Healthypeople 1 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Healthypeople 1 - Essay Example The spirit and intention of Healthy People 2020 policy was to ensure that every citizen access quality healthcare regardless of the social and economic status. Another fundamental point that you have raised in this post is that IOM must ensure that customer is the boss. Quality healthcare is achieved when the customer is satisfied. Patient should always come first in all issues of healthcare because without the patients there would be no need of constructing health facilities. You have concluded your well-written post by giving a recommendation to all patients to consider taking advantage of technological advancement such as mobile phones apps and Google searches to manage their own health. It is through technology that patients can become better informed about health issues facing the. The noble task of taking personal responsibility of educating patients is something that must be emulated and adopted by everyone because effort of a single individual has little impact in achieving the goal of Health for all by 2020 as compared to cumulative effort of many

Gay Marriage Essay Example for Free

Gay Marriage Essay Persons acquire special duties on account of their moral and legal relationship to another. One such relationship is established in marriage. Marriage is a moral and legal contact between a man and woman. It is a moral contract because it is entered into by both parties, giving free and voluntary consent. It is a legal contract because it is solemnized in accordance with the law. Marriage is an important institutional element of the family. It is the cultural mechanism that ensures its continuity. Marriage is an institution consisting of a cluster or mores and folkways, of attitudes, ideas, and ideals, of social definitions and legal restrictions (see Brennan, Robert Edward: Thomistic Psychology, New York Macmillan Co. , 1999). People marry for a combination of reasons: love, economic and emotional security, the parents’ wishes, escape from loneliness or an unhappy home situation, money, companionship, protection, adventure, or common interests (see Buckley, Joseph: Man’s last End, London, Herder Book Co. , 1999). Sex or sexual attraction is the least consideration, but marriage makes sexual intercourse legitimate. It sanctions parenthood and provides a stable background for rearing of children. Marriage is the foundation of the family, an inviolable social institution. Its purpose may not necessarily be for procreation or to have children but for companionship, as in the case of couples past the age of procreation. This paper intends to discuss the pros and cons of gay marriage or same-sex marriage. II. Discussion A. Pros †¢ Society should allow same Gay Marriage: In the article, fighting the same sex marriage should be allowed. Ralph Wedgwood firmly believes that same- sex couple has every right to marry. For him, marriage is not just a mere ceremony but through it the people in the community may know that both of the parties are very serious of their relationship and that it is not just a game. For them, it is a commitment and a thing to be really cherished even if the society throws issues on them. Having a same sex relationship that eventually, if permitted could lead to marriage is about a domestic and long lasting relationship. The article by Wedgwood, who is an assistant professor of Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of technology at Cambridge. The purpose of marriage is mutual support and companionship. Marriage is a state where spouses compliment each other. Love and concern for each other is the foundation of a happy marriage. Without such love and appreciation for each other, no man and woman or a couple with the same sex can be together permanently. Thus, such love which draws spouses in marriage must be more than physical attachment, sexual attraction, or infatuation. It is the deep commitment of matured persons for each other. Married spouses have every rights and duties to perform like in the financial aspect, in division of possession, insurance and other things that should be shared by the couple. Many same sex couples now are being given privilege if they are not yet married or are committed legally with each other Marriage is not just about rights and benefits they will get from the society and with their partners. It is a deeper union of the souls loving each other. Some people tags marriage of low- respect, they see marriage as a means of satisfying ones’ self of sexual desires, well in fact it is more than that. Procreation and sex are not the only reason why people want to get married. Some couples after getting married and found out that it won’t click, and then decides to get a divorce. A person does not have any right to choose and disapprove a decided marriage, the decision is up to the ones involve in the relationship. The laws determine the ones who are those that are married and those who are not being recognized. Society’s expectations on marriage depend on the rights and obligations of both parties, thus these duties and obligations should be done by both parties. The spouse should support his/ her partner, and if divorce will result they should equally divide all their properties. Marriage is a serious thing to decide. The parties should be that committed and they should really love and care for each other. Marriage is not just a joke; it is a long term domestic partnership with the one you adore. Same sex couples want to get married for the reasons that a normal boy- girl relationship also has. They are not just after of the benefits and privilege that they could get in the society and with their spouses but they also want to be recognized by the society. Their relationship is not just purely based on lust or sexual desires but also for them to have a serious commitment, like sharing of responsibilities. Many homosexuals, lesbians and gays aspires that what the society expects of marriage is also the kind of marriage that they are dreaming to achieve or to have. Many questions are being raised on having a domestic partnership. People may ask, if having a domestic partnership is renewable? Do they really have to support each other in all aspects? Or they just stick with each other because of sex and fun? For the society, it is less recognized than having the ceremony of marriage. They wanted to be recognized by the society that even if they are of the same sex, they still know what real love is and they are ready for a lifetime commitment. For them it is the greatest benefit of marriage, to be recognized by the society and that is why the State disapproves of this. Many critics say that if same- sex marriage is approved it would then deviate to the real purpose of marriage, such as its real meaning like procreation or the process of bearing children. But as we see now, some of the married couples are not able to perform this duty. The disapproval of same sex marriage still needs to be reviewed. The State is concerned on the moral values of the church, and Christianity. Some believes that heterosexual partnerships are above homosexual relationships. Many criticized same sex marriage and many are against it because it if is approved it will just be equal with the heterosexuals