, pervasively affects American jurisprudence; indeed, â€Å"Much constitutional discourse is predicated on the assumption that the United States Supreme Court is a counter-majoritarian institution, and normative theories supporting the exercise of judicial review are seen, by some, as having to accommodate that fact.† (Solimine, and Walker n. p). Should this fundamental assumption be proven to be incorrect, and there is a growing body of research that suggests that it may be incorrect, then the constitutional discourse and the normative theories that have flowed from the traditional countermajoritarian characterization of the Supreme Court may be similarly flawed and incorrect.In short, a threshold determination needs to be made. This threshold question, as is relevant to the relationship between the United States Supreme Court and public opinion, is whether the Supreme Court is in fact a countermajoritarian institution as scholars have traditionally assumed or a majoritarian institution as some modern scholars argue. 2. Supreme Court as Arbiter of LegitimacyIn addition and intimately related to the aforementioned characterization debate, scholars have also examined the relationship of the United States Supreme Court and public opinion in terms of legitimacy; more specifically, scholars have debated whether and to what extant Supreme Court decisions resolve contentious legal issues legitimately so far as public opinion is concerned and whether and to what extant legitimacy instead results from public opinion affecting the Supreme Court either directly or indirectly.In short, is the ultimate source of legitimacy regarding contentious legal issues the Supreme Court, public opinion, or the interplay between the two? This source of legitimacy debate is made more difficult by the fact that public opinion tends to be more responsive to a narrow range of legal issues or what has otherwise been referred to in the literature as landmark cases such as Brown v. Board of Education, Roe V. Wade, and, more recently, Bush v.Gore. If this assumption is correct, that public opinion is only concerned with landmark cases, then the scope of academic inquiry must be significantly narrowed; to this end, one scholar has noted that â€Å"if we assu me that only the huge national landmark cases affect public opinion, in essence, we are saying that the remainder of the Court's work is inconsequential, at least in terms of public opinion. † (Hoekstra 3).An additional set of threshold questions, therefore, needs to address the more precise relationship between different types of Supreme Court cases and public opinion. Is the relationship relevant only with respect to national landmark cases? Does the relationship differ between landmark and non-landmark cases? This, in turn, demands an analysis which examines both the national and local effects of Supreme Court decisions. Indeed, acknowledging that â€Å"Using national data, it may be possible to connect cases such as Bush v.Gore to changes in public opinion and support for the Court† (Hoekstra 3) one scholar has argued for engaging in a more nuanced analysis that examines localized effects as well by suggesting that beneath the noise may actually be systematic effect s–ones not easily detectable or the same for all citizens–but systematic nonetheless. If citizens learn about different Court decisions based on information available and salient to them, then looking for uniform national level effects is misguided. This does not mean that Court decisions are without national effect.If the Court's effect is more localized–either in terms of geography or some other process–we might still see the effect of Court decisions on public opinion and that Court decisions might affect support for the Court on a national level. The process is just more subtle and possibly more gradual. Another reason to look at local public opinion is that Court decisions frequently require active implementation, oftentimes by local officials. If the Court can change public opinion on the issues, or at least cast legitimacy on the policy under review, the probability of successful implementation is greatly enhanced (Hoekstra 3)Thus, in short, a seco nd threshold set of questions addresses the extant to which scholars assume that relationships between the Supreme Court and public opinion are limited to national landmark cases or whether the relationship can be extended according to local effects and conditions. C. Benefits of a Majoritarian Approach The first benefit of a majoritarian approach is rather intuitive; more specifically, because legal issues affect the public then the public’s opinion ought to be considered.Although this essay also argues that public opinion is relevant in disputes that may not be considered landmark cases, the evidence strongly supports the proposition that public opinion particularly affects national landmark cases and that landmark cases decided by the United States Supreme Court tend to affect public opinion. What complicates a proper characterization of the court derives from different historical relationships between the court and the United States Supreme Court. Traditionally, the Ameri can public did view the justices as enlightened individuals whom didn’t require public input.This sort of public trust justified, in the past, the countermajoritarian approach; indeed, with respect to general public opinion, the justices were significantly insulated. One leading scholar, writing in 1957, stated that Until recently, the attitude of Americans toward the Supreme Court recalled with singular fidelity that with which, according to Burke, Englishmen of a century and a half ago should have looked upon the institutions of their country: â€Å"We ought to understand it according to our measure; and to venerate where we are not able to understand.