Saturday, January 25, 2020

Karl Marx Continuation Of The Enlightenment Sociology Essay

Karl Marx Continuation Of The Enlightenment Sociology Essay Karl Marx is regarded as one of the classics of sociology. His social thought, considered one of the most important social theories, was a humanistic theory, concentrated on the condition of society and a place of individual in social structure. Marx is known as one of the greatest ideologists of the nineteen century. His political theory was revolutionary. As a sociologist though, he is regarded to be a great heir of Enlightenment  [1]  , using and developing key concepts of the eighteen century thinkers. This paper is aimed to discuss Karl Marx theory in comparison to the Enlightenment philosophy. I will try to answer a question: to what extend Marx work inherited from the Enlightenment thinkers? In order to that I will discuss the key concepts of the Enlightenment that were further developed in Marxs works. In the following part of the paper I will compare the ideas of the eighteen century thinkers with Marx theory, in regard to notions of progress, social structure, religion, science, materialism, state and individualism. Social development, progress and social change The theory of social development and progress was the key concept of the Enlightenment  [2]  . The experience of Renaissance recovery from the dark ages, rediscovery of antique philosophy, the expansion of colonialism and exploration of non-European cultures, violated established order and lead to expansion of new ideas doubting tradition. The Enlightenment recognized that human history changes and that societies experience material and mental, moral or philosophical progress. It became clear, that modernity is just another stage of development, that does not lead the end of history, but might be as well a beginning of some better, new society. Eighteen century thinkers considered reason as the leading force of change, believing, that human knowledge and consciousness may develop linearly. Since the Enlightenment was an age of science and reason, philosophers tend to classify and order possessed knowledge. That lead to a few theories of historical stages development of societies that arranged historical periods in progressive order  [3]  . Marx inherited from the Enlightenment that linear and deterministic perspective on development of societies, building his theory on the idea of progress. In his works he wrote about successive stages of development of societies: primitive society, feudalism, capitalism (bourgeois formation), socialism and communism. He abandoned the concept of reason as the leading force of progress, though. For Marx the key force of development was ownership and mode of production emerging from it. HeEach of the stages presented different social relations, policies, politics and consciousness all of which resulting from economic relations. The mode of production representing each of historical formation of society was regarded as a base, and resulted in different superstructures culture, religion and politics. Every stage of history was more complex than another and lead to the next one. For Marx it meant that the history of all societies is inevitable and must lead through the same phases. The Enlightenments attachment to the notion of progressive development of societies lead to the ideas of future utopia final, goal stage of social evolution. It was a very optimistic concept of history, beginning in dark, oppressive periods of the past, through ambiguous and chaotic modernity, leading to some enlighten, better and just future. Such utopian vision was described by Condorcet, for whom future society would prevail tyranny by changing tradition and superstition into reason  [4]  . Delany wrote of the Enlightenment as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦characterized by a certain utopianism, which was a reflection of the belief in the promises of modernity to bring about freedom. Unlike earlier social thought, it displayed a great belief in the power of human action to shape the future  [5]  . The same was true for Marx, who saw communism as the perfect and most of all just, social system. For Marx the end stage of human history communism represented the most desired and final pha se of human development. As Sideman wrote: Marx never gave up his Enlightenment faith in the coming of a new era  [6]  . But contrary to the Enlightenment philosophers, for Marx, the utopia was not to be obtained through evolution and development of reason, but through revolution of working class. The idea of revolution was not present in eighteen century before the experience of French revolution. Though it is sad, that the Enlightenment prepared the ground for the revolt in France, works of eighteen century thinkers did not appeal to force or violent change. Marx shared the romantic vision of revolution with socialist thinkers and activists supporting French strife. Moreover, unlike his eighteen century ancestors, Marx sought emancipation in proletariat the working class of modernity. The Enlightenment was an age of intellectuals, giving special role to philosophers in the process of development of society  [7]  . In eighteen century thought, reason had the emancipatory force. Marx violent vision of revolution did not reserved place for intellectuals, though Marx was one