and it will just lower the view of the society about relationships. They should be allowed because they are not hideous criminals to do such an act; it is just being with someone you love. The murderers and even convicted criminals are allowed to marry but still the State still does not allow this kind of relationship. Same sex marriage would not force anybody to allow this gay or lesbian relationship if it is just totally against them and their beliefs. But all they wanted to happen is for the society to understand their feelings and relationships with the same sex and they are really serious with it. B. Cons †¢ Society should not allow same- Sex marriage: According to Burman Skrable, when same- sex marriage will be legalized it would be a great detriment to the society. It totally deviates from the real purpose of marriage which is to â€Å"procreate†. These children will be the future of the society and the environment. Approving it would somehow destroy the essence of marriage and the family which is the basic unit of the society by legalizing a relationship that is non procreative. Some Christians fight to disapprove it. For it totally disobeys God’s doctrines and Commandments. But all of them are aware that these days, there are great query about the laws that God has put up because of the rising taboo that has been happening in the society now. Great changes are being called out by the believers but the challenge of this is fast arising. We should stand firm and follow or obey the instructions that God has written in His Word. We should not involve ourselves in such promiscuous acts that we ourselves know is unacceptable towards God. The couple should give a stable future to their children and family that may be in the aspects of financial, emotional and spiritual. They should bring their children to school and educate them and let them become a friend to all. But how would these become successful if a child is being brought up in such an abnormal way, where in his/ her mother and father are of same sexes. The traditional family is composed of the husband, wife and natural children. These units of the society are all normal variables. This is the one that gives a bright future for the society they are in and also by forming a natural family. The family is the most basic unit of the society where the children are being taught values and morals that greatly affect on how they interact with other individuals in the society. Yes, raising a family is sometimes hard especially in raising finances for their education, but the hardship is worth fighting for because of the love you feel for them. The society expects that these children would make their family and their parents as a model as they will grow and build a family of their own. The society needs a family that is stable and the one that they can really recognize. What they expect is a male and female marriage and not of the same sex. The greatly arising sexual revolution brought a big impact on how individuals and the society see and do things, that sometimes they think is not bad were in fact it has already crossed God‘s boundaries. Time has erased the moral values that we should follow, like now marriage is already not seen as a form of procreation, for raising children; that there should be faithfulness and that sex should only be done with in the bounds of it. For Karen Murray it has become a public declaration of love and pledge of fidelity with the partner. The rise of the same revolutionary forces encourages this interest for having a homosexual marriage. The belief that sex is not just about procreating drives the toleration of the society of this same- sex marriage. But the homosexuals does not get affected by this instead they are proud that they have found a relationship where in they will cherish and have commitment forever. Gay marriage or same sex-marriage is totally erasing the real definition of marriage. It removes the reality that it is only the man and the women are to be bind, that both partners should procreate to raise their children who are the hope of the society’ improvement. Approving or making same- sex marriage legal would dissolve the uniqueness of the sacrament that God has given to us. If same sex marriage would be approve, it could jeopardize the health of the society. Diseases like HIV, AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases are much great when one is involved in this same- sex marriage. III. Conclusion The foundation of the family is marriage, which provides the cultural mechanism to insure its continuity. This marriage is the one God wanted for us. The family performs varied functions, among them the sex and parental function, socialization and social control, biological maintenance, status placement, and economic, religious, educational, recreational, and political functions. Therefore, Marriage is such a holy and sanctified Eucharist and is bound to be respected by people.

History of the Calle Ocho Festival :: Little Havana Culture

Twenty Years of Calle Ocho Over the years, the Calle Ocho festival has brought hundreds of smiles to thousands of people. Behind the smiles, the laughter, and the dances, there is a serious side to the festivities. In the beginning, Willy Bermello just wanted a little backyard get-together that would bring neighbors closer, but the festival turned into something much, much bigger. With the festival's growth and inevitable commercialization, Bermello increasingly felt that its importance was being forgotten. He wanted to let people know this was more than just a big party. He wanted people of different races and different ethnicities to be able to feel comfortable with each other, and not just for one day. He wanted Calle Ocho's influence felt throughout the year. In 1998, Cuban refugees are still being held captive in camps at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Many refugees left Guantanamo last year in hopes of reaching America, but unfortunately, few have yet to make it here. In the hearts of many people, there lies the hope, that, by the next festival, those Cubans wishing to be in South Florida will be able to celebrate the festival with their friends and family. On Calle Ocho, people of all races and backgrounds are helping to make the Cuban exile community party a success. It has been a difficult year for divided families everywhere. Many of the proceeds from various stands at the festival go to giving financial aid to Cubans who are brought over from the island. A portion of the festival proceeds go to support Operation Angel; the MCI long-distance telephone tents are giving away five minutes of free calling time. This calling time gives families the chance to call Cuba; many are calling their families for the first time. Furthermore, T-shirt stand s are raising money to help those still interred in camps. Block after block, people from all over are packed in Little Havana; they form a river of cultural unity. Unfortunately, the Calle Ocho festival of 1996 was cancelled due to the ill-fated shooting down of four Cuban exile aviators, from the Brothers to the Rescue organization, by Cuban warplanes on February 24, 1996. People who attended the festivals after that incident maintain, in their hearts, the memories of those pilots who gave their lives to help refugees in need.

