Communication in health and social care organisations Essay

Communication in health and social care organisations - Essay Example The essay will outline important factors that are known to have a huge impact on communication including values, culture legislations and other rules that govern the health and social care sector. The essay also gives suggestions on how communication can be improved to have a greater impact on health and social care. Additionally, the paper will give a discussion of basic software that are used by health practitioners, an evaluation of the advantages associated with such applications, a description of how this technology develops operations in the profession and examines the legal considerations that are important in the use of information and communication technology. The entity provides generalized care for patients with mental and physical illnesses. Patient-practitioner communication is vital in health care and service delivery. To begin with, health practitioners should exercise decorum while retrieving information from the patients. At times, the patients are writhing in pain, which affects communication. For example, in the case of Ann, she was feeling pain in a number of her body parts. This affected communication. Initially, she could speak. However, when the situation escalated, her words were slurred, due to the pounding headache. After a while, she could no longer speak. Secondly, there is an issue with the emergency telephone numbers in the healthcare system. Paul, Ann’s husband spent an arguably long time over the telephone trying to reach the emergency care numbers. This situation evidently shows that the healthcare system is not prepared for emergencies (Senker, 2013:14). For effective communication, there is a need for constant information flow from the sender to the receiver. However, when the means of comm unication are not effective, the information flow is distorted. Due to impending conditions, her husband

A History, a past, and a Trail Essay Example for Free

A History, a past, and a Trail Essay The discovery of the North American continent created, literally, an entirely new world. With the congestion of Europe and a desire for agricultural land, many from the East loaded upon massive carrier ships in sight of a new life. It was a long voyage across the Atlantic. The sight of the new world from off-shore had been described as salvation. What these settlers did not know was that they were entering into shore-side cities that were even more cramped than their original location. The flocking to America is what attributed to the congestion and size of New York itself. This degraded living conditions and created an entirely new form of social status that had never been seen by Europeans. Something needed to be done to spread out the population of the Eastern shore side. Luckily our rookie government, fresh out of a war, had a creative idea to promote a move to the West. These politicians, in a vote of fifty-two to fifty. decided to intervene by offering any married couple six-hundred and forty acres of land. This was the equivalent to one square mile of land. They labeled the effort: Manifest Destiny. One can imagine how tempting this sounds to factory workers and small time farmers. Previously to this, some early explorers thought it necessary to devise a route from East to West. Lewis and Clark were the first to map the journey. The route they took covered 2,170 miles and practically covered all of the land that was accessible to wagons(Wiki). After a little fine-tuning by John Jacob Astor, to avoid dangerous areas of the Rocky Mountains and hostile Blackfeet Indians, the Oregon Trail was set in stone. This sparked many to make the dangerous move from East to West. Settlers that lived in cramped suburbs and local Camp Towns now had the motivation to spread out their horizons in a search for wealth and happiness. Manifest Destiny developed from a dream to a reality. With all of this came the hearsay and rumors that many viewed as dangerous. Many had heard of the Dead Lands located in the South Western dessert. Fatal stories were told about land that was not suited for farming. Although this caused a delay among some settlers, many had no choice to move westward, and set off on to their destination. Starting in Kansas City, the Oregon Trail began following the Santa Fe Trail. The growth of Kansas City can be attributed to being at the start of the massive trail; Local business sky-rocketed within a few years (END). The need for supplies caused many stores to become profitable overnight. Since there wasnt much along the route to Oregon, many had to stock up for the long journey. Horses, food, and spare parts were just some of the many items a traveler would need to complete the journey (END). Many referred to the Kansas City area as The Docks, in reference to it being a loading dock for the expansion. After leaving Kansas City, and sticking to the rules of survival, wagons would use the natural terrain to their advantage. Many would stick to lower valleys that followed the river. After a few years, the trail was actually visible to those who traveled it; however, this does not seem to hold true for the remainder of the trip. Nebraska was in sight for most that started the trip. After crossing the Blue River it was just one river after another until arriving at the Rocky Mountains. Along the way, settlements began to form, which made the journey easier. The more who traveled, the easier it became. Many did not actually travel the entire route. If a good location or opportunity arose, families would start their new lives at that very spot along the trail (Wiki). Since many had no idea of where they were going to live when they completed their journey, it made sense that, if a good location was spotted along the way, that became their home. This is what forged cities and trade routes along the way. Even in the Rocky Mountains people began to settle. Mountain towns became good places to start the logging industry. With the rivers along the Oregon Trail flowing from North to South, logs from the Rockies found their way back down the trail to Kansas City. The direction of trade, however, was not a one-way street. The towns that were created along the trail needed supplies too. Many who traveled beyond the Rocky Mountains were sure to bring over-stocked supplies with them. Supplies were almost as valuable as gold on the Oregon Trail. Beyond the Rockies, it was pretty much a straight shot to Oregon. Following rivers one could go as far as Washington State. Many started homes in the forests of Oregon. After avoiding the southern desserts, it was clear that this area was suitable for cultivation and living. The only problem was that Oregon had harsh winters and very short windows of time for farming. New ways, such as the gold rush, were what sealed the fate of the northwestern states as being a contributing district of America. The settlers of western America were not just poor people looking for a way out of trouble. Many rich tycoons took advantage of the rising boom towns. When starting any venture, most people need a lender. Banks started to sprout at several points along the trail. In terms of business, it was common practice for towns to make their start, purely on credit. Many say that this is the reason the west side of the continent received venues for big business. It was until a newer improved method of transportation was devised that the Oregon Trail became the secondary path to the west. Until the invention of the Transcontinental Rail Road, the Oregon Trail was the main route for traversing the middle section of the country (Vance, 1961). People still relied on animal-based transportation and inefficient ways to cultivate their lands . This is where a change needed to take place the most in our country. Since the land was harder to farm and many were having a hard time finding the resources to do so, many believe that ingenuity was the only answer to the wests problems. The need of the settlers is what sparked the inventions that farmers were looking for. New methods of plowing and irrigation were among the advancements along the trail. It seems, though, that pure luck and not the Oregon Trail is the hammer that etched the fate of the western states into stone. The Gold Rush of 1848-1855 drove the remainder of the population to the west . The search for gold and prosperity could be seen in people throughout the country. Although most were left empty handed, they had at least gained a new home in the left side of our country. This new home would suit them nicely. In the end, the Oregon Trail can be said to have carved a path of prosperity along the horizon of our nation. The details of this can often be seen in cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco. Many started on a destination of uncertainty and ended up with more than they had bargained for. The rest worked hard and put food on the plate. History is the only area that the Oregon Trail is used today. Even though US Highway number 26 practically parallels the trail, the duration of the trail stays in the culture and heritage of families that live in the Western United States. Works Cited http://www.endoftheoregontrail.org/histhome.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Trail

The History Of The Galapagos Islands

The History Of The Galapagos Islands Geographically, the Galapagos Islands belong to The Equator, and are situated on the Pacific Ocean near Central America. Its an archipelago composed of 41 volcanic islands. The islands have a population of slightly over 30,000 inhabitants. Historically, the Galapagos Islands were officially discovered by the bishop of Panama, Tomas de Berlanga in 1535. Until the 17th century, the islands are used as a natural water tank and food. What people can find is not only drinking water but also animals in particular tortoises. Unfortunately, lots of animals were used as food and some species were killed off definitely. In 1835, Charles Darwin explored the archipelago. Surprised by the specific fauna of the islands, he studied particularly the geology and the biology on the islands. Thanks to his observations made, he published his first study on the origin of species and the natural selection. Between the 1920s and the 1930s, a wave of European settlers arrived in the islands. By 1934, laws on the protection of the archipelago were promulgated. However, because of the World War Two, some species were exterminated. The archipelago officially became a National Park in 1959. At that period, Darwin foundation was created in order to get funds for the conservation of the islands. Tourism started toward the end of the 1960s. Today, thousands of millions of people visit the Galapagos Islands each year. They are the first site in the world that became a listed UNESCO World Heritage site in 1978. Furthermore, in 2007, UNESCO put the Galapagos Islands on the list of WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER because of the environment threats (mass tourism, overfishing, invasive species). In 2010, they have been removed from this list thanks to the significant progress made by Ecuador. The question that could be asked: what role has tourism played on the Galapagos islands? This study on the Galapagos Islands is divided into three main points. First of all, it will be focusing on the impact of tourism, positive as well as negative, on the islands. Then, it will talk about the management of tourism in that protected area. To finish, it will be discussing the role of eco-tourism in the Galapagos Islands. The Galapagos Islands, where Charles Darwin developed his theory of evolution, are at risk of being ruined by tourists. Indeed, animals are disrupted by large numbers of tourist abandoning their babies and eggs including the famous giant tortoises. Its a disaster for all fauna on the Galapagos Islands but as well a real risk for the flora. There are so many species on the islands and in the surrounding waters that are now considered critically endangered, while another ninety have been officially declared as vulnerable. In the last five years, more than 100 new plants species