of them. Social structure The Enlightenment was a period of a great expansion of egalitarian theories. The idea of natural laws developed and notion of equality had spread. Eighteen century philosophers attempted to find and describe origins of social order as well as discover best social conditions to maintain and expand individual freedom. Especially the latter freedom, understood as unconstrained development and expansion of reason was an important issue in the theory of state and governance. The Enlightenment cherished the idea of liberated individual in the society free from state, church and other collective forms of organizations. To reconcile the concepts of state and freedom, the idea of civil society was developed. Individuals became citizens residents of a state that had their natural, internal rights, individuals who through that civil rights gained freedom. Though human beings were not equal, especially because of different kinds and sizes of ownership, they had the potential of equality inte rnalized through their natural, inalienable rights. For Marx idea of equality was a goal of the development of societies. Contemporary social structure was far from egalitarian one. To describe social structure Marx used a concept of class as sets of people or parts of society that differ by the effective control over the means of production and property ownership  [8]  . The class designated people who lived in similar conditions. For bourgeois stage of development social structure was basically dichotomous, consisting of two classes owners (capitalists) and workers. Since individuals within one class shared alike economic positions they also shared the same interests. Individuals from different classes, on the other hand, remained in permanent conflict as they interests were opposite. For in Marx theory class structure is a structure of permanent class-conflict. As E.C. Cuff and others expressed it: Since the inequality between the owning class and the labouring class is not simply an economic one, narrowly defined, but involv es a social relationship of power and control, the difference of interest between these classes refers to freedom and further: The conflict of interest between owning and labouring classes is, then, a conflict over power and freedom.  [9]  Once again Marx theory rejected peaceful and optimistic assumptions of the Enlightenment. Ideologies and religion The end of the Middle Ages ended the era of gods laws and theological explanation of social order. The Enlightenment separated religion from politics. Eighteen century brought to life the concept of public private spheres. Religion became private matter of citizens. Gods rights no longer decided on political questions and social relations. Secular society was based on secular rules. The Enlightenment believed in reason and science, and through them sought emancipation from religion and superstition. Social change required that cultural traditions be weakened to allow for new ideas and attitudes favoring social progress  [10]  . Religion and tradition constrained social change and overruled the utopian vision of future. It does not mean that the Enlightenment was a truly secular era. Rejection of religion covered only public, political sphere. None of the great philosophers of the period Becon, Diderot, Locke postulated atheism  [11]  . The issue was to separate religion fr om science, theology from logical reasoning. Religion intruded cognition, so had to be abandoned in the sphere of knowledge. Marx also shared with the Enlightenment the concept of secular society, though he brought the idea of secularization further. For Marx every ideology and meta-narration of society, in every stage of its development, was a product of current economic relations, and so was religion. Religion internalized rules, regulations and prohibitions served justification of the conditions of production and hence, the justification of exploitation. In this sense religion was a mechanism of oppression. It was no longer a private issue, but a political one, that justified bourgeois order. As in the eighteen century religion obstructed change, but this time, though, it was not suppose to be withdraw from public life, but destroyed absolutely. That is why, according to Marx, emancipation not only required rejection of theological order of the world, but also complete rejection of religion. Once again this emancipation required revolution dramatic and sudden change of economic conditions that would change social relations, including execution of religion. The role of science The Enlightenment was the era of development of sciences. A great expand of sciences such as mathematics, medicine, natural sciences changed the view of modern philosophers on the world and human kind. Science revealed mystery of existence and the order of nature. That is why science became one of the ways to obtain individual freedom. Eighteen century philosophers presumed that one day science will lead to discovery of logical, rational order of human and societal relations. For Marx science also had an important role in revealing the rules of organization of society. Marx knew that in order to change, it is necessary to understand the social forces institutions, cultural traditions, social groups  [12]  . In Marx theory science held the explanatory role by revealing the real nature