Business Ethics in Brazil Essay

In this comparative survey of 126 Brazilian and U.S. business professionals, we explore the effect of national culture on ethical decisionmaking within the context of business. Using Reidenbach and Robin’s (1988) multi-criteria ethics instrument, we examined how these two countries’ differences on Hofstede’s individualism/collectivism Rafik I. Beekun (Ph.D., The University of Texas, Austin) is Professor of Management and Strategy in the Managerial Sciences Department at the University of Nevada, Reno. His current research interests are in the area of strategic adaptation, the link between national cultures and ethics, and the relationship between management and spirituality. He has published in such journals as Journal of Applied Psychology, Human Relations, Journal of Management and Decision Sciences. Correspondence regarding this article should be sent to him at: Managerial Sciences Department, Mail Stop 28, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557-0206. Yvonne Ste dham (Ph.D., University of Kansas) is an Associate Professor of Management in the Managerial Sciences Department at the University of Nevada, Reno. She has published in such journals as the Journal of Management and Journal of Management Studies. Dr. Stedham’s research focuses on the following areas: CEO performance evaluation, gender discrimination in employment, ethics in business, decision making across cultures, and managing knowledge workers. Jeanne H. Yamamura (CPA, Ph.D., Washington State University) is an Associate Professor of Accounting in the College of Business at the University of Nevada Reno. Her teaching responsibilities include auditing and accounting information systems courses. Dr. Yamamura’s research focuses on the management of accounting professionals with a particular interest in cross-cultural differences and her work has been published in accounting and business journals. She has extensive practical experience in the field of accounting through her previous employment in public and private accounting. Rafik I. Beekun Yvonne Stedham Jeanne H. Yamamura dimension are related to the manner in which business practitioners make ethical decisions. Our results indicate that Brazilians and Americans evaluate the ethical content of actions or decisions differently when applying utilitarian criteria. By contrast, business people from both countries do not differ significantly when they use egoistic criteria in evaluating the ethical nature of business decisions. KEY WORDS: Brazil, egoism, ethics, national culture, U.S., utilitarianism As business organizations move from domestic to global and transnational competition, they are finding that cultural values vary significantly across national boundaries, and are likely to affect business practices (Husted, 2000). During the past decade, several researchers (Ferrell and Gresham, 1985; Hunt et al., 1989; Abratt et al., 1992; Hunt and Vitell, 1992; Tsalikis and Nwachukwu, 1991; Vitell et al., 1993) have noted the potential influence of national c ulture on ethics within a business context. What obscures the impact of national culture on ethics is that business practices may conflict with ethical values in a manner that medicine, law and government do not (DeGeorge, 1993). Not surprisingly, empirical research investigating the relationship between national culture and ethical decision-making is relatively sparse (Vitell et al., 1993). A primary reason for exploring the effects of culture on ethics is the increased globalization of business. This trend, in turn, is characterized by a diverse array of interorganizational arrangements that require cross-cultural interaction. As a result, cultural misunderstandings are likely to occur. One of the key areas where such mis- Journal of Business Ethics 42: 267–279, 2003.  © 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. 268 Rafik I. Beekun et al. understandings take place is in the area of ethics, partly because of the influence that national cultures may have upon business ethics (Husted, 2000). Accordingly, in our study, we explore the relationship between national culture and business ethics. We will seek to investigate what process underlies ethical behavior across national boundaries. Understanding this process may help global managers develop tools to promote ethical behavior in their international workforce. In this research, we compare two culturally diverse countries, the United States (U.S.) and Brazil, in order to identify similarities and differences with regard to approaches toward ethical decision-making in a business context. Since culture is a broad concept, it is necessary to specify the values that could be related to behaviors or practices (Husted, 2000). For the purposes of this study, we used a well-established framework of national culture (Hofstede, 1980). Hofstede conducted one of the most important studies that ascertained the relationship between national culture and management. From this study, he identified several â€Å"value† dimensions along which countries differ. Using Hofstede’s (1980) framework, we carried out a crosscultural, comparative survey to assess the relationship between his individualism/collectivism dimension of national culture and ethical criteria. With respect to ethical decision-making, we adopted the instrument proposed and validated by Reidenbach and Robin (1988, 1990). They have generated a set of scales that measure the core dimensions characterizing different perspectives of ethical philosophy. Defining national culture: Hofstede’s dimensions of culture Multiple definitions and conceptualizations of national culture exist (Hofstede, 1980, 1988, 2001; Kluckhohn, 1951, 1962; Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, 1961; Ronen and Shenkar, 1985; Trompenaars, 1993). Although these frameworks and conceptualizations typically center on values, they differ with respect to the specific values that are included in their respective frameworks. For instance, Trompenaars (1993) focuses on values related to relationships such as obligation, emotional orientation in relationships, and involvement in relationships. By contrast, Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck (1961) emphasize more global values such as people’s relationship to nature and time-orientation. With respect to our study, Hofstede’s framework of national cultures is the most appropriate since he ident ified values related to economic activity (Husted, 2000). Therefore, his framework is germane for the study of business decisions. Focusing on national cultures, Hofstede (1997, p. 260) defines culture as the â€Å"collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another†. Thus, although the problems faced by groups (whether organizational or national) are universal, the solutions devised by each group may be relatively unique to that group. These solutions then become taken for granted over time, and may suggest why people hold certain beliefs and behave the way they do (Schneider and Barsoux, 1997). Hofstede (1980, 1988) has suggested that five dimensions of national culture underlie differences in the behavior of individuals from different cultural backgrounds. Since these dimensions describe how individuals view and interpret situations and behavior, they are likely to be related to how individuals engage in decision-making in general (Weick, 1979; Adler, 2002). Ethical decisionmaking, too, is likely to be affected by these dimensions of national culture. Hofstede’s five cultural dimensions (1980, 1988) are