Financial analysis of Burberry Company(FTSE 100 Company) Assignment

Financial analysis of Burberry Company(FTSE 100 Company) - Assignment Example fiscal year 2012/13 on market review and research that will be centered on important sites in Asia.2 Indeed, Burberry has turnout to be resilient. Since 2009, the company’s assets have grown by 43% and its equity has increased by 64%. The equity growth is mostly due its Retained Earnings that have more than doubled during the last four fiscal years of the company – from ?199.2 million in 2009 to ?507.1 in 2012. To fuel the continuing expansion of its operations in the last four years and to fund its working capital requirements, Burberry has not opted to issue additional common shares. Thus, its common stocks, at par value, have not increased in the course of the last four years. Instead, Burberry’s long-term liabilities have increased by almost 250% from ?35 million in 2009 to ?122.4 million in 2012. While Burberry has generally been operating as a profitable company, it incurred a net loss of ?6.0 million for the year ended 31 March 2009. In spite of the dire e ffects of the financial crisis that substantially crippled global giants that have considerable operations in USA and Europe, Burberry has generated operating profits that amounted to ?182.6 million for 2009. However, the non-operating expenses for 2009 ended up gobbling such profits made from the company’s operations. The total bulk of ?193.5 million was incurred mostly for booking impairment charges at ?129.6 million – the sum of ?116.2 million pertaining to the goodwill initially recognized for Burberry’s operations in Spain plus ?13.4 million for the stores established in the same country. In addition, negative goodwill has as well been credited at ?1.7 million for the formation of the Burberry Middle East joint venture. These procedures were conducted in compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) regulations that uphold International Accounting Standards (IAS) #36, which require the writing down of impaired assets and the recognition of impairment losses on goodwill and intangible assets.3 The foregoing matter aside, Burberry’s operations has delivered Earnings Before Income Tax (EBIT) that increased year-on-year from 2009 to 2013. In fact, the company’s EBIT in 2012 is 195% of the equivalent in 2009. The income statements below provide that while Burberry’s revenues increased by 54.57% from 2009 to 2012, its cost of sales increased by only 4.22%. This reflects an increased efficiency in the operations – sourcing, production and distribution. The balance sheets and income statements of Burberry for the years 2009 to 2012 reflect an overall uptrend of its income and, subsequently, its book value per share. The common-size balance sheets highlights the increasing share of Burberry’s equity vis-a-vis the decreasing share of its total liabilities in the total assets of the company. It means that the investment of creditors in the form of loans, etc. have through time become less t han the worth of the company’s equity. While the company’s assets were represented as 51.68%-liabilities and 48.32%-equity in

IP Addresses Classes and Special-Use IP Address Space Essay Example for Free

IP Addresses Classes and Special-Use IP Address Space Essay IANA (Internet Assigned Number Authority) assigned Internet Protocol Address to the vendors. Internet Protocol version four divided by five structure classes. The five structure classes are A, B, C, D, and E classes. What are the historical signification for classes A, B, and C? What are the address spaces for each class? What are RFC 1918 Internet Protocol address ranges and its special use? The first three classes (A, B, C) are mainly for public use, and the last two classes (D and E) are for experimental and reserved for multicast. The first octet in the Internet Protocol Address determines its structure class. Class A addresses are ranges from one to one hundred and twenty-six in the first octet. Class B addresses are ranges from one hundred twenty-eight to one hundred and ninety-one in the first octet. Class C addresses are ranges from one hundred and ninety-two to two hundred and twenty-three in the first octet. Class D addresses are ranges from two hundreds and twenty-four to two hundred and thirty-nine in the first octet. Finally, class D addresses are ranges from two hundred and forty to two hundred and fifty in the first octet. Class A Internet Protocol addresses are reversed for a few large organizations. The network identifiers in class A are the remaining seven bits of the first octet. Class A addresses are available up to sixteen millions host addresses. Class B addresses are for medium sized enterprise. The first two octets (16 bits) in class B Internet Protocol addresses are for network addresses. The last two octets (16 bits) in class B are for the host addresses. Class B addresses has more than 65,000 networks. Class C Internet Protocol addresses are commonly found networks in the internet. Class C Internet Protocol are private addresses. The first three octets (twenty-one bits) in class C addresses are for network addresses. The last octets (eight bits) in Class C address are for host identifiers. There are more than sixteen millions network addresses in Class C Internet Protocol. Class D Internet Protocol addresses are for multicasting and is not for general use. Class D addresses are not used for public.