of social order, gave information about social classes, modes of production and rules of historical development. According to Marx, science should be based on rational assumptions and logical laws, it should reject common sense and superstitions. When discussing the role of science in Marx theory, his contribution to scientific methods is worth mention. The Enlightenment admired achievements of modern mathematics and physicists, especially those of Newton. Philosophers were dreaming of finding scientific method, similar to methods used in physics and mathematics, to investigate and describe social world. Modern thinkers presumed that since the complex world of nature can be characterized through clear rules and patterns of numbers, the same can be done with human environment. Marx sought different path of inquiry. His scientific method characterized as historicism  [13]  postulated investigation on every social phenomena in their historical context. Marx claimed that all individuals and their actions are embedded in broader setting, since none human being exists separated from his environment. Moreover he posed the question of a researcher as a social actor, entangled in social reality beside investigated objects. Marx claimed that scientist shares common consciousness to the same degree as all other members of society. True scientific method required from the researcher detachment from false, superstition knowledge embedded on the surface of social life  [14]  . Here again Marx expressed belief in reason and logic, similarly to his eighteen century ancestors. Economic perspective Though Marx theory shares materialistic perspective, he was not the one to introduce economic interpretation of social life. Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson and others eighteen century thinkers saw the leading role of economy in social life. Those early economists wrote about dehumanization of work and disintegration of society through modern specialization of production and technical development of the production process  [15]  . Industrial revolution of eighteen century brought to light new phenomena that were not overlooked by present-day thinkers. Negative effects of industrialization, demographic explosion and urbanization were thoroughly discussed by that time. As we can see, the importance of material conditions for human individual and collective life was not the Marx invention, though he also observed that technology destroys social relations. According to him, innovations, machines and devices used in the process of production serve the dominant class for exploitation of workers  [16]  . Nevertheless, with his materialistic view on society, Marx went further with the idea, claiming that: the reproduction of material life precedes the production of culture  [17]  . For Marx material conditions of existence were the basis for all other characteristics of life. In this concept, living conditions determined social structure, policies, rules and morality. Marx showed that certain social conditions shape certain forms of consciousness. That was a great contribution of Marx thought to social sciences. Since Marx, social scientists began research on the role of material conditions on human thoughts, believes and attitudes, giving a star t to many disciplines of social sciences, as sociology of thought, sociology of knowledge or sociology of religion  [18]  . Moreover, since then, social scientists considered development process and ownership relations of societies as some of the most important criteria of social studies analysis. The concept of state Eighteen century philosophy was critical towards the old order or regime. The Enlightenment developed several state theories  [19]  , all connected with the concept of social contract. Hobbes, claimed that the states are made on the basis of common agreement in which citizens give their rights to absolute power. John Locke postulated conception of liberal state based on tolerance, private ownership and freedom of economic action. In this conception it was not the absolute ruler but society that hold the power. Kannt, on the other hand, proposed peaceful republican regime of federation of states. Finally Rousseau wrote about egalitarian regime of equal chances, conditions and rights of citizens. All the eighteen century concepts of authority were positive ones, assuming rationality of power and universality of interests. Marx concept of the state was not the optimistic one. In his works state power had class character  [20]  . Regime authority served class interest of dominant group of society capitalists, through organized violence towards the suppressed class. There was no possibility to gain freedom through or within the state. Unlike the eighteen century theories, Marx project of desirable future assumed abolishment of the bureaucratic, oppressive, class regime. Decomposition of the state should be accomplished through a proletariat revolution that would lead to class-free society of common owners. Individualism and collective action In earlier philosophy, the status of human being in society was constant and determined, not by human himself, but by external forces the world order, gods will, some kind of justice and internal sense of social existence. Enlightenment and especially the French revolution, brought the idea of civil society and civil