power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity/femininity, individualism/collectivism, and long-term/short-term orientation. Power distance refers to the degree to which less powerful members in a country accept an unequal distribution of power. Uncertainty avoidance depicts a people’s ability to cope with ambiguous situations as well as the mechanisms they have created to avoid such situations. Masculinity exemplifies a focus on material things, such as money, success, etc., whereas femininity refers to a focus on quality of life, caring, etc. Individualism, which will be discussed in more detail later, refers to the tendency of people to consider their interests and those of A Comparative Investigation of Business Ethics their immediate family only. By contrast, collectivism refers to the inclination of people to view themselves as part of a larger group, and to protect the interests of group members. Longterm/short-term orientation describes the time perspective people take when dealing with a situation. Table I represents the scores for Hofstede’s cultural dimensions for Brazil and the U.S. While the scores indicate dissimilarities between the U.S. and Brazil on all five cultural dimensions, by far the largest difference appears in the individualism/collectivism dimension. Brazil scored low on individualism, and hence is considered a collectivistic country; by contrast, the U.S. scored high on individualism and is considered an individualistic country. The individualism/collectivism dimension describes how individuals relate to others and to society, and represents the extent to which they are emotionally and cognitively attached to a particular network of individuals. Individualism describes the inclination of individuals to be primarily concerned with their personal interests and their immediate family’s welfare (Hofstede, 1980). Members of a highly individualistic country view themselves as independent of organizations or institutions, and place a higher value on self-reliance and individual action. Collectivism, in comparison, describes a culture where individuals are viewed as part of a larger group, and look after each other. Collectivistic cultures protect the interests of their members in return for their loyalty. In collectivist cultures, morality is defined in terms of the benefits for the in-group (family, friends, work companies, 269 etc.), implying the maintenance of solidarity (Triandis and Bhawuk, 1997). Hofst ede (1980) noted that the individualism/collectivism dimension carried â€Å"strong moral overtones† because this dimension was reflected in value systems shared by the majority. For example, in a highly individualistic country, individualism is viewed as a strength and the major reason for the country’s accomplishments. By comparison, inhabitants of a highly collectivistic country view an emphasis on self as a negative attribute to be eliminated for the good of society. Competing ethical frameworks for business decisions Ethics are the principles of human conduct regarding either an individual or a group (Shaw, 1999), and represent the moral standards not governed by law, that focus on the human consequences of actions (Francesco and Gold, 1998). Ethics often require behavior that meets higher standards than those established by law, including selfless behavior rather than calculated action intended to produce a tangible benefit. With respect to this study, business ethics describe the ultimate rules governing the assessment of â€Å"what constitutes right or wrong, or good or bad human conduct in a business context† (Shaw, 1999). In the assessment of ethical behavior, perception is critical (Hartmann, 2000). Indeed, ethical decisions may be influenced by our own perception, by others’ perceptions of our actions, and by our perception of â€Å"universal laws†. As a TABLE I Cultural dimensions (Hofstede 1980, 1988, 2001) Dimensions of culture U.S. Brazil Difference Power distance Uncertainty avoidance 40 46 69 76 (29) (30) Individualism/Collectivism 91 38 53 Masculine/Feminine Confucian Dynamism 62 29 49 65 13 (36) 270 Rafik I. Beekun et al. result, our final choices may be determined by the perception tha t is the most salient at the time. Further, Hartmann suggests that cultures may differ not only with respect to the ethical principles underlying decisions but also with respect to which of the three stakeholders – self, society, and universal laws – is emphasized in any given situation. Depending on which stakeholder is emphasized, people from different cultures may vary in their assessment of the ethical nature of a decision. Across most situations, ethical principles that distinguish right from wrong actions are encompassed by several normative theories, e.g., justice, relativism, egoism, utilitarianism, and deontology. These theories can generate potentially conflicting interpretations of what is ethical or unethical, originating from the very nature of the theories themselves. Moreover, prior research (Cohen et al., 1996; Hansen, 1992; Reidenbach and Robin, 1988, 1990) indicates that individuals making ethical decisions do not select a single theory or philosophy by which to make their decisions. In fact, Reidenbach and Robin (1988) found that a varying combination of ethical philosophies or theories is employed when ethical decisions are made. Shaw (1999) draws a distinction between two types of ethical theories, consequentialist and nonconsequentialist. Consequentialist theories suggest that the moral rightness of an action depends on the actual or intended results of the action. What is right is determined by â€Å"weighing the ratio of good to bad that an action is likely to produce† (Shaw, 1999, p. 45). A key issue underlying consequentialist theories is the nature of the beneficiaries of the action under consideration. Should one consider the consequences for oneself or for all involved? The most important consequentialist theories are egoism and utilitarianism. Egoism promotes individual self-interest as the guiding principle whereas utilitarianism advocates that everyone affected by the action or decision must be taken into account (Shaw, 1999). By contrast, nonconsequentialist theories suggest that it is not simply the consequence of an act that matters, but also its inherent character. Although these theories do not deny that con- sequences are morally relevant, they assert that other factors are also important in assessing the moral significance of an action. For example, â€Å"breaking a promise† is wrong not simply because of the consequences that result from breaking it, but also because of the nature of the act itself. In this study, we focus on consequentialist theories for several reasons. First, Hofstede’s individualism/collectivism dimension can be clearly and easily related to the two consequentialist theories. Second, the two theories represent the perceptions of two of the three possible sta keholders identified by Hartmann (2000), namely own perceptions and others’ perceptions. Third, staying within one theoretical category allows for a much more parsimonious, yet thorough, analysis. Ethical perspectives and national culture: hypotheses Whether egoistic or utilitarian principles are employed, ethics are a product of a society’s culture, which includes its traditions, values, and norms. Within a society, ethical behavior is generally agreed upon. Francesco and Gold (1998, p. 40) explain that â€Å"members implicitly understand how relationships, duties and obligations among people and groups ought to be conducted, and distinguish between their selfinterests and the interests of others.