For the first half of our course in mediation, we have been looking how people typically make decisions and how a mediator can use certain strategies to help bring people together to make constructive decisions that is beneficial for both parties and minimizes conflict. These themes are laid out and explored deeper in Malcom Gladwell’s novel, Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. This book focuses on how people make sudden judgments and decisions, while never even consciously aware of these decisions or the factors that influenced their decision-making processes. Gladwell describes this phenomena as an “automatic pilot,” where “the way we work and act and how well we think and act on the spur of the moment are a lot more susceptible to outside influence than we realize.” It is important to note that while these quick assessments come from the unconscious and cannot exactly explored in depth, the author argues that ways do exist to reasonably explain these “blink” decisions. For a mediator, the ability to identify and understand this unconscious human behavior can come in handy.
That tone is used to enforce a feeling of a conversation as opposed to a feeling of a lecture. For example, the authors say, “Who cheats? Well, just about everyone, if the stakes are right … Some cheating leaves barely a shadow of evidence. In other cases, the evidence is massive. Consider what happened …” (Levitt and Dubner 19).
In the section titled Teaching the AHA states “Integrity in teaching means presenting competing interpretations with fairness and intellectual honesty...leading them toward the insight that history is a process of living inquiry, not an inert collection of accepted facts” (AHA Statement on Standards 11). Additionally, the AHA highlights that textbooks, course offerings, and public history presentations should represent “the diversity of human experience”, which is primarily the goal of Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States (AHA Statement on Standards 11). However, students hold the freedom to openly disagree with certain interpretations and it is not the role of the teacher to dismiss criticisms. The role of the teacher is to present conflicting interpretations and allow students to come to their own conclusions. Lastly, the section called Shared Values of Historians discusses the importance of creating critical dialogue.
The making of a decision is always composed of opinions, beliefs, and past results. Analyzing a particular decision and its effect on individuals or groups is simple to evaluate. However, understanding the premise, process, and thought needed to compile these conclusions is far more complex. Such is the case with Judges and their forms of judicial behavior that lead them into forming conclusions. Political and legal theorist have tormented themselves trying to figure out how judges really behave.
Conflicts A conflict is a situation where two or more people have different opinions and then that people enter into a discussion to put their opinions in order and to see the different points of views. The conflicts have always existed and have always been an important part of the humans to have a good communication. Conflicts are resolved differently. Many people resolve their problems in a way and other people in a different way. Humans are different in many things, some people can be very ripe to resolve their conflicts but other people cannot resolve their problems and if they do they resolved with great difficulty.
Even though they suspect the perspectives of their audiences such as lawmakers and officials may not change at all, they remain determined to their goals and future accomplishments. With the diversity of each appeal each speaker uses it makes the speech even more sensitive, and relatable. Including the uses of the Logical Appeal (Logos), and the Emotional Appeals (Pathos). The Logical Appeal is the uses of statistics, metaphors and similes, and finally the uses of providing testimony. In the I Have a Dream speech, Dr. King expresses his evidence by using metaphors such as, “Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.” This metaphor represents how they do not want to find their freedom through bitterness and hatred just like how they are treated.
I have learned that compromising, even-splitting or building trust are not the right tactics in a win-win negotiation. Instead, knowing yourself (i.e. your target, your BATNA, reservations points, etc. ), understanding your counterparty (i.e. their underlying interests, concerns, their BATNA, etc.)
You should consider mediation as a solution because of its time efficiency and lasting conflict management skills. Quick problem resolution is one of the main benefits of mediation along with inspiring effective communication, identifying behavioral patterns, uncovering deeper seeded issues and teaching employees the skills to manage conflict in the future (Podro, & Suff, 2003). A study conducted by The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service showed that businesses that used mediation when resolving conflict saw an 80% improvement in work relationships and 49% said conflicts were completely resolved (Podro, & Suff,
Power based negotiations can be a useful tactic in negotiations. Power based negotiations are an adversarial negotiations in which both parties try to exert their power over one another. This tactic is essentially a competitive interaction. Both parties are fighting over resources, and each view the negotiation as a zero-sum game. The parties are both willing to use their power to deceive and take advantage to pursue their personal goals.
Frege and Geach on Assertion In this paper I will analyse Frege’s view on Assertion (as discussed in his papers “Sense and Reference” and “Thought”) followed by an account of Geach’s defence of this idea. Frege holds relevance in the history of analytical philosophy for proposing a sense to bridge the gap between what is said and what is heard and thus educating us about what is ‘expressed’. But among his rather rigid theory about how language works, he also advances an even more obscure theory about how assertion works. On Frege’s account, an assertion is any thought acknowledged as a judgement. There is no other parameter for an assertion to be called so.
It helps me better understand that certain word choices helps to create a tone and an image in the readers head. Here is one example from one of the JITT post I did. I also learn a lot about how most authors include many details in their text. It is important because when including many details in the text it can
Traditional argument assumes that people are most readily convinced or persuaded by a confrontation “debate”. This form of argument is mostly used in essays or critical analysis. In a traditional argument, even though the writes argues reasonably and fairly, the writer provides evidence to support or back up their claim, the argument becomes kind of a struggle of “war”. Unlike the traditional argument, the Rogerian argument does not take the confrontation stance; it uses logic to solve problems by establishing a common ground with the opposition. If people are with each other, they need to be willing to change their views and identify where they can adjust their beliefs.
I trust I now have improved as a composition researcher in view of my elaboration of my vocabulary and from what everything my teacher have taught me this semester. Besides, amid the written work process I appreciate having satisfactory time to plan my thoughts and musings and afterward discovering genuine proof to bolster it and verbally sharing my thoughts. To put it plainly, I am despondent this course has find some conclusion however I am exceptionally thankful for this experience and I anticipate utilizing what I have realized as a part of this class to improve as an author and in addition be successful in future written work