Defense Mechanisms Unruly Id and Neddy Essay example -- Essays Papers

Defense Mechanisms Unruly Id and Neddy The Swimmer The idea of the human mind being composed of both a conscious and unconscious has been around for quite some time. Not until Sigmund Freud elaborated on these structures though were the ideas so popular and accepted. Freud described our conscious mind as what we are aware of in any present situation including our thoughts, ideas and perceptions. Freud also introduced us to the idea of the preconscious mind, which is closely related to the conscious in that it holds thoughts and ideas that are easily available to be brought to the conscious. The most important aspect of the mind, as Freud would tell us, is that of the unconscious realm that holds information not readily available to us. It is proposed that much of the information in the unconscious is stored there because we cannot bear to think about it. Closely related to the conscious, preconscious and unconscious minds are structures Freud believes determine our behavior: the id, ego, and superego. When reading a piece o f literature the main focus is almost always on the characters. We try to understand their thoughts, feelings, perceptions, and drives. In The Swimmer, John Cheever forces us to ask ourselves what it is that compels Neddy to push himself beyond his limits and forget such critical aspects of his life. By analyzing Neddy’s id, ego, and superego, we begin to see a clearer picture of what drives his strange behavior. The id, located in the unconscious, is thought to be the primitive part of our psyche and the source of our motivations that drive us to fulfill our needs immediately. Freud believed that the id consisted of two parts: one driven by the life instinct, or pleasure principle, and the other driven by the death instinct. The life instinct promotes life of the individual and species by motivating him to eat and procreate. The death instinct refers to our desires to be still, at peace, and have no more needs. This instinct manifests itself by alcohol and drug abuse, getting lost in a book, craving sleep, or sometimes as seriously as suicide. Throughout the whole story of The Swimmer, we are constantly asking the question â€Å"why?† We first wonder why Neddy is pushing himself to the point of exhaustion while undertaking this journey, then we begin to wonder what it is that happened to Neddy and his family,... ...his family were probably too much for him to think about. This more than likely led to the unconscious repression of the event, person, or situation. The repression of these things into his unconscious is why he cannot recall anything relating to the situation. After first reading The Swimmer, I was confused as to why Neddy was behaving as he did. After applying Freud’s theories of different levels of consciousness and the id, ego and superego, we start to see a clearer picture of this disturbed individual. Neddy’s problems run far deeper than houses, money, or work related problems. His inability to cope with reality and its stressors is more troubling than any material possessions that he may be lacking. Neddy’s out of control id combined with his overwhelmed ego and resulting abuse of defense mechanisms seem to be at the route of his problem. Neddy’s ego has done a wonderful job of totally distorting his reality in an attempt to reduce stress. I think at at least one time in our lives we have all wanted to forget about some horrible, embarrassing, or troublesome event. The story of The Swimmer allows us ponder if this â€Å"easy way out† is really so easy after all.

Borland Software Corporation Case Study Essay

A)Intangible assets are operational assets that lack physical substance. However, the future economic benefits that are derived from intangible assets are usually less certain than tangible operational assets. Due to this uncertainty, the valuation of these assets rely upon multiple estimations, therefore the reliability of the information may not be as accurate. Additionally, the relevance of the data in the decision making process comes into question since the future benefits are unknown. Copyrights, franchises, goodwill, patents, and trademarks are just a few examples of intangible assets. Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), intangible assets including patents, trademarks, copyrights, franchise agreements, customer lists, license agreements, order backlogs, employment contracts, and noncompetition agreements should appear on a company’s balance sheet. GAAP requires intangible asset recognition (apart from goodwill) on the balance sheet if the said asset arises from contractual or other legal rights or is capable of being separated from the acquired entity. B)The value of goodwill in a company’s balance sheet captures the unique value of a company as a whole over and above its identifiable tangible and intangible assets. Goodwill can only be recognized as an asset on the balance sheet when a company engages in the acquisition of a whole of portion of another company. The value of goodwill is a residual value that is calculated by subtracting the fair value of the acquired company’s net assets from the fair value of the consideration exchanged (or purchase price). Additionally, if the goodwill is developed internally (as opposed to purchasing another company), the costs incurred is expensed not capitalized. Process C)i)December 31, 2006253356= 57.1% 443899 December 31, 2007226688= 41.7% 544017 ii)26.5 million of impairment was recorded against our CodeGear reporting segment iii)CodeGear,26509= 39.4% 67340 iv)In the text is says that they consider various data points when determining these values such as discounted cash flows and market comparable transactions. This should be done at least annually v)Loss on Impairment of Goodwill26,509 Goodwill26,509 vi)On the statement of cash flows it shows that the impairment of goodwill was under the operating activities. Its shows that it is giving the company a loss of 26,506 in 2007 vii)If there is a loss on impairment by goodwill and this has an effect on the cash flow statement I think that it should known to everyone in a footnote. It would be understandable if this amount is minute and