rights  [21]  . The Enlightenment claimed that all human beings share some common characteristics that are independent of external, historical or natural conditions. It was the kind of individualism, that claimed that human nature in general have some common qualities inherited from the state of nature. That is what makes society egalitarian differences between human status in society are merely secondary, in a sense that all (male) human beings are equal and share the same civic rights. Emancipation in this context was a political emancipation of citizens from feudal, traditional relations. Marx connected human position in social structure with material conditions and idea of work and ownership. For him the idea of society was not based on the idea of civil rights, but on the idea of economic relations between different social groups classes. It was dichotomous vision of society made of workers and capitalists the owners of means of production. Emancipation was possible not on the basis of civil rights, but on the basis of changing economic relations. This was a revolutionary perspective, leading to turnover of social order. Unlike the Enlightenment, Marx did not perceived emancipation and concept of freedom in individual actions. He clearly rejected individualism both in terms of individual social actions and as the method of inference about human conditions. Marx claimed that every individual is rooted in his collective history and society, and his consciousness, as well as beliefs, goals and needs are shaped through that heritage. That is why not only analysis of human conditions, but also the projected change of social relations, has to take into consideration collective baggage and collective effort. Conclusions As we can see, Marx benefited much from the Enlightenment philosophy, though we have to keep in mind, that issues presented in this paper are merely examples of eighteen century tradition in Marx thought. Marx indeed was a child of the Enlightenment in a sense, that he took form that tradition in different ways, sometimes directly, sometimes developing further ideas and sometimes criticizing and negating the eighteen century thought. This heritage however seems somehow natural, since we cannot abandon of our history and are always influenced by previous discourses. What we have to remember about is, that eighteen century tradition does not exhaust Marx thought but merely enriches and embeds it in historical context.

Friday, January 17, 2020

American Economy

In a broad sense, the macroeconomic policies developed and implemented by the Federal Reserve (the Fed) are those which regulate the national supply of money. Either through foreign exchange operations, or management of public funds, the Fed seeks to maintain the level of money supply in ways that would sustain stable inflation rates. It should be noted that while Fed’s macroeconomic policies tend to impact aggregate demand and GDP these are primarily short-term effects, with the rate of inflation being the main long-term target of any monetary policy.Now, in conditions of the growing financial crisis, it is more than important to reconsider and reevaluate the effects of the major Fed’s macroeconomic policies on the major sectors of the U. S. economy. Given the instability of the current financial and housing markets, this analysis is expected to become the source of useful policy recommendations in short and long run. American Economy Introduction In a broad sense, mac roeconomic policies developed and implemented by the Federal Reserve (the Fed) are those which regulate the national supply of money.Either through foreign exchange operations, or management of public funds, the Fed seeks to maintain the level of money supply in ways that would sustain stable inflation rates. It should be noted that while Fed’s macroeconomic policies tend to impact aggregate demand and GDP these are primarily short-term effects, with the rate of inflation being the main long-term target of any monetary policy. Now, in conditions of the growing financial crisis, it is more than important to reconsider and reevaluate the effects of the major Fed’s macroeconomic policies on the major sectors of the U.S. economy. Given the instability of the current financial and housing markets, this analysis is expected to become the source of useful policy recommendations in short and long run. Monetary policies have long been the issue of the Fed’s major concern . Through the prism of numerous monetary factors, the Fed used to evaluate the causes and consequences of particular monetary decisions and their effects on economic behaviors. The truth is, however, that in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the macroeconomic policies in the U. S., a detailed review of the structural factors that stand behind the current economic crisis is required. The combination of the housing and credit crunch drivers needs to be reconsidered, to realize the real-life implications of all monetary initiatives the Fed has been able to implement over the course of the last three years. To start with, the current economic crisis originates from the strategic change in equilibrium within housing markets, as well as the decline in house prices â€Å"as the market gives back the excessive part of the rise in real house prices – the part not justified by realized rentals† (Wu, 