have been introduced. Some species of the giant tortoise and the Galapagos mouse have disappeared completely. When visitors are coming to the island they bring with them spores or insects, which can be dangerous for native species. For example, they brought the mosquito of Malaria, who can kill many birds. People are thinking that the Island isnt disfigured by the impact of mass tourism but this is the saddening observation of the latest years. Facts are here and nobody can do anything now. The damage is done. The Galapagos need tourism but in the same time, tourists are damaging the Islands. Tourists need services such as hotels and resorts. They want the same thing they can find everywhere with the Galapagos landscape. They ask for tourist information centres and guides on the islands. These demands are creating a large part of employment on the island. They need transport and airport, which has required the setting up of many buildings. The land used to be a magnificent forest and its now transforming in small urban areas like everywhere in South America. The Galapagos were concreted like Benidorm in Spain. The concrete spoiled the Spanishs East coast. For example forty years ago, people could go only by local supplies boat, but today there are up to 5 flights a day or cruise ship. The government decided to create a highway all around the main island. After a few years of intense urbanism, traffic congestion and a high density of people coming to the tourist attractions, tense relationships took place with local people. Finally in 1997, after years of governmental mismanagement, crucial decisions were made. UNESCO and all the actors of the Galapagos political life decided to create several laws to calm down tensions on the archipelago. They gave priority to the preservation of the ecological system and the biodiversity. The sustainable development on the islands has been one of the most important points of the law. Rising the standard of living for local inhabitants has been implemented. Integrated managements resources have been created to help people. The main goal of this driving change and law was set up to favour a peaceful climate on the Galapagos Islands. We know that a good political situation is essential for the tourism industry. Locals and tourists have to progress a great deal together. In the same environment, they have to live together and change their mind. Thats the real impact of tourism in The Galapagos Island. The development of tourism in the Galapagos Islands has caused numerous changes both on the economic and on the environmental point of view. Over the years, the impact of tourism has become increasingly one of the main preoccupations on the future of the archipelago. The popularity of the Galapagos Islands attracts lots of tourists. However, this massive influx of visitors is presently a threat to the ecosystem because some people dont have concern for our environment. Therefore, though tourism remains the main economic activity in the archipelago, the implementation of rules was necessary to manage tourism in order to ensure the preservation of the Galapagos Islands. The Galapagos National Park is the main attraction of the tourists but is submitted to strict rules. Created by the government of the Ecuador in 1959, it aimed to the preservation of wildlife from human influence. Currently, one of the main concerns is the flow of tourists within the islands. In order to reduce the negative impact on the environment, the government has set up a management system in protected areas. In 1973, the Management Plan of the Galapagos National Park fixed a limited number of tourists to the islands but over the years the number of visitors has increased. Looking at the rise of tourists, that measure wasnt efficient and so has been reviewed in 1996 focalizing more on the capacity of a site. The capacity is characterised by several parameters such as the time spent in during a visit, the area available, climateà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Before their departure to the islands, visitors receive information about the conservation of the islands and are notified of the appropriate behaviour to adopt over there. Once arrived, tourists are strictly controlled; making sure everything is in accordance with regulations. During the visit, tourists are accompanied by a certified guide. Guides play an important role in park management. They have attributed a small group with a limited number of people (by boat or on the terrestrial visitor sites). Their main role is to ensure no one infringes rules and respects the wildlife. Tourists are required to stay on marked trails and are not allowed to disturb fauna and leaving trash. Guides have to pay attention to it to avoid damages on the environment. Guides have to make the tourists realise the importance of such rules by providing information on programs carried out by the Galapagos National Park in order to respect the environment. The Management Plan allows tourists to visit only at selected sites in the National Park and at a small capacity. The visit is authorised in small numbers so that the wildlife and the environment are preserved. The conservation of the islands involves all tourists; they must pay high fees before entering in protected areas. In addition, the Galapagos National Park Service manages the number of people visiting the sites by establishing a specific and fixed itinerary for ships which transports 20 customers or more. The control of tourism is done as well on land as on sea. Different standards are monitored: itineraries for visits, naturalist guides qualifications, the quota of passengersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ All these factors must be conformed to the legislation. The role of visitors is a key point in the management of tourism. Managing visitors consists in controlling the identity of each one (once arrived on the islands, tourists provide their personal information: age, nationalityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦). Then, the monitoring is also focused on reports made by the guides about visits (number of tourists, duration of the visit). One of the main challenges for park managers would be to regulate the flow of tourists by implementing a monitoring system. Tourism in the Galapagos Islands must continue to attract visitors in terms of education, personal experience and awareness. However, it has been necessary to put some limits to regulate in an easier way the activities within the islands. At last, tourism in the islands is considered as Ecotourism. Ecotourism is defined by TIES (The International Ecotourism Society: a non-profit organisation dedicated to promoting ecotourism) as responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the well-being of local people. (TIES, 1990) The Galapagos Islands have been an ecological destination for 30 years. With hindsight, we can see the benefits of ecotourism in two major domains: environment and economy. First of all, it is clear that people need to work to live, but farming and industry have a high impact on the conservation of the environment. Therefore, Ecotourism has been a way to allow people to work while preserving and protecting the nature. This kind of tourism is educational: it teaches people how to live with and be more aware of the surrounding environmental wealth. As a fact, endangered habitats and biodiversity are conserved because both tourists and local people understand the importance of their impact on the environment. The Ecotourism has permitted tourism to continue and progress in the Galapagos Islands, even if its biodiversity is very protected, thanks to a very strict conservation policy, rules and controls. The low-impact tourism developed in the Galapagos has benefited the islands. As a matter of fact, Ecotourism provides financial motivations that encourage local people to protect the environment and work for it. On an economic point of view, Ecotourism has contributed to raising the quality of life of the natives. It enabled that money spent by tourists (around $1000 per tourist for 2 weeks, so much more than a recreational tourist) goes directly to the locals and not to international companies. This money is reinvested to both increase the standards of living and to finance the Galapagos National Park, in the way to conserve the biodiversity. Generally, in poor countries, the primary resources permit to survive (water, minerals, trees) but Ecotourism in the Galapagos Islands has provided an alternative source of incomes. Indeed, tourism expenses encourage local people to seek for a sustainable job: guide, cleaner, waiter, security, boat owner. Finally, the employment generated by the Ecotourism ensures that fewer people leave for cities. To sum up, the Galapagos Islands example shows that Ecotourism requires a very well balance between economy and environment. There is a real correlation between conservation and development in the Galapagos Islands. As a matter of fact, tourism has a significant impact on the environment, because of the entire town planning it needs, the pollution, the noise, and the constant increase in the number of tourists. To manage this, many rules have been settled to restrict that. Ecotourism was the best way to reduce the environment damages caused by the tourism while keeping an important source of revenue. However, Ecotourism should not become an important economic industry. If so, it will not be called Ecotourism any longer.

Family Complexities in Interracial Marriages Essay -- Families Marryin

Family Complexities in Interracial Marriages This paper was really interesting to write because it is a topic that could affect me some day. Plus,"Fools Rush In" is my favorite movie so I loved the opportunity to analyze it. I liked writing the paper because I think that it's a topic that a lot of people tend to overlook or think unimportant. The truth is that many people rush in to interracial marriages without stopping to think of the effects on their families. This paper wasn't written to dissuade anyone from marrying someone of a different ethnicity or religion, only to inform them of what could (and does) happen. It was really hard to write a synthesis on the two movies without comparing and contrasting them. It was a challenging paper but also a lot of fun to write. Family Complexities of Interracial Marriages Mom's apple pie and dad's fishing trips are the American family dream. Everyone dreams of a white picket fence house in the suburbs with sweet children playing on the perfect green lawn. This is the American ideal of a perfect family, one that never argues or fights about anything. Yet what happens when mariachis and pià ±atas are one family’s dream, while decorating one’s house to resemble the Parthenon is another’s? Despite cultural differences, the purpose of all families is to love, guide, and support. Often times, however, families overstep the bounds when dealing out advice and guidance. Families can create many conflicts in interracial marriages in today’s society, as seen in the movies Fools Rush In and My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Families are often the deciding factor when it comes to a marriage. They view and critique every possible match, deciding if it will work. The question is how... ...an work, and society is accepting them more and more. Like Toula’s father said, â€Å"So, okay†¦we have apples and oranges. We are all different but in the end, we’re all just fruit!† (My Big Fat Greek Wedding). Self-Evaluation This paper was harden that I thought that it would be. I tried to make it easier, though, by picking two movies that I know pretty well. I also picked a topic that was interesting to me and I thought I could prove well. My synthesis is a little jumbled and goes off on two tangents, religion and culture. I hope I got the main idea through. I ended with a quote that I liked from My Big Fat Greek American, I hope it makes sense with the essay. I had a hard time starting the beginning also, but I tried to make it interesting. If I had more time I would try to organize my ideas a little better about family affecting religion and culture.