Death Penalty Argumentative Essay

Death Penalty Argumentative Essay The death penalty is the ultimate punishment. There is no harsher punishment than death itself. Currently fifty-eight nations practice the death penalty. Our nation, the United States of America, is one of the fifty-eight nations that practice the death penalty. Currently the United States will only use the death penalty, if one commits first-degree murder. Individuals that believe in the death penalty believe that capital punishment will deter murderers. In this paper, I will be arguing that the death penalty does not deter criminals and that the United States should outlaw the practice. Before I make my argument, I would like to provide some background information regarding the death penalty to the readers. The idea of capital punishment was brought over from Britain, when the founding fathers declared independence. Our ancestors loved the idea of the death penalty, since it was a common part of life. Europeans gave the death penalty for various crimes. The first recorded execution in America occurred in Jamestown, 1608. A man named George Kendall was executed for treason. In the earlier colonial days, laws regarding capital punishment varied area to area. During the nineteen century, the death penalty changed dramatically. Around this time the death penalty started to lose popularity. States no longer committed public executions. All executions were done in private. Pennsylvania was the first state to adopt this trend. Eventually some states abolished the death penalty all together. In current times, fourteen out of fifty states no longer carry out the death penalty. These states are Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhone Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. In addition, a series of cases regarding the death penalty went to the Supreme Court. Many tried to argue that the death penalty violated the eighth amendments and that capital punishment is cruel and unusual. In 1972, Furman v. Georgia successfully brought an temporary end to the death penalty for ten years. Eventually the death penalty was reinstated with the execution of Gary Gillmore on January 17, 1977. As of today, the United States still practices capital punishment. However there are limitations. For example, the government cannot execute the mentally handicap and is not supposed to execute juveniles. The United States currently has six ways to execute, lethal injection, electrocution, lethal gas, a firing squad and hanging. Methods will vary state by state. Although the United States still practices the death penalty, executions are declining, compare to the past, according to statistics. Those that are for the death penalty claims that the death penalty will serve as a deterrence and is the only way for retribution against murderers. Both issues are highly debatable and have been a subject of criticism. Punishment as a deterrence has been a goal for ages. This concept does work, but it should not be applied to all criminals, in my opinion. Pro capital punishment individuals claims that it is an efficient deterrence against criminals. In the article Death penalty is a deterrence, the authors claims that by practicing the death penalty, violent crimes will decrease. violent crime has declined 11 percent, with murder showing the largest decline at even more than 22 percent. We believe that this has occurred in part because of the strong signal that the death penalty sent to violent criminals and murderer.  [1]  These statistics taken from this article may be inaccurate and should be closely examined. There is a huge amount of conflicting evidence from similar studies done currently and in the past. Retribution has also been a goal for punishment. Logically if a killer is put to death then there would be no more killings. American society seems to favor retribution. An eye for an eye has been a law for ages. In a pro death penalty article, the author believes that, When someone takes a life, the balance of justice is disturbed. Unless that balance is restored, society succumbs to a rule of violence. Only the taking of the murderers life restores the balance and allows society to show convincingly that murder is an intolerable crime which will be punished in kind.  [2]  This ideology has many flaws, mainly with morality issues. For example, if the country is punishing one for killing, what gives the country the right to kill? Both articles fail to present any solid evidence that supports their thesis. Death penalty is a deterrence had statistical information, but fail to present how the information was obtained. Depending on the researchers information gathering methods, the statistical information could have been different. For example In an article in the Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, Dr. Jeffrey Fagan of Columbia University describes numerous serious errors in recent deterrence studies, including improper statistical analyses and missing data and variables that are necessary to give a full picture of the criminal justice system. Fagan writes, There is no reliable, scientifically sound evidence that [shows that executions] can exert a deterrent effectà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦. These flaws and omissions in a body of scientific evidence render it unreliable as a basis for law or policy that generate life-and-death decisions.  [3]  There needs to be solid evidence in order to prove a theory. Those who clai m that the death penalty is an efficient deterrence fail to submit conclusive evidence, therefore as a critic, we should dismiss the claim that the death penalty works as deterrence. In addition, many studies seem to disprove the theory that the death penalty is a good deterrence against violent crimes and murders. