Comparing short stories Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Comparing short stories - Essay Example Later on it was found out that her daughter from her first marriage was alive and was living in the cottage. The little girl was black and Effie concealed this fact from Grant as she was scared that he would reject her as she was mother of a child of mixed race. â€Å"The Murders in the Rue Morgue† revolves around twin murders of a mother and her daughter in Rue Morgue, which is a fictional street in Paris. Dupin, who lives in Paris takes it upon himself to solve the mystery. There were numerous witnesses who claimed they heard the suspect but could not recognise the language. At the murder venue, Dupin finds a hair which does not belong to any human. Eventually, it was revealed that an Ourang-Outang has escaped from a sailor with his shaving razor, and the animal is responsible for the murders. Though the theme of both the stories circles around unlocking of a mystery but they are very different from one another in terms of plot in both the stories. The theme in the â€Å"The Yellow Face† lies in the mystery surrounding a previously married but devoted wife’s sudden suspicious behaviors, whereas, we witness a much more complex theme in â€Å"The Murders in the Rue Morgue† where we are gripped with an aura of chilling mystery surrounding a couple of ruthless murders. The first story is a framed narrative from Dr. Watson’s point of view, like most other Holmes’ series. On the other hand, the second story is narrated in first person by an unnamed narrator. Although its inspirations can be traced back to the â€Å"Das Frà ¤ulein von Scuderi† by E.T.A. Hoffmann in 1819 and the 1748 publication of the â€Å"Zadig† by Voltaire, The Murders in the Rue Morgue (1841) by Edgar Allan Poe is considered to be the first ever detective mystery that showcases the art of deduction in solving a crime based on detection and analysis of clues that by an investigator.

Personal statement Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 14

Personal Statement Example inance is to develop advanced mathematical knowledge and skills that will help me provide innovative solutions to the multifaceted economic problems in China. My interest in economics and finance bolstered during my junior year. I played with simulated stocks programs and discovered my proficiency in and enthusiasm for it. After completing my Bachelor’s degree of Business Administration and majoring in economics and finance, I found myself driven to work in the field of investments. I want to seek employment in an investment bank and serve as an investment banker. I see myself advising clients on high level issues of financial management, where I can recommend and carry out strategies of mergers and acquisitions and handle stock strategies for public selling. Most of all, I want to use my advanced finance and economics competencies to address poverty in China. I will use my graduate studies to research on financial and economic analysis and planning that will soon help me contribute to programs that can enable China to attain a more equitable distribution of wealth. I want to carve another milestone, where after acquiring my Master’s in Finance, I can help develop strategies for poverty alleviation measures. I want to integrate the Chinese rural poor into the world market, where they can tap diverse opportunities for growth. Your program will empower me to achieve my dreams, so that I can spread empowerment to others

Macbeth was one of the first plays written during the reign of James I Essay Example for Free

Macbeth was one of the first plays written during the reign of James I Essay Macbeth was one of the first plays written during the reign of James I. Shakespeare intended to honour the King by glorifying Banquo, the legendary founder of the Stuart line. Hence the play also serves as a mirror for magistrates, a dramatization of the theme of kingship. James I strongly believed in the Divine Right of kings. He believed that the lord of the heavens had placed kings to rule over people in the world, thus Kings had a god-given right to rule and treachery was like turning away from God and not only the king. In actually fact, if you went against your own king, you were indeed challenging God. James I had ruled the Scottish Parliament more or less how he liked using the concept of Divine Right but when he came to rule over England, he found the English parliament far less easy to handle, insisting that the king could only rule by its consent. In Macbeth the common theme is based on the natural order of things. Macbeths lawless act destroys all law: it occasions confusion and disorder in the world of men and animals as well as in the heavens above. Everywhere there is upheaval: on the night when the murder is done, chimneys are blown down, lamentations and strange screams of death are heard in the air, and some say the earth was feverous and did shake (2,3,53-59). All this confirms the interdependency of man and nature. The natural elements, following the death of Duncan, are in strange disorder and there is the further recounting of other amazing violations of nature, the unnatural behaviour of animals no longer acting according to their ways. A falcon towering in her pride of place was by a mousing owl hawked at and killed (2,4,13). As you can probably guess the owl is supposed to represent King Duncan, on top of the chain, and mousing owl is supposed to be Macbeth, the person who broke this chain and disordered everything, to the tiniest atom. Macbeth, at