Grapes of Wrath and Migration Experience Essay Example for Free

Grapes of Wrath and Migration Experience Essay The novel, â€Å"The Grapes of Wrath† by John Steinbeck, takes you on a chronicle of one family’s migration, from Oklahoma to California as a result of exodus. The family is forced to migrate west in search of a livelihood during the great depression of the 1930’s. The structure of the chapters in this book alternate between narrating the journey of the Joad family with descriptions of the westward movement of migrant farmers in the 1930s as they flee drought and industry. Steinbeck, a native of California, draws from first hand experiences to guide the reader not only along the journey of one family in particular, the Joad’s but, to also expose the desperate conditions of migrant farming-families faced during the great depression in America. The Joad family was a part of a migration of people called â€Å"okies† which were farmers from the southwest that migrated westward in search of opportunity. The Okies were farmers whose topsoil blew away due to dust storms and were forced to migrate along Route 66 to California in search of work. The Okies were resented for migrating in large numbers to areas in the West where work was already hard to find and the sudden multitude of workers caused wages to be lowered. The Joads reside in Oklahoma, referred to as the Dust Bowl of the U. S . because of its lack of rain. The Joads’ were sharecroppers evicted from their homes because they failed to pay the bank their loan payments to the Shawnee Land and Cattle Company. The entire area was being evicted by the land owners, forcing sharecroppers’ to leave all that they have ever know and cared for behind in search of a sustained life elsewhere. The novel opens up by introducing the main characters and painting a picture of a dried up withering Oklahoma farming region. Released from an Oklahoma state prison after serving four years of a manslaughter conviction, Tom Joad makes his way back to his familys farm amid the desolation of the Dust Bowl. He meets Jim Casy, a former preacher and the man who baptized Tom as a child. Tom gives the old preacher a drink from his flask of liquor, and Casy tells Tom how he decided to stop preaching. He admits that he had a habit of taking girls â€Å"out in the grass† after prayer meetings and tells Tom that he was conflicted for some time, not knowing how to reconcile his sexual appetite with his responsibility for these young women’s souls. Eventually, however, he came to the decision that â€Å"there ain’t no sin and there ain’t no virtue. There’s just stuff people do. It’s all part of the same thing. † No longer convinced that human pleasures run counter to a divine plan, Casy believes that the human spirit is the Holy Spirit. Jim accompanies Tom to his family’s farm; when they find it deserted, fronted by withered crops, they find Muley in that house. Muley is an old family friend that stayed behinde while his family leaves for California to tend to his rightful land. He explains haltingly that a large company has bought all the land in the area and evicted the tenant farmers in order to cut labor costs. The three men proceed forward traveling to Toms Uncle Johns house, where they find the Joads preparing for a long trip to California in search of work. The entire family has gone to work picking cotton in hopes of earning enough money to buy a car and make the journey to California. Large California landowners have poster announcement for employment throughout western Oklahoma, and Ma and Pa Joad have decided to move their family their; evicted from their farm by the bank that owned it, they feel as though they have no choice. Once Tom has been reunited with his family, in the following chapters, the narrator assumes the voice of generic tenant farmers, expressing what their possessions and memories of their homes mean to them. The farmers are forced to pawn most of their belongings, both to raise money for the trip and simply because they cannot take them on the road. Steinbeck makes it apparent during this section of the novel that he believes that the economic system makes everyone a victim—rich and poor, privileged and disenfranchised. All are caught â€Å"in something larger than themselves. † This is used to give reference to the bigger picture of society and how situations dictate undesired behavior. In a sense it was a way of taking some hatred off the people hired to kick people off their lands because these people too lost their livelihood. When the time comes to leave, Muley Graves bids the family good-bye, but Grampa suddenly wants to stay. He claims that he aims to live off the land like Muley and continues to protest loudly until the Joads lace his coffee with sleeping medicine. Once the old man is asleep, the family loads him onto the truck and begins the long journey west. When the families leave the farms, the land if left vacant, and is worked by people with no connection to the land. This is used to drive home a theme of man and his relationship to the land as a symbol of ownership. Such a separation between work and life causes men to lose wonder for their work and for the land. As the Joads make their way down highway 66, it is described as being backed-up and filled with broken down poor farmers getting ripped off by auto repair shops selling parts. Steinbeck suggests that the hardships the families face stem from more than harsh weather conditions or simple misfortune. Human beings, acting with calculated greed, are responsible for much of their sorrow. Such selfishness separates people from one another, disabling the kind of unity and brotherhood that Casy deems holy. It creates an ugly animosity that pits man against man, as is clear in Chapter 12, when a gas station attendant suggests that California is becoming overcrowded with migrants†. Steinbeck uses Pa Joad to embody the desire to be connected with the land, this is displayed by his willingness to stay back from his family to tend and live off his native soils. Conversely Jim Casy represents the focus of the family and it’s the most important aspect is to stay together. Ma Joad also represents the glu holding the family together and the backbone of the family unit. The family reaches Oklahoma City, while here they suffer the loss of their dog, and Grandpa Joad, and are forced to give them informal funerals due to a lack of money. After suffering such a major loss, the family picks up new passenger the Wilson’s a family they met broke- down on the side of the road. A few days down the road the family gets told by a car salesman that implications of open jobs in California are false. This brings a large sense of worry among the family because there survival depends on the opportunities waiting in California. At this point of the novel the many amilies traveling along the road have come together as one family creating a sense of comfort and belonging. The people have created rules and enforcement of law; this is a drastic change in identity and life. They are no longer farmers but migrant men. The family reaches California, marking a major shift in the journey. Once in California, the family is warned by Ma that the family is falling apart, as a result of the passing Grandma and the separation from the Wilson’s. Coming after two sets of dire warnings from ruined migrant workers, Granma’s death bodes especially ill for the Joads. They now seem fated to live out the cautionary tales of the men they have met in Chapters 16 and 18, who now seem like predictors of the future. Before the Joads even set foot on its soil, California proves to be a land of vicious hostility rather than of opportunity. The unwelcoming attitudes of the police officers and border guards seem to testify to the harsh reception that awaits the