Aggression & Biological explanations

The demand to understand aggression over the years has continued to intensify as it remains the central cause for broken families and relationships, societal conflicts and most importantly the major cause of incarceration for people in all age groups.Though some scholars have concluded that biological causes of aggression, the ability to address it by changing things in the environment at different levels of growth and development makes it to be more psychological.However, it is the findings from many scholars that men are more aggressive than women which that has resulted to a more heated debate.   Joel et al (2010) found that women suffered about 65% of the total domestic violence.Aggression is any action or behavior by members of the same community that is intended to instill pain or cause harm to a specified target; for instance murder, domestic violence, manslaughter, and aggravated assault.   It from this consideration that this evaluation intrinsically analyzes aggression and why men are more aggressive compared to women.Biological explanations(a)  Ã‚     Variation in libido levelsAccording to Yvonne et al (2010), an individual’s actions can be traced from his respective genetic constitutions of chemicals that command them.   In this case, aggression arises from stimulation of these chemicals and their relation to respective environments.Biologically, men’s higher levels of aggression can be understood from two different perspectives. First the psychodynamic theory by Sigmund Freud considers behavior as a derivative and motivated by sexual and libido energies.Aggression is therefore a libido representation as exemplified by the Oedipus complex.   With men’s libido being relatively higher compared to women as Rhiannon ands Crisp (2010) explain, their aggressiveness is equally higher.   At childhood level, a boy of about five years develops strong sexual desires to his mother after realization that she is the provider of food.Notably, this innate desire to associate with the mother makes the boy to develop and display aggressive behavior towards the father who is considered an immediate rival. For the girls, they seek to associate more with their fathers from penis envy before they are able to resolve the conflict.   Though Yvonne et al (2010) differ with Society for Neuroscience (2007) on libido extent in causing aggressive behavior, they emphasize that boys often take longer and their aggression is evident from a broader perspective (in school and community) compared to girls.Report by Sigelman and Rider (2008) indicate that boys and girls exhibit aggression in about 10% and 6% of their varied social behaviors respectively.(b)  Ã‚   Evolutionary explanationsBuss (2005) consideration presents aggression as a factor of an individual’s chemical constitution and heredity effects.   Over the years different genes are passed down through generations to facilitate their survival in the commu nity.   Similar to non-human organisms where males fight for mating preferences and food, men equally seek to control their dominance in the community and institutions.Following the male dominance in most of the top executive positions, their aggression is projected at protecting themselves, their progenies and even relatives; an aspect that soon turns into a cycle with only one family or region being in   leadership or management.   Notably, this consideration has however received major criticism as emerging scholars cite environmental factors as the main cause of aggression.Neurotransmitter chemicals differences in men and women determine the levels of aggression in them.   Society for Neuroscience (2007) indicates that serotonin, a major neurotransmitter messenger, in ordinary levels as it mostly happens with women, have a calming effect.   However, men generally have a major deficiency of serotonin which has been linked to greater aggression levels.However, these resul ts appear to contradict previous findings by Garandeau and Cillessen (2006) which indicated that serotonin causes aggression when in higher levels.   . Yvonne et al (2010) findings are further supported by Buss (2005) who indicates that serotonin is used in treating aggressive behavior.Unlike other causes of aggression which appear to be controversial in causing aggression in people, high levels of the testosterone (male sex hormone) in men compared to women is a major cause of their aggressive behavior.Rhiannon ands Crisp (2010) explain that in a jail with males of violent crimes, their levels of testosterone was found to be higher compared to those without criminal record.   Unlike women, men’s testosterone levels easily rise at slightest provocation to make them easily get involved in different crimes.Therefore, though testosterone among men is generally high compared to women, it requires an effective precursor situation for one to be involved in aggression activity.P sychological underpinnings(a)  Ã‚   Social learningIn his view which appears to partially support biological causes of aggression, South and Georgina (2007) postulate that psychological considerations have more weight.   Naturally, people are subjected to differing environments which mould how they react to various situations.According to Albert Bandura’s social learning theory, when people are subjected to aggressive environments, they internalize and latter practice related actions (Hines and Saudino, 2003).   In his experiment with children on aggressive and non-aggressive dolls, Bandura found that related aggression and non-aggressiveness was effectively replicated.   However, why are men more aggressive than women?From a cultural perspective, South and Georgina (2007) argues that men are expected to be handy and therefore often subject themselves to key aggressive events.   For instance, more boys often prefer hostile computer games as girls prefer working with dolls. South and Georgina (2007) adds that as men grow up, they often seek to relate with more aggressive systems as they consider them to be useful in defending themselves and their families.For instance, men will always seek to build up their boy muscles, train in defense skills and also watch hostile media which could easily result to aggression.   As indicated earlier, internalization of these violent actions creates a series of constant feedbacks reflected in their behavior as aggression.

Manufacturing alumina

The production of aluminum begins with the mining and beneficiation of bauxite. At the mine (usually of the surface type), bauxite ore is removed to a crusher. The crushed ore is then screened and stockpiled, ready for delivery to an alumina plant. At the alumina plant, the bauxite ore is further crushed or ground to the correct particle size for efficient extraction of the alumina through digestion by hot sodium hydroxide liquor. After removal of â€Å"red mud† (the insoluble part of the bauxite) and fine solids from the process liquor, aluminum trihydrate crystals are precipitated and calcined in rotary kilns or fluidized bed calciners to produce alumina (Al2O3). (Bounicore & Wayne 1992) Some alumina processes include a liquor purification step. Primary aluminum is produced by the electrolytic reduction of the alumina. The alumina is dissolved in a molten bath of fluoride compounds (the electrolyte), and an electric current is passed through the bath, causing the alumina to dissociate to form liquid aluminum and oxygen. The oxygen reacts with carbon in the electrode to produce carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. Molten aluminum collects in the bottom of the individual cells or pots and is removed under vacuum into tapping crucibles. . Depending on the desired application, additional refining may be necessary. For demagging (removal of magnesium from the melt), hazardous substances such as chlorine and hexachloroethane are often used, which may produce dioxins and dibenzofurans. (Bounicore & Wayne 1992) Industrial forms of aluminum include commercially pure metal and alloys with other metals such as chromium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, nickel, titanium and zinc. Aluminum alloys may contain as much as fifteen percent of the alloying metals. In powder form, aluminum and its alloys are combustible in air and present a potential explosion hazard. In sheet or block forms, aluminum will not normally propagate or sustain combustion. (Metals & Alloys, 1976) Hazards and Risks Entail in Processing At the bauxite production facilities, dust is emitted to the atmosphere from dryers and materials- handling equipment, through vehicular movement, and from blasting. The dust is not hazardous; it can be a nuisance if containment systems are not in place, especially on the dryers and handling equipment. Other air emissions could include nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and other products of combustion from the bauxite dryers. (Paris Com, 1992) Ore washing and beneficiation may yield process wastewaters containing suspended solids. Runoff from precipitation may also contain suspended solids. At the alumina plant, air emissions can include bauxite dust from handling and processing; limestone dust from limestone handling, burnt lime dust from conveyors and bins, alumina dust from materials handling, red mud dust and sodium salts from red mud stacks impoundments), caustic aerosols from cooling towers, and products of combustion such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides from boilers, calciners, mobile equipment, and kilns. The calciners may also emit alumina dust and the kilns, burnt lime dust. Although alumina plants do not normally discharge effluents, heavy rainfalls can result in surface runoff that exceeds what plant can use in process. (Brady & Humiston, 1982) Hydrogen Generating Reactions Aluminum is a very reactive metal, and the greatest industrial hazards associated with aluminum are chemical reactions. Aluminum is an excellent reducing agent, and should react with water readily to liberate hydrogen. However, the protective aluminum oxide coating protects it from reaction with moisture or oxygen. If the protective coating is broken, for example, by scratching or by amalgamation (the process of coating with a film of mercury in which the metallic aluminum dissolves; the aluminum oxide coating does not adhere to the amalgamated surface), rapid reaction with moisture and/or oxygen can occur. The significance of this reaction is dependent upon the quantity of aluminum available to react. Aluminum is also oxidized by heat at a temperature dependent rate. (Ogle, Beddow, Chen, Butler, 1982) Aluminum metal is amphoteric (exhibits both acidic and basic characteristics). Therefore, aluminum will react with acids or bases; both reactions liberate hydrogen, a flammable gas. However, aluminum does not react with concentrated nitric acid because the oxidizing potential of the acid contributes to the formation of the protective aluminum oxide coating. (Martin, 1976) Thermite Reactions Aluminum readily extracts oxygen from other metal oxides to form aluminum oxide with the simultaneous release of large amounts of heat (enough heat to melt the products of the reaction). For example, the reaction of aluminum with ferric oxide to produce liquid aluminum oxide and liquid iron produces temperatures approaching 3000 °C (5400 °F). This reaction, referred to as the â€Å"thermite reaction,† has been used to weld large masses of iron and steel; when enclosed in a metal cylinder and ignited by a ribbon of magnesium has been used in incendiary bombs; and, with ammonium perchlorate added as an oxidizer, has provided the thrust for the space shuttle booster rockets. (May & Berard, 1987) Dust Explosions A dust explosion is a complex phenomenon involving simultaneous momentum, energy, and mass transport in a reactive multi-phase system. Aluminum particles, when in dust, powder, or flake forms from operations such as manufacturing powder, grinding, finishing, and processing, may be suspended as a dust cloud in air and consequently may ignite and cause serious damage. If the dust cloud is unconfined, the effect is simply one of flash fire. If, however, the ignited dust cloud is at least partially confined, the heat of combustion may result in rapidly increasing pressure and produce explosion effects such as rupturing of the confining structure. Aluminum dust is not always easily ignitable, and, therefore, the hazard of dust explosions is often ignored. Minimum explosive concentrations of aluminum dust have been reported upwards from about 40 grams per cubic meter (0.04 ounces per cubic foot) of air. (May & Berard, 1987) Effects on Health Aluminum particles deposited in the eye may cause local tissue destruction. Aluminum salts may cause eczema, conjunctivitis, dermatoses, and irritation of the upper respiratory system via hydrolysis-liberated acid. Aluminum is not generally regarded as an industrial poison, although inhalation of finely divided aluminum powder has been reported as a cause of pneumoconiosis. In most investigative cases, however, it was found that exposure was not solely to aluminum, but to a mixture of aluminum, silica, iron dusts, and other materials. Aluminum in aerosols has been referenced in studies involving Alzheimer's disease. Most exposures to aluminum occur in smelting and refining processes. Because aluminum may be alloyed with various metals, each metal (e.g., copper, zinc, magnesium, manganese, nickel, chromium, lead, etc.) may possibly present its own health hazards. (Buonicore & Davis, 1992) Implication Aluminum dust is strongly fibrogenic. Metallic aluminum dust may cause nodular lung fibrosis, interstitial lung fibrosis, and emphysema as indicated in animal experimentation, and effects appear to be correlated to particle size of the dust30; however, when exposure to aluminum dusts have been studied in man, most exposures have been found to be to other chemicals as well as aluminum. (Buonicore & Davis, 1992) Safety Measures: Prevention and Control The American Council of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) recommends the need for five separate Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) for aluminum, depending on its form (aluminum metal dust, aluminum pyro powders, aluminum welding fumes, aluminum soluble salts, and aluminum alkyls). The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has also established Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs) for aluminum. (May & Berard, 1987) Pollution prevention is always preferred to the use of end-of-pipe pollution control facilities. Therefore every attempt should be made to incorporate cleaner production processes and facilities to limit, at source, the quantity of pollutants generated. In the bauxite mine, where beneficiation and ore washing are practiced, tailings slurry of 7– 9% solids is produced for disposal. The preferred technology is to concentrate these tailings and dispose of them in the mined-out area. A concentration of 25–30% can be achieved through gravity settling in a tailings pond. The tailings can be further concentrated, using a thickener, to 30–50%, yielding a substantially volume reduced slurry. The alumina plant discharges red mud in slurry of 25–30% solids, and this also presents an opportunity to reduce disposal volumes. (May & Berard, 1987) Today’s technology, in the form of high-efficiency deep thickeners, and large-diameter conventional thickeners, can produce a mud of 50–60% solids concentration. The lime used in the process forms insoluble solids that leave the plant along with the red mud. Recycling the lime used as a filtering aid to digestion to displace the fresh lime that is normally added at this point can minimize these lime-based solids. Finally, effluent volume from the alumina plant can be minimized or eliminated by good design and operating practices: reducing the water added to the process, segregating condensates and recycling to the process, and using rainwater in the process. (Ogle, Beddow, Chen, Butler, 1982) References Brady, James E. and Humiston, Gerard E. (1982), General Chemistry: Principles and Structure, Third Edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York. Bounicore, Anthony J., and Wayne T. Davis, eds. (1992), Air Pollution Engineering Manual. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Martin, R. (1975), â€Å"Dust-Explosion Risk with Metal Powders and Dusts,† P/M Group Annual Meeting 1975: Handling Metal Powders, Session I: Health and Safety in Powder Handling,† Powder Metallurgy, No. 2. May, David C., and Berard, David L. (1987), â€Å"Fires and Explosions Associated with Aluminum Dust from Finishing Operations,† Journal of Hazardous Materials, 17. â€Å"Metals and Alloys,† (1976), Loss Prevention Data 7-85, Factory Mutual Engineering Corporation. Paris Commission. (1992), â€Å"Industrial Sectors: Best Available Technology—Primary Aluminium Industry.† Ogle, R. A., Beddow, J. K., Chen, L. D., and Butler, P. B. (1988), â€Å"An Investigation of Aluminum Dust Explosions,† Combust. Sci. and Tech.   