the time would have been exceptionally, politically advantageous to James because it would have greatly increased the publics view that James I was Gods so-called Sergeant on earth, and so had the right to do or change whatever he pleased. The easiest way to attack a political rival was to accuse him of treachery and the easiest way to prove his treachery was to link him with one of the proscribed religious groups. In 1605 James dealt with some troublesome rivals by claiming to have detected a Catholic plot to blow up the parliament. In Scotland, even more than in England at the time, political troublemakers were accused of witchcraft and heresy. James himself was an authority on witchcraft and the London edition of his Demonology was published in 1603, the year of his accession to the throne of Great Britain. Certainly most people believed in the existence and power of witches, devils and ghosts and the religiously orthodox stressed that the devil could take many shapes. According to the teaching of the Church, Heaven and Hell were actual places and the central teaching of Christianity was the sinful (fallen) nature of man and the necessity of a sense of guilt to bring the sinner to accept the salvation from sinfulness offered by Christ. The reason of man was not foolproof and the Church urged the faithful to be on their guard against any suggestion of communication with the Devil. In Act I, Scene 3 of Macbeth Baquo expresses similar fears concerning the witches: Were such things here as we do speak about? Or have we eaten on the insane root That takes the reason prisoner? (Lines 82-84) And And oftentimes, to win us to our harm, The instruments of darkness tell us truths; Win us with honest trifles, to betrays In deepest consequence (Lines 122-125 At the start of the play there surrounds two conflicting views of the hero, Macbeth. In scene 1, when the audience have already found out that the witches have met in order to meet Macbeth, a big question mark surrounds Macbeth. The audience is forced to ask themselves who is this Macbeth and what business does he have with these foul witches. In scene 2 the audience finds out the true identity of Macbeth. He is indeed a Hero! We learn that a battle between King Duncans army and the rebels is raging nearby. The scene starts of with King Duncan being given the latest news of the rebellion by the sergeant. The sergeant reports, with great enthusiasm, how the battle was at first, in balance. That is until, gallant and brave Macbeth, ignoring all the odds, slashing in and out with his bloody sword reached the traitor Macdowald and with no pity, ripped the traitor from head to toe. After hearing how the battle went, King Duncan has nothing but praise for the heroic deed of Macbeth and announces that Macbeth is to be given the title of Thane of Cawdor and the treacherous Cawdor is to be executed immediately. The battle is given a size and importance that magnify the qualities of Macbeth and our curiosity and anticipation are aroused to meet this might champion so praised by all who have seen him. But our memories still hold the mention of his name by the witches and the finale line of the scene (What he hath lost noble Macbeth hath won) reminds us of line 4 in scene 1 (When the battles lost and one) and this connexion is consolidated in Scene 3. Macbeths first words echo the witches so foul is fair a day I have not seen. This suggests Macbeth is already in tune with the way the witches think. Banquo believes that these witches are in league with the devil and thus should not be trusted, Can the devil speak truth? However Macbeth wants to hear more of this strange intelligence, upon this blasted heath you stop our way with such prophetic greeting? Speak, I charge you. The witches predict two things:- that Macbeth will become the thane of Cawdor, and the king hereafter. They also predict two things for Banquo that he will be lesser than Macbeth, and his children will be the kings after Macbeth. The witches second prediction of Macbeth (All hail Macbeth, that shalt be king hereafter) is exactly what Macbeth wants to hear because it is his greatest ambition to be king, the ultimate prize is his for grabs. The soliloquy beginning Two truths are told which shows that the witches second prediction has come true about Mabeth earning the title of Thane of Cawdor. Macbeth then begins thinking about the witches third prophecy the greatest is behind and what he needs to do now to become king. It is at this point that he starts to consider murder but he feels very uneasy about the word even though he is renown around Scotland as a ruthless soldier, why do I yield to that suggestion whose horrid image doth unfix my hair and make my seated heart knock at my ribs (1,3,134-136). Macbeth is confused but still very ambitious. Macbeth shows signs of having a good heart and good intentions, but he also shows that he has a weak mind that ignores and disobeys what he knows is right. You can straight away see that Macbeth has got a powerful conscious when Lady Macbeth has a torrid time trying to convince him to kill King Duncan. At first he absolutely refuses to do such a horrible deed to such a noble person. He knows in his heart that to kill Duncan is wrong and deceitful. The reader can tell that Macbeth is trying is utmost best to resist the misgivings of his wife. We will proceed no further. He hath honoured me of late, and I have bought Golden opinions from all sorts of people, Which would be worn now in their newest gloss, Not cast aside so soon (1,7,31-35). Although he