2008).These structural shifts have obviously impacted the situation with em ployment, banking, and construction. Another set of structural factors is readily visible in the financial sector, where subprime mortgages and the following illiquidity and reduced supply of loans have led the banks to the need for increasing their assets and making their share prices vulnerable to even the slightest changes in business sector (Kutter & Mosser, 2007).The slowdown of productivity, the decreasing value of business and economic expectations, and oil prices have also contributed in the expansion of the current financial crisis, which is more the result of structural shifts in global and national economy, rather than the direct consequence of ineffective monetary approaches. In this context, the natural question is what the Fed has done to decrease the negative impact of financial crisis on the major sectors of business and economy, and whether Fed’s macroeconomic policies in their traditional form remain relevant in the changing financial and economic conditions .Since the end of 2006 and up to the beginning of 2009, the gradual increase of the Fed’s reserve balances has been the distinctive feature of the Fed’s response to the expanding economic crisis. The increase in reserve balances have become particularly visible and sharp by the end of 2008, when the Fed faced a serious need to provide banks and business entities with additional liquidity instruments and loans (Lacker, 2009). In a very short-time period, the Fed has increased the reserve balances supply by over 100-fold, with the latter reaching the amount of $848 billion (Boivin & Giannoni, 2008).Purchasing securities and providing financial institutions with guaranteed loans was one of the reasons for such sharp reserve balances increase, but beyond that, the Fed sought to finance its loan activities by creating additional money. It should be noted here, that with the need to obtain additional financial instruments, the Fed can follow the three different pathways: cre ating money, borrowing funds from the U. S. treasury, and issuing debt (Gilpin, 2008).Selling government securities is just another option the Fed can utilize to obtain additional funds. Importantly, with the emergence of the economic threats and during the first months of crisis the Fed chose to follow the fourth path, adjusting its portfolio to its economic and financial needs by selling off government securities, but with the amount of government securities being insufficient to maintain financial and monetary stability in the U. S. , the Fed has come to realize the need for creating new money.In the light of the essential structural shifts, and given the long-term impacts which the process of creating new money produces on all areas of economic activity, these macroeconomic policy decisions have already turned into the source of increasing professional concerns, and there are several reasons for that. First, the effectiveness of federal reserves increase seems doubtful due to th e inflationary trends with which it is usually associated. Under the impact of falling commodity prices, when inflation risks seem at least improbable, the Fed nevertheless should not lose the sense of caution.The fact is that when the need withdraw the funds and to reduce the amount of federal reserves arises, the Fed is likely to face another inflationary challenge, and whether it is able to avoid long-term increase in prices will depend on the moment the Fed chooses for reducing the amount of funds (Boivin & Giannoni, 2008). Second, Gilpin (2008) suggests that as long as the Fed is increasingly involved into selective financing as a part of its macroeconomic initiatives, the Fed’s independence from other governmental institutions becomes irrelevant and at least doubtful.Rudebusch (2008) writes that â€Å"the recent request by the Treasury for the Fed to assist in creating a Consumer and Business Loan Initiative is certainly reminiscent of the request by Treasury for the F ed to help out in its own borrowing operations before the Accord of 1950†. Thus, whether the Fed acts in accordance with macroeconomic principles or follows the recommendations and requirements of Congress will also determine its consistence as the central financial body and as the source of the major macroeconomic initiatives.Finally, as Congress is trying to tie the Fed to its authoritative decisions, and the Fed does not look beyond the need for creating additional money and applying selective funding principles, the only effect the Fed has been able to produce is proving its inability to act as an independent financial body. The problem is that against the continuous success of its expansionary initiatives and the absence of deep recessions, the Fed found itself in the midst of predictable policies and workable macroeconomic guidelines.Since the end of 2006, however, those guidelines and policies have gradually lost their effectiveness (Rudebusch, 2008). Scholars and profe ssionals in economics recognize the declining effectiveness of the major Fed’s initiatives: the Fed is no longer able to produce immediate positive effects on the interest rates; the benefits of the major macroeconomic initiatives have been muted by the mortgage securities market issues; investors are disappointed with the recent Fed’s decisions – all these factors