Guilt and Shame Essay Example

Guilt and Shame Essay Example Guilt and Shame Essay Guilt and Shame Essay Essay Topic: African Religions and Philosophy Anna Karenina The society of traditional  Japan  was long held to be a good example of one in which shame is the primary agent of  social control. The first book to cogently[citation needed]  explain the workings of the Japanese society for the Western reader was  The Chrysanthemum and the Sword. This book was produced under less than ideal circumstances since it was written during the early years of  World War II  in an attempt to understand the people who had become such a powerful enemy of the West. Under the conditions of war it was, of course, impossible to do  field research  in Japan. Nevertheless, depending on the study of members of that culture who were  available for interview and study in the West, namely war prisoners at detention centers, as well as literary and other such records pertaining to cultural features,  Ruth Benedict  drew what some regard[who? ]  as a clear picture of the basic workings of Japanese society. Her study has been challenged and is not relied upon by anthropologists of Japan today. Contemporary  Western society  uses shame as one modality of control, but its primary dependence rests on  guilt, and, when that does not work, on the  criminal justice  system. : Paul Hiebert  characterizes the shame society as follows: Shame is a reaction to other peoples criticism, an acute personal chagrin at our failure to live up to our obligations and the expectations others have of us. In true shame oriented cultures, every person has a place and a duty in the society. One maintains self-respect, not by choosing what is good rather than what is evil, but by choosing what is expected of one. Personal desires are sunk in the collective expectation. Those who fail will often turn their aggression against themselves instead of using violence against others. By punishing themselves they maintain their self-respect before others, for shame cannot be relieved, as guilt can be, by  confession  and atonement. Shame is removed and honor restored only when a person does what the society expects of him or her in the situation, including committing suicide if necessary. (Hiebert 1985, 212) guilt society  is one in which the primary method of  social control  is the inculcation of feelings of  guilt  for behaviors that the society defines as undesirable. It involves an implicit judgment on the being (rather than just the behavior) of the individual: You are an  evil  person if you would do such-and-so. It also involves creating the  expectation  of punishment now (when the behavior fails to be kept secret) and/or in the hereafter. One of the interesting features of many such societies is that they inculcate feelings of guilt for feelings and/or impulses that the individual cannot help but feel. Where a  shame societymight tell its members that sexual interactions are to be hidden from general view or knowledge, a guilt society may tell people that they are guilty or sinful for mere  sexual desire. A prominent feature of guilt societies is the provision of sanctioned releases from guilt for certain behaviors either before the fact, as when one condemns sexuality but permits it conditionally in the context of marriage, or after the fact. There is a clear opportunity in such cases for authority figures to derive power, monetary and/or other advantages, etc. by manipulating the conditions of guilt and the forgiveness of guilt. Paul Hiebert characterizes the guilt society as follows: Guilt is a feeling that arises when we violate the absolute standards of  morality  within us, when we violate our conscience. A person may suffer from guilt although no one else knows of his or her misdeed; this feeling of guilt is relieved by confessing the misdeed and making restitution. True guilt cultures rely on an internalized conviction of sin as the enforcer of good behavior, not, as shame cultures do, on external sanctions. Guilt cultures emphasize punishment and forgiveness as ways of restoring the moral order; shame cultures stress self-denial and humility as ways of restoring the social order. (Hiebert 1985, 213) GUILT, SHAME,  and embarrassment are forms of social control. Whether these are cast in evolutionary, psychological, or cultural terms, we should not lose sight of that basic function. These emotions may not always be portrayed in these terms, but that is how they have evolved and become embedded in our cultural beliefs and practices. It is in this context that we should raise the question: Are there shame cultures as opposed to guilt cultures, with corresponding differences in how people within them experience guilt and shame? In American culture (and Western cultures enerally), personal identity is conceived of as being independent and autonomous. Society is seen as a collection of self-contained individuals who are held responsible for their own behavior. Ones interests are best served by allowing maximum freedom and responsibility in choosing ones objectives. Moral precepts are based on conceptions of justice. Even when these are tempered by interpersonal obligations, the focus remains on individuals who must balance their responsibilities between the self and significant others. THE PRIMARY  moral obligation is to avoid harming significant others. It is when you cause harm, or are unjust, that you feel guilty. Being responsive to the needs of others is desirable, but is not a moral duty. Individuals are free to follow their inclinations within the limits of the law and in consideration of the rights of others. Their obligations to others are defined in negative terms- what they should not do- rather than as positive duties of what they should do. Whereas the failure to uphold justice is a vice, the failure to be beneficent to others is only a lack of moral virtue. By contrast, in Asian contexts, ones identity is defined in relation to the group one belongs to, typically the family. Whereas in the West, a person would be known as Jane or John Doe, in the East, they would be identified as members of the Doe family. In her study of Indian Hindus, psychologist Joan Miller found that the primary basis of determining moral conduct was not justice but a persons duties to significant others. Among Americans, moral duty is imposed on the individual to constrain that individuals actions. For Hindus, doing ones duty meant both meeting ones obligations as well as realizing ones own nature. Therefore acting benevolently toward others was not an aim secondary to considerations of justice, nor was it a matter of acting above and beyond the call of duty- fulfilling ones social duty was the primary purpose of moral conduct. These differences lead to contrasting ways of determining what is moral. For instance, if there is no other way to help a friend in need, it would be ethical for an Indian to steal but unethical for an American to do so even if it means failing to help the friend. These differences are not absolute; nonetheless, twice as many Indians as Americans would give priority to interpersonal considerations over abstract ethical principles. Moreover, Indians were more prone than Americans to make contextual exceptions (where the morality of an action depends on the nature of the relationship and the circumstances of the case), whereas Americans took a more absolute view about an action being right or wrong, irrespective of other considerations. The moral objective in the West, as noted above, is to avoid doing wrong and is more objective; in the East, it is to do what is right and is more subjective. Similar considerations apply in other Asian cultures. In China, the family is the great self. One starts by literally owing ones life to ones parents. Ones primary obligation in life is to serve and protect social ties, not pursue personal goals. Similarly, while Americans place a high premium on self-reliance, the Japanese favor interdependence and harmonious integration within the group. Individuals in both groups are highly competitive, but in different ways. Americans want to  get ahead  of others; the Japanese are concerned with not falling behind; instead of pushing ahead, they line up sideways. The personal boundaries of Americans have been compared to the hard shell of an egg; those of the Japanese, to an eggs soft internal membrane. Erich Lessing/Art Resource This individualistic-versus-interdependent basis of moral judgment helps clarify the problematic distinctions between shame and guilt cultures. Instead of these designations explaining differences in such a way that makes one culture seem morally superior to another, they explain cultural differences as the outcome of serving different needs. In the Western context of individualism, guilt, with its emphasis on autonomy, provides a better moral foundation for guiding individuals who are responsible for themselves. With a lesser sense of responsibility for others, there is less need for shame as a form of social control. By contrast, in the Asian cultural context, where maintaining harmony in relationships is most valued, shame is a more effective means of moral control. Since personal boundaries extend beyond the individual, it becomes more difficult to generate guilt. When someone does wrong, it is not only the person but everyone related to that person who shares in the guilt. Therefore, shame in Asian cultures fulfills some of the same functions of social control that guilt does in the West and vice versa. These considerations are important to our understanding of differences in the ways guilt and shame are perceived in Western and Eastern religion. . . . For instance, the centrality of shame in Confucianism has led to the general impression that Confucian China is a shame society, and hence is ethically less developed. [Religion scholar] Mark Berkson [MA 92, PhD 00] has raised cogent arguments that this characterization is not valid. Confucian ethics, far from being ethically less well developed, offers much to others to learn from. While generally framed in East/West terms, these differences between guilt and shame can also be seen within Western culture itself in historical perspective. Homeric heroes in ancient Greece were driven by the twin virtues honor and fame. In their warlike society such virtues were best manifested on the battlefield. The self-esteem of heroes like Achilles, Odysseus, and Oedipus depended on their standing in the eyes of their peers, with whom they were in fierce competition and often conflict. Failure led to loss of face and shame. Consequently, shame has been generally assumed to be the predominant moral sentiment that motivated and restrained the ancient Greeks. Their shame culture was based on public esteem. What mattered was where one stood with respect to ones peers, who constituted an honor-group. This view has been challenged by moral philosopher Bernard Williams, who argues that Greek conceptions of shame also included elements of guilt. The moral objective in the West is to avoid doing wrong; in the East, to do what is right. These cultural differences are embedded in various languages as well. This makes translating terms like guilt and shame a common source of confusion. For example, when we look for synonyms for shame and guilt in Chinese, we do not find single terms that correspond to them. Rather, we find a number of terms that correspond to various types of shame, making distinctions that do not exist in English. In some contexts, even guilt may appear as a subsidiary form of shame. Even if the terms to designate them vary, are these emotions universal or culture specific? Do an American and an Indian experience guilt and shame the same way, whatever they call them? There are no simple answers to this question. Some emotions appear to be more universal than others; for instance, it is hard to imagine a culture that does not recognize expressions of fear or anger. However, when it comes to complex emotions like guilt and shame, which are more subject to cultural variation, the picture becomes less clear. Even the fact that a culture has no word for an emotion does not mean that the emotion it represents is absent. Linguists point out that even if certain emotions are universal, their