family. Once in California the family is forced to move north by authority, which do not take a liking for the okies. The family reaches a camp where they stay for a little while. This camp was a squatter settlement of okies with no food or work to speak of. This is an unsettling feeling for the Joads and a sense of anguish settles over the family. A man come into the came looking for people to work, but he does not have the proper papers and will not disclose the wages to the workers. This creates skepticism by for the okies and a scuffle breaks out. Which results in Jim Casy taking the blame for Tom knocking out a police officer. The men take Jim Casy away and the Joads flee in search of safety and work. The family finds work in a peach orchard where they get paid 5 cents a basket. That evening, Al goes looking for girls, and Tom, curious about the trouble on the roadside, goes to investigate. Guards turn him away at the orchard gate, but Tom sneaks under the gate and starts down the road. He comes upon a tent and discovers that one of the men inside is Jim Casy. Jim tells Tom about his experience in prison and reports that he now works to organize the migrant farmers. He explains that the owner of the peach orchards cut wages to two-and-a-half cents a box, so the men went on strike. Now the owner has hired a new group of men in hopes of breaking the strike. Casy predicts that by tomorrow, even the strike-breakers will be making only two-and-a-half cents per box. Tom and Casy see flashlight beams, and two policemen approach them, recognizing Casy as the workers’ leader and referring to him as a communist. As Casy protests that the men are only helping to starve children, one of them crushes his skull with a pick handle. Tom flies into a rage and wields the pick handle on Casy’s murderer, killing him before receiving a blow to his own head. He manages to run away and makes it back to his family. In the morning, when they discover his wounds and hear his story, Tom offers to leave so as not to bring any trouble to them. Ma, however, insists that he stay. They leave the peach farm and head off to find work picking cotton. Tom hides in a culvert close to the plantation—his crushed nose and bruised face would bring suspicion upon him—and the family sneaks food to him. Word gets out that Tom is a murder and is forced to leave his family. Before he leave he has a hear to heart with his mother, he speaks of Jim Casy and his way of spirituality for the greater good. As Tom leaves his family to fight for social justice, he completes the transformation that began several chapters earlier. Initially lacking the patience and energy to consider the future at all, he marches off to lead the struggle toward making that future a kinder and gentler one. The Joads are left to work on the farm but, then there is a six day flood that wipes away the families cars and settlement. This forces the family to set off on foot for higher ground. Al decides to stay with the Wainwrights and Agnes. Traveling on foot, the remaining Joads spot a barn and head toward it. There, they find a dying man and small boy. The boy tells them that his father has not eaten for six days, having given all available food to his son. The man’s health has deteriorated to such an extent that he cannot digest solid food; he needs soup or milk. Ma looks to Rose of Sharon, and the girl at once understands her unstated thoughts. Rose of Sharon asks everyone to leave the barn and, once alone, she approaches the starving man. Despite his protests, she holds him close and suckles him. This is the closing of the book, which for me is an amazing ending. It was symbol of family and the fight for the greater good of the common people. Analysis In the Grapes of Wrath, we are taken along side a family of okies, who are forced to migrate west. Through this journey we can use the insights of the suffering the migrants went though to better understand the immigrant experience. Throughout history outsiders have driven people off their native land. They fall victim to the physical and environmental forces that drive them off the land. Immigrants or in this case migrant workers are labeled as trash and are used as capital gain and cheap labor. This is due a lack of options and the people are forced to work for unfair pay and to be treated unjust. The Dust bowl was an ecological and human disaster in the Southwestern Great Plains regions of the United States in the 1930s. The areas affected were Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, and Colorado. The poor handling of the land and years of drought caused this great disaster (Jones History). During this time the Okiesa name given to the migrants that traveled from Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, or anywhere in the Southwest or the northern plains to Californiaencountered many hardships. These hardships are brilliantly shown in John Steinbecks The Grapes of Wrath. Scholars agree, The most important fact about the dust storms was not scientific but human: their tragic effect upon people seeking livelihood on the stricken Midwestern farms (French 4). Steinbeck believed society was inhumane to the Okies and through his novel we can account for how the Okies were treated. By looking at Steinbecks own personal background and information from historical commentaries we are better able to grasp his reasoning for writing the novel because he understood what it was like to grow up as a farmer, and an outsider. More importantly, however, we are able to share in his compassion for the Okies. To fully understand Steinbecks reasoning for writing the novel it is important to look at his family and where he grew up. John Ernst Steinbeck was born on February 27, 1902, in Salinas California. His parents were middle-class people who played many roles in the community and cultural life. His father worked as a manager of a flourmill, and his mother taught in a one-room rural school (Swisher 13). Steinbecks compassion for the Okies is clearly seen in passages like, this: The Okies are resourceful, and intelligent Americans who have gone through the hell of the drought, have seen their lands wither and die and the topsoil blow away: and this, to a man who has owned his land, is a curious and terrible pain (French 56). The encounters Steinbeck had with the Okies inspired him to write The Grapes of Wrath (Swisher 20). The Okies were not only exposed to greed but also to the terrible feeling of an empty, deprived stomach. Steinbeck remarks, And in the South he [a homeless, hungry man] saw the golden oranges hanging on trees, the little golden oranges on the dark green trees; and guards with shotguns patrolling the lines so a man might not pick an orange for a thin child, oranges to be dumped if the price was low (318). In conclusion Steinbeck wants his readers to feel the pain of the Okies. They were discriminated against because of a circumstance (The Dust bowl) they had no control over. Steinbeck can relate to this inhumane treatment because he too had suffered teasing and hatred based solely on his physical characteristics. Nature handed the Okies and Steinbeck a bad hand and he wanted society to grasp the reality of human unkindness. Steinbeck writes, If you [land owners] could separate causes (hunger in a stomach, hunger in a single soul, hunger for joy and security) from results (growing labor unity, striking at new taxes, widening government), if you could know that Paine, Marx, Jefferson, Lenin, were results, not causes, you might survive. But that you can not know. For the quality of owning freezes you forever into I, and cuts you off forever from the we (Steinbeck 206). So we can use Steinbeck’s life experiences and historical references to use the Joads journey west to better understand the immigrant experience.

