Essay --

I, Alexander III, was born the son of a great warrior, King Phillip II of Macedonia and a Olympia’s, daughter of King Neoptolemus I of Epirus. I was born on the 20th day of July in the year 356 BC in Pella Greece. I spend most of my childhood in Pella’s royal court. I hardly ever saw my father because he spend most of his time in military campaigns or with one of his may other women, besides my mother. On the other hand, mother, was always there for me, even when I did not ask for her presence. From a young age mother and father wanted the best for me, even if I times I didn’t see it. Both my parents influence me to become what I am today. To them my education was extremely important. First, Leonidas tutored me; he was a very stern man. Of course, me being the free spirited young lad that I was might have contributed to the way he treated me, non-the-less. I do have to admit that Leonidas did help develop my physical endurance; his harsh schooling was the foundation for my physical hardiness and endurance. My father was not completely satisfied with Leonidas’s ways, so he saw to it that I would no longer be taught by force but rather by persuasion. Consequently, at the age of 13, in the year 342, Aristotle was assigned control over my education. He was a master of science and my father thought he would be the best for me. Indeed it was one of the best decision my father made for me, being that he hardly had time for me. With Aristotle my passionate love of Greek culture came to be; he made me entirely Greek in intellect. Aristotle was an inspiration for me then and continues to be now as I write this. Being around all these extremely intelligent individuals and hearing stories about the victories that great military general acc... ...h my father and Alexander. As Alexander and I took our seats and allowed my father to walk to his throne to sit, Pausanias rushed upon him and drove a blade between his ribs. My father dropped dead and Pausanias was killed while trying to escape. After this I was rushed to the palace and declared king. As delighted as I was I could not forget what had just happened. How could Pausanias, my father’s chief bodyguard and friend do this? Within a matter of seconds I understood what had occurred. Mother had encouraged Pausanias to commit this horrendous crime. My mother had accomplished what she set out to do, she had killed King Phillip II and made me King Alexander III. Later, she confessed to me all she had done, as king I could have had her executed, but I could not do such I thing. I loved my mother and she did it for my benefit. I’ve kept her secret till this day.

Case in motivation and teamwork of Starbuck Essay

Case in motivation and teamwork of Starbuck Introduction Question 1 Â   Â   Â   Â   Â   Â   Formal teams are teams whose structures are clearly defined mainly of the basis of specialization. In these types of teams, the members are not equal and every one of them has a rank (Moorhead & Griffin, 73). For example, there are managers, supervisors and other junior employees. It is worthy noting that every member of a formal team performs their specific duties. For example, managers stay in their offices and issues directives to their juniors. On the other hand, informal teams have no structure and all team members are seen as equal regardless of their specialty. In these types of teams, any member can perform any task. Question 2 A team in Starbucks consists of three to six people and this helps the employees to know each other well. Any opinion expressed by employees is given an equal significance regardless of their position. The top management at Starbucks work together with their juniors which makes them more familiar and closer compared to other bureaucratic companies. The management at Starbucks treats all employees as equals and this is aimed at reducing the gap between the employees and the management. The top management at the company believes that employees are its main spirit. Consequently, the management adopts an interactive organizational structure that makes the employees love their jobs and perform them with passion. Question 3 a) The size of a team is an important factor because it determines how well the team members know each other. This is important because it brings about cohesion in the work place. b) The first benefit of Starbucks having small teams of staff in every branch is that the team members get to know each other better. Secondly, it improves communication within the group. Question 4 Â   Â   Â   Â   Â   Â   From the Starbucks case study, it is clear that there are three major issues that the company needs to address in its planning process namely listening to the opinion of its employees, equal treatment and ensuring good welfare for the employees. Â   Â   Â   Â   Â   Â   Equal treatment- this is one of the major issues that the company needs to address in its planning process. Equal treatment requires all employees to be treated equally regardless of their position. According to the case study, it is clear that the management at the company treats all employees as equals and refers to them as partners. This is important because it narrows the gap between the employees and the management. Treating every employees fairly and equally in the workplace results in a friendly working environment. Consequently, if the issue of equal treatment is addressed in the planning process, it will help in creating closer working atmosphere and good management (Rynes & Rosen 64). Â   Â   Â   Â   Â   Â   Listening to the employees- listening to the employees is other issue that requires to be addressed in the planning process. From the Starbucks case, it is clear that the company wants every employee to take part in developing plans and work as a team to achieve the set goals. Consequently, the company’s principles and policies are communicated to all employees, and there is no restriction in the employee’s individual opinions. By listening to the employees, makes them feel important which in turn motivates them hence increasing their productivity (Rynes & Rosen, 83). References Moorhead, G., & Griffin, R. W. Managing organizational behavior. (10th ed.). Cengage Learning., 2012. Print Rynes, S., & Rosen, B. A field survey of factors affecting the adoption and perceived success of diversity training. Personnel Psychology, 1995. Print Source document