terminology is not. For instance, there is no word for disgust in Polish. And in one Australian aboriginal language, fear and shame are expressed by the same word (associated with the impulse to retreat). The common error is to start with ones own language and look for exact translations in other languages. Ultimately, it is not through specific terms like guilt or shame but throughmetalanguage- descriptions of the essential elements in emotional states- that we can test the universality of the emotions. For instance, the answer to How do you feel when you have lost someone dear to you? would convey the idea of sadness better than would the answer to the question Do you feel sad? How does the evolutionary view help us in  dealing with guilt? This is not a matter explicitly addressed by evolutionary psychologists. . . . Nonetheless, the evolutionary basis of the capacity for altruism and the capacity to feel guilty provides us with a natural foundation for guilt, and hence the need for its acceptance and usefulness. If guilt is indeed part of our nature, and there are good reasons for it, it makes no sense to fight it or deny it. Accepting guilt as a fact of life therefore makes it easier to approach it in a positive manner, and perhaps helps us to resolve it in more authentic and adaptive ways. HERANT KATCHADOURIAN,  who came to Stanford in 1966, is an emeritus professor of psychiatry and human biology and former president of the Flora Family Foundation. He has received the Dinkelspiel and Lyman awards and has been selected seven times as Outstanding Professor and Class Day speaker. HONOR AND SHAME  IN A MIDDLE EASTERN SETTING| Roland Muller Copyright 2000 All rights reserved. Sociologists have recognized that three social issues have existed since earliest times. As civilizations formed, each of them grappled with the concept of fear, shame and guilt. These are, in essence the building blocks of society. Every society has its particular ways of dealing with these issues. And each of these issues have different importance, depending on the cultural makeup of that society. These three aspects make up the basic building blocks of worldview. It is similar to the three basic colors that an artist mixes to make all the colors of the universe. On my computer, I can mix the three primary colors to make up 64 million other colors. Thats the way it is with worldview. There are many different kinds of worldview, but when carefully examined they can be better understood when looking at them in the light of mans response to guilt, shame and fear. Sociologists have used terms like guilt-based cultures, and shame-based cultures for years now. We must be careful, however, not to try and fit each culture or worldview into one specific category such as fear based or shame based. As I stated, these building blocks are similar to an artist, creating thousands of colors from three basic primary colors. How much of each primary color is used, determines what the final color will be when the paint is mixed. In the same way, all three building blocks are present in all cultures and worldviews, but how much of each one is present, determines the actual type of culture that emerges. Having determined this, one must also consider how people in a particular local culture react to the elements of the overall culture. As an example, when an Arab is shamed, he may react by taking revenge on the one who causes the shame, but when an oriental is shamed, he may react by committing suicide. So while individual cultures may react to sin in different way, in general terms there are great blocks of the world that have similar worldviews. Where are the major blocks? Many western nations (Northern Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand) have cultures that contain mostly guilt-based cultural characteristics. On the other hand, much of the Middle East and Asia is made up shame-based cultures. Most of the primal religions and cultures of the world (such as tribes in the jungles of Africa, Asia, and South America) are structured around fear-based principles. The problem comes when we want to simply classify cultures into these three basic classifications. They do not easily fit, because they are made up of blends of all three. Thus, when analyzing a culture, one must look for the primary cultural characteristics, and then the secondary ones. As an example, many North American Native cultures are made up of elements of both shame-based and fear-based cultures. On the other hand, much of North American culture has been made up almost exclusively of guilt-based principles, although this has changed in the last two decades. As cultures and worldviews developed over the millennia, they have gravitated towards one of these groups. This polarization has created three mega-trends in worldview. While the majority of worldviews fits into these three classifications, many cultures draw equally from two or all three worldviews. This mixing of worldviews is especially noticeable in South America where jungle tribes with fear-based cultures come in contact with shame-based cultures originating out of southern Spain, and guilt-based cultures brought by western religion and western business. The goal of this paper is to simply introduce the idea of guilt, shame and fear based cultures, and then to examine how the Nabataean culture fit into this picture. Along the way I will use illustrations drawn from many cultures of the world, including modern Muslim culture. Guilt-Based Culture None of us lives in exactly the same culture. Culture varies from town to town, family to family and sometimes even from individual to individual. All of us are different. We are made up of different fabrics and formed by the different experiences that come into our lives on a day to day basis. Even those who try to define American or Canadian culture can only talk in vague generalizations. Americans come from all kinds of ethnic backgrounds, and have all kinds of values. Some live in middle class housing, some in cardboard boxes on the street, and some in large impressive mansions. Its hard to place categorizations and descriptions on people who are so diverse. Despite this, however, there are some general characteristics or mega-traits that fit the majority of people in the western world. Certain basic fundamental beliefs have molded western civilization. These beliefs have laid the foundations upon which these nations are built, and from which the fabric of their society has been formed. One of these basic foundations is their belief in right versus wrong. This understanding is so deeply ingrained in western culture, that westerners analyze almost everything from this perspective. Most western forms of entertainment are built upon the good guys and the bad guys. It is so familiar to westerners that few of them question its validity. It is such an integral part of religion and society, that they often cannot imagine a world where right versus wrong isnt the accepted basic underlying principle. Right versus wrong is the yardstick used in their culture to measure everything else with. They talk about the rightness and wrongness of someone elses actions. They talk about things being right for me. They are obsessed with knowing their rights and exercising them. Many western societies spend countless hours and billions of dollars debating the wrongs of society. Is homosexuality right or wrong? Is spending billions on the military right or wrong? Is possession of drugs right or wrong? How about possession of nuclear bombs, or weapons of mass destruction? Almost every major issue the west struggles with involves an aspect of deciding whether something is right or wrong. They arrive at this basic tension in life because almost everything in western culture is plotted on a guilt/innocence line. (Innocence being something defined as being right or righteousness). Guilt - Innocence The pulls and demands of these two diametrically opposed forces dictate much of western human behavior. Guilt can plague and haunt people bringing fear and condemnation upon them. Many westerners do everything they can to avoid being guilty. Psychologists spend a great deal of their time helping people deal with all sorts of guilt complexes. Evangelical Christians in particular, often live in circles that are governed by guilt principles based on the authority of the Bible. Outside of these circles, guilt is defined in many other ways. It can be a sense of public disapproval, being in trouble with the authorities, or not being politically correct. However guilt is defined, and to what extent it influences a culture varies widely from location to location. However, the understanding of right and wrong has been instrumental in forming much of western society. On the other end of the spectrum, is righteousness, or innocence. This is the unspoken goal of much of western society. Im OK, youre OK is the most comfortable situation for many. Many westerners express their innocence with the statement that they are as good as the next person. If this is true, then they can get about their business of pursuing happiness and pleasure within the bounds of being OK and not guilty. Most westerners do what they can to avoid being guilty and at the same time exercise their rights. This guilt/innocence thinking is so ingrained in western society that most westerners have immediate reflexes to events that catch them off guard. Being a westerner, I have often noticed some of the reflexes that we have developed. Have you ever noticed what happens in the swimming pool when the lifeguard blows his whistle? Almost all westerners will stop to see who is guilty, and when they realize they are innocent will resume swimming. This is a normal scenario from the western world, but it is not true in much of the eastern world. When we in the western world do something wrong, like unintentionally running a red light, we may feel guilty. This is also not necessarily true in the eastern world. Or, how about this scenario? Imagine a classroom full of grade school kids. Suddenly, the intercom interrupts their class. Johnny is being called to the principles office. What is the immediate reaction of the other children? In the west the immediate reaction would almost always be: What did you do wrong? Even western children almost always immediately assume guilt. Perhaps the school principal was going to hand out rewards, but much of western society conditions people to expect the worst, and they feel pangs of guilt. So much of western thinking is wrapped up in guilt. Wars are justified on the basis of establishing guilt. During the opening days of the Gulf War, the American government spent many hours and millions of dollars determining if Saddam Hussein was guilty. Once they thought they had established that he was guilty of committing atrocities they had the right to take military action against him. Throughout the war, they continued to make statements about Mr. Husseins deranged mental state and irrational actions. All of this helped justify the war. In fact, all during the history of western civilizations, wars have had to be justified, and each side identifies the other as being the bad guys. But some things are not easy to chart between right and wrong. Is a hungry child stealing food guilty? Should he be punished despite his hunger? These questions disturb us, because we feel that everything in life must fit somewhere between guilt and innocence. In fact, western association with guilt has gone so far as to provide an avenue for people to develop guilt complexes. They feel guilt for what they have done and also guilt for what they have not done. They even feel guilt for what others have done. People who struggle with a guilt complex can even be overcome with embarrassment and feelings of guilt from the actions of others. The flip side of guilt is innocence, righteousness, and exercising rights. As I mentioned, Im OK, youre OK is an important philosophy in western culture. In order not to point a finger at people, western society continues to expand the limits of what is acceptable activity. By making homosexuality acceptable, they help thousands of people avoid feeling guilty. This alone is enough to convince many people in western society that its OK for people