Poverty Policy In The Land Of Milk And Honey Essay Example for Free

Poverty Policy In The Land Of Milk And Honey Essay People might think that poverty is the last thing to be occurred in the United States of America –the land of milk and honey as they say, because America is known for having a Tiger Economy ever since. But it is a shame should the government of America admits that they too can experience poverty? Let them allow having an excuse that nothing is perfect. Everything is possible. However, we all know that we can attain the 0% rate of poverty in our country if everyone will work it out together. How the poverty is being measured in the United States of America? The United States Department of Health and Human Services says that there are two slightly different versions of the federal poverty measure. One is the poverty threshold which is used mainly in Census Bureau for statistical purposes, and the other one is the poverty guidelines which are basically for administrative purposes. (2007). But the US government do not really understand that the only thing this policy or measurement can do is the knowledge about figures and recoded data of how many could pass yearly in the poverty line in accordance to the standards that they have set. They never realize that the poverty measurement has nothing to do with poverty itself and how to totally demolish the poverty problem in the United States of America – the land of milk and honey! As a citizen, all I can say is that we have to go back to the main roots of the problem. What are those problems that lead us to poverty? Are we ready to face them? I guess we should. And it is not just facing them but to act on them for the betterment of any individual or household concern but also for the good of the common people, government and country. Poverty has not to be measured in starvation and emptiness only. There are many factors involve including illiteracy, illegitimacy, immorality, unemployment, dirty politics, bureaucracy, environment, lifestyle, vices, crime, over population, sickness, mortality or even having your own identity and citizenship. But as long as the scarcity and level of consumptions of every household are the major factors that we keep on measuring, we will never resolve the problem of poverty. Again, I suggest that we go back to the main roots of the problem. I affirm to David Brooks’ optimism outlook in his argument â€Å"†¦these rapid improvements (which refers to globalization) at the bottom of the income ladder are contributing to and correlating with declines in illiteracy, child labor rates and fertility rate. † (2004). But there are also some things that should be remembered. Tiger economy or third world country has the equal opportunity of experiencing poverty. However, addressing the issue of poverty lies not to the government alone. Every human beings living on Earth has to do their fair share of opinions and actions in fighting poverty. It could be done by helping others or the nation. But I guess the best poverty alleviation policy is improving first your own quality of life wherever you are; hence, every place you could have been has the chance to be a poverty-free land of milk and honey.

Performance Appraisal System

Performance Appraisal System Procedural justice and Interactional justice: Assessing employees perception of fairness of performance appraisal; an empirical study of a small manufacturing company. ABSTRACT This research identifies procedural justice and interactional justice influences on perceived fairness of performance appraisal at a small private manufacturing company located in Newcastle, UK. Distributive justice refers to the perceived fairness of procedures used to determine the appraisal ratings. Interactional justice refers to the perceived fairness of the raters interpersonal treatment of the ratee during the appraisal process. A qualitative and quantitative case study method was used to obtain an understanding of employee perceptions of the fairness of their performance appraisal. Data from both interviews with nine employees was collected along with questionnaires completed by these participants. Two hypotheses were developed. Both hypotheses were supported by research data. 1.1 Aim of the researcher The researcher will assess the relationship between perceived fairness of justice among employees of the performance appraisal system. The aim of this research is to prove through this study that level of employees satisfaction with the appraisal system is influenced by the employees perceived fairness of procedural and interactional justice of the performance appraisal session. 1.2 Introduction Performance appraisal is a process designed to evaluate, manage and ultimately improve employee performance. It should allow the employer and employee to openly discuss the expectations of the organisation and the achievements of the employee. That is, the primary emphasis is on future development of the employee within the objectives of the organisation. There is no universally accepted model of performance appraisal. However, more often than not this process is designed around the following elements: setting performance goals and objectives; measurement of performance against those goals and objectives; feedback of results; amendments to goals and objectives. Performance appraisal systems can provide organisations with valuable information to assist in the developments of organisational strategies and planning. The information gained from this process can assist: in identifying and developing future management potential; in increasing performance and overall productivity; it works towards identifying strengths and managing weaknesses; in providing clarity to employees about an organisations expectations regarding performance levels; in providing an opportunity to audit and evaluate current human resources and identify areas for future development. Managers may conduct appraisals primarily to affect employee input through the feedback process, or justify some sort of human resource action (termination, transfer, promotion etc). Jawroski and Kohli (1991) identify other benefits that can be obtained from performance appraisals. Among these benefits are increase in role clarity, performance, and job satisfaction. Given the positive returns obtained from performance appraisals, one could reasonably expect that organisations would devote considerable resource to the appraisal process. Correspondingly, it may be anticipated that managers try to make certain that the dimensions of the appraisal process are known, understood, and supported by the participants. Theres probably no management process that has been the subject of more research than the performance appraisal. At the best managed companies, the performance appraisal is no joke it is a serious business that powers the success of the organization. (Montague, 2007) It has been suggested that to enhance satisfaction, managers should consider expanding the evaluation criteria to include those criteria which are important to the employee, perhaps creating a participatory performance appraisal system. (Thomas and Bertz 1994) In fact, employee input into the process has been described as having an impact on the perceived fairness of the evaluation (Latham at el. 1993). It has been stated that the opinions of employees, as they pertain to the appraisal system, may be greater determinant of the systems effectiveness than the validity or reliability of the system itself (Wanguri 1995). As stated by Thomas and Bretz (1994) without a sense of ownership, both managers and employees may view the process with fear and loathing. Thus, they contend that a major concern in the evaluation process is an acceptance of the system by those employees being evaluated. To this end, if employees believe they are evaluated based upon inappropriate criteria, it would fol low that their commitment to and satisfaction with the organisation supporting this particular evaluation system would be correspondingly reduced. Academic background 2.1 The social context of performance appraisal Levy Williams (2002) argue that identifying, measuring, and defining the organizational context in which appraisal takes place is integral to truly understanding and developing effective performance appraisals. Further, it is believed that this has been the framework driving the performance appraisal research since about the 1990 and into the beginning of the 21st century. Whether it is discussed as the social-psychological process of performance appraisal (Murphy Cleveland, 1991), the social context of performance appraisal (Ferris, Judge, Rowland, Fitzgibbons, 1994) the social milieu of performance appraisal (Ilgen at al. 1993), performance appraisal from the organisational side (Levy Steelman, 1997) the games that