Platos and Aristotles Views on Knowledge - 1414 Words

Anthony Pulliam Humanities 09/17/2010 Platos and Aristotles Views on Knowledge Plato and Aristotle view knowledge and the process whereby it is obtained. They both point out that many epistemological concepts which they believe where knowledge comes from and what it is actually. Most of them have been astonished me in certain ways, but I found that rationalism and wisdom consists in knowing the cause which made a material thing to be what it is make the most sense to me regarding the nature of knowledge. As the following, we will discuss about why these two philosophical viewpoints are superior and the others are inferior. Aristotle believes that sensory perception of material objects is knowledge and he says, Our senses†¦show more content†¦Plato and Aristotle both believe that thinking, defined as true opinion supported by rational explanation is true knowledge; however, Plato is a rationalist but Aristotle is not. Plato thinks that the external world can be obtained proceeding from the inside out. Thus, the foundation of true knowledge for the rationalists is that it originates in the faculty of reason. Furthermore, reason has the capacity to discover ideas or beliefs independently of the senses. These ideas or beliefs are self-validating and therefore have the status of knowledge because the rational faculty, which has discovered them, is the most accurate of the means by which human beings obtain knowledge. In Platos Theaetetus, he says, Any one forms the true opinion of anything without rational explanation, you may say that his mind is truly exercised, but has no knowledge. This is quit e true that when one can state a true opinion supported by a rational explanation, ones opinion constitutes knowledge, since perceptions of senses are excluding in this case. Moreover, a rational explanation does not contain any subjectivity, it is an objective entity for humans to understand true knowledge. For this reason, I fall with rationalism and believe it is a superior philosophical viewpoint about the nature of knowledge. Aristotle sustains that wisdom consists in knowing the cause which made a material thing to be what it is. For Aristotle, wise people know more than just what somethingShow MoreRelatedPlatos and Aristotles Views on Knowledge1407 Words   |  6 Pages09/17/2010 Platos and Aristotles Views on Knowledge Plato and Aristotle view knowledge and the process whereby it is obtained. They both point out that many epistemological concepts which they believe where knowledge comes from and what it is actually. Most of them have been astonished me in certain ways, but I found that rationalism and wisdom consists in knowing the cause which made a material thing to be what it is make the most sense to me regarding the nature of knowledge. As the followingRead MoreExamining the Ethics of Plato and Aristotle Essay1063 Words   |  5 Pagesand view on their ethics. I will concentrate on their theories on the good life as a life of justice, censorship, knowledge and the good life. I will first examine Plato’s ethics. Plato was a philosopher who was both a rationalist and absolutist. According to his view, people must be schooled to acquire certain kinds of knowledge i.e. mathematics, philosophy and so forth. This training will give them the capacity to know the nature of the good life. Since, evil is due to lack of knowledge. NotRead MoreAnalysis of Aristotle and Platos Thoughts Essay985 Words   |  4 Pagescontrary to Plato’s strict utopian structure and group over individual hierarchy view of the ideal state. Plato’s ideal state is strictly structured through a utopian ideal. Everything within Plato’s ideal state has a place and purpose, and everyone within it is aware of that. While the state works for the people as a whole instead of individual, Plato also proposes the idea of propaganda to mold even the lowest of his utopia into model citizens for the state. Plato’s state is theRead MoreThe Ethics Of Plato And Aristotle977 Words   |  4 Pagescensorship, knowledge and the good life. I will first explain Plato’s ethics. Plato was a philosopher, both a rationalist and absolutist. According to Plato, people must be schooled to obtain certain kinds of knowledge for example mathematics, philosophy etc. The training will give them the ability to know the nature of the good life. Not many people have the mental ability to learn what the good life is. They have to be exactly like a person who has knowledge. The people who have knowledge areRead MoreDistinctions and Comparisons between Aristotle and Plato Essay1681 Words   |  7 PagesAristotle are in agreement on certain factors of their philosophy. Many have scrutinized and compared the dissimilarities and similarities of Aristotles doctrine of categories and Platos theory of forms. The observations found are of an interesting nature. The beauty behind the writings of Plato is to not accept what is interpreted through the senses. In Platos theory of forms, Plato explained the immaterial world as the realm containing the perfect form of objects and ideas that are presented onRead More1.In Your Own Words, Define The Term â€Å"Metaphysics† As Used1161 Words   |  5 PagesDoes anything exist? Is anything that we see or believe in real? My examples of metaphysics from the book: I will be using Plato and Aristotle’s metaphysics examples. Interestingly enough, â€Å"Plato’s metaphysics claims that there are two kinds of reality† (Lavine 26). He believes in the material and immaterial word. The world of reality and the world of the senses. Plato’s metaphysics actually gives life to one of his most famous writings, The cave of allegory. This particular piece tells the story ofRead MorePlato And Aristotle s View On Knowledge Essay1297 Words   |  6 Pagesconflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and relationship with the development of human beings and their mindsets. Although Plato’s view o n knowledge describes the internal predisposed essence of all Forms and the needRead MorePlato vs. Aristotle: Virtue1656 Words   |  7 PagesPolitical Science 201 November 12, 2013 Anna Umstead Plato and Aristotle, arguably two of the most influential Greek philosophers, discussed their differing views on virtue extensively throughout many of their works. Although they agree that virtue is a desirable characteristic that will lead to happiness, the ultimate good, there exists between the two philosophies salient differences. While Plato believes only philosophers are capable of true, inherent virtue, Aristotle believes all men canRead MoreBoth Plato and Aristotle are among the most influential philosophers in the history. Socrates was900 Words   |  4 Pagescritic of Plato’s teachings. Since Aristotle found faults in Plato, hence their work is easily comparable as it is based on the common aspects of philosophy. In this paper I will first explain some similarities and then I shall explain the differences between the theories of Plato and Aristotle. Both Plato and Aristotle based their theories on four widely accepted beliefs of the time; â€Å"knowledge must be of what is real, the world experienced via the senses is what is real, knowledge must be ofRead MoreConceptions of the Soul Essay1161 Words   |  5 PagesPlato (in Phaedo) and Aristotle (in De Anima) present two fundamentally different conceptions of the soul. Through an analysis of their frameworks and genre, and whether their methods are plausible, it can be concluded that Aristotles formulation of the soul is more compelling than that of Plato. According to Plato, the body and the soul are separate entities. The soul is capable of existing before life of the body and after death of the body and it is constant, unchanging and non-physical