to be homosexual. In fact, almost anything is tolerated as long as it doesnt hurt another person. I have been surprised to discover that many people in our western world believe that our fixation with right and wrong is not only normal, but also the only correct way to think. They assume that anyone, who does not think in these terms, does not think rationally or logically. In order to understand guilt-based culture, we must go back to Greek and Roman times, and examine the origin of this pattern of thinking, and discover how this has had an impact on society and religion. The Roman Connection The Roman Empire has come and gone, leaving us with a few ruined cities, and a wealth of stories about conquest and heroism. While most of what the Romans accomplished has disappeared, there is one facet of Roman life that has impacted the west, right down to the present. It is the Roman law, or the pax romana (Roman peace) which was brought about by everyone obeying the Roman law. Roman law introduced the concept that the law was above everyone, even the lawmakers. This idea was not totally new. The Jews under Moses understood this. Greek politicians developed a similar plan with their city-state, but with laws that were man made, not divine. The Romans, however, perfected the system, and put it into widespread use. They developed a type of democracy known as the republic. They put in place a complex legal system that required lawmakers, lawyers, and judges. This Roman system of law left a tremendous impact on western society. Even to this day, much of the western legal system is still built around the basic Roman code of law. Western civilization today is littered with references to the Roman Empire. Much of their coins, architecture, and language have Roman roots. Legal and economic theories are so filled with Romanisms that westerners no longer see them for what they are. They have become so much a part of their mental furniture, that few people today question them. As an example, Roman law during the Roman Empire assumed that the individuals rights were granted by the state (by government) and that lawmakers can make up laws. Under Roman law, the state was supreme, and rights were granted or erased whenever lawmakers decided. This philosophy is sometimes called statism. Its basic premise is that there is no law higher than the governments law. Roman politicians were not the first to invent statism but hey did such an effective job of applying it, that the Roman Empire has become the guiding star for politicians in the west. Statists see the pax romana, the period in which Rome dominated the Mediterranean world, as the golden days of statism. The known world was unified and controlled by one large government. This unification was symbolized in Roman times by something known as the  fasces. This was a bundle of wooden rods bound together by red-colo red bands. In ancient Rome the fasces was fixed to a wooden pole, with an ax at the top or side. This symbolized the unification of the people under a single government. The ax suggested what would happen to anyone who didnt obey the government. The Roman fasces became the origin of the word fascism. During Roman times, pax romana (the Roman peace) meant, do as you are told, dont make waves, or you will be hauled away in chains. Roman Law was supreme. In contrast to this, there was the old way of obeying the supreme ruler. Under this system, the word of the ruler was law. With the Republic, the Romans elevated law, so that it was above the ruler. Now everyone, even the emperor of Rome had to obey the law. The law, not the ruler determined if people were innocent or guilty. It is interesting to note, that as the early Christian church developed and grew, Roman law also had an impact on Christian theology. Since Roman law interpreted everything in the terms of right versus wrong, early Christians were deeply influenced by this thinking. Early Church Theologians Tertullian,  the early church father who first developed a code of systematic theology, was a lawyer steeped in Roman law. Using his understanding of law, and the need for justice, guilt, and redemption, he laid the basis for Christian systematic theology, as it would develop in the west. Tertullian was born shortly before 160 AD, into the home of a Roman centurion on duty in Carthage. He was trained in both Greek and Latin, and was very much at home in the classics. He became a proficient Roman lawyer and taught public speaking and practiced law in Rome, where he was converted to Christianity. In the years that followed he became the outstanding apologist of the Western church and the first known author of Christian systematic theology. Basil the Great  was born in 329 AD, and after completing his education in Athens he went on to practice law and teach rhetoric. In 370 AD, Basil, the awyer, became Basil the Bishop when he was elected bishop of Caesarea. During his time as Bishop he wrote many books in defense of the deity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit. Basils training in law and rhetoric gave him the tools he needed to speak out in defense of the church. Next came  Augustine  who was born in 354 AD into the home of a Roman official in the North African town of Tagaste. He received his early education in the local school, where he learned Latin to the accompaniment of many beatings. He hated studying the Greek language so much that he never learned to use it proficiently. He was sent to school in nearby Madaura and from there went to Carthage to study rhetoric, a technique used in Roman law for debate. He then taught legal rhetoric in his hometown and Carthage until he went to Milan in 384 AD. He was converted in 386 and became a priest in 391. He returned to Africa and became a prolific writer and bishop. No other Christian after Paul has had such a wide and deep impact on the Christian world through his writings as Augustine. Ambrose  was born around 340 AD, in Gaul. When his father, the prefect of Gaul, died, the family moved to Rome where Ambrose was educated for the legal profession. Later, he was appointed civil governor over a large territory, being headquartered in Milan. Upon the death of the bishop of Milan in 374, the people unanimously wanted him to take that position. Believing this to be the call of God, he gave up his high political position, distributed his money to the poor, and became a bishop. In 374, Ambrose demonstrated his ability in the fields of church administration, preaching, and theology. But as always, his training in Roman law enforced his views of guilt and righteousness. Have you noticed the impact that law and lawyers had on the development of the early church? This trend did not stop with the early church. Reformation Theologians John Calvin  was born in 1505 in northeastern France where his father was a respected citizen. He studied Humanistic Studies at the University of Paris, and then law at the University of Orleans, and finally at the University of Bourges. Sometime between 1532 and 1533 he converted and adopted the ideas of the reformation. The writings of John Calvin, the lawyer and theologian, have had a tremendous impact on our society. Calvin was not alone. Arnauld Antoine the French  theologian (1612-1694), studied at Calvi and Lisieux, first law, then theology. He was made a priest and doctor in 1634. Arnauld spoke out against the Jesuits and his writings added to the impact of the reformation. There are more examples of theologians who were also lawyers, such as  Martin Luther, but this list will suffice to point out that legal thought and expression had much to do with the development of the theology of the Early Church and the Reformation. Each of these church leaders continued to develop the relationship between Christianity, as it was known in the west, and the legal understanding of guilt, justice, and righteousness. These lawyers were concerned with establishing guilt, or innocence, and they brought this emphasis with them, into their theology. And so the western church that developed used this theology to build their civilizations. In the ensuing years, new nations in the New World would be founded on the theological basis developed by these church leaders. The United States of America was founded on these principles. The American founders attempted to establish a nation built on the Roman principle of a republic, and on the early churchs understanding of right and wrong. Today, it is interesting to notice that there are many non-western sources who link guilt-based culture with Christianity. In October 1999, Isaiah Kalinowski, the Opinion Editor for the Jordan Times, wrote an article entitled The Shame Culture that is Wabash. In this article he pointed out: guilt culture is due largely to Christianity. A shame culture is one in which individuals are kept from transgressing the social order by fear of public disgrace. On the other hand, in a guilt culture, ones own moral attitudes and fear of retribution in the distant future are what enforce the ethical behavior of a member of that society. From Kalinowskis perspective, guilt-based culture is linked to Christian theology. This is an unfortunate misrepresentation, as the Bible was written in a shame-based setting and speaks to all cultures and worldviews. On the other hand, Christians, must recognize the incredible impact that guilt-based culture has had on their history and understanding and interp retation of the Bible. The Eastern Scene Christianity in the east, however, developed differently. Eastern theologians did not use Roman law as a vehicle for interpreting the gospel. Rather, the eastern world was caught up in the shame-honor relationship that was prevalent in societies scattered from the Middle East to the Far East. Eastern Orthodox theology didnt deal directly with sin, guilt, and redemption. Chrysostom,  the early church theologian for the Eastern Church, was born about 345 AD into a wealthy aristocratic family in Antioch. He was a student of the sophist Libanius who had been a friend of the Emperor Julian. This man gave him a good training in the Greek classics and rhetoric that laid the foundation for his excellent speaking ability. After his baptism in 368, he became a monk in the eastern churches. Chrysostom rose to being an outstanding preacher, even winning the acclaim of the emperor. Today we have a record of around 680 of Chrystostoms sermons and homilies and I am told that he never once preached on justification. In the end, he was banished because he spoke out so sharply against the views of the western theologians. In the same way,  Islam,  which rose to prominence around 600 AD, teaches that God remains over all, and that law is in his hands, not the hands of lawmakers. The Quran enforces the principle that God is overall with the story about Pharaoh and how he was shown Allahs mightiest miracle, but he denied it and rebelled.   The Pharaoh quickly went away and summoning all his men, made to them a proclamation. I am your supreme Lord.   