rates and rates play (Kozlowski, Chao Morrison, 1998), or the dues process approach to performance appraisal (Folger, Konovsky Cropanzao, 1998) it is argued along with other scholars that performance appraisal takes place in a social contact and the context plays a major role in the effectiveness of the appraisal process and how participants react to the process (Farr Levy, 2004). It has been suggested elsewhere that research over the last 10 years has moved noticeable away from a limited psychometric scope and toward an emphasis on variables that compose the social context (Fletcher, 2001). Distal factors Levy Williams (2002) definition of distal variables is generally consistent with Murphy and Cleveland (1995). Specifically, distal variables are broadly construed as contextual factors that affect many human resource systems, including performance appraisal. In other words, distal variables are not necessarily related to performance appraisal, but they may have unique effects on the performance appraisal process that are useful to understand and consider. Distal factors include but are not limited to organisational climate and culture, organisational goals, human resource strategies, external factors, technological advances, and workforce composition. Levy Williams (2002) believe these factors have an effect on rater and rate behaviour, although not directly. For instance, an organisation that espouses a continuous learning culture may structure and implement a very different type of performance appraisal system than an organisation without such a culture. A review of the performance appraisal literature over the last 7-10 years reveals little systematic empirical work on the distal variables other than some studies on culture, climate and technology issues (see, e.g. Hebert Vorauer, 2003). While this is at some levels disappointing, it is rather understandable. First, there is little theory specific to performance appraisal to methodically guide this level of research. Second, the breadth of the constructs Levy Williams (2002) construe as distal make it difficult to measure and implement within the research setting. Third, given the distal nature of these factors, their direct effects on performance appraisal behaviour may be small. Perhaps closer examination of the relationships between distal and proximal relationships would prove more fruitful. Even with the difficulties regarding this type of research, however, it is believed it will be important to continue examining these factors to fully understand the social context in which performance appraisal operates. (Levy Williams, 2002) Process proximal variables The next two section of the paper will underscore those proximal variables (both process and structural) receiving attention in the recent appraisal literature. Some researchers chose to categorize the proximal variables as either process (i.e. having a direct impact on how the appraisal process is conducted including things such as accountability or supervisor subordinate relationships), or structural (i.e. dealing with the configuration or makeup of the appraisal itself and including areas such as appraisal dimensions or frequency of appraisal). Rater issue Rater affect is one of the most studied rater variables. Although the literature has not been consistent regarding a formal definition of affect in performance appraisal (Lefkowitz, 2000), a good general definition linked to most of this research involves liking or positive regard for ones subordinate. The Affect Infusion Model (Forgas Georges, 2001) suggests that affective states impact on judgements and behaviours and, in particular, affect or mood plays a large role when tasks require a degree of constructive processing. For instance, in performance appraisal, raters in good moods tend to recall more positive information from memory and appraise performance positively. Consistent with the Affect Infusion Model, a few recent studies have examined the role of mood or affect in performance appraisal. Lefkowitz (2000) reported that affective regard is related frequently to higher appraisal ratings, less inclination to punish subordinates, better supervisor subordinate relationships, greater halo effect, and less accuracy. A couple of recent studies have looked at the role of similarity in personality and similarity in affects levels between raters and rates, finding similarity is related to appraisal ratings. Antonioni and Park (2001) found that affect was more strongly related to rating leniency in upward and peer ratings than it was in traditional top-down ratings and the this effect was stronger when raters had observational time with their subordinates. They concluded from this that raters pay so much attention to their positive regard for subordinates that increased observations result in noticing more specific behaviours that fit their affect-driven schema. It was also found that although affect is positively related to appraisal ratings; it is more strongly related to more subjective trait-like ratings, then to ostensibly more objective task-based ratings. Further, keeping performance diaries tended to increase the strength of that relationship between affect and performance ratings leading the authors to conclude that perhaps affect follows from subordinate performance level rather than the other way around. A second broad area related to raters that has received considerable research attention has to do with the motivation of the raters. Traditionally, research seemed to assume that raters were motivated to rate accurately. More recently, however, researchers have begun to question whether all or even most raters are truly motivated to rate accurately. One line of research related to raters motivation has focused on the role of individual differences and rating purpose on rating leniency. Most practitioners report overwhelming leniency on the part of their raters and this rating elevation has been found in empirical papers as well as surveys of organisations (Murphy Cleveland, 1995). The role of attributions in the performance appraisal process has also attracted some recent research attention. In some of these studies investigators have examined how the attributions that raters make for ratees behaviours affect their motivation to rate or their actual rating. For instance, using a traditional social psychological framework, researchers found that whether individuals opted for consoling, reprimanding, transferring, demoting, or firing a hypothetical employee depended in large part on the extent to which rater believed that the exhibited behaviour was due to ability or effort. It was found that both liking and attributions mediated relationships between reputation and reward decisions. More specifically, raters consider ratees behaviour and their reputations when drawing attributional inferences and deciding on appropriate rewards. The implications of this line of research are clear: attributional processing is an important element of the rating process and these attributions, in part, determine raters reactions and ratings. (Murphy Cleveland, 1995) A second line of research related to rater motivation has to do with rater accountability, which is the perceived potential to be evaluated by someone and being held responsible for ones decisions or behaviours (Frink Ferris, 1998) With respect to performance appraisal, accountability is typically thought of as the extent to which a rater is held answerable to someone else for his or her ratings of another employee. They concluded that accountability can result in distortions of performance ratings. It is demonstrated that raters told that ratees had been rated too low in the past responded by inflating ratings while others told that they would have to defend their ratings in writing provided more accurate ratings. In a follow up to this study it was hypothesized that the accountability pressure on raters to justify ratings may operate through an increased motivation to better prepare themselves for their rating task. This was manifested in raters paying more attention to performanc e and recording better performance-related notes. A related study looking at accountability forces in performance appraisal found that raters inflated ratings when they were motivated to avoid a negative confrontation with poor performers, but did not adjust ratings downward when good performers rated themselves unfavourably (Levy Williams 1998). Ratee issues A second major of focus of performance appraisal research consist of research centred on the performance appraisal ratee. Two areas were covered, in particular, the links between performance ratings and rewards; those elements of the performance appraisal process which increases ratees motivation such as participation. Related article argues the while pay is an