significantly contribute into the expansion of the current financial crisis, making the financial image of the Fed even more negative.Until present, the ineffective macroeconomic activity of the Fed has only led to re-appreciation and reconsideration of the benefits of fiscal stimuli and responses to the changing economic conditions. Against the inconsistency of the Fed’s decisions, the scope of the Fed’s operations was limited to adjusting federal funds rate and issuing additional financial instruments. Federal Reserve lending in the broader macroeconomic contexts has also become the to pic of increasing professional interest.In response to recent slowdown, the Fed has developed a whole set of lending initiatives, which either targeted specific groups of assets, or specific business entities or institutions, or implied the need for standard discount window lending (Lacker, 2009). From the viewpoint of macroeconomics and the long-term impact which these interventions tend to produce, before the middle of 2008 the Fed had been working to provide lending in ways that would not increase the monetary base but would instead redirect additional bank reserves to cover its lending commitments.Since the end of October 2008, however, the Fed has no longer been able to maintain its monetary base unchanged, and had to combine its lending ideas with additional monetary stimuli (Lacker, 2009). These lending programs have been effective to the extent that changed the balance of credit in specific markets, and â€Å"while some market segments benefit from reduced funding costs, ot hers may actually see their costs rise as credit is diverted to those markets that have been targeted by support† (Lacker, 2009).In relation to lending, it is essential to note that over the last three years the Federal Reserve intentionally chose to conduct its monetary interventions with the help of the federal funds rate, which provides the Fed with an increasingly active position regarding macroeconomic policies in the U. S. By changing the discount rate, the Fed gives financial institutions a chance and the right to borrow directly from the Fed, and the Fed’s board can either approve or deny the loan (Gilpin, 2008).The situation is similar with other lending initiatives, but when it comes to supporting specific business entities or markets, the Fed risks losing its independence and faces a decision-making challenge of cooperation with Congress. More than that, with lending being one of the major macroeconomic operations initiated by the Fed in the last 3 years, pro fessionals have come to realize the inconsistence and the distorted vision of the Fed with regard to discount rate as the central policy instrument.In other words, where financial institutions seek to replenish the lack of liquidity, they prefer borrowing overnight, thus leaving the Fed no time to review the real financial needs of financial institutions (Krugman, 2007). As a result, it was not before the middle of 2007 that the Fed has become concerned about the decreasing liquidity of its assets and the need to reduce the discount rate for primary credit.Since that time, the Fed continuously supported its â€Å"federal funds rate reduce† line, which suggests that reducing discount and federal funds rates was one of the least ineffective macroeconomic approaches and did not extend beyond producing short-term positive impacts on financial and commodity markets (Yuan & Zimmerma, 2008). The structural forces that currently govern the economic and financial balance in the U. S. and the world inevitably impact the so-called natural interest rates, of which the Fed seems unaware.That means that while the current rate of return on equities is above 5. 5%, it is also much higher than the policy rates which the Fed adjusts to make them fit to the current rates of inflation (Gilpin, 2008). Furthermore, given that the origins of the current economic crisis lay within the limits of the housing markets, it is very probable that â€Å"what will be driving real rates of interest once the economy settles into its new growth path is the rate that households require on loans† (Krugman, 2007).Thus, in its credit initiatives, the Fed has obviously neglected a whole set of important factors, which make its macroeconomic policies at least irrelevant. While the Fed seeks to expand the liquidity of available funds by maintaining interest rates at the levels close to zero, it distorts the macroeconomic balance. The fact is that against the reduced wealth levels and the growing negative expectations, the expected rates of interest in future will be much higher than the Fed currently promotes (Krugman, 2007).With the growing need for funds on the side of financial and business entities, the Fed is likely to face the crisis of expectations, where it is either unable to maintain sustainable interest rates or fails to provide businesses with sufficient amount of financial assets. Thus, whether the Fed is able to promote the success of its major macroeconomic initiatives depends on its ability to timely review its macroeconomic attempts and to adjust them to real-life market contexts.In the light of the increasing inefficiency of the major Fed’s interventions, special attention needs to be paid to the so-called moral hazard problem. â€Å"Safety net support for financial institutions encourages private market