knows that this deed will have profound consequences he allows Lady Macbeth to persuade him into doing what he knows is wrong. Macbeth knows he has chosen the wrong path when he says, Ill go no more. I am afraid to think what I have done; Look ont again, I dare not (2,3,46-48). Therefore Macbeth is disobeying what his own heart is telling him. In fact, Macbeth speaks of the distrust he has for his own heart when he says False face must hide what the false heart doth know. Lady Macbeth persuades her husband to do the murder by telling him that, all he is doing, is fulfilling his own lofty ambition and that surely he is not a coward. If he is a man, he should act like one. The fact that Macbeth is so easily persuaded to kill a man, proves that he must have considered murder before. It is also the sign of a person who has a weak mind and who does not stand up for himself. Lady Macbeth feeds on this weakness. Macbeth is tempted to do evil and Lady Macbeth is the key human agent the one Macbeth trusts and loves- who ensures his temptation is through and complete. Lady Macbeth, when we first encounter her is, dominant, determined, powerful, and even perhaps frightening in the intensity of her uncompromising desire for her husband to ascend the throne. Be it, the price of murder. We understand that Macbeth has his own deep desires, but this seems tame compared with Lady Macbeths unquenchable aspirations (she summons evil itself into her body and soul to unsex her and remove any doubts she might have). Further, we see in her actions, a cool, self-assured person, unlike her husband. When Macbeth falters, she is there and she also has the courage to return the daggers and to faint at the news of King Duncans murder, and so distract any attention from her husband. She plans the details of the murder; she has the future worked out. She is also pre-eminently cunning and shows no fear of the supernatural and death itself. That is why she can say, a little water clears us of this deed (2,2,67), because there is nothing to fear from God and old-fashioned ideas of retribution. She can happily envisage hypocrisy and falsehood. Lady Macbeth and Macbeth fates are inextricably joined, but her role and character support Macbeths destiny. However like Macbeth, Lady Macbeth shows moments of humanity she would have killed Duncan herself only he reminded her of her own father. It is these small details that perhaps indicate that she is not as cold and inhuman as she makes herself to be. It could actual, all be an act just to persuade Macbeth to do the final deed. This of course makes her breakdown seem the more inevitable as she is bound to blame herself in some way for the murder. Ultimately she finds out that water will not wash away the stain of blood. It is then ironic that Macduff on first meeting Lady Macbeth refers to her as gentle lady and one too sensitive to even hear the word murder. By the end of the play she is recognized for what she is, a fiend-like queen (5,6,108). Macbeth, in the final analysis, is too preoccupied with his own role to give support to her. Once he has done his first major murder he needs no help from her to do the others. Macbeth is a man of action: the play proves this in more ways then others. He is a fearless warrior and an important lord who defends his king against treachery. However, ambition is his finale weakness. He allows, first the witches prophesy and then his wifes ambition for him, to undermine his integrity. It is clear that he is not easily won over to evil. His conscience is strong and throws up many objections to his doing the deed. However, he is also too easily influenced in the direction that he secretly desires to go. Once he has decided, he does not deviate, and each step subsequently reaffirms his initial choice. Macbeth, then, is determined, and with this determination turns to a violent and ruthless path, full of chaos. So how does Macbeth a peerless kinsman, develops into King Duncans murderer? Is Macbeths mistake in killing gracious king Duncan, his entire fault? Is he to blame for his own doing or were they any other factors that bade him to do this terrible deed? Is Macbeth still the hero at the end of this play and does he deserve what he gets? For these Questions to be answered we need to look at the fundamental theme of the play, Ambition. Partly because it is the driving force of Macbeths life. Macbeth is a deep sentimental tragedy. Tragedy, in Shakespeare usually concerns a great person, the hero, who through some weakness of his character falls from grace, endures intense sufferings (which fascinate the audience), and who inevitable dies a tragic death. In fact, who must die as a consequence of their weakness. Thus if you look at The Tragedy of Macbeth, we find all these ingredients; and if we consider what is the heros weakness, it must and can only be ambition. Macbeth says this specifically when he is attempting to resist the murder of Duncan: I have no spur.but only/Vaulting ambition which oerleaps itself (1,7,25-7).This acknowledgement comes after he has considered all the good reasons for not murdering Duncan. Only ambition is left to overrule his troubled conscience. Furthermore, whilst the influence of both Lady Macbeth and the witches is strong, their power over Macbeth is only possible because the ambition is already there. Macbeth ,then, is a hero but one who is fatally undermined by his ambition, that are the fabric of the play. Put in another way: it is his ambition that leads Macbeth to murder, treason, hypocrisy, corruption and deepest evil.