important motivator along with recognition, work enjoyment , and self-motivation, very few organisations actually link the performance appraisal system to pay or compensation in a clear, tangible way (Mani, 2002). Both traditional academic research (Roberts Reed, 1996) and more practitioner-focused research (Shah Murphy, 1995) have identified the significance of participation in the appraisal process as an antecedent of ratees work motivation. It suggests that participation is simply essential to any fair and ethical appraisal system. It was identified that participation and perception of fairness as integral to employees pe rceptions of job satisfaction and organisational commitment. Roberts Reed (1996) take somewhat similar track in proposing that participation, goals, and feedback impact on appraisal acceptance which affects appraisal satisfaction and finally employee motivation and productivity. Performance appraisals are no longer just about accuracy, but are about much more including development, ownership, input, perceptions of being valued, and being a part of an organisational team. Focus on reactions to the appraisal process Cardy and Dobbins (1994) arguing that perhaps the best criterion to use in evaluating performance appraisal systems was the reactions of ratees. The claim was that even the most-psychometrically-sound appraisal system would be ineffective if ratees (and raters) did not see it as fair, useful, valid, accurate, etc. Good psychometrics cannot make up for negative perceptions on the part of those involved in the system. Folger et al. (1992) define three elements that must be present to achieve higher perceptions of fairness: adequate notice, fair hearing, and judgement based on evidence. Although they identified specific interventions that should be implemented to increase due process, they cautioned that â€Å"due process mechanisms must be implemented in terms of guiding principles (i.e. designed with process goals in mind) rather than in a legalistic, mechanical, rote fashion. In general studies have found that both ratees and raters respond more favourably to fair performance appraisal systems (e.g. less emotional exhaustion, more acceptances of the feedback, more favourable reactions toward the supervisor, more favourable reactions toward the organisation, and more satisfaction with the appraisal system and the job on the part of both rater and rate) (Taylor et al. 1995, 1998). Trust issue Researchers have posited that trust is the key element in managing the supervisor employee relationship. According to Mayer and Davis (1999) trust is made up of three components: ability, benevolence, and integrity. In other words, if an employee believes a supervisor has the skills to properly appraise, has the interests of the employee at the heart, and believes the supervisor upholds standards and values, the employee is likely to trust that supervisor. Interest in understanding the processes related to trust are the result of research that support both direct and indirect effects of trust on important organisational and individual outcomes. For instance it is supported by research the relationship between trust and outcomes such as employee attitudes, cooperation, communication, and organizational citizenship behaviours. As with appraisal perceptions and reactions it is also believed that trust issues can limit the effectiveness of performance appraisal. If ratees have low level s of trust for their supervisor, they may be less satisfied with the appraisal and may not as readily accept feedback from the source. More to come 2.2 Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) performance appraisal Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) are a relatively new approach to performance evaluation. They are in effect a combination of the graphic rating scales and the critical incident method. An actual description of important job behaviour is developed and â€Å"anchored† alongside the scale. The evaluator is then asked to select the description of behaviour which best matches actual employee behaviour for the rating period. In a controlled field study, Silverman and Wexley (1984) used BARS to test the effect of rate participation on the appraisal process. BARS were developed for each of the following job classifications: clerical, non-clerical staff, technical and professional, nursing, management/supervisory. Those employees who participated in creating, and were evaluated by, the behaviourally-based scales, had a more positive reaction to the entire performance appraisal process. Specifically, they felt that the performance appraisal interviews were more useful, that their supervisors were more supportive, and that the process produced more motivation to improve job performance. BARS address many of the problems often found in traditional evaluation approaches such as the halo effect, leniency, and the central tendency error. In addition, research suggests that many employees prefer this evaluation method (Rarick Baxter, 1986) BARS are however not a panacea for management and do possess both advantages and disadvantages. According to Rarick and Baxter (1986) advantages of BARS are: clearer standards both subordinate and superior have a clearer idea of what constitutes good job performance. Ambiguity concerning expectations is reduced; more accurate measurement because individuals involved with the particular job develop the BARS instrument they have a good understanding of the requirements for good performance; better performance feedback since the BARS is based on specific behaviour it provides a guideline for improving future work performance; better consistency BARS have been shown to be more consistent in terms of reliability than more traditional e valuation methods. In other words, when more than one supervisor rates the same employee, the results are more similar when BARS is the evaluation method. Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales are, however, not without drawbacks. Disadvantages of BARS are: more costly more time and effort, and eventually more expense is involved in the construction and implementation of BARS; possible activity trap since BARS are more activity oriented, they may cause both supervisor and subordinate to become more concerned with activity performance rather than accomplishing actual results; not exhaustive behaviour scale even if the rator posses lengthy listing of behaviour examples he/she may not be able to match the observed behaviour with the stipulated anchor. As Rarick and Baxter (1986) note Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales have the potential to increase both the accuracy of employee appraisal and ultimately the effectiveness of the organization. BARS are equally useful as a judgemental instrument and as an employee developmental device. They are designed to make performance appraisal more accurate by minimising ambiguity and focusing on specific behaviour. BARS move employee performance appraisal away from the subjective opinions of the evaluator and closer towards on objective measure of true performance. 2.3 Limitations in performance appraisal The advantages and disadvantages of using performance assessment in making employment decisions are well documented (e.g. Murphy Cleveland, 1995). The limitations of performance assessment, such as inflated ratings, lack of consistency, and the politics of assessment (Tziner, Latham, Price Haccoun, 1996), often lead to their abandonment. Managers responsible for delivering performance reviews who are uncomfortable with the performance rating system may give uniformly high ratings that do not discriminate between rates. Poor ratings detract from organisational uses and increase employee mistrust in the performance appraisal system (Tziner Murphy, 1999). Employees on the receiving end of the appraisal often express dissatisfaction with both the decisions made as a result of performance assessment and the process of performance assessment (Milliman, Nason, Zhu De Cieri, 2002), which may have longitudinal effects on overall job satisfaction (Blau, 1999) and commitment (Cawley, Keepin g Levy, 1998). The extensive research on performance appraisal (Arvey Murphy, 1998: Fletcher, 2001: Fletcher Perry, 2001, Murphy Cleveland 1995) has not addressed the fundamental problems of the performance appraisal process the performance appraisal is influenced by a variety of relevant, non-performance factors such as cultural context (Latham Mann, 2006), that it does not provide either valid performance data or useful feedback to individuals (Fletcher, 2001) , or that performance appraisal instruments often measure the â€Å"wrong things† (Latham Mann, 2006). Murphy and Cleveland (1995) state that â€Å"a system that did nothing more than allow the making of correct promotion decisions would be a good system, even if the indices used to measure performance were inaccurate or measure the wrong set of constructs.