not shown but if it large and ongoing it is something that needs to be known and dealt with. D)i)December 31, 2007(31658/544017) = 5.82% December 31, 2006(40521/443899) = 9.13% ii)The gross amount if recorded intangible assets at December 31, 2007 was $68,205 iii)Primary cause of the decrease in the value of intangible assets, net on Borland’s balance sheet from 2006 to 2007 was amortization. All intangible assets are amortizable and that’s why total accumulated amortization for 2007 was higher than 2006. iv) Amortization Expense$ 8,863,000 Accumulated Amortization$8,863,000 E)Software development cost was not capitalized in 2007 balance sheet. It was feasible because they were not selling any third party software and as soon as software was considered for technological feasible they put it up for sale. Analysis F)Borland accounts for these expenditures by expensing the production costs of the advertising the first time the advertising takes place. The costs from funding certain activities of the reseller channel are treated as advertising expenses. i) 2007 2006 2005 Total advertising expense including funded advertising $2.3 million $2.8 million $4.4 million Total advertising expense / Total revenues Total advertising expense / Selling, general, and administrative expense ii)This table shows that advertising spending has decreased each year. When taken in proportion to total revenues and general expenses, the percentage that composes advertising expense decreases each year. Since advertising costs are expensed the first time the advertising takes place, this may not represent an actual decrease in advertising, just a decrease in new advertising campaigns. iii)Looking at the assets of the company may help to show fluctuations in the current value at least in terms of book value. Even more so, the company’s stock price will help to see where investors see the current value of the company and its brands. G)i)For the purchase of Segue Software, Inc, the purchase price was allocated to the acquired assets and liabilities based on their estimated fair values on the date of acquisition with the remaining classified as goodwill. The developed technology, customer relationships, agreements, and trademarks are all amortized over their respective periods. These amortizable intangible assets were calculated using the income approach by estimated the expected cash flows from once the projects become viable and discounting them to the present value. ii)131,663/141,456 = 86.93% iii)In process research and development is research and development acquired from Segue Software, Inc that had not reached technological feasibility and had no alternative use. This amount was charged to operating expense upon completion of acquisition. The value was computed using the income approach by estimated the expected cash flows from the projects once commercially viable and discounting the cash flows to their present value. v)On the cash flows statement, an outflow of $115,939 million is reported for the acquisition. This amount is different because the statement of cash flows only reports the amount of cash that actually changes hands. H)i)Based strictly upon the figures on Borland’s financial statements, it seems as though the company has had a record of poor financial performance from the years 2005 to 2007. The company’s net income reported an increasing loss in all three years ($29,832 in 2005, $51,953 in 2006 and $61,673 in 2007). Also, according to the Borland’s balance sheet more than half of the company’s assets are either goodwill or intangibles. Since these intangible assets have a more uncertain economic benefit than other tangible assets, the financial condition is not as strong as it initially seems on the balance sheet. However, a closer inspection of the financial statements gives an explanation that doesn’t reflect Borland’s financial condition as poorly. Much of the company’s operating expenses come from research and development and expenses relating to goodwill and intangibles (36% in 2007, 32% in 2006, and 31% in 2005). This is technically a violation of the matching principle, but it is a necessity since the future economic benefits of goodwill and intangibles is uncertain. This results in increased expenses and lower earning in the current periods and decreased expenses/increased earnings in the future. The statement of cash flows shows that Borland spent a large portion of its expenditure on acquisitions of different companies (Legadero, TeraQuest, and Segue Software), technologies, and investments that include goodwill and intangibles, which further supports this analysis. ii)The market’s perception of Borland’s value over the period from April 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008 is a negative one. The overall trend shows a decrease in value of Borland’s stock price (beginning approximately 5.4/share and ending roughly 2.0/share), indicating negative perception of Borland’s value. Borland’s market capitalization at the end of 2007 was about $218,927,916 [(total common shares outstanding) * (stock price) = (72,975,972 shares * $3/share = $218,927,916). The book value of equity is $202,070,000; therefore the market value estimate is greater than the book value by about $16.9 million as of December 31, 2007. iii)After reviewing the analysis in parts h. i and h. ii, it is clear that the current value of Borland’s goodwill and other intangible assets is undervalued. Although current earnings are low due to increased expenses in the current periods, the high market capitalization over the book value shows that investors believe the value of the company will be higher in the future. iv)In Borland’s May 7, 2008 press release regarding Q1 2008 data, the company states that the goodwill impairment charge of $13.3 million associated with CodeGear is an infrequent occurrence and was required by GAAP standards. Borland did not believe that this accurately portrayed the financial status of the company’s normal operations and thus should be excluded in any investor’s assessment of the company. Borland has a valid point in this statement since these goodwill impairments affect the financial documents but do not arise from the core operations of the company.