Voluntary Euthanasia Should Be Legalized Philosophy Essay

Voluntary Euthanasia Should Be Legalized Philosophy Essay Euthanasia comes from the Greek word Eu which means good and Thanatos meaning death Euthanasia. In modern usage, it has come to mean a gentle and painless death. Life is ended for a compassionate reason by an active or passive step taken by another person or the individual whom is suffering from a terminal illness or agonizing pain with no hope recovery. Voluntary euthanasia should be legalized in the United States, because a terminally ill, rational human being has the right to choose how they live and how they die. Individuals can choose to drink alcohol, smoke tobacco, eat an unhealthy diet and choose to not exercise, which will enviably lead to a shorter life expectancy as well as a terminal disease. However, none of these choices are illegal, uncommon or generally perceived as unethical. To force someone who is essentially going to die a very slow and agonizing death to live, changes their right to live to an obligation to live. Therefore, to deny euthanasia is to deny a persons right to autonomy and obligate them to suffer for the benefit of an outside agents belief. Euthanasia is broken down into voluntary, involuntary, non-voluntary categories and into sub categories of active and passive. Voluntary euthanasia refers to choosing to end life to escape prolonged suffering with either verbal consent or a written document such as a living will. Involuntary euthanasia refers to the mercy killing of an unconscious or comatose patient who is otherwise unable to explicitly make his intentions known. Non-voluntary euthanasia is taking a patients life without consent; murder. A well known philosopher Peter Singer believes, The consequences of an act or omission will often be, in all significant respects, indistinguishable. If a child needs antibiotics to survive an illness, not giving them is the moral equivalent of administering a lethal injection. Most of our moral guidelines are written to be in a negative format, do not kill as opposed to a positive format, you must preserve life. This is the only thing that bares weight to the argument that there is a difference between killing and letting die. Singer also believes, Just as preference utilitarianism must count a desire to go on living as a reason against killing, so it must count as a desire to die as a reason for killing. Singer has declared that the principle of respect for autonomy tells us to allow rational agents to live their own lives according to their own guidelines and decisions and to be free from coercion or interference. Should a rational agent choose to die, then respect for autonomy will lead us to assist them in their decision to die if they choose to do so. Singer refers to an earlier section of his book and restates these four reasons not to kill a self-conscious being; 1. The classical utilitarian claim that since self-conscious beings are capable of fearing their own death, killing them has worse effects on others. 2. The preference utilitarian calculation that counts the thwarting of the victims desire to go on living as an important reason against killing. 3. A theory of rights according to which to have a right one must have the ability to desire that to which one has a right, so that to have a right to life one must be able to desire ones own continued existence. 4. Respect for the autonomous decisions of rational agents. When considering voluntary euthanasia, active or passive, all four of these ideas favor euthanasia not the preservation of life. In 1 the fear of death does not exist and others will not fear being killed against their will if they must ask for euthanasia before it can be administered. In 2 the victim of euthanasia has no desire to go on living and can only be thwarted by prolonging their life. If a person must desire life to have a right to it no right is violated by voluntary euthanasia as in number 3. The fourth reason is one of the foremost arguments for euthanasia, autonomous decision. Mirko Bagaric, a professor at