† However, when two or more countries interact, they often find that their ethics differ. According to Hendry (1999), these differences may lead to three types of culturally based ethical conflicts. First, there are those conflicts where the ethical values typifying the two national cultures lead to differing conclusions; what is deemed unethical from one perspect ive is considered to be ethical from the other. Second, conflict may arise when businesspersons from one culture consider something morally significant whereas their counterparts from another culture are ethically neutral. Third, business people from two cultures may interpret a common situation differently even when there is some commonality among their national values. A Comparative Investigation of Business Ethics To investigate the relationship between national culture and ethics, we chose two culturally diverse countries, Brazil and the U.S. Given the differences in their respective national cultures, we expect Brazilians and Americans to differ in their assessment of the ethical content of business decisions. Accordingly, we propose the following hypothesis: H1: The assessment of the ethical content of business decisions is a function of national culture. Egoism and individualism/collectivism According to egoism, the only valid standard of one’s behavior is one’s obligation to advance one’s well-being above everyone else’s (Beauchamp and Bowie, 1997). Promotion of one’s own longterm interest is viewed as the only worthwhile objective and the only determinant of whether an act is morally right or not. Nothing is owed to others or to the organization that one works in. Those who abide by this approach to ethics intensely believe that all altruistic efforts by others are really acts of self-promotion since an individual may have to help others in order to advance his/her own interests. Brazil is collectivistic whereas the U.S. is individualistic. As discussed earlier, persons from an individualistic culture emphasize their families’ and their own int erests. H1.a: When applying egoistic criteria to judge the ethical content of an action or a decision, respondents from the U.S. will be less likely than respondents from Brazil to see a decision or action as unethical. Utilitarianism and individualism/collectivism Utilitarianism, in direct contrast to egoism, â€Å"is the moral doctrine that we should always act to produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone affected by our action† (Shaw, 1999, p. 49). Although utilitarians also 271 evaluate an action in terms of its consequences, an action is ethical if it results in the greatest benefit or â€Å"good† for the largest number of people. Issues of self-interest are not germane since actions are assessed in accordance with one primary standard: the general good. Utilitarianism has long been associated with social improvement and the promotion of actions that are in the best interest of â€Å"the community.† Actions are right if they promote the greatest human welfare. Brazil is collectivistic. Persons from a collectivistic culture focus on actions that lead to the greatest benefit for most members of a group. H1.b: When applying utilitarian criteria to judge the ethical content of an action or a decision, respondents from Brazil will be less likely than respondents from the U.S. to see an action or decision as unethical. To be consistent with prior ethics research (Reidenbach and Robin, 1988), the above hypotheses (H1.a and H1.b) together suggest that Americans and Brazilians rely on more than one ethical criterion when assessing the ethical content of an action or decision. However, we are also suggesting that when each specific ethical criterion they refer to is considered separately, people from different national cultures will vary in their assessment of the ethical content of a course of action or a decision. Methodology Sample Data were collected from 126 respondents – 92 from the U.S. and 34 from Brazil. U.S. participants included MBA students at a regional university as well as business professionals. Brazilian participants were all students enrolled in an Executive MBA program. We used MBA students in our study for two reasons. First, MBA students are a commonly used proxy for business people (Dubinsky and Rudelius, 1980). Dubinsky and Rudelius’ (1980) comparison of 272 Rafik I. Beekun et al. student versus professional evaluations found a high degree of congruence between the two groups. Second, since all students (both U.S. and Brazilian) were currently employed by companies or had recent professional work experience, the sample can be used as a proxy for business professionals in both countries. Data collection The instrument we used was Reidenbach and Robin’s (1988) pre-validated, multi-criteria instrument incorporating the core dimensions that underlie several ethical perspectives. We selected this survey instrument because it is a multi-philosophy and multi-item questionnaire. As a result, it will enable us to assess both ethical dimensions of interest, i.e., egoism and utilitarianism, simultaneously. This instrument incorporates multiple items for each ethical philosophy and, therefore, is relatively more reliable than single item instruments (Kerlinger, 1986). Reidenbach and Robin’s instrument includes an initial set of scales that has shown evidence of high reliability and modest convergent validity with respect to U.S. respondents. The scales correlate highly with a univariate measure of the ethical content of situations. Hence, the instrument can be said to have high construct validity in the U.S. Additional reliability and validation efforts for the wh ole sample and for Brazil specifically are reported below. Using a seven-point Likert scale (1 = ethical, 7 = unethical), respondents were asked to rate the action in three scenarios using the criteria (items) described in Table II. The perception of and the criteria emphasized in evaluating the ethical content of a decision or situation depend on the nature of the decision or the situation. In accordance with previous research, scenarios will be used in this study to provide the contextual stimulus and to motivate the evaluation process (Alexander and Becker, 1978). We adopted the three scenarios developed and validated by Reidenbach and Robin (1988, 1990). Table III presents the three scenarios used in this study. Data were collected by means of the abovementioned instrument administered to Brazilian participants (in Portuguese) and provided via written instrument and website access to U.S. participants (in English). The Brazilian instrument was back translated to ensure equivalence. Efforts were made to establish the reliability and validity of the instrument in this comparative context and are reported as follows. We examined the reliability of the instrument by assessing its internal consistency through the use of Cronbach’s alpha. Since we used three different measures (one for each of the scenarios), we calculated three inter-item coefficient alphas. The Cronbach alpha was 0.81 for the first scenario, 0.75 for the second scenario and 0.86 for the third scenario. All three coefficients indicate that the scale items are internally con- TABLE II Ethics instrument scales Ethical perspective Items (Seven-point Likert scale †“ 1 to 7)* Egoism Self promoting/not self promoting Self sacrificing/not self sacrificing Personally satisfying/not personally satisfying Utilitarianism Produces greatest utility/produces the least utility Maximizes benefits while minimizes harm/minimizes benefits while maximizes harm Leads to the greatest good for the greatest number/leads to the least good for the greatest number * Generally speaking, in the above bipolar scales, 1 = fair or just or efficient (ethical) whereas 7 = unfair, unjust or inefficient (unethical). A Comparative Investigation of Business Ethics