participants to view some institutions as ‘too big to fail’ and weakens those institutions’ incentive to monitor and m anage the risks they face in their business strategies and financial market transactions† (Gilpin, 2008); as a result, this inattentiveness to the major market risks weakens financial and business institutions and increases the cost of this financial protection.In other words, while the Fed pursues the need to reduce the cost of credit for ultimate borrowers by providing financial and credit institutions with additional financial assets, it unintentionally leads these institutions undertake higher additional risks than they otherwise would be willing to recognize (Lacker, 2009). As a result, the cost of borrowing substantially increases, leaving these institutions in the need to absorb the effects of moral hazard without external support.Does that mean that the Fed has initially chosen a wrong macroeconomic path? This question lacks a single and obvious answer, and while many financial institutions and business entities will require expanding the range of available liquid reso urces by using federal funds, a stronger regulatory basis and strict system of monitoring could significantly increase the efficiency of all macroeconomic policies aimed at reducing the negative impact of the current financial crisis. ConclusionThe Federal Reserve has appeared completely unprepared to facing the challenges of the expanding economic crisis. Despite the relevance of the new liquidity mechanisms and the Fed’s striving to expand the range of available financial instruments, these measures will hardly be effective in the long run. Moreover, given the undue risks financial institutions and business entities undertake and the limitedness of the Fed’s financial resources, its current macroeconomic initiatives are likely to become counter effective in the U.S. striving to preserve its leading position among the major economic powers. In this context, strict regulation and a well-developed system of federal monitoring will increase the effectiveness of all Fedâ €™s initiatives at the macroeconomic level. References Boivin, J. & Giannoni, M. P. (2008). Has monetary policy become more effective? The Review of Economics and Statistics, 90 (3): 445-462. Gilpin, R. (2008). Global political economy: Understanding the international economic order.Orient Longman. Lacker, J. (2009). Government lending and monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Retrieved April 1, 2009 from http://www. richmondfed. org/press_room/speeches/president_jeff_lacker/2009/lacker_speech_20090302. cfm Krugman, P. (2007). Thinking of the liquidity trap. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 14 (4): 331-337. Kuttner, K. N. & Mosser, P. (2007). The monetary policy transmission mechanism: Some answers and further questions.Federal Reserve Bank of New York Economic Policy Review, 8 (1): 15-26. Rudebusch, G. & Wu, T. (2008). A macro-finance model of the monetary policy and the economy. Economic Journal, 118 (530): 906-926. Wu, T. (2008). On the ef fectiveness of the Federal Reserve’s new liquidity facilities. Elsevier, 52 (4): 745-777. Yuan, M. & Zimmerman, C. (2008). Credit crunch, bank lending, and monetary policy: A model of financial intermediation with heterogeneous projects. Springer, 29 (1): 244-265.

Thursday, January 9, 2020

The Origin Of Species By Charles Darwin - 898 Words

Charles Darwin is perhaps one of the most well known men of science to this date. He’s most known for his theory of evolution and in particular, natural selection. His most famous works, and one of his most controversial works as well, was his book titled On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Darwin wrote the Origin of Species after an almost five-year voyage aboard the H.M.S. Beagle. While aboard the beagle, Darwin was presented with many facts that appeared to â€Å"shed some light on the origin of species†. Darwin has contributed in many ways to the world of science, specifically the history of science. His works and theories can be found today in almost any historical science class. Darwin may not have been the first to talk about evolution, but he certainly is one of the most well-known historians of science to have addressed the issue. In his book, The Origin of Species, Darwin descri bed in detail how certain species evolve over time, as well as how his theory of natural selection has affected evolution. While on his voyage aboard the H.M.S. Beagle, Darwin observed the various typed of birds of the Galapagos Islands. While doing so, he discovered that the life forms native to those islands bore a striking resemblance to similar species living on nearby continents than to those living on more distant islands. From these observations, Darwin formed his theory of natural selection. In itsShow MoreRelatedOn the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin1148 Words   |  5 PagesOn November 24th, 1859, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life by Charles Darwin (renamed On the Origin of Species 13 years later) was published in London, England. In it, Charles Darwin specified his observations and gave his insight on what he thought caused evolution. He called it natural selection. Before this, n early everyone believed that a single God created every living organism that none of them had