Deaken University, argues that legalizing voluntary euthanasia will cause health care professionals to carry out acts of non-voluntary euthanasia and cites 2 wide spread studies from the 1990s that revealed abuse of end of life decisions in the Netherlands where it is legal. Professor Bagaric asserts that in roughly 1000 cases in each study euthanasia was carried out without the patients legal consent. However, he fails to conclude whether or not these causes were due to the lack of ability to consent or articulation of wanting to continue life. Another argument brought forth by Professor Bagaric is the risk that some lives, namely the terminally ill, will be seen as less valuable than others. This would lead to a logical conclusion that an individuals capacity to flourish is diminished due to mental, social or physical problems and they would be candidates for euthanasia also. The Declaration on Euthanasia by The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued by The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and signed by Pope John Paul II argues that, Human life is the basis of all goods, and is the necessary source and condition of every human activity and of all society. The declaration goes on to state that, Nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying. The justification offered is the intrinsic value of human life and to their believers the divine gift life represents. According to Roman Catholic teaching suffering, particularly during the last moments of life has a special place in Gods plan and is a sharing of Christs pain and sacrifice. The declaration offers exclusion for double effect action. According to James Fieser, if a pain medication is given to alleviate pain, even if the medical practitioner administering it knows it will speed the death of the patient, and no other pain management is available the act is morally permissible. The declaration further elaborates that even if the patient is not lucid enough to indicate whether they want the medication or not, it should be given. The declaration also distinguishes the difference between medical and biological life support being removed. Feeding tubes serve a biological function by feeding a patient and cant be discontinued on a live person. However, dialysis or chemotherapy serves a medical function and the decision to discontinue treatments such as these is the discontinuation of a medical support and therefore permissible if the costs are disproportionate to the expectations. All four of these positions focus on a few key points. First, is the intrinsic worth of life subject to termination under the authority of personal autonomy? Taking a utilitarian perspective of maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain, ending all pain permanently is preferable to existing in pain with no hope of pleasure and therefore moral. Arguments made by the Roman Catholic Church declare that life is divinely inspired and taking life for any reason not moral. However, even under the guise of divine moral law, it is permissible to administer pain medication in lethal doses and refuse treatment which could sustain life. This conflicts with the statement, It is necessary to state firmly once more that nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying. Singer and Battin showed that there is no moral difference between an act and omission in terms of the consequence. Therefore, the churchs declaration truly describes two opposing views in an attempt to make a definitive statement that is consequentially as clear as mud. From a utilitarian perspective the authors advocating euthanasia make good logic points that euthanasia, at least in some cases, is moral and often active euthanasia is a moral requirement. The authors condemning euthanasia still put forth evidence and arguments that, from a utilitarian perspective euthanasia is at least sometimes moral. However, if I was sick and in pain with no hope of recovery I would feel much more comfortable in the Netherlands with Singer as the executor of my durable power of attorney for healthcare.