† No assessment system, however, would meet with success if it did not have the support of those it assessed. In developing a new performance appraisal system it is important to use past research on performance appraisals that identified a number of factors that lead to greater acceptance of appraisals by employees. Firstly, legally sound performance appraisals should be objective and based on a job analysis, they should also be based on behaviours that relate to specific functions that are controllable by the rate, and the results of the appraisal should be communicated to the employee (Malos, 1998). Secondly, the appraisals must be perceived as fair. Procedural fairness is improved when employees participate in all aspects of the process, when there is consistency in all processes, when the assessments are free of supervisor bias, and when there is a formal channel for the employees to challenge or rebut their evaluations (Gilliland Langdon, 1998). In addition to perceptions of fairness, participation by employees in the appraisal process is related to motivation to improve job performance, satisfaction with the appraisal process, increased organisational commitment and the utility or value that the employees place on that appraisal (Cawley et al. 1998). 2.4 Blended approach Competencies To overcome the problem of job-specific performance dimensions, the performance assessment system was based on behaviourally defined core competencies (Dubois 1993; Klein 1996). The core competencies had been previously identified through an extensive process as being common to all positions; these competencies were to become the basis for training new recruits and for the continuous development of existing members (Himelfarb, 1996). Fletcher Perry (2001) stated the â€Å"the elements constituting what we normally think of as performance appraisal will increasingly be properly integrated into the human resources policies of the organisation using the same competency framework for all HR processes, linking individual objectives with team and business unit objectives framing the input of appraisal to promotion assessment in an appropriate manner, and so on† making it â€Å"more effective mechanism and less of annual ritual that appears to exist in a vacuum.† Along the s ame lines, Smither (1998) went on to note that the same competency model should guide â€Å"numerous human resource initiatives†. The competency development process used for this study followed the suggestions of Fletcher Perry (2001) and Smither (1998) and included a review of functional job analysis data for general police constables that covered a majority of the different job positions. In this sense, the competencies were blended by incorporating the values and specific attributes (Schippmann et al., 2000). A blended approach is one that couples and organisations strategy in the derivation of the broad competencies with the methodological rigor of task analysis. As Lievens, Sanchez, and De Corte (2004) note, blended approach is likely to improve the accuracy and quality of inferences made from the resulting competency model because a blended approach capitalizes on the strength of each method. Strategy is used as a frame of reference to guide subject matter experts to identify those worker attributes or competencies that are aligned with the organisations strategy and the to use the task statements to pro vide more concrete referents for the associated job behaviours (Lievens et al., 2004) 2.5 Justice of fairness The study of justice of fairness has been a topic of philosophical interest that extends back at least as far as Plato and Socrates (Ryan, 1993). In research in the organizational sciences, justice is considered to be socially constructed. That is, an act is defined as just if most individuals perceive it to be on the basis of empirical research (Cropanzao Greenberg 1997). Each approach propose a different way of conceptualizing justice, from the provision of process control (Thibaut Walker, 1975) to a focus on consistency control (Leventhal et al. 1980) and an examination of interpersonal treatment (Bies Moag, 1986). Performance appraisal systems are among the most important human resource systems in organizations insofar as the yield decisions integral to various human resource actions and outcomes (Murphy and Cleveland 1995). Reactions to appraisal and the appraisal process are believed to significantly influence the effectiveness and the overall viability of appraisal systems (Bernardin and Beatty 1984; Cardy and Dobbins 1994; Carroll and Schneier 1982, Lewer 1994), For instance. Murphy and Cleveland (1995:314) contended that â€Å"reaction criteria are almost always relevant and an unfavourable reaction may doom the most carefully constructed appraisal system†. Perceptions of fairness are important to all human resource processes, e.g., selection, performance appraisal, and compensation, and particularly so, to the performance appraisal process. Indeed, a decade ago, Cardy and Dobbins (1994:54) asserted that â€Å"with dissatisfaction and feelings of unfairness in process and inequity in evaluations, any appraisal system will be doomed to failure.† Other researchers have also acknowledged the importance of fairness to the success or failure of appraisal system (Taylor et al. 1995). 2.6 Procedural justice Procedural justice refers to the perceived fairness of the procedures used to determine appraisal outcomes (Greenberg 1986a), independent of favourability or fairness of the performance rating or its administrative consequences (Skarlicki, Ellard and Kelln 1998). Folger et. al (1992) have developed a procedural justice model for performance appraisal, rooted in the due process of law, and possessing three basic factors: adequate notice, a fair hearing and judgment based on evidence. Adequate notice involves giving employees knowledge of appraisal system and how it affects them well ahead of any formal appraisal. More specifically, it entails developing performance standards and objectives before the appraisal period commences. These standards and objectives must be well documented, clearly explained, fully understood and preferable set by mutual agreement, with employees only held accountable for standards and objectives properly communicated to them. Adequate notice also involves hi gh appraisal frequency and giving employees constant feedback on timely basis throughout the performance evaluation period, so that employees can rectify any performance deficiencies before the appraisal is conducted (Folger et al. 1992). Studies show that adequate notice is important to employee perceptions of procedural fairness. Williams and Levys (2000) study of 128 employees from three US banks revealed that system knowledge significantly predicts appraisal satisfaction and procedural fairness, controlling for the much smaller effect on organizational level. The second factor that affects employee perceptions of procedural fairness is a fair hearing. A fair hearing means several things in a performance appraisal context. These include: an opportunity to influence the evaluation decision through evidence and argument, access to the evaluation decision, and an opportunity to challenge the evaluation decision (Folger et al. 1992). Fundamentally, a fair hearing entails two-way comm unication, with employee input or voice in all aspects of the appraisal decision-making process. Several researchers have consistently found the ‘voice effects procedural justice in a variety of work contexts (Greenberg, 1986; Korsgaard and Robertson, 1995). In a study of 128 food service employees and their 23 supervisor at a large, US university, Dulebohn and Ferris (1991) found that the informal voice provided by influence tactics affected employee perceptions of fairness in the appraisal process. Two types of influence tactics were differentiated: the first on the supervisor and the second on the job. Influence of the supervisor focused on, for example, efforts at ingratiation. Influence on the job focused on, for example, manipulating performance data. Uses of supervisor-focused, influence tactics were positively associated with employees perceptions of procedural justice, but uses of job-focused influence tactics were negatively associated. The authors argue that this negative association may result from reverse causation: perception of unjust appraisal procedures ma y encourage employees to adopt job-focused influence tactics. The third procedural justice factor is the judgment based on evidence. This means convincing employees that ratings do accurately reflect per

The Role of Language in Shakespeares Play The Tempest Essay -- The Te