Miller comments Essay

During ‘The Crucible’ the acts which unfold able some characters to empower themselves: most notably Abigail Williams, Mary Warren and even John Proctor. Some characters begin with little or no power, then abuse the situations to gain power, whereas others begin with power and lose it, sometimes justly and other times unjustly. This could be seen as a moral message for the audiences of the play, warning of power abuse which could lead to devastating consequences. In the introductory comments, Miller comments before the events begin to unfold how â€Å"†¦the children were anything but thankful for being permitted to walk straight† which shows before the witchcraft trials and accusations had begun, children were powerless under the authority of the male dominated society -children had no power to roam freely. One of the people that gained power in the play is Mary Warren, who is a servant and so is one of the lowest ranks of the Puritan society- much like the children of Salem. At first she does not have any power at all as she is taught that she has to follow orders from the Proctors, who she works for. This is seen when she â€Å"lept† with â€Å"fright† upon Proctors entrance. Yet, she manages to turn from a â€Å"mouse† to a â€Å"daughter of a prince† as she suddenly gains power from working in the court, trying possible witches. Her increasing power is also shown from her defiance of Proctor when she refuses his order of not going to â€Å"court again†, and responds that she â€Å"must† and â€Å"will be gone everyday†. It also shown through stage directions, when Mary is â€Å"terrified† of Proctor but quickly becomes â€Å"erect†, which highlights her ability to overcome her fear of Proctor because of her growing confidence and power. Mary even manages to intimidate Proctor in this part of the play. When threatened with the â€Å"whip† from Proctor, she manages to threaten him further by responding â€Å"I would have you speak civilly to me, from this out. † Mary, filled with this newly found power, is able to threaten Procter to stop beating her or she will not speak so highly of his family next time. By using the phrase â€Å"from this out† shows that Mary doesn’t usually expect that kind of treatment from the Proctor, yet now she is able to demand it because of the power gain. Again, further on in the play Mary is also able to â€Å"numb† Proctor when she overthrows his â€Å"grip† on her to tell the truth about the accusations, and instead turns on him. When pressured by Abigail and the other girls, once they start accusing Mary to save themselves, she is not able to stand her ground – which highlights her feebleness and weakness which was seen at the very start of the play. This is seen as she even admits she has â€Å"no power†. This links to her inferior position in the society and even within her social group, she is not popular, and respected. This is shown when Abigail tells Mary to â€Å"shut it† and Mercy Lewis starts â€Å"pointing† and â€Å"looking† at Mary as if she were to blame. However, the fact that Mary was able to then accuse Proctor of being â€Å"devil’s man†, who is a highly respected in the village, shows that she does have more power than she started with. But she is abusing her power, to save herself and because of her lack of power on her social circle. So, this once ‘innocent’ girl who thought they â€Å"must tell the truth† took advantage of the situation so she and her friends would not be â€Å"whipped†. Overall, Mary arguably, has the most progressive power of all the girls and possibly all of the characters in ‘The Crucible’, but that’s not to say she has the most power overall. Another character like Mary Warren who gains power throughout the play is Abigail Williams. Once shunned and scorned by the inhabitants of the village because of her â€Å"blackened name†, Abigail becomes a domineering power, and is treated like a â€Å"saint†. A mere accusation from Abigail or one of her girls is enough to convict even a well-respected inhabitant of Salem like Rebecca Nurse who does â€Å"great charities†. Even though in present day we would associate â€Å"saint† with good Samaritans, which would seem absurd to see Abigail called this in present day, she was seen in this way because in puritan society if you went against god, you went against the law. So Abigail’s act of bringing Salem’s attention to the presence of the devil, and then through the court eradicating it was seen as an act of greatness. Abigail starts off as a scared young girl which is seen through Millers stage directions, as she â€Å"quavers† when being questioned by Parris about Betty’s mysterious illness. However, soon she is able to assert her power of the girls by â€Å"smashing† Betty round the face and threatening all the girls not to tell anyone about the events of the previous night, or she will â€Å"come† to them at the â€Å"black of one terrible night†. This implies they could be her prey, and if they make a wrong move she could pounce on them, which again puts her in a domineering position. This characteristic allows her to control within the group which creates more tension because Abigail also seems to be possessive which is seen when she says â€Å"Now look you. All of you†. The repetition of â€Å"you† makes the phrase quite aggressive and short commanding sentences have a strong impact, and make Abigail seem hostile but ultimately powerful. Her empowerment is also documented as the inhabitants of Salem think the â€Å"sea parts like Israel† for Abigail, so her sins are overlooked, as people take her word to be an expression of â€Å"God’s will. † This allowed Abigail to control and manipulate even the most powerful men in Salem, which is seen when Abigail threatens that Danforth- a high court official. So, Abigail Williams, who was once powerless in general society, is a perfect example of someone who became empowered by deciding the fate of other people and, by controlling and threatening people. Although, Abigail did have a powerful status among her social group from the outset and throughout which is shown when she starts â€Å"pointing with fear† and accusing Mary of â€Å"hurting her†, and quickly all the girls chime in with her. The third character who is subtly empowered is John Proctor. Despite his prideful ways, John Proctor describes himself as a â€Å"sinner. † His conversation with Elizabeth in act two where he exclaims for Elizabeth to â€Å"judge him not† demonstrated his internal conflict and his own unwillingness to forgive himself for his act of lechery. There are moments when his anger and disgust towards himself burst forth, such as when he exclaims to Judge Danforth: â€Å"I hear the boot of Lucifer, I see his filthy face! And it is my face, and yours. † So, although it is not clear from the outset that John Proctor has been empowered, he has. He is able for the first time to â€Å"see some shred of goodness† in himself- his relief from his constant guilt- when he decides to deny his confession. In conclusion, all three characters were empowered through the play, which led to the unjust killing of numerous inhabitants of Salem through the false allegations of witchcraft. So, Miller uses this to show the audience the consequence of abuse of power. Abigail is the best example because she falls from her position of high power, and resorts to boarding a â€Å"ship†, in order to escape.