Othello and Desdemona Essay -- Literary Analysis, Shakespeare, Marriag

In Shakespeare’s Othello, Othello and Desdemona’s marriage was doomed from the start. They did not start well; their marriage was controversial because of their race and Othello’s failure to follow proper etiquette while he was courting her. However these issues could have been overcome with time. The biggest problem is Othello’s attitude to Desdemona. Othello’s model of Desdemona prevents him from considering her a person. He thinks of her instead as superior to himself in every way, to the point that she is a god. Her race, beauty, and status make her godly in his mind. She becomes untouchable in Othello’s mind, and he begins to distance himself from her. Because Othello thinks of Desdemona as â€Å"Alabaster†(5.2.5) he will never consider her capable of responding to his love. Because Othello is at his wit’s end when he refers to her as â€Å"Alabaster†, he is speaking out of his heart. When Othello receives a letter from Venice informing him that he is to return home and leave Casio in command of Cyprus he is greatly enraged. As a result he loses his grip on sanity and begins to speak in less cohesive manner. Take the line, â€Å"Pish! Noses, ears, and lips. Isn’t Possible? Confess! Handkerchief! O devil!†(4.1.42) contains none of Othello’s former eloquence. He begins to speak with word association, rather than in complete sentences. The word â€Å"confess!† brings up the word â€Å"Handkerchief!†, and â€Å"devil!†. Because Desdemona, the handkerchief, and the sense of maliciousness were on his mind so much, he begins to express with abstract words and ideas instead of sentences. Although this makes his lines harder to read, they show us what he is constantly thinking of. Instead of clear and concis e lines, they are a torrent of his true feelings. In the... ... Because of his high view of her, he creates a complex of his own insignificance. From his point of view, Desdemona is unable to love him because she is too elemental to have emotion. Othello has, put simply, encased Desdemona in alabaster. He has formed an opinion of her from which she is unable to break free. Because he has so strongly locked her into this state of mind he is unable to think of him in any other way. She is so high up on the pedestal that he puts her on that he is unable to see who she truly is. This is Othello’s failing. By making her too powerful, too divine, any minor fault is a glaring defect to her immaculate surface. Then at the first flaw, she becomes low and nothing, and he needs to return her to her former glory. He must â€Å"Quench thee†¦ [and] again they former light restore†(5.2.9). He fails to see her love through her alabaster covering.

Consumer Behaviour in the Unisex Shoe Store Category :: Marketing, argumentative, persuasive

This report analyzes the role personal, social, and situational factors in consumer behaviour in the unisex shoe store category. Observations were made at three different shoe retailers including Town Shoes, Payless Shoe Source, and The Shoe Company. These three stores offer very diverse retail environments targeted towards different demographics of people. This report also found that the retail setting, such as music, light, and organization, had an effect on the actions of the consumers in the store. The time of day also had an effect on consumer’s purchasing behaviour. Environmental analysis Town Shoes: The store had bright lights and loud pop culture music without lyrics which attracted a younger demographic of customers. There were â€Å"Buy one get one half off† signs displayed all around the store, which encourages consumers to buy more than one pair of shoes. The shoes are displayed without any form of organization; brand name shoes are mixed in with non-brand low quality ones, all stocked in piles on the floor. There are no specific try-on areas for shoppers to try on their shoes and the sales people were mostly unavailable to answer questions because of the high turnover rate of customers entering and exiting the store. The sale racks that post 50% have mixed shoes of different color, style, and size. Most of the shoes are for the current season (i.e. sandals, pumps) and the majorities are female sandals and heels. Payless: The sale discount signs and cheap price of shoes is the big attention grabber for this store. The medium lighting with soft background music provides consumers a relaxing environment to shop. The shoes are displayed in a warehouse style according to size and gender and accessories. There are also medium quality bags and accessories located near the cashier that satisfies consumer’s desire to take part in the summer fashion. The store layout implies that there is no other inventory since all the shoes are out on display. Most of the shoes only targets the current season. There are limited numbers of try-on areas at the end of the aisles near the back of the store, encouraging shoppers to test out shoes. The employees do not seem to approach customers to help them, but are available for questions. The Shoe Company: The recognizable designer shoes are on the display to attract consumers who seek for quality shoes or the desire to identify themselves as having a higher social status.