Dancing with Death †an Inquiry Into Retribution and Capital Punishment - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 6 Words: 1862 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2019/03/05 Category Law Essay Level High school Tags: Capital Punishment Essay Did you like this example? Dancing with Death an Inquiry Into Retribution and Capital Punishment The persistent hum of a fluorescent bulb fails to drown the sound of your heartbeat, your thoughts, the faint weeping of your mother. A warm sensation travels through cold veins, there is no return now. Perhaps a lifetime in supermax would have been worse, but perhaps you should not have slaughtered that girl. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Dancing with Death – an Inquiry Into Retribution and Capital Punishment" essay for you Create order Did you? She wanted it. Where are you? The lights become fuzzy and your muscles contract. Helplessly and vigorously you writhe, like a great predator in the captivity of his hunter. Existence becomes pain until you cease to exist, and find liberation from mortal responsibility. The United States government saw to the deprivation of your life, among twenty other lives in 2018, through capital punishment. This permanent mode of retribution and subsequent safety of the general population demands controversy throughout the history of the American criminal justice system. In some cohorts, the life sentence suffices as just repercussion for dangerous inmates. In others, capital punishment serves as a repulsive deterrent for future offenders. The heated debate over the necessity of execution or lack thereof takes years of statistical studies, special cases, and public opinion into question. Death is not a gentle act, and thus requires due support and justification from those who deliver it. Society asserts that capital punishment is an effective method of deterrence and crime prevention in order to justify their own dark desire for retribution. From the gallows of Puritan Massachusetts to the execution chamber in Huntsville, Texas, capital punishment holds onto its harrowing place in the American criminal justice system with fervor. The colonists, though more conservative than England, liberally dealt the maximum punishment for violent offenders or repeated offenders of lesser crimes. Murder, rape, witchcraft, and incorrect religious affiliation sent dozens of citizens to death, often with little contention from the masses (Malik 695). Biblical text and other archaic tradition provided enough reasoning to society at the time. People widely accepted the exchange of bloodshed humanity partook in, as it was the way things always were. In the years after the revolution, â€Å"America evolved from its predominantly religious beginnings† and citizens began to challenge the nature of criminal execution (Malik 696). The death penalty now exclusively applied to murders, rapists, and traitors to the nation. Sentiments in opposition to execution gained strength until the abolition of public hanging practices. In the 1880’s a number of states declared hanging as barbaric and thus introduced the electric chair. The electrocution execution of Jesse Tefaro highlights the occurrence of human error in any method of capital punishment. In the case of Tefaro, an improper head sponge was put in place to conduct the electrical charge to the brain, resulting in â€Å"six-inch flames [blazing] from his headand three more rounds of jolts to stop his heart entirely† (Hodgkinson 161). One the electric chair became too violent for the taste of America, death by asphyxiation became the popular route in the chamber. Donald Harding of Arizona was given cyanide tablets to induce suffocation in the Arizona prison. Witnesses recounted seeing Harding’s â€Å"body turn from red to purpleas violent spasms and jerks† lasted nearly seven minutes (Hodgkinson 163). The usage and evolution of this process gradually became focused on the public interest, rather than that of the justice system or the victims it aims to honor. Throughout the twentieth century, new methods of execution leading to the modern chemical injection were developed to make the process â€Å"less visually disturbing to onlookers† than the ways of old (Malik 700). Strong sentiments in opposition to the death and violence of the Vietnam War impacted opinion on capital punishment and drove support to an all- time low. Formative events and influential Supreme Court cases such as Furman v. Georgia which suspended all executions for a brief period, disturbed the benumbed United States enough to reevaluate cruel and arbitrary aspects of the matter (Anderson 845). Modern dialogue suggests that this interest in reform stems from a place of guilt in man upon realizing the egoistic nature of vengeance. Three main proponents of capital punishment are deterrence, retention and retribution. The relationship between deterrence and retribution examines the issues societal justification of the death penalty presents. Deterrence refers to the action of preventing aspiring offenders from committing heinous crimes by ‘making an example’ of inmates on death row. Retired judge and former federal prosecutor James P. Gray comments that premeditated or paid murders are the only circumstances in which lethal injection has the potential to change the killer’s mind. The vast majority of homicides occur in situations that are unplanned, violent, and too quick to weigh the consequences to come (Gray 257). Homicide committed in kidnapping, gang related, or otherwise premeditated scenarios are typically in the hands of a mentally ill individual, an individual who believes they have nothing to lose, or by an individual who feels their reasoning outweighs any risk of penalty. Hubris i n the heart of killers creates a sense of invincibility against the law, and it is a deep rot in the psyche that cannot be exterminated by syringe. Philosophical aspects of good versus evil action aside, does lethal injection serve as an effective deterrent for murder? Advocates for criminal execution are quick to claim that deterrence rates affirm the fatal practice is â€Å"an uniquely effective