The Quran then tells us that Allah Smote him, and goes on to warn, Surely in this there is a lesson for the God fearing. Therefore it would be unthinkable to a Muslim, that a lawmaker could make a law that is over all. This is why Islam presents both a religious and a cultural pattern for people to live by. God dictates both moral laws and civil laws. Western Historians Roman law and thinking has also impacted the way we westerner look at history. The danger comes, when we westerners take our Roman understanding of civilization and culture and apply it to those who do not have a Roman-based culture. We fruitlessly spend untold hours and incalculable amounts of energy explaining to what motivates people and shapes society, when in truth, we dont understand the real principles of the other culture. The answer to this dilemma is quite simple. We westerners must put our Roman, guilt-based understanding of culture and history aside, and strive to understand other worldviews and their thinking. Then we need to return to our history books and discover what is happening in a society that is not pre-occupied with right and wrong, or guilt and innocence. Fear-Based Cultures As we drew near to the jungle village, the sound of drums could be heard. Drawing closer, we could see people dancing and withering on the ground. A man approached us and explained that they could not go further. The village was doing a sacred rite to improve the economy and bring more trade to the area. We were escorted away and not given a chance to introduce why we had come to their village. Later we heard that a human sacrifice had been offered to the spirits that day. In another situation we arrived in a village when a rain-making ceremony was about to begin. They were invited to watch. A black bull was led to the edge of the village where it faced the direction from where the rain would come. The animals throat was cut and it fell over on its left side, to the delight of all. This indicated that the sacrifice was acceptable. The men then cut up the meat and cooked it. As the meat was cooking, an old man began to shout out a prayer to the spirits for rain. Soon everyone joined in. After the meat was eaten, the shouting turned into dancing. The villagers danced all afternoon until the rain came. It rained so heavily that everyone had to run for shelter. Did the rituals bring the rain? To the natives it was obvious and there was no way that we rational westerners convince them otherwise. As these two stories illustrate, there are many people in the world today whose lives revolve around their interaction with the spiritual world. They believe that gods and spirits exist in the universe and they must live in peace with these unseen powers, either by living quietly, or by appeasing these powers. Based on their worldview, these cultures and peoples view the universe as a place filled with gods, demons, spirits, ghosts, and ancestors. Man needs to live at peace with the powers around him, and often man lives in fear. This fear is based on a number of different things. First, man fears man. Tribal wars are endemic, with captives becoming slaves or, sometimes, a meal for cannibals. Whenever tribes encounter people from outside of their own group, they approached them with suspicion and fear. Secondly, these people fear the supernatural. All around them events are taking place that can only be explained by the supernatural. Much like the ancient civilizations, they have developed spiritual explanations for how things work in this world. If crops fail, then specific gods or demons are responsible. If sickness comes, then other gods or demons are responsible. If a tribe fails in battle, it is because of the activity of a god or demon. Sickness is often viewed as a god reaping revenge. Everything in life, even romance, is somehow attributed to the activities of gods or demons. The struggle that these people face is simply one of needing power. Using their voodoo, charms, and other methods, they seek to gain control over other people and over the controlling powers of the universe. The paradigm that these people live in is one of fear versus power. At the end of the 19th century, E. B. Tylor attempted to understand the difference in thinking between Europeans and other peoples living in Africa and South America. In his writings he coined the word animism from the Latin word  anima  for soul. He saw the animistic worldview as interpreting everything from a spiritual philosophy rather than a materialistic philosophy. Many sociologists of Tylors era saw mankind moving from an ancient worldview based on the supernatural to a modern worldview based on science and reality. Dave Burnett states in his book  Unearthly Powers,  that H. W. Turner later advocated the use of the term primal religion, meaning that these religions both anteceded the great historic religions and continue to reveal many of the basic or primary features of religion. Almost everywhere you find animists or primal religions you find people living under the influence of a fear-based culture. Burnett goes on to state, Power can be understood in many ways: physical, political, economic, social, and religious. The secular worldview tends to regard all power as originating from within the material world. In contrast, primal worldviews see such powers not only as being real within the empirical world but as having their primary origin outside the visible world. In this way, those whose lives operate in the fear/power paradigm see themselves living in a physical world that co-exists and is influenced by unseen powers. These powers may be present in people or animals or even in inanimate objects like trees or hills. In some cultures, powers may be perceived in personal terms such as we would use for living beings. These powers are often regarded as having their own particular character, feeling, and ability to relate to others, and often, even have a will of their own. Like people, they may be angered, placated, or turned to in time of need. Power is an important concept in fear-based cultures. In the Pacific Islands it is often called mana, while the Iroquois of North America call it orenda, which particularly refers to the mystic power derived from a chant. The Eskimos have the notion of sila, a force watching and controlling everything. The Chinese have the concept of fung shui, or the powers within the earth and sea. In folk Islam the term baraka  (blessing or holiness) sometimes embraces many of these concepts. In most fear/power cultures, the main way of dealing with a power is to establish rules to protect the unwary from harm and procedures to appease those powers that are offended. These rules and procedures are generally referred to as taboo. Taboos come in the form of things like special people, forbidden or unclean foods, sacred objects, special acts or rituals, and special names. Appeasements are usually made in the form of sacrifice or dedication to the invisible powers. These powers can take various forms, such as: ghosts, demons, ancestors who live around people, spirits in trees and rocks, and totems (clans associated with certain animals or inanimate objects. ) In order to deal with these powers, rituals are established which people believe will affect the powers around them. Rituals are performed on certain calendar dates, and at certain times in someones life (rites of passage), or in a time of crisis. In order to appease the powers of the universe, systems of appeasement are worked out. They vary from place to place. Some civilizations offer incense while some offer their children as sacrifices to gods. However it is done, a system of appeasement, based on fear is the norm for their worldview. Wherever this system of appeasement comes into being, religious persons come to the forefront to control these systems. In some cases they are known as priests. In other cases they are known as witch doctors, or shamans. Whatever their title, their role is the same. They are the ones who hold power. Often they are the only ones who understand the needs of the gods or demons, and they are the ones through whom the demons or gods communicate. In every fear-based culture, the pattern is much the same. The witch doctor, priest, or shaman controls people through the use of fear. They are very effective in their roles, and as a result, whole cultures and people groups are held in their iron grip. Early Religion As archeologists and historians have dug through the sands of time, they have uncovered temples and signs of religious activity that reflect strong fear-based elements in early civilizations. Along with this, the structure of civilizations where rulers held absolute power reflects a fear-power base for their civilization. Kings, pharaohs, and rulers held supreme authority and wielded power through the fear that they instilled in the members of their civilization. This allowed civilizations like the Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians and others to conquer wide areas of their world. While we can deduce the fear-power aspect in these civilizations from ancient buildings and military records, it is much harder to detect the importance of shame and honor. Shame-Based Cultures Our taxi screeched to a halt. Lying in the middle of the street was a teen-age girl, dying. She had been shot in the head four times. Just then her brother walked across the street with two policemen and stated, There she is. I killed her because she was in an immoral situation with a man. Under the laws of the country, the young man was innocent. He had not committed murder but had preserved the honor of his family. In another case, a girl ran away from home. Later her family learned she had married someone from another religion. They were furious. The police imprisoned the girl so that she would be protected from her family. Elderly grandmothers taunted the brother and father. How long do we need to keep our heads to the ground in shame? Wont you do something to cleanse the shame from our tribe so we can raise our heads and live in honor once again? The family finally agreed to pay the police a $50,000. 00 guarantee that they would not hurt her and she was released into their custody. Within hours her father and brother shot her thirteen times. The entire family was pleased that honor had been restored. The guilt/innocence perspective in which westerners live dictates much of our thinking in the west. However, not everyone in the world operates within this paradigm. As I mentioned earlier, while living in the Middle East I noticed that when the lifeguard at a swimming pool blew his whistle, the westerners all stopped to see who was guilty, but the Arabs kept right on swimming. As I observed this and other phenomena, I began to realize that Arabs and Arab society were operating in another whole dimension. Guilt did not have the same power and influence as it did in the west. While they were aware of guilt, it didnt have the same strong connotations for them as it had for me. If a policeman pulled me over, I immediately felt guilty, thinking that perhaps I had done something wrong. But when my Arab friends were pulled over, they didnt display any sign of guilt. They talked boldly to the policeman, and even argued loudly with him over the issues at hand. It was only after many years of living in a Muslim culture that it started to dawn on me that the Arabs around me were not operating on a level of guilt versus innocence. Nor were they operating in a fear versus power paradigm. I had heard much about this from missionaries living in Africa but it didnt seem to apply to the Arabs of the Levant. Rather, I discovered that Arabs were living in a worldview where the predominant paradigm was shame versus honor. Once I clued in to this, I began to explore this concept and tried to verify it on all social levels. I was amazed to discover what I found. When I would visit my friends, I would try to act correctly and they would try to act honorably, not shamefully. I was busy trying to learn the rights and wrongs of their culture, but somehow my framework of right versus wrong didnt fit what was actually happening. The secret wasnt to act rightly or wrongly in their culture. It wasnt that there was a right way and a wrong way of doing things. The underlying principle was that there was an honorable and dishonorable way of doing things. Every part of the Muslim culture I lived in was based on honor and shame. When I visited my friends I could honor them in the way I acted. They could honor me, in the way they acted. Three cups of coffee bestowed honor on me. The first, called salam (peace) was followed by sadaqa (friendship), and the third cup of coffee was called issayf (the sword). The meaning was clear in their culture. When I arrived I was offered a cup of coffee that represented peace between us. As we drank and talked, the cup of friendship was offered. The last cup, the sword, illustrated their willingness to protect me and stand by me. It didnt matter if I was right or wrong, they were bound by their honor to protect me. Everywhere I moved in the Middle Eastern culture there were things that pointed to honor or shame. What chair I chose to sit in, who entered the door first, the way I expressed myself in Arabic, the very way I walked and held myself, all communicated to others around me my place in the world. The cultures of the Middle East are filled with thousands of tiny nuances that communicate messages about shame and honor. Shame is a popular topic today in western