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, states without the death penalty have had lower murder rates. In their seventeen-year old study, states without the death penalty showed a 40% decrease in murder rates. In regards to the article Death penalty is a deterrence, New York has now abolished the death penalty and their murder rate has gone down significantly compared to when the state was still practicing capital punishment. In fact, in the first year that New York abolished the death penalty they saw a four percent decrease in their murder rates. The reason why the death penalty does not serve as deterrence is that offenders do not believe they will be caught. Logically, no one would commit a murder, if one knew he/she was to be executed. Deterrence is a psychological process. Therefore, if an offender does not believe that a real risk is present, there will be no deterrence. The death penalty as retribution no longer makes sense in our current society. By executing an offender, our government, is sending subliminal messages regarding murder. The point of capital punishment is because the United States government wants to express that killing is an intolerable crime. By killing, an offender the government is contradicting itself. In addition, the death penalty can be seen as revenge. We are simply taking an eye for an eye. Two wrongs will not make a right. Killing a murderer will not bring back the murdered. In the 21th century our criminals laws should now reflect a higher standard that an eye for an eye. In current times, the death penalty can no longer be claimed as an efficient form of retribution. There are huge delays in carrying out the executions of an inmate. Statistics show that there is over an eight-year wait before an execution can take place. In fact, most death row inmates die of old age, before their execution sentence. Californias death row is a great example. Since 1976, only thirteen inmates have been executed. Currently there are around seven hundred inmates in Californias death row. If the trend continues, that would mean most of the inmates would die of natural causes before their execution sentence can be carried out. Those that claim the death penalty as retribution fail to take notice of the execution process in our criminal justice system. Legally an inmate is allowed to appeal his/her case. Appealing is needed in the American criminal justice system because the process is designed to protect against human errors. An average appeal can take over ten years. There are simply not enough judges to response to all case reviews. For example, the United States Supreme court receives thousands of case reviews annually, but because there are only nine judges in the Supreme Court, only a handful of cases are reviewed. For these reasons, the death penalty cannot be claim as an efficient form of retribution. Since the death penalty is no longer an affected punishment, I purposed that we abolish the practice in the United States. Throughout Americas history, many have tried to abolish the death penalty. Many were successful in temporary abolishing the death penalty, but most states reinstated the death penalty after judicial review. The most current issue regarding the abolishment of the death penalty was Baze v. Rees. Baze V. Rees, was an attack on the process of execution, specifically lethal injections. Baze argues that lethal injections is a form of cruel and unusual punishment and went against the constitution. That debate ultimately failed, since the judges ruled in favor of the death penalty. The trial court held extensive hearings and entered detailed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. It recognized that [t]here are no methods of legal execution that are satisfactory to those who oppose the death penalty on moral, religious, or societal grounds, but concluded that the proced ure complies with the constitutional requirements against cruel and unusual punishment.  [4]  Baze V. Rees was a good attempt in trying to abolish the death penalty, but ultimately was unsuccessful because they were attacking the process not the problem. In addition, Baze fail to show any solid evidence that lethal injections may cause pain. In order to abolish the death penalty in the United States successfully, one would need to make a case to the United States Supreme Court. One would need to submit a writ of either certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition. In addition, one can appeal against the death penalty. If the case were selected, then one would need to argue that the death penalty is no longer a form of justice. The key to winning this case, in my opinion, is to present solid and conclusive evidence. Show the nine justices, that the death penalty is a waste of resources and unconstitutional. Some may criticize that by abolishing the death penalty, crime rates will increase. Studies have already shown that the death penalty will not deter criminals. Currently there is no solid evidence that proves that the death penalty will deter criminals; however, there is evidence showing that states with no death penalty has a lower murder rate than states with the death penalty. In a recent examination, researchers concluded that the estimates claiming that the death penalty saves numerous lives are simply not credible. In fact, researchers stated that using the same data and proper methodology could lead to the exact opposite conclusion: that is, that the death penalty actually increases the number of murders  [5]  . Conclusive evidence such as the fact should dispel any criticism regarding the death penalty and murder rates. The death penalty should be abolish. Those that believe in the death penalty, failed to make their case. There is no conclusive evidence that supports their claims. There is evidence however that the death penalty is failing. Executing a death row inmate is no longer an easy task. There can be