Calculating Questions on ACT Science Interpolating and Extrapolating From Data

Calculating Questions on ACT Science Interpolating and Extrapolating From Data SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips In these questions, math meets science. You might be thinking, â€Å"Wait, but the ACT Science section doesn’t let you use your calculator!†This is true! And this means the ACT Science questions that require calculations will only require very simple math that you can do by hand or in your head. Calculation questions require you to find a specific value based on the figures provided. However, the value will not be shown in the figure.Using the information you are given, you will need to predict what would happen past the edges of the graph or between values on a table.In this article, I'm going to cover interpolations and extrapolations, along with tips and realistic ACT Science practice questions. Interpolations The word itself seems complicated, but it simply means calculations of numbers between known data points (which are provided in the visuals).Let’s check out this ACT Science practice question: Start by trying to locate the relevant data (aka the data mentioned in the question, the average change in AGTB at 75 m from the nearest clearing) in this scatterplot: After examining the scatterplot, I see there are points marked at 70 and 80 m from the center of the plot to the nearest clearing, but not at 75 m, this gap in data is what makes this an interpolation question! You have the data that surround the point, but you need to figure out what the point is. What mathematical calculation could you do (using the data you do have) to find the approximate average change in AGTB at 75 m from the center of the plot to the nearest clearing?Perhaps, averaging the average change in AGTB for 70 m and 80 m from the center of the plot to the nearest clearing?At 70m from the center of the plot to the nearest clearing, the average change in AGTB is about -3.1.At 80m from the center of the plot to the nearest clearing, the average change in AGTB is -2.2. Now, calculate using the average formula: Sum of the values / (divided by) the number of values: ((-2.2) + (-3.1)) / 2 = -5.2 / 2 = -2.6 Then, compare it to the answer choices: so, the answer is G. ACT Science Tip #1: even if you were a little off in your data grabbing (let’s say you said at 80m from the center of the plot to the nearest clearing, the average change in AGTB was -2.1), you see the answer choices are widespread enough that you will get the answer choice right by just picking the answer closest to the average you found in your calculations. ACT Science Tip #2: There is an alternate method to solve these questions when the answer choices are widespread (as they are in the question above). You can simply draw a line connecting the dots in the scatterplot, and then, you approximate the point at 75 m from the center of the plot to the nearest clearing. See my example below: Using this method, you can approximate the average change in AGTB at -2.8. This is closest to answer G, so that is the correct answer. Through this method, you find the answer a lot quicker. However, as I said before, this will only work for widespread answers. If -2.9 had been an answer, this method would not have been very effective, as you may have chosen incorrectly. So only use this method if the answer choices are widespread. Otherwise, stick to theprocess that will always work to answer these questions: Find the relevant data (two data pointsequidistant from the point in question) Average the data together to find the approximate value for the midpoint. Find the closest (or hopefully matching) answer This process gets a little trickierin extrapolations, in which we'll calculate data that is beyond the bounds of what we're given. Extrapolations In order to show how extrapolation works, we are going to work through an ACT Science practice question: Using this table to answer the question: This extrapolation, like all extrapolations, requires identifying a pattern in the data and predicting the next step in that pattern (in whichever direction the question's data lies).These patterns will always be relatively simple, so the steps we take are also relatively simple: Steps for every extrapolation question Pinpoint what we're figuring out: is it a value more or less than what we are given? Identify the relationship between 2 consecutive data points in the table or graph (it doesn't matter which points we use, as long as they are consecutive) Find the relationship between the data in the question and the data in the table Apply the pattern in the table to the new data point Let’s follow these steps to solve the ACT Science practice question above:We're figuring out the density that would match 67.54 g of solution in the graduated cylinder according to the table.The relationship between 60.63 g of solution (the second to last entry in the table) and 64.64 g (the last entry in the table) is +4.01 g of mass and +0.08 g/ml of density. The 67.54 g of solution (from the question) is above the highest step 64.64 g in the table. Figure out the exact mass difference between the two: 67.54-64.64 = 2.9 2.9 g is the mass difference as opposed to 4.01 g between the last and second to last entry.Between the second to last entry and last entry there was a +0.08 g/ml change in density.Since there is a slightly smaller mass change (about  ¾ the amount of change between the last and second to last entry), the density change will be slightly smaller (about  ¾ the amount of change between the last and second to last entry). So, the change should be about +0.06 g/ml.Add that to the last density value in the table (1.29). 1.29 + 0.06 = 1.35 g/ml So, the answer is H.Again, even if you were slightly off, you would have been closest to that answer choice. If you feel unsure of this process, you're about to get some more practice in extrapolating information. Check out this ACT Science practice question: Again, we follow the same steps:We need to use the table above.The highest given capacitance is 1.2 x 10^-6, and we are asked about 1.5 x 10^-6.The time for 1.2x 10^-6 was 8.3 seconds.The second highest given capacitance was 0.6 x 10^-6, and the time for it was 4.2 seconds.The difference in time between 1.2 and 0.6 (the second highest given capacitance) is 8.3 - 4.2 seconds.So the difference is +4.1 seconds. Recap I hope you feel like a calculating machine!For every interpolation question, Find the relevant data (two data pointsequidistant from the point in question). Average the data together to find the approximate value for the midpoint. Find the closest (or hopefully matching) answer. For every extrapolation question, Pinpoint what we're figuring out, is it a value more or less than what we are given? Identify the relationship between 2 consecutive data points in the table or graph. How much does the y-valueincrease or decrease as the x-value increases? Find the relationship between the data in the question and the data in the table. For example, is the data in the question 5 more or less than the data in the table? Apply the pattern in the table to the new data point. Findthe closest (or hopefully matching) answer. What’s Next? Now that you're a calculating machine learn about the other types of questions on the ACT Science section such asfactual questions,interpreting trends questions, experimental design questions, and interpreting experiments questions. In a hurry to study for the ACT? Learnhow to cram. Not sure where you want to go to college? We can help you pick your target school and figure out what should be your target ACT score. Like this article? Want to improve your ACT score by 4 points? Check out our best-in-class online ACT prep program. We guarantee your money back if you don't improve your ACT score by 4 points or more. Our program is entirely online, and it customizes what you study to your strengths and weaknesses. If you liked this Sciencelesson, you'll love our program.Along with more detailed lessons, you'll get thousands ofpractice