society. Shame, however is closely identified with a lack of self-esteem. Shame often stems from some form of abuse where children fail to learn trust. This is quite different from the shame societies of the east where shame and fear of shame are used as controlling forces in peoples lives. (As compared with right and wrong being used as a controlling factor. As western parents, we teach our children to act rightly. If they dont, we teach them that feelings of guilt are the proper response. In a shame-based culture however, children are taught to act honorably, and if they dont, feelings of shame are the proper response. But it goes farther than just feelings. Shame and honor are positions in society, just as being right (and justified) is a position in our western culture. In the west, young people are free to act as spo ntaneously as they want, as long as they are within the framework of right and wrong. They can be loud, boisterous, and happy, as long as they dont break things, or abuse others. Our rule in the west is As long as I dont hurt someone else or their property, Im generally ok. Young people in a Muslim setting are different. Wherever they go, they represent their families and tribes. Young people are not free to act as they want. They must always act honorably, so that the honor of their family and tribe is upheld. If they act shamefully, then the family or tribe will react against them. Shameful deeds are covered up. If they cant be covered up, they are revenged. It is the unwritten rule of the desert. The whole concept of shameful deeds can be traced back to the early Bedouin code of practice, which existed even before Islam arrived. This code, still much in existence today, affects not only the way individuals act, but also the actions of entire nations. As I have visited with people from other eastern countries, I have continued to explore the concept of honor and shame among these other countries. It has helped me understand and communicate with people from places such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, China, Japan, and Korea. In fact, I have discovered that the concept of shame and honor makes a great discussion topic. I have often asked people from shame-based cultures what are honorable or shameful acts or actions in their cultures. The discussion that follows is often highly stimulating, and usually reflects or contrasts similar attitudes right across the shame- based countries of the world. In some cases however, there are distinct differences between cultures. As I mentioned earlier, if someone is badly shamed in an Arab culture and the shame cannot be hidden, then it is revenged, and the person responsible for the shaming is killed. In many eastern cultures, if a shame cannot be hidden, the way out is suicide. Even here, however, there are many similarities, as I have known of a number of students in Jordan committing suicide because of their poor school marks, just as happens in Japan. In order for shame-based cultures to work, shame and honor are usually attached to something greater than the individual. Honor is almost always placed on a group. This can be the immediate family, the extended tribe, or in some cases, as large as an entire nation; as was demonstrated in Japan just previous to World War Two. In most Middle Eastern cultures, honor is wrapped up with ones tribe. Everyone grows up within a tribal concept. If someone is from the Beni Hassan tribe, he thinks and acts, and dresses as a Beni Hassan. His actions reflect on the honor the Beni Hassan tribe. If he acts honorably, the Beni Hassan tribe is honored. If he acts shamefully, the whole tribe is shamed. If the act is vile enough, the Beni Hassan tribe will react, and execute the offender, even though he is a member of their own tribe, and perhaps even their immediate family. Thus the honor of the tribe is restored. Many years ago an Arab soldiers gun accidentally discharged and killed his friend and companion in the army. After serving seven years, he was released on condition that he leave Jordan. He lived for nearly twenty years in the United States, but decided to return one day to see his family. When it was learned that he had returned, several young people, some of whom had not been born at the time of the killing, surrounded the house where he was and riddled his body with bullets. Their honor was restored, and shame removed. If someone shames another tribe, tribal warfare could result, and often only the skilful intervention of a third party ends the strife. Arab lore is full of stories of how wise and skillful men have intervened in difficult situations. In fact, many national rulers gain their fame and reputation from their skills at ending tribal strife. In the Middle East two methods are recognized. First, a skillful ruler, through diplomatic efforts and displays of great wisdom, can end disputes. Solomons dealings with the two mothers who claimed the same baby displayed the kind of wisdom that Arabs appreciate and desire in their rulers. The second kind of ruler crushes all of the tribes and by force makes them submit to himself. Peace may then rule, but once the controlling power is removed, old animosities return. This is well illustrated in the Balkans conflict where the domination of communism brought about a measure of peace. Once freedom returned however, old conflicts and animosities flared again. The storytellers who frequent the coffeehouses of the Middle East excel in telling stories of both kinds of rulers and heroes, especially heroes who can effectively deal with shame and restore honor. This is very different from the entertainment styles of the west, where the hero determines who is guilty, and punishes him, and right and goodness reign again. This is because in our worldview, we try to hang onto the concept that in the midst of a crooked and perverse world, right still reigns and has the upper hand. Those from a shame-based culture, on the other hand, cling to the idea of maintaining honor, in the midst of a shameful and alienated world. For many western people it is very hard if not impossible to try and comprehend a culture that is based on shame, not right versus wrong. In most western cultures, telling the truth is right and telling lies is wrong. In the Middle East, people dont think of lies as being right or wrong. The question is, Is what is being said, honorable? If a lie protects the honor of a tribe or nation, then it is fine. If a lie is told for purely selfish reasons, then it is shameful. Thus, in the west we debate ethics, by trying to determine if things are right or wrong. In the east, they debate ethics, by trying to determine if things are honorable or not. Shame in Western Culture In the past, shame has played a role in western culture. One has only to read Tolstoys  Anna Karenina, or any of Shakespeares works to see the role that shame used to play. Shakespeare uses the word shame nine times as often as he does guilt. In time, however, our culture has changed and guilt has become much more important. Then, during the last twenty years, we have begun to move away from such a strong guilt-bases for our culture. Why is this? I suspect that the popularity of Freuds teachings is one reason. Sociologists generally credit Freudian psychology for the removal of guilt from western culture. Since his teachings have become popular in many universities, the concept of guilt has become unpopular and guilt has been assigned to others, such as our parents. Other factors, like the lack of responsibility within modern politics have influence young people today. Nixon and Watergate, and Clinton and Lewinsky have illustrated to people today that right versus wrong is not the only way to think. During the period of 1960 to 2000 western civilization has begun a slow but steady shift away from the right versus wrong paradigm. Today young people are very reluctant to label anything as right or wrong. Instead, things are assigned the label as cool or not cool. In the eyes of many high school students, being cool is equivalent to being honorable. Being not cool is the equivalent of shame. I believe that this slow shift in worldview is responsible for many of the differences between boosters, boomers, busters, and Generation Xrs. Shaming in History Early Roman culture started out in the fear/power paradigm. Events of nature and history were interpreted within this paradigm. The worship of a pantheon of gods carried on during their whole civilization until Christianity became the state religion. When the Romans adopted the Greek pattern of placing the law above the emperor, they began to interpret events in their society on the guilt/innocence paradigm. This soon came to the forefront of their civilization, and fear/power was pushed to the back. When the Romans conquered shame-based civilizations the people they conquered had a profound impact on their own culture. Shame was always present in Roman culture, but it slowly came more and more to the forefront and eventually into Mediterranean culture today. In republican Rome, criminals had the doors to their houses burned as a public sign that a criminal was living there. Those who had been wronged could legally follow the criminal around, chanting and accusing him in public places. The concept of public shaming carried on into the Middle Ages, and even into Victorian England where criminals were put into stocks. These stocks were located in public places, so that the criminal would be known and shamed before all. Pillories were rife during the Victorian age, when those who were pilloried had to endure the shame of publicly having rotten vegetables thrown at them. Branding criminals was practiced in England until the eighteenth century. Brands were often placed on the hands or face, so that the criminals would be publicly shamed wherever they went. The major difference between east and west, however, is not the presence of the shame concept, but rather, the structure of society around either the group mentality or individualism. Eastern shame became much more powerful than western shaming activities, simply because in the east the shame rests on the persons group rather than the individual. Since many eastern society functions in a group setting, the whole group suffers rather than just the individual. If the crime is bad enough, the group itself may oust or, for a severe offense, kill the offender. In 1999 at least twenty-five women were killed to maintain the honor of their families in the country of Jordan. Hundreds of others were killed in countries like Egypt, Sudan, Syria, and Iran. In many countries where shame-based culture is predominant, the names of criminals and those being ousted from their families for shameful activities are publicly printed in the newspapers. In western countries we tend to isolate criminals from their surroundings, and then determine if they are guilty. Criminals are then locked away out of sight, rather than publicly shamed in stocks in the public square. Its interesting to notice that in the Crow Indian culture in North America, mocking of some one elses inappropriate behavior effects shaming. This is sometimes called buying-of-the-ways. If you imitate someone elses inappropriate behavior, you are buying his ways. In some cases a person actually offers money to buy someone elses inappropriate behavior. This is the ultimate shame. In many shame-based cultures, rather than encourage others, people criticize and question others. This is seen as positive, as it keeps them from becoming too proud. In the same way, Arabs are often quick to criticize leaders, especially elected ones, if they perceive that they are too ambitious or proud. They are sometimes publicly questioned or shamed, and often they leave public life. Even new language students discover that their neighbors are quick to point out that someone else speaks better than they do, or they are asked why they speak so poorly after being there for a whole four months! The criticism is often meant to keep them from being proud of how well they have done. Arabs understand that the criticism may be a compliment, but the poor westerner is often crushed. Clash of World Views As I mentioned earlier, there are three basic planes on which worldview, function. On each of these planes, there