changedRead MoreThe Origin Of Species By Charles Darwin868 Words   |  4 Pagesinanimate Polymorphic-different forms or types in organisms of the same species. Potent-something of great power or influence. Vigorous-healthy or strong. Volition-choosing or making a decision. B) 1. The text was written by Charles Darwin, who is renowned for his theory of evolution. Besides his book The Origin of Species, he also wrote Voyage of the Beagle and The Descent of Man to name a few. Credence should be given to Charles Darwin for his contributions to the evolution theory and for serving asRead MoreThe Origin Of Species By Charles Darwin1689 Words   |  7 Pagesmain book where we get out information about evolution is in Origin of Species’ by Charles Darwin. In his book, Darwin introduced the concept of evolution by natural selection. Natural selection is the process in which the organisms which are better suited for their environment. According to Darwin, there are four major points to natural selection. The first point is overproduction, indicating that more offspring survive, meaning the species would survive longer. Then, there s genetic variation. TheRead MoreThe Origins Of Species By Charles Darwin983 Words   |  4 PagesAfter Charles Darwin publishe d the Origins of Species, society began to turn away from religion and towards science to justify slavery and segregation by seeking out physiological and psychological differences between Blacks and Whites (Parks Heard, 2009). Physiologically, some Whites argued that black people were the missing link between apes and humans. Psychologically, others like Frances Galton proposed his theory of eminence, or the notion that certain abilities, many of them psychologicalRead MoreOn The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin915 Words   |  4 PagesHuman evolution has been of interest to people for quite some time. Even though in the publication of On The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin in 1859 human evolution was not specifically mentioned, only that light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history, Darwin did argue for the evolution of new species from older ones (1). Since then, interest in evolution, and especially human evolution, has been growing. An example of one of t he first debates about human evolution is the debateRead MoreThe Origin of The Species by Charles Darwin Essay994 Words   |  4 PagesDarwinism is a theory developed by Charles Darwin with the help of many others. It states that natural selection is the most common cause of evolution. All species of organisms arise and grow through the natural selection of inherited variations that help increase the individuals ability to survive and reproduce in its environment. 1735 Carolus Linnaeus: He believed that God had created the world in a divine order from the simplest creatures up to human beings. He said God created struggle andRead MoreThe Origins of the Species by Charles Darwin Essay examples2012 Words   |  9 Pagesmystery, death, supernatural and horror. But as all the literary genres it underwent a transition. In the nineteenth century, the coming of Queen Victoria to the throne, the introduction of new scientific theories, the publication of The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin and industrialization modified the structures of society , its motivation, and believes. This influenced the genre, creating a new literary movement: Victorian Gothic, and therefore also the novels written in these different periodsRead MoreAfter Sir Charles Darwin had introduced his original theory about the origins of species and700 Words   |  3 PagesAfter Sir Charles Darwin had introduced his original theory about the origins of species and evolution, hu manity’s faith in God that remained undisputed for hundreds of years had reeled. The former unity fractured into the evolutionists, who believed that life as we see it today had developed from smaller and more primitive organisms, and creationists, who kept believing that life in all its diversity was created by a higher entity. Each side introduced substantial arguments to support their claimsRead MoreAnalysis Of Charles Darwin s The Origin Of Species Declared That Human Beings Developed Overtime From More Simple Forms843 Words   |  4 PagesIn 1859, Charles Darwin in his book On the Origin of Species declared that human beings developed overtime from more simple forms. Evolution suggested that the human species originated from ape-like creatures and gradually changed in structure. Essentially, given the changing patterns of weather and environment, the species had to acquire new skills and adapt to survive. Those that could not change were eliminated in a process that is known as Natural Selection (Larson 47). The Evolution theory,Read MoreCharles Darwin s Theory Of The Creation Of Species1560 Words   |  7 PagesJustus English 2 Mr. Johnson 2/16/15 Project Eagle Final Paper: Charles Darwin Charles Darwin has become Christianity’s greatest enemy with his theories of the creation of species and has caused people to turn their backs on faith and look to science to be their religion. The way in which Darwin describes the creation of species in The Origin of Species does not agree with how species are created in Christian teachings. Charles Darwin’s theories have impacted so many different aspects of life