long delays in the execution process. Inmates are dying before their execution sentence can be carried out. For all the reasons stated above, the United States of America should abolish the death penalty. Work Cited Death Penalty Curriculum A just society requires the death penalty for the taking of a life: Agree, Michigan State University http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/node/10 Death Penalty Information Center, Discussion of Recent Deterrence Studies, Berkeley Electronic Press http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/discussion-recent-deterrence-studies Death Penalty Information Center, Discussion of Recent Deterrence Studies, Ohio State Journal http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/discussion-recent-deterrence-studies George E. Pataki, Death penalty is a deterrent, USA Today http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/Articles/Pataki.htm Unknown Author, RALPH BAZE AND THOMAS C. BOWLING, Petitionersv.JOHN D. REES, COMMISSIONER, KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL. United States Supreme Court. 2008, 1

The Fourth Crusade Essay -- History, The Crusades

The Fourth Crusade Is karma the reason for the slow but evident sinking of Venice into the Mediterranean? Maybe it is indemnity for the cruel selfish acts of Venice during the Fourth Crusade. The Venetians along with crusaders robbed Constantinople for personal gains. The Fourth Crusade should be an example that it is crude and unjust to attack fellow men for no reason. The Crusades were a series of battles and short wars against the Muslims. In the eleventh century Jerusalem had been taken over by the Turks. This sparked the Crusades the Crusades ended up lasting 200 years. The third crusade was deemed unsuccessful because Jerusalem was still in Muslim hands. In 1198, Pope Innocent issued the need for a Fourth Crusade. Excitement was stirred up by Priest Faulk of Neuilly after he preached at a knight tournament (Williams 103). In other areas the recruitment work "was done on tours by major prelates, preaching sermons designed to move their listeners to take the cross" (103). At the time Egypt was the center of Muslim power so Egypt was the intended target. Unknown to crusaders, ambassadors of the Doge of Venice Enrico Dandolo were in Egypt negotiating with the sultan and assuring the sultan that Egypt would not be attacked (Williams 104). Dandolo wanted to attack Constantinople. The leader of the crusaders Count Boniface agreed with Dandolo. In Venice, Dandolo agreed to supply enough ships for 33,500 men and 4,500 horses as well as an extra 50 armed galleys (Williams 104). By the intended departure date their were only 10,000 men ready to leave (Robinson). Later, 30,000 men arrived but a new problem arose. The men only had 51,000 marks when the price was set at 85,000 for the ships. Dandolo agreed to suspend the debt if... ...new throne and Catholicism was the new state religion (Cooke). Although, "the advantages that had been gained by the Fourth Crusade vanished, as water vanishes on a hot stone" (Williams 116). What looked like a simple attack on Egypt changed into a destruction of the greatest city on earth. It was done out of greed and done by selfish people. Everyone in the hierarchy was involved up to the pope who saw his treasury rise from the gold of Constantinople. Dandolo was a good strategist but a crude man. Today many people still resent him and one scholar was asked if he knew the location of Dandolo's grave and he replied "Yes, I go there and spit on it" (Cooke). Venice gained new heights in wealth but did it come at a price. Venice is sinking into the Mediterranean. Maybe it is karma and hopefully this was a lesson that it is unjust to attack fellow men for greed.

My Thoughts About Worldviews

A worldview, in my opinion, is the way you look at the world and how you see God; a worldview is a set of beliefs that directs the way you act. To determine your worldview, you must ask yourself a few questions. Some of these questions include: Who is God? Where did I come from? Why do I exist? What is my purpose in life? Answers in Genesis defines a worldview as â€Å"the overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world. A worldview is a collection of beliefs about life and the universe held by an individual or a group. †[1] To make this definition easier to understand, I’ll use an analogy. A worldview is like a pair of glasses.If you get the right prescription, you’ll be able to see really clearly. If you get the wrong prescription, it could make your eyes worse and make everything blurry. Just like how the glasses make a big difference in your life, your worldview makes an even bigger difference. Your worldview influences the way you live and m ake choices. For example, the worldview can show how a teen could do their homework. If he was Christian and wanted to do everything for the glory of God, he would do his homework the best he could. If he was a Post-Modernist and wanted to please himself, he might not do his homework to do something â€Å"fun†.Having the right worldview is very important. The Christian worldview includes monotheism which is the belief in one God. Not only do Christians believe in a personal, knowable Creator but he believes in the Trinity. The Trinity is God being in three parts: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. To most people, this is very confusing because they don’t understand how God can be three in one. In this case, Christians go to heaven not because of their works but because of God’s grace. God displayed His grace when He died on the cross for us. Christians get most of their information from the Bible.This is the foundation for a Christian’s philosophy. Since Christians believe in God, their philosophy includes believing in the supernatural. As for the Christian view of metaphysics, one