Yes Men Fix the World, Ethics of Protest and Bringing Issues to Light

AG401 Film Yes Men Fix the World, the Ethics of Protest and Bringing Issues to Light 1. What ethical/moral/philosophical constructs are the activists operating under with respect to their tactics in protest? The Yes Men use Utilitarian Ethics of Duty and Rule Consequentialism. With this mindset, they carry on pranks and hoaxes to reveal the lies of large corporations and government. In the theory of Duty-Based Ethics, people do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. These large corporate giants do nothing but take the toll on others’ misfortunes.An example of Duty-Ethics can be seen when Andy impersonates Jude Finisterra, a spokesperson for Dow Chemicals, being interviewed on BBC regarding the Bhopal Legacy catastrophe of Union Carbide and its deadly gas leaks in India. He is quoted saying, â€Å"this is the first time in history that a publicly owned company, of anything near the size of Dow, has performed an action which is significantly against its bottom lin e, simply because it’s the right thing to do. † In theory of Rule Consequentialism, it states that an action is morally right just because it is required by an optimific social rule; relating back to Duty Ethics.With the motive under Rule Consequence, the Yes Men planned to set a course of actions which might trigger a reaction so that corporate giants and government may conform to such a social rule. As long as the outcome is of a happy ending for the public, Mike and Andy will have succeeded to change and affect society in ways that money could not. To correct an action which harms society more than benefits it, sometimes ridiculing and exposing the negative aspects of it might be the only course for corrective action. 2. Do the tactics distract from the message or lend power to the message? On what ethical grounds?In theory, such pranks and hoaxes are supposed to create change as a result from negative publicity. This derives from Kantian Ethics, which actually goes against Consequentalism, kind of an oxy-moron. Although it is morally just, their actions do have negative consequences to certain parties. As far as exposure goes, their tactics seemed have to work in their favor, and the Yes Men have also defied legal repercussions in every scenario. And by bringing such important public issues into light, some objectives were achieved; transmitting the power of voice towards the public, and conveying the theory of moral duty to the companies.However, their main purpose was not accomplished, and their tactics seem to have failed again; in fact nothing significant was taken into consideration or changed by any of the targeted corporations, or even the government entities. For example, in the Catastrophic Loss Conference, Andy and Mike pose as representatives from Halliburton; which they have claimed was the top company in extracting profits from a disaster. Halliburton has made hundreds of millions of dollars off the Hurricane Katrina disaster, and now the Yes Men have arrived to presenting another invention called the SurvivaBall; again to â€Å"profit† off some disaster.Their tactic was to create the â€Å"biggest joke ever by making fun of stupid concepts with stupid ideas. † And with something as simple as the SurvivaBall being so useless, it relates to the concept of Big Corporate making money off others’ misfortunes instead of solving the problems which lay before them; the ironic part is that the SurvivaBall is actually more useful than what the government or companies like Halliburton have created for disasters. But to their shock when all was presented, their attempts of letting people know what â€Å"sucked about letting greed run our future,† was instead greeted with business cards. . What about the ethics of law enforcement in dealing with activists? If anything was taken from this documentary, it was that companies cannot learn to behave differently by themselves; government has to mak e rules to control them. To fix the world, it is going to take more than two guys, cheap suits, and fake websites; it would take millions of people. When activists begin threatening for change, law enforcement entities may only deal on legal premises; as there is a right to freedom of speech and to assemble and petition the government.If no harm and damage or rioting is caused, law enforcement may only be there to prevent incidents. An example may be observed with over two dozen people wearing SurvivaBall costumes demonstrating in the East River; where police shut down the demonstration for lack of a permit. Andy Bichlbaum was arrested on an outstanding parking ticket charge and a handful of others were served with summons and tickets for disorderly behavior and creating hazardous conditions. So they also tried this, attempting to cost HUD more money and put some out of jobs.They hope to expose to the public by making a mockery of an entity in able to stimulate a solution or action. But it never works. Mike Bonanno Andy Bichlbaum Duty-Based Ethics Jude Finisterra, faking as a spokesperson for Dow Chemicals regarding the Bhopal Legacy catastrophe of Union Barpide and its deadly gas leaks in India, quoted saying that â€Å"this is the first time in history that a publicly owned company, of anything near the size of Dow, has performed an action which is significantly against its bottom line, simply because it’s the right thing to do. However it was hilarious that he noted they were going to liquidate $12 billion in assets to provide care and compensation to the victims and their families. Halliburton #1 company in extracting profits from a disaster. Made Hundreds of millions off Katrina, and now (name) and (name) are presenting the Survivor Ball, to â€Å"profit† off a disaster. Biggest joke ever, of how to make fun of stupid ideas, well, with stupid ideas. For example, something so simple of a Survivor Ball is useless, also like the concept of mak ing money off others’ misfortune instead of solving the problem.But the ironic part of this is that the survivor ball is actually more useful than what the government or companies like Halliburton have created solutions for disasters. But what their attempts of letting people know what sucked about letting greed run our future, but instead of freaking out, they just took their business cards. Companies cannot learn to behave differently by themselves, government has to make rules to control them. So they also tried this, attempting to cost HUD more money and put some out of jobs.