† (Schwartz iii). This veneration, this assumption that the public can no longer understand the legal issues presented to the United States Supreme Court, is no longer an accurate description of the American public; quite the contrary, the public regularly criticizes Supreme Court decisions, it more carefully follows po tential and actual nominations to the highest court in the land, and through a variety of groups and organization it attempts to influence the court by presenting friend of the court legal briefs on virtually every type of imaginable case.What has emerged more recently is a United States Supreme Court that is besieged by rather than isolated from public opinion; one scholar has noted that even presidents attempt to influence the justices, stating that â€Å"presidents can influence the Supreme Court beyond the appointments process. † (Martinek, n. p. ). From the unemployed mother interested in an abortion issue to competing presidential candidates seeking a favorable ruling the United States Supreme Court has become, for better or worse, America’s arbiter of last resort.This change in the way the public perceives and interacts with the United States Supreme Court is the first reason why the countermajoritarian framework is no longer the best approach for analyzing the justices or the relationship between the Supreme Court and public opinion. The detached veneration of the public is a relic of the past and has been replaced by a greater public awareness. This greater public awareness, however, cannot be overstated; to be sure, though â€Å"Shifting majorities of the public do disagree with many decisions, to the extent they perceive them, or are simply ignorant of the great mass of the Court's jurisprudence.† (Solimine, and Walker, n. p. ) There are, therefore, gaps in the public’s knowledge about the nature of the Supreme Court’s power and the underlying issues. This imperfect knowledge, however, does not render public opinion marginal or irrelevant. It simply suggests that public opinion may at times be somewhat irrational; both a rational and an irrational public opinion can affect the Supreme Court and the majoritarian approach can be adapted to account for an idealized public which possesses an advanced understanding of c omplex legal issues and an imperfect public which sometimes reacts in less than informed ways.In short, the majoritarian approach is better able to incorporate the complex interactions between the United States Supreme Court than the rigidly outdated countermajoritarian model. In addition to the fact that public perceptions and demands have changed over time, it is also evident that legal precedents have been modified or overturned in response to public opinion. Some of the more well-known cases illustrating this fact have involved controversial issues dealing with racial segregation, abortion, and civil rights more generally.A countermajoritarian framework would assume that the justices would be significantly isolated from the public in cases such as Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade. Had these justices been insulated, it is entirely plausible that these cases would never have reached the United States Supreme Court, and if they had, that they would have been decided diff erently. The majoritarian model, on the other, admits that these issues were, to some extant, forced upon the United States Supreme Court and that the justices accommodated public opinion by resolving important national issues.This framework further contributes to an ultimate type of legitimacy with respect to the judicial decisions, even if the legitimacy remains challenged by some members of the public, because it treats the decision as a sort of cooperative effort between the United States Supreme Court and the American public. These decisions, in turn affected public opinion. More people accepted racial integration, more people accepted abortion, and more people came to believe that George W. Bush was entitled to the highest office in the land. In Brown v. Board of Education, for instance, the public was badly divided regarding issues of racial segregation.While it is true that the modern trend was toward integration the sad fact was that many members of the public, including st ates, resisted attempts to integrate the races more completely; as a result, pressure was brought to bear on the United States Supreme Court. On the one hand, there was a notion that the federal government shouldn’t interfere too much in state affairs; on the other hand, there was also a growing public recognition that only a decision by the United States Supreme Court, and not any actions by the executive or legislative branches alone, would settle the issues legitimately across the country (Klarman 348).A countermajoritarian framework would instead assume, and incorrectly so, that the justices themselves suddenly decided that racial segregation was unconstitutional rather than attributing a great deal of credit to the American public. The majoritarian model can both predict and explain cases such as Brown v. Board of Education. D. Conclusion In the final analysis, the United States Supreme Court is best analyzed when accounting for the influence of public opinion on its ope rational and decision-making process.This necessitates shifting toward a more majoritarian approach that also analyzes why and how legitimacy is often a function of the interaction of the Supreme Court and public opinion rather than the outdated view of the justices as isolated wise-men immune to public scrutiny or understanding. Works Cited Davis, Richard. Electing Justice: Fixing the Supreme Court Nomination Process. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Greenberg, David. â€Å"The New Politics of Supreme Court Appointments. † Daedalus 134.3 (2005): 5+. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Hoekstra, Valerie J. Public Reaction to Supreme Court Decisions. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Klarman, Michael J. From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Lasser, William. The Limits of Judicial Power: The Supreme Cou rt in American Politics.Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1988. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Martinek, Wendy L. â€Å"Popular Justice: Presidential Prestige and Executive Success in the Supreme Court. † Presidential Studies Quarterly 33. 3 (2003): 692+. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Norrander, Barbara, and Clyde Wilcox. â€Å"Public Opinion and Policymaking in the States: The Case of Post-Roe Abortion Policy. † Policy Studies Journal 27. 4 (1999): 707. Questia. 16 July 2009 . O'Brien, David M. The Supreme Court in American Politics The Supreme Court in American Politics. New York: W. W. Norton, 2000. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Perry, Barbara A. â€Å"†The Cult of the Robe†: The U. S. Supreme Court in the American Mind. † Social Education 66. 1 (2002): 30+. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Schwartz, Bernard. The Supreme Court, Constitutional Revolution in Retrospect. New York: Ronald Press, 1957. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Solimine, Michael E. , and James L. Walker. â€Å"The Supreme Court, Judicial Review, and the Public: Leadership versus Dialogue. † Constitutional Commentary 11. 1 (1994): 1-6. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Spurlock, Clark. Education and the Supreme Court. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1955. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Stephenson, Donald Grier. Campaigns and the Court: The U. S. Supreme Court in Presidential Elections. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999.Questia. 16 July 2009 . Vieira, Norman, and Leonard Gross. Supreme Court Appointments: Judge Bork and the Politicization of Senate Confirmations. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1998. Questia. 16 July 2009 . Waltenburg, Eric N. , and Bill Swinford. â€Å"The Supreme Court as a Policy Arena: The Strategies and Tactics of State Attorneys General. † Policy Studies Journal 27. 2 (1999): 242. Questia. 16 July 2009 .

The Great Gatsby Old Money Vs. New Essay - 1008 Words

September 20th, 2013 East Vs. West Money, just like anything else, can be new and old. Some people in our country have been wealthy for centuries, and the wealth of their bloodline can go extremely far back in time. However, the attitude of people who have what is considered â€Å"Old Money† in contrast to the people who have â€Å"New Money† can be quite different. This is shown in the novel The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. In TGG Tom and Daisy Buchanan and Jordan Baker all reside in East Egg, New York and are considered â€Å"Old Money† while Jay Gatsby who lives in West Egg, New York is considered â€Å"New Money†. The people who are depicted as â€Å"new money† are materialistic and egotistical; while people who are labeled â€Å"old money† are†¦show more content†¦Tom Buchanan, a member of the East Egg comunity, is shown to have amazing tastes, in particular when it comes to the beauty of his home. Fitzgerald writes, â€Å"Their house was even more ela borate than I expected, a cheerful red-and-white Georgian Colonial mansion overlooking the bay. The lawn started at the beach and ran toward the front door for a quarter of a mile, jumping over sun-dials and brick walks and burning gardens-finally when it reached the house drifting up the side in bright vines as though the momentum of its run. The front was broken by a line of french windows glowing now with reflected gold and wide open to the warm windy afternoon† (6). The way in which Nick describes Toms home, makes it sound like a beautiful wonderland. It seems extremely elegant and just simply perfect. Even the setting and time of day match its beauty coincidentally. Furthermore, the intricacy of Toms home reflects what people think of the people who reside in East Egg. Their tastes seem to be so far ahead of everyone else’s, and they are able to express their minds through crafting these landscapes with ease. This portrays a very pretty picture of what Fitzgerald w ants the reader to think about the characters who reside in East Egg. The people of East Egg who are â€Å"old money† are further portrayed as elegant and down to earth by what the wear and how they dress. Jordan Baker and Daisy are both two women whoShow MoreRelatedThe Great Gatsby By F. Scott Fitzgerald1465 Words   |  6 Pagestext, â€Å"Is The Great Gatsby the Most Overrated Literary Novel of All Time,† Daniel Honan argues that the classic American novel, The Great Gatsby is an overrated novel in his opinion. Honan challenges his claim on the novel by questioning, should his book be considered an