would go to John 1:1-4 for an answer: â€Å"All things were made by God. †[2] For their view of cosmology, they believe that there was no accident; God created the world with a purpose and it shows how great God is. Christian philosophers also believe the mind is a reflection of God, and that it is evidence of Him. Some great Christian philosophers are C. S. Lewis and Francis Schaeffer.A Christian’s ethic is grounded in the character of God, which is known because of the Bible. This is the reason why ethics goes hand in hand with theology. Christians do not have rules that differ for each person, instead, they have moral absolutes. This is â€Å"the belief that an absolute ethical standard exists for all individuals regardless of era or culture. †[3] As followers of Christ, Christians have a huge responsibility: â€Å". . . lov e the Lord your God with all you heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself. [4] Jesus tells us to love our neighbor because loving your neighbor is like loving your Lord, and when we serve our neighbors, we’re serving Him. Biology, however, starts with the creation of the world in six literal days. The Bible states that â€Å". . . God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. †[5] If you kept reading, you would find that God created the world with order, design, and purpose. Michael Behe, the author of Darwin’s Black Box, came up with the phrase â€Å"irreducible complexity. † A bacteria flagellum is irreducibly complex.This means that if the flagellum lost one of its parts, the flagellum would not work. This denies evolution by saying that the flagellum could not have evolved because it needed every part to work. â€Å"Th e biblical worldview is about viewing everything-our friendships, careers, property, environment, interaction, ultimate responsibilities, even our homework-the way God views it and talks about it in Scripture. †[6] Muslims believe in monotheism, just like Christians, but they believe in a different god. They believe that Allah is god and that Muhammad is his messenger.They do not think Allah is a knowable god and they do not believe in the Trinity. They do not believe in heaven but they believe in a paradise and to go there you must do a certain amount of good deeds. Also, Muslims must complete some tasks, often called pillars. These pillars include: confession, prayer, fasting, almsgiving, pilgrimage, and in some cases, jihad. Like Christians, Muslims have a book of scripture, called the Qur’an, written by Muhammad. Islam philosophy also believes in the supernatural because of Allah. Muslim philosophers, and some Christian philosophers, use the Kalam Cosmological Argum ent for the existence of God.Although Muslims do believe in miracles, Muhammad never performed any. This created some doubts but they still had faith in Muhammad. Some great Islamic philosophers are Ahmad and Yusif Ali Hammuda Abdalat. Like Christians, Muslims believe in moral absolutes. However, these absolutes come from Muhammad and the Qur’an (or Hadith), rather than Allah, because Muslims believe that Allah cannot be known. To help Muslims follow moral obligations, they follow the Five Pillars. Unlike Christians, Muslims are motivated to do good because of their fear of judgement.Another similarity with Christians and Muslims is the belief that a god created the earth with order, design, and purpose. Sometimes, there can be contradictions. Some Muslims think the earth was created in six days and others think it was eight days. Also, some think the days were ages instead of 24 hours. There is one big difference between Christians and Muslims: the fall of man. Muslims belie ve that man sinned but they do not believe that man was cursed. Secular Humanists believe in atheism. This means they do not believe in a god. God is not the only thing the Secular Humanists do not believe.They do not believe in Satan, angels, or souls. They think instead of God creating us, we created Him just like we created Santa Claus. Although they do not believe in a god, they still tolerate religions. Unlike Muslims and Christians, they do not believe in an afterlife. Books that are very popular among Secular Humanists are the Human Manifestos I, II, and III. Secular Humanist philosophy does not believe in the supernatural. They only believe in things that are made out of matter; this is also called naturalism. Since Secular Humanists don’t believe in the supernatural, they deny all miracles.Another problem for not believing in supernatural things is the mind and body problem. This is a problem because they do not believe in supernatural. Secular Humanists believe the mind is a â€Å"manifestation of the brain. †[7]If you do not believe in the supernatural, you could not think because it is not made of matter. Some famous Secular philosophers are Corliss Lamont and Carl Sagan. The ethics of a Secular Humanist is that everyone has their own ethics. Unlike in Christianity or Islam, Humanists avoid absolutes. Everyone chooses what is right by what they think is right or whatever fits the situation. This is also called moral relativism.Secular Humanists use reason to determine what is right or wrong. As for Secular Humanists, they believe in Neo-Darwinism. This is â€Å"the theory that new species were made from natural selection acting over vast periods of time on chance genetic mutations in reproductively isolated populations. †[8] They also believe in spontaneous generation and the big bang theory. Both of these ideas talk about how everything was made randomly without a god. Secular Humanists have six â€Å"planks† they hold their biology on: spontaneous generation, natural selection, struggle for existence, beneficial mutations, adaptations, and the fossil record.Marxists and Leninists, like Secular Humanists, are called scientific atheists. Unlike the secular humanists, they do not tolerate