The Role of Language in Shakespeare's Play The Tempest 1 The role of language in Shakespeare’s play â€Å"The Tempest† is quite significant. To Miranda and Prospero the use of language is a means to knowing oneself. Caliban does not view language in the same light. Prospero taught Caliban to speak, but instead of creating the feeling of empowerment from language, Caliban reacts in insurrectionary manner. Language reminds him how different he is from Miranda and Prospero, and also how they have changed him. It also reminds him of how he was when he wasn’t a slave. He resents Prospero for â€Å"Civilising† him, because in doing so he took away his freedom. Language and knowledge is the key to power on the island. Prospero is a well educated man, and has many books, which gives him his magical power. Prospero rules the island and has many creatures under his command. He possesses so much power that he can even cause weather to change and indirectly the fate of the people who were shipwrecked on the island. William Sherman has the opinion â€Å"Knowledge was magical, and sometimes even entailed magic. But the attacks on libraries, the condemnations for conjuring, and the polemical complaints betray a deeper and more significant phenomenon: there were in early modern England dramatic uncertainties about the power of information and those who possessed it. (Cited in Jardine 1996: 105) Throughout the whole play there is evidence of power, someone in possession of it and another subordinate to the person with the power. Mostly this happens in the scenes with prospero, as he is almost an omniscient and omnipotent character, with god-like qualities. He has the means to change many things not possible for humans, because of his magic and his power over magical creatures such as Ariel. Caliban also does the will of Prospero; But, as ‘tis, We cannot miss him: he does make our fire, Fetch in our wood, and serves in offices That profit us. What, ho! Slave! Caliban! (I.ii.351-53) The shipwrecked people also play into Prospero’s hand, but they don’t even realize this. Even Miranda is dutiful to her father, and does what he says with little complaint. There is a hierarchy on the island, with Prospero on top of the list. Lorie Jerrell Leininger writes in her article â€Å"Miranda is given to understand that she is the foot in the family ... ...epresents every person that has been colonized by Europe, and their attempt to civilize the savages. Their method of civilizing and to maintain a firm grip on their savage labourers was language. It was their means to communicate and control the people who they didn’t consider as themselves and a means to discriminate against it. This is reason why Caliban resists and rebels against Prospero and disparage the language he has been taught. To him it is the loss of freedom and the agency through which he is being discriminated against. References: Knight,G.Wilson. â€Å"The Shakespearean Superman: An essay on The Tempest.† The Crown of life: Essays in Interpretation of Shakespeare’s Final Plays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1947. 203-255 Leininger, Lorie Jerrel. â€Å"The Miranda Trap: Sexism and Racism in Shakespeare’s Tempest.† The Woman’s Part: Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare. Eds Carolyn Ruth Swift Lenz et al. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1983. 285-294 Smith, Ian. "When we were capital, or lessons in language: Finding Caliban's roots." Shakespeare Studies 28 (2000): 252-256 Tomlinson, Gary. "The matter of sounds." Shakespeare Studies 28(2000):236-239

Electric Cars :: essays research papers

Privately Owned Gasoline Powered Vehicles Should Be Limited The automobile has become a very important part of today’s society. It is a necessity to own or to have access to a car in order to keep up with all of the competition of the business world, and also one’s social demands. Most people would not be able to travel around a country or the world without this incredible machine, for it provides freedom and mobility, even for people who do not own a car. Unfortunately, the car has a very destructive nature. Automobiles make a major contribution to air and noise pollution, the depletion of fossil fuels, and the abnormalities in children and adults due to lead poisoning. Although our economy currently defends on gasoline- powered cars, it is my belief that the use of gas-powered automobiles must be limited because of air pollution, natural resources and lead poisoning. First of all, and most importantly, automobiles are harmful to our environment. By definition, automobiles run on gasoline, which is a mixture derived from petroleum. Gasoline contains hundreds of different hydrocarbons, or compounds containing the chemical elements carbon and hydrogen (Gasoline). When the gas is burned in the engine of the car, several byproducts result. These exhausts include hydrocarbons and oxides of three elements: Carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur (Emissions). Tiny amounts of poisonous trace elements such as lead, cadmium, and nickel also are present. Everything contained in the exhaust affects the environment intensely. Auto engine exhaust contributes about fifty percent of today’s atmospheric pollution, and in highly populated and industrialized cities, air pollution consists of up to 80% car exhaust. Because of all of the gasoline-powered cars on the road, the earth’s outermost protective shell, the ozone layer, is being destroyed. The ozone layer g uards against, among other things, global warming and skin cancer. If it is annihilated, the whole planet, including the human race, will be erased along with it. This is one reason gasoline powered automobiles should be limited. Another reason privately owned gasoline powered vehicles should be limited is the depletion of the fossil fuel supply. People all over the world need petroleum, a fossil fuel, to fill their cars in order to get around. However, petroleum, like many other natural resources on this earth, is in short supply. The continued use of petroleum at the current rate will cause the limited supply to dwindle. Our society does not seem to realize this point, though.

Developing Countries Essay -- International Political Economy, Debt

Developing countries are closely linked to debt. This is because developing countries needs to allocate more funds to resolve debt crises. Debt can create a negative effect to the host country’s economy and the social condition of a country. This issue of indebtedness is usually solved using domestic capital. Since developing countries have low income, therefore they have low level of savings. The savings are insufficient to repay debt. Thus the government resolves the issue by imposing higher tax. But this will lead to inflationary tax, which is a burden to the further generation. Therefore, the government resorts to foreign borrowings. Domestic borrowings and foreign borrowings have further increased the total debt accumulated by the nation leading them to poverty. To resolve the debt issue, foreign direct investment plays an important role as a source of fund and also in acquiring skills and knowledge. But the inflows of foreign direct investment depend on location advantage. There are various channels that determine the location advantage such as human capital development channel, financial development channel and environmental condition channel. According to Wilhelms and Stanley (1998), foreign direct investment movements are derived from the both financial transaction and non-financial transaction such as changes in price, foreign exchange and others. Figure 12 shows the foreign direct investment theory and its determinants in emerging economics. According to the foreign direct investment theory, socio culture is the oldest institution, complex and most diffused factor that influence the inflow of foreign direct investment. It is most difficult and time consuming to change. The degree to which a society is recepti... ...ivariate regression models were used to further probe the nature of the relationships between income, talent, and other factors. The adjusted R-squared values for these models are (0.57) and (0.65) respectively, suggesting a reasonably positive and robust relationship. These findings support the human capital growth by Lucas (1988), Simon (1998) and Geetha (2002). This was also supported by Eaton and Eckstein (1997) and Black and Henderson (1999) that workers are more productive when they locate around others with high levels of human capital. In addition, Romer (1990) also claims the importance of knowledge and human capital in generating economic growth through economic geography. Romer (1990) stressed that what is important for growth is integration not into an economy with a large number of people but rather into one with a large amount of human capital.