American classic? Author, F.Scott Fitzgerald, portrays his novel The Great Gatsby with a unique writing style, structure, and captures life in the 1920s realistically. Fitzgerald demonstrates the theme of illusion vs. reality by showingRead MoreThe Great Gatsby By F. Scott Fitzgerald1166 Words   |  5 Pagestheories of both Biographical and Historical lenses provide a unique interpretation of the Great Gatsby centered around context. Ena bling one to see how the few real things and feelings of the world have been reflected in the Great Gatsby. The life and experiences of F. Scott Fitzgerald provide added analysis to the reading of The Great Gatsby. The first thing that stands out while reading The Great Gatsby from an biographical lense are the parallels between F. Scott Fitzgerald and the NarratorRead MoreCharacterization Of The Great Gatsby By F. Scott Fitzgerald927 Words   |  4 Pagesand Reality in The Great Gatsby The Great Gatsby, written by F.Scott Fitzgerald, is a story where dreaming stays in one’s sleep. One of the overall themes of the novel is the idea that there is a contrast between one’s dreams and reality. Characterization plays an important role in developing the central theme through the use of various characters. Characterization in the Great Gatsby provides how Fitzgerald contrasts an individual s hopes from his or her reality. Jay Gatsby, one of the main charactersRead MoreThe Life Of Frederick Douglass And F. Scott Fitzgerald959 Words   |  4 Pagesdoesn t want to be apart of it. The Great Gatsby written by F Scott Fitzgerald in 1953 is all about old money vs. new money, fantasy vs. reality and being a self made American. One of the main characters Jay Gatsby who was become a milliner by bootlegging views the American Dream very differently then Douglass. In the first half of the book I believed that Gatsby’s view on the American Dream was to have people know him as the biggest guy in West Egg, that money and power were everything to him andRead MoreLove story vs Satire827 Words   |  4 PagesAP  Literature  and  Composition  Ã‚   Ms.  Harrison   27  November  2014   Is  Fitzgerald  writing  a  love  story  that  embraces  American  ideals,  or  a  satire  that  comments  on   American  ideals?   Love  Story  vs.  Satire     At  the  surface  of  this  novel  it’s  an  ongoing  love  story  but  when  you  peel  away  at  the   layers  it  is  actually  a  satire  of  society’s  expectations.  The  novel  The  Great  Gatsby  by  F.  Scott   Fitzgerald  was  written  to  criticize  the  American  dream  of  the  1920s  through  love  affairs,and   corrupted  ambitions.   This  novel  has  various  loveRead MoreExamples Of Naturalism In The Great Gatsby1559 Words   |  7 PagesEven all the money in the world could not make Jay Gatsby happy because he lived in West Egg and never grew up having money, so having it wouldn’t mean anything to him. Daisy on the other hand, lived in East egg so they grew up with completely different childhoods. The Great Gatsby, by Scott F. Fitzgerald, is about what life used to be like in the 1920’s, especially for social climbers. Jay Gatsby is a great example of someone trying to live out the American Dream. In America, we’ve believedRead MoreThe Great Gatsby : Coming Of Age Novel1453 Words   |  6 PagesTiffany Gomez Period 5 October 20, 2014 IB English 3 Individual Oral Presentation The Great Gatsby: Coming of Age Novel Statement of Intent: While The Great Gatsby may not seem like a classic coming of age story, considering that the protagonist, Nick, establishes himself as an adult through his experiences. His overall character matures as he is exposed to the realities of new morals. With this topic I intend to combine the themes and experiences of the novel that ultimately change Nick’s personaRead MoreIt Was Only Just a Dream in F. Scott Fitzgeralds The Great Gatsby950 Words   |  4 PagesThe great American dream influenced the lives and literature of American history. The dream that everyone has the equal opportunity to reach their highest potential, no matter their living situation or social position at birth, is something that Americans wished to fulfill. Americans created a materialistic ideal for American life that for some was not possible to attain, and not possible to maintain. While trying to reach or uphold this ideal based on money and the social ladder, Americans becameRead Mo reAfrican American Dream1039 Words   |  5 Pagesfamous poem Let America be America Again, he states â€Å"I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart, I am the Negro bearing slavery’s scars. I am the red man driven from the land, I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek—And finding only the same old stupid plan of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.† This quote is extremely powerful and speaks to the idea of different social classes, being that Hughes brings up African Americans, Native Americans, and immigrants, and then shows the flaw of AmericaRead More The Great Gatsby: Nick vs Gatsby Essay1001 Words   |  5 PagesThe Great Gatsby: Nick vs Gatsby Mainframe computers analyze information and present it so that the observer is able to make accurate observations. In The Great Gatsby, written by F. Scott Fitzgerald, the narrator, Nick Carraway, tells a story in which Jay Gatsby tries to attain happiness through wealth. Even though the novel is titled after Gatsby, Nick, just as a mainframe computer, analyzes the actions of others and presents the story so that the reader can comprehend the theme.