religion, they hate it and want to get rid of it! Karl Marx said that we created religion in order to worship ourselves. He said this but he also believes that we are gods so we should take reality and use to our liking. Like Secular Humanists, Marxists-Leninists do not believe in an afterlife. They believe the book related to Marxism-Leninism is the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marxist-Leninist philosophy isn’t called naturalism or supernaturalism.It is called Dialectical Materialism. There is no god in this philosophy but they call many Christian attributes, dialectical matter. This means that something begins with a thesis. Eventually, an antithesis is made and then the thesis an d antithesis combine and make a synthesis. This process repeats many times. For a Marxist-Leninist, their epistemology has faith in science. Their view of metaphysics is that the earth is all that exists and the only thing that will exist. As for the mind/body problem, Marxists and Leninists think the mind is a reflection of matter and then it is translated into thought.Some famous Marxist-Leninist philosophers are Frederick Engels and Vladimir Lenin. Marxists-Leninists have a different kind of morality: proletariat morality. This is â€Å"the ethical belief that whatever advances the proletariat and the cause of communism is morally good and whatever hinders the proletariat or communism is morally evil. †[9] This is pretty much saying that people who are trying to get rid of the class system are good, and whoever is trying to interfere is evil. Marxists-Leninists also believe that morality is constantly changing. Lastly, Marxists-Leninists want a classless society, also call ed utilitarianism.They believe that if we have a classless society, we will all be considered moral. Like Secular Humanists, Marxists-Leninists believe in spontaneous generation but, contrary to Darwinism, they believe in punctuated evolution. This is â€Å"the theory of evolution that proposes that evolutionary changes occur over a relatively quick period of time, followed by periods of little to no evolutionary change. †[10] Cosmic Humanism is a little different than the worldviews we have talked about so far. Cosmic Humanists are not monotheists or atheists; they believe in pantheism.This means they believe everything is God (eg. nature and humans). Also, they do believe in an afterlife but they believe in reincarnation. Not only do you live after you are dead but you have had previous lives. For Cosmic Humanism, there is no book like other worldviews. In my opinion, I think they just look at movies. Cosmic Humanist philosophy is also different from previous philosophies. They believe everything is supernatural (non-naturalism). They also embrace Zen Buddhism. This is the belief that you can become enlightened through meditation and self-contemplation.A Cosmic Humanist’s ontology is, in a way, like a Marxist or a Secular Humanist. A Marxist/Secular Humanist believes everything is material and a Cosmic Humanist believes EVERYTHING is spiritual. As for their view of epistemology, they believe we need to get in touch with our higher self. Since we are all gods, Cosmic Humanists believe in truth relativity. This means, truth is whatever each person thinks it is. A couple of Cosmic Humanist philosophers are Joseph Campbell and Neale Donald Walsch. Out of all the ethical systems, the Cosmic Humanist’s is the easiest to understand.Since everyone is God, we all do good all the time. Everyone does what they feel is right so you can’t judge. This is another example of moral relativism. As for their system of justice, they believe in karma. They think that if you do good, good things will come but if you do bad, you will be punished for it. Cosmic Humanists believe in something very different. This is called cosmic evolution. Cosmic evolution is the idea that â€Å"all humanity is going toward a new age of higher consciousness. †[11] All Cosmic Humanists are trying to get into an age of higher consciousness and become gods.Also, they believe in the idea that all living things make up one, complex living organism ( The Gaia Hypothesis). Postmodernists are also atheists. Not only are they atheists but they believe in something called the â€Å"Death of God† theology. This is â€Å"a movement that was essentially promoting the idea that religion did not need to invoke ‘God’ in the area of theology. †[12] Something that is different from the other worldviews is that Postmodernists like to be ambiguous. They also believe there are no universal truths (relativism) so they, like Secular Huma nism, tolerate religion (pluralism).Finally, Postmodernists have a â€Å"trend† called emergent churches. It is a church that is incorporating Postmodernism into a Christian’s theology. Post-Modernists’ philosophy is called Anti-Realism. This means reality is anything a human can think up. Since a human can think up reality, a human can also have their own truth (subjective truth), and when they read something, it can mean whatever they want it to mean (deconstruction). Because a human can have their own truth and reality, there is no metaphysics, ontology, cosmology, or epistemology. Strangely, there are still influential philosophers.A couple of them are Jean-Francois Lyotard and Jacques Derrida. As for Postmodernists, they follow cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is â€Å"the belief that truth and morals are relative to one’s culture. †[13] Although they believe that Postmodernism is the best worldview, they still call it relative. Commun ity morals are determined by coercion and consensus. Like Marxists-Leninists, Postmodernists think morality evolves with society. Lastly, Post-Modernists affirms in punctuated evolution. They believe in evolution because they like the idea that man is insignificant and because they like the thought of chance.