deterrent to murder† compared to life sentences (Lamperti 1). This common argument stumps the uninformed interlocutor, who ought to know that the statistics are in their corner. Professor John Lamperti of Dartmouth College asserts that after all, â€Å"factual evidence can and should [influence]† legislation concerning American lives. (Lamperti 1). Without the ability to carry out a controlled experiment on murder, researchers must take decades of data from the United States Census Bureau and retroactively determine the relationship between providence of the death penalty and its effect on murder rates. States with and without the death penalty in each geographical region were studied from 1920 to 1958 by then renowned sociologist Thorsten Sellin . The data revealed that homicide trends were mostly indistinguishable from any state. Another study conducted on homicide trends analyzed data from 1973 to 1984, and astoundly suggested that states with the death penalty experienced higher rates of murder than their non-executing counterparts (Lamperti 3-5). As more data is introduced, researchers continue to conclude that capital punishment shows no association or causal relationship to homicide decrease. Such conclusion cannot account for murders that never took place as a result of deterrence, however it can support the claim that any deterrent effect holds an insignificant impact. Such conclusion also challenges the pro-death penalty side further. If capital punishment does not serve as a statistically effective deterrent of murder, what drives its preservation? The third proponent of execution by lethal injection, retribution, is the most complex of the set. Retribution is the deliverance of punishment as consequence of wrongdoing against an individual or institution. Capital punishment is the highest degree of retribution in the justice system and is thus exclusively enacted on the most animalistic convicts. A violent crimes meets a violent end. Consider the point-and-blame American public and the historical journey from gruesome spectacles to private injection chambers. The process was shaped to become more humane to the general population who imposed the legislation (Radelet 43-46). In this way, Americans find it easier to turn their heads from the moral and ethical implications of the death penalty. If the general population comprehends the cruel reality of capital punishment, it is plausible that precarious arguments like deterrent effectiveness merely acts as a proxy for pure relishment found in revenge. Two perspectives of retribution arise; that which satisfies the victim’s family and that which satisfies a greater human depravity. In early civilization it was only logistical to impose equivalent pain onto the perpetrator to not defame the deceased. The ancient statues of vengeance upheld one’s family honor and preserved justice. In the present day the argument supporting the death penalty stresses the pain experienced by the victim’s family that will go unresolved without proper retribution. Closure is subjective for each grieving individual, especially for the loved ones of a murder victim. The value of the human life cannot be empirically or monetarily be measured. It is not replaceable or comparable to the life of another human being. Despite the most solid pro-death penalty arguments uttered in the marketplace of ideas today, no noose, no firing squad, no chair, no gas, or no chemical can bring the victim back into the world. Most inmates on death row spen d years in custody awaiting appeals, trials and retrials, all of which are emotionally and financially exhausting for the family on the other side. After years of depressing undulation, not â€Å"much satisfaction [arises] when the object of one’s hatred simply goes to sleephooked up to a needle† at their end (Gray 257). Many families would recover better knowing that the offender is locked away, left to rot, never to hurt another soul. When a family does not want to pursue the death penalty the legal system encourages follow through for the sake of the victim’s honor. Some may chop it up to a final display of respect, others just become engulfed by the American standard of violence. Is this cathartic? The family must carry the burden of tragedy, the killer is liberated from human law. Conclusion How can we, as a nation, strive to be the â€Å"champion of human rights if [we are] so at odds† with an issue that potentially brings us to destruction (Gray 258)? The United States criminal justice system views retribution as a display of power for the government and humanity itself. Whether death comes from a jawbone or a freakish curation of pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride, it disturbs the order of nature and man’s place within it. Deterrence in the broader sense can be extended to justify actions that suppress civil progress and violate constitutional rights for societal good. Even though capital punishment is solely perpetuated by the benefits of public safety, criticisms claim that wrongful executions contribute to racial and class bias in the country. Studies discussed in â€Å"Age, Period, and Cohort Effects on Death Penalty Attitudes in The United States, 1974-2014† show that the proportion of executed inmates is overwhelmingly African American or Hispanic when compared to the number of white criminals who do not see the chamber or otherwise get off death row. A country that has the power to exercise judgement of who lives and dies as if no other form of rehabilitation or ramification is feasible influences constituents to indulge in their selfish desires and hold lesser regard for life. People want their pain to matter. They know that nothing will take it away, so they must witness the suffering of another to receive a sense of validity. There is no due justification for rape and murder, why would there be proper reasoning for an ultimate hurrah of violence? It is aestheticization of violence in our culture. It is a self serving need to survive and to be feared. Let the offender rot in prison, burn in hell, or slip into nothingness– lest you find the everlasting stain of blood on your hands as well.