On the Necessity of Rationalism

In the process of considering the various means of justification, a relativistic conception of reality assumes that the truth and hence the validity of a statement may only be assessed in relation to the perspective of the discipline which holds a particular belief. In this sense, truth is dependent upon the internal coherence of beliefs within a system of thought. In his The Last Word, Nagel claims that such is not the case. He argues that the truth and hence the validity of statements are dependent upon an unqualified notion of reason.He claims that the truth of a statement is independent upon any particular perspective. If such is the case, it follows that the truth of any statement is independent from the schema [truth schema] presented by any system of thought. In relation to scientific claims, it thereby follows that the truth of scientific claims ought to be assessed through the unqualified notion of reason as opposed to merely their internal coherence within the scientific co nception of reality [scientific framework].The aforementioned argument is based upon the critique of the intrinsic limits to subjectivist doubt since challenges to the independent validity of reason must themselves assume the independent validity of reason. Any explanation of reason deriving from outside the mind can itself be explained only from inside the mind, as having its own independent validity. In the case of scientific knowledge, he argues that it is mistaken to assume that the scientific discipline has freed itself from the limits of the Cartesian problem through the replacement of judgments about rules of practice from objective judgments.Nagel argues that if science will continually adhere to a subjectivistic and hence relativistic framework, the discipline will fail to provide an objective account of reality. He claims, â€Å"the general aim of such reasoning [scientific reasoning] is to make sense of the world in which we find ourselves and how it appears to us and ot hers† (81). If such is the case, it is necessary to conceive of the conception of the world which is not based upon an a priori conception of reality dependent upon a preconceived and limited conception of the word. According to Nagel, such an account is not provided by science.The reasons for this lies in the subjectivism of science (Nagel 84). Subjectivism within science [scientific methods] is apparent if one considers that the scientific â€Å"demand for order cannot itself be rationally justified nor does it correspond to a self-evident necessity† (Nagel 84). He notes that scientific subjectivism can only end if it adheres to rational means of knowledge acquisition. It is only through the defense of rationalism that an objectivist account of evidence is possible.Nagel further argues that the appeal of subjectivism arises out of a certain reductionist impulse in modern explanation as this reductionist impulse enables the explanation of things to hinge on their reduc tion to local and finite terms thereby ensuring subjectivist conclusions. Although this enables the assurance against rationalist explanations that refuse to make reason into something irrational or that conceive of reason as a capacity for grasping the universal and infinite principle, the reductionist explanation is in itself dependent on an irreducibly nonlocal and objective understanding of reason. Nagel argues that doubt about reason presupposes reason’s independent validity hence reason’s independent validity cannot be coherently doubted.He rightly argues that to object to reason on the grounds we cannot strictly explain it in naturalistic terms is to misunderstand the irreducible nature of the concept since reason cannot be so explained without losing its meaning or validity and that, as such, it is justified in a different way, by showing it to be necessary to intelligible thought and action. Science thereby must opt for a rationalistic as opposed to a subjecti vistic account of reality for it to maintain its value as a discipline.Work CitedNagel, Thomas. The Last Word. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.Essay Number TwoEdmund Gettier’s Counterargument Against thePlatonic Tripartite Account of Propositional KnowledgeThe Platonic tripartite definition of propositional and fallibilist knowledge found in the last section of the Theaetetus states that knowledge of P occurs when an epistemic agent S knows that P if and only if (1) P is true, (2) S believes that P, and (3) S is justified in believing that P (90). A well-known opposition to such an account of propositional knowledge questions the sufficiency of the aforementioned conditions.It is argued that although the aforementioned conditions are necessary in the definition of propositional knowledge such conditions are insufficient due to their failure to ensure S against conditions wherein knowledge of P occurs as a result of mere epistemic luck (Gettier 123). This critique is b est known as the Gettier type counter examples towards the tripartite definition of propositional knowledge mentioned above.A logical problem is posited by the Gettier type counter examples. This logical problem is evident in the lack of successful coordination between the truth of P and the reasons that justify S in holding P. Floridi notes that Gettier type counter examples arise â€Å"because the truth and the justification of P happen to be not only independent but also opaquely unrelated that they happen to fail to converge or agree on the same propositional content P†¦without S realizing it† (64). In order to understand this, it is important to lay down the main assumptions of Gettier’s counter argument that seeks to explicate the aforementioned logical problem.Gettier’s argument against the tripartite account of propositional knowledge, which involves the conception of knowledge as justified true belief arose as a result of the following claim: knowl edge [propositional knowledge] does not merely involve justified true belief. Such a claim is based upon the following assumptions. First, there are instances wherein the warrant is not a sufficient condition for a belief in P. This is evident if one considers that instances of belief and knowledge of P are in some respects epistemically different [other than in terms of truth] from belief of P without knowledge of P. Second, there are instances wherein warrant is fallible.This is due to the insufficiency of truth and justification as warrants for knowledge. The evidence of such, according to Gettier is apparent if one considers that it is possible for P to be false even if S believes that P possesses epistemically significant properties such that whenever a belief possesses such properties and is true the belief may thereby qualify as knowledge. Lastly, there is the closure of knowledge under obvious and known entailments. The last assumption argues that if S is justified in believ ing P and a deductively valid inference is drawn from P to another belief Q then S is justified in believing Q. This is a result of the entailment of Q from P.From what was stated above, it is possible to present the usual form of Gettier’s attack against the tripartite account of knowledge. Gettier’s counter argument is based upon the critique of warrant, fallibility, and closure. Note that combination of the three claims mentioned above leads to a contradiction. From what was mentioned above it follows that it is possible to believe in an obvious deductive consequence of P, which is Q, while in the process retaining the epistemically significant properties of the belief in P.If such is the case, it is possible to have a justified true belief of any property which has led S to have a belief in Q or any other type of belief which has Q’s epistemic characteristics. Note that this contradicts the assumed necessity that P and Q differ from each other since one qual ifies as knowledge [S believes and has knowledge of P] whereas Q merely qualifies as a belief [S believes but does not have knowledge of Q].Works CitedFloridi, L. â€Å"On the Logical Unsolvability of the Gettier Problem.† Synthese 142(2004): 61-79.Gettier, E. â€Å"Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?† Analysis 23(1963): 121-23.Plato. Theaetetus. Trans. M.J. Levett. Indiana: Hackett Publishing Co., 1992.