Liberty Coun 501 Ethics Comparison

Ethics Codes Comparison Paper H Michele Wallach Liberty University Online Abstract These publications regarding ethics, American Counseling Association: Code of Ethics (2005) and the American Association of Christian Counseling: Code of Ethics (2004), are available as a reference for use. The purpose of this paper is to compare general and specific elements of the two publications. There are two areas of general exploration: 1) relation to their format for retrieval of specific data, 2) their value or standards basis, if any, from which the publications are written.More specifically three specific areas will be compared. First, the area of informed consent as it relates to the client and the counselor. Second, codes relating to conduct for relationships with former clients. Third and lastly, is how each of the publications relates to the issue of abortion. Limitations were evident in that many codes do not offer rationale. Future review of revisions would be an effective part of know ledge to use of both publications.The field of professional counseling provides for occasions for the counselor to make decisions based on professional ethics. Ethics can be commonly derived from one’s own values. In order to create a more consistent standard codes of ethics have been published. Two of these publications will be used in this paper: 1) American Counseling Association (ACA): Code of Ethics (2005), 2) American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC): Code of Ethics (2004). Whereas these organizations are based on different ideals, a general comparison will be made.Inasmuch as revisions are ongoing, this paper will review several that were revised in the latest publication, as highlighted in the article New Mandates and Imperatives in the Revised ACA Code of Ethics. (2009) Section I: General comparison of the two codes The ACA: Code of Ethics (2005) and the AACC: Code of Ethics (2004), each offer a logical breakdown of codes referring to situations of an ethic al nature and is presented in a format that is easily referenced by both the seasoned professional and the novice.The design and layout of the ACA: Code of Ethics is laid out with color and graphics and written very formally, giving a tone of legal-ease. The ACA: Code of Ethics codes section is formatted in columns, suggesting the style of a quick access guide. The ACA: Code of Ethics codes are set up in sections with the first level header served by an upper case alphabet letter in chronological order, broken down further by a numerical value in chronological order, and then finally sub-divided once more by a lower case alphabet letter in chronological order.The AACC: Code of Ethics is laid out in a streamlined fashion and executed with a professional vernacular tone. The AACC: Code of Ethics has no color or specialty graphics adorning its pages and the codes section pages are laid out in a full page format without the use of columns. The AACC: Code of Ethics codes are set up in se ctions with the first level header served by and upper case Roman numeral, the next level is led by the upper case letters of the first two words of the section followed by a numerical value, with no spaces, the section is further sub-divided into numerical values carrying three place values (i. . 100,101, etc. ) in chronological order. At this level, within each section, when a new sub-topic started the numeric value will move to the ten’s place chronologically. Is this important? Absolutely, it is the virtual road map to referencing where information can be found. Although the description here is in generalities, it is to the advantage of the counseling professional to gain a working understanding of the layout. Understanding the way reference material is filed will assist the user immensely.Another structured piece of these publications explains why the reference has been constructed and written the way that is has. Each of the references being compared contains similar in formation and some of the perspectives overlap in many places AACC: Code of Ethics (2004) ACA: Code of Ethics (2005). The preliminary information in each publication, prior to the code of ethics, offers similarities. They both offer a preamble, mission, and a purpose for use. The ACA: Code of Ethics (2005) publication moves directly into the codes at this point. p 3) Whereas, the AACC: Code of Ethics (2004) offers a prayer and seven Biblical-ethical foundations, on which their codes of ethics were founded. (p 4, 5) Section II: Specific comparison of three particular areas Specific codes of each publication offer different interpretations of the same practices. The practice of informed consent according to the ACA: Code of Ethics (2005) is that it is the counselor’s responsibility to give a written and verbal account for the rights and responsibilities of the counselor and the client.This responsibility even extends to cover the inclusion of an interpreter where it is deemed n ecessary. The practice of informed consent according to the AACC: Code of Ethics (2004) is that it is the counselor’s responsibility to â€Å"take care† that the client has the â€Å"capacity†, â€Å"reasonably understands† and â€Å"freely gives consent† to the nature, process, costs, time, work, limits of the counseling and appropriate alternatives. All of this must be done without â€Å"coercion or undue influence†. (p 10, 11)The next set of codes differs greatly due in part by the influence of Biblical standards. The code in ACA: Code of Ethics (2005) is defined as â€Å"Former Clients† (p 5) the code references only sexual and romantic interests of the former client and counselor. There is no mention of marriage. The code also extends to include â€Å"former clients, their romantic partners, or their family members†. The code simply states that the counselor cannot have professional contact with the client within 5 years b efore or after a relationship.The counselor must also â€Å"demonstrate forethought and document†, in writing, the possibilities of exploitation, or potential harm to the former client. If either of these elements is present, then the counselor avoids the interaction or relationship. The code is AACC: Code of Ethics (2004) is defined as â€Å"Marriage with Former Clients/Patients† and the stipulations are explained that this type of relationship is allowed with three provisions. p 8) First, the counseling sessions had to have been terminated without the influence of a relationship or potential relationship, also within the proper guidelines of termination as defined in the AACC: code of ethics guidelines. Secondly, the client must understand unequivocally that any further counseling must be by someone other than the counselor-spouse. Thirdly, there must be no harm to the client or the client’s family as a result in the change of the relationship between the clie nt and the counselor.Lastly, the counseling or helping relationship must be terminated at least two calendar years prior to marriage. There are occasions where an ethical standard is addressed by the AACC: Code of Ethics (2004) and not addressed at all by the ACA: Code of Ethics (2005). The AACC: Code of Ethics speaks specifically to the responsibility of the counselor to offer all possible alternatives and not to give any narrative of consent to an abortion. It also advises the counselor to continue to serve the client regardless of their decision regarding the pregnancy.The ACA: Code of Ethics does not address abortion specifically. There are areas of the code that speak to the issue in a general manner. The areas to be considered are: a) does the decision to have an abortion have any relation to the client’s personal culture: b) the counselor’s own â€Å"values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors† will need to be carefully guarded as to not be imposed on the c lient (p 4): and c) are the decisions the client is facing within the competency of the counselor to help guide the client.As in any client’s case being reviewed by a counselor or counseling group all of these elements must be weighed out, as well as some that may not have been discussed in this paper. The ACA: Code of Ethics (2005) is written and adapted based on an ever-changing world. The AACC: Code of Ethics is based on unchanging Biblical standards. It stands to reason that if an individual adheres to the AACC: Code of Ethics that a standard of consistency is more likely to be seen, due to the unchanging nature of the Bible. A Christian counselor may find both publications to be very useful.In the same way a non-Christian will probably have absolutely no use for the AACC: Code of Ethics (2004). No matter what an individual’s faith-related position is, as a professional counselor, it is the highest priority to first â€Å"do no harm† ACA: Code of Ethics (200 5), and AACC: Code of Ethics (2004). The very cornerstone of helping people through counseling requires that the counselor make a deliberate treatment plan to do no harm. With that understanding, it is the responsibility of the professional counselor to employ and explore whatever empirical resources are available to execute such a plan.References American Association of Christian Counselors: Code of Ethics. (2004). American Association of Christian Counselors A ». Retrieved August 23, 2012, from http://www. aacc. net/about-us/code-of-ethics/ American Counseling Association: Code of Ethics. (2005). Ethics |http://www. counseling. org/CP/CT2. aspx|. Retrieved August 23, 2012, from http://www. counseling. org/Resources/CodeOfEthics/TP/Home/CT2. aspx New Mandates and Imperatives in the Revised ACA Code of Ethics. (2009). Journal of Counseling & Development, 87(2), 241-256.