problems organized by individual skills so you learn most effectively. We'll also give you a step-by-step program to follow so you'll never be confused about what to study next. Check out our 5-day free trial: Have friends who also need help with test prep? Share this article! Tweet Dora Seigel About the Author As an SAT/ACT tutor, Dora has guided many students to test prep success. She loves watching students succeed and is committed to helping you get there. Dora received a full-tuition merit based scholarship to University of Southern California. She graduated magna cum laude and scored in the 99th percentile on the ACT. She is also passionate about acting, writing, and photography. Get Free Guides to Boost Your SAT/ACT Get FREE EXCLUSIVE insider tips on how to ACE THE SAT/ACT. 100% Privacy. No spam ever. hbspt.forms.create({ portalId: '360031', formId: '2167ba30-e68e-4777-b88d-8bf3c84579af', formInstanceId: '2', submitButtonClass: 'btn-red-light btn', target: '#hubspot-container2', redirectUrl: 'http://ww2.prepscholar.com/blog-subscribe-thank-you', css: '.post-bottom .hs-form.stacked label {display:none;} .post-bottom .hs-form.stacked .field div.input {padding-top: 55px; padding-left: 300px;} .post-bottom .hs-input {width: 220px} .post-bottom .btn-primary, .hs-button.primary {margin-top:0px; padding-left:350px} .post-bottom .hs-form-field {margin-bottom:5px}' }); $(function(){ $(".exclusive-tip-form #hubspot-container2 label").hide(); }); function replace_tag(a, b){ $(a).each(function(index) { var thisTD = this; var newElement = $(""); $.each(this.attributes, function(index) { $(newElement).attr(thisTD.attributes[index].name, thisTD.attributes[index].value); }); $(this).after(newElement).remove(); }); } $(function(){ replace_tag($(".posts-by-topic h3"), "h2"); }) Ask a Question BelowHave any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply! Search the Blog Search jQuery(function(){ var $ = jQuery; var url = 'http://google.com/search?q=site:' + location.protocol + '//' + location.hostname + ' '; var $searchModule = $('.hs-search-module.3873e88b-e66e-4891-851b-5edb407b597c'); var $input = $searchModule.find('input'); var $button = $searchModule.find('.hs-button.primary'); if (false) { $input.val(decodeURIComponent(location.pathname.split('/').join(' ').split('.').join(' ').split('-').join(' ').split('_').join(''))); } $button.click(function(){ var newUrl = url + $input.val(); var win = window.open(newUrl, '_blank'); if (win) { //Browser has allowed it to be opened win.focus(); } else { //Browser has blocked it location.href = newUrl; } }); $input.keypress(function(e){ if (e.keyCode !== 13) return; e.preventDefault(); $button.click(); }); }); Improve With Our Famous Guides SATPrep ACTPrep For All Students The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section: Score 800 on SAT Math Score 800 on SAT Reading Score 800 on SAT Writing Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section: Score 600 on SAT Math Score 600 on SAT Reading Score 600 on SAT Writing Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For? 15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section: 36 on ACT English 36 on ACT Math 36 on ACT Reading 36 on ACT Science Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section: 24 on ACT English 24 on ACT Math 24 on ACT Reading 24 on ACT Science What ACT target score should you be aiming for? ACT Vocabulary You Must Know ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA How to Write an Amazing College Essay What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For? Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide Should you retake your SAT or ACT? When should you take the SAT or ACT? Michael improved by 370 POINTS! Find Out How Stay Informed Get the latest articles and test prep tips! Looking for Graduate School Test Prep? Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here: GRE Online Prep Blog GMAT Online Prep Blog TOEFL Online Prep Blog

How the WWII Battle of Stalingrad Was Fought

How the WWII Battle of Stalingrad Was Fought The Battle of Stalingrad was fought from July 17, 1942 to February 2, 1943, during World War II (1939-1945).  It was a key battle on the Eastern Front. Advancing into the Soviet Union, the Germans opened the battle in July 1942. After over six months of fighting at Stalingrad, the German Sixth Army was encircled and captured. This Soviet victory was a turning point on the Eastern Front. Soviet Union Marshal Georgy ZhukovLieutenant General Vasily ChuikovColonel General Aleksandr Vasilevsky187,000 men, rising to over 1,100,000 men Germany General (later Field Marshal) Friedrich PaulusField Marshal Erich von MansteinColonel General Wolfram von Richthofen270,000 men, rising to over 1,000,000 men Background Having been stopped at the gates of Moscow, Adolf Hitler began contemplating offensive plans for 1942. Lacking the manpower to remain on the offensive all along the Eastern Front, he decided to focus German efforts in the south with the goal of taking the oil fields. Codenamed Operation Blue, this new offensive began on June 28, 1942, and caught the Soviets, who thought the Germans would renew their efforts around Moscow, by surprise. Advancing, the Germans were delayed by heavy fighting in Voronezh, which allowed the Soviets to bring reinforcements south. Angered by a perceived lack of progress, Hitler divided Army Group South into two separate units, Army Group A and Army Group B. Possessing the majority of the armor, Army Group A was tasked with capturing the oil fields, while Army Group B was ordered to take Stalingrad to protect the German flank. A key Soviet transportation hub on the Volga River, Stalingrad also possessed propaganda value as it was named after the Soviet leader  Joseph Stalin. Driving towards Stalingrad, the German advance was led by General Friedrich Paulus 6th Army with General Hermann Hoths 4th Panzer Army supporting to the south. Preparing the Defenses When the German objective became clear, Stalin appointed General Andrey Yeryomenko to command the Southeastern (later Stalingrad) Front. Arriving on the scene, he directed Lieutenant General Vasiliy Chuikovs 62nd Army to defend the city. Stripping the city of supplies, the Soviets prepared for urban fighting by fortifying many of Stalingrads buildings to create strong points. Though some of Stalingrads population left, Stalin directed that civilians remain, as he believed the army would fight harder for a living city. The citys factories continued to operate, including one producing T-34 tanks. The Battle Begins With German ground forces nearing, General Wolfram von Richthofens Luftflotte 4 quickly gained air superiority over Stalingrad and began reducing the city to rubble, inflicting thousands of civilian casualties in the process. Pushing west, Army Group B reached the Volga north of Stalingrad in late August and by September 1 had arrived at the river south of the city. As a result, Soviet forces in Stalingrad could only be reinforced and re-supplied by crossing the Volga, often while enduring German air and artillery attack. Delayed by rough terrain and Soviet resistance, 6th Army did not arrive until early September. On September 13, Paulus and 6th Army began pushing into the city. This was supported by 4th Panzer Army which attacked Stalingrads southern suburbs. Driving forward, they sought to capture the heights of Mamayev Kurgan and reach the main landing area along the river. Engaged in bitter fighting, the Soviets fought desperately for the hill and the No. 1 Railroad Station. Receiving reinforcements from Yeryomenko, Chuikov battled to hold the city. Understanding the German superiority in aircraft and artillery, he ordered his men to stay closely engaged with the enemy to negate this advantage or risk friendly fire. Fighting Among the Ruins Over the next several weeks, German and Soviet forces engaged in savage street fighting in attempts to take control of the city. At one point, the average life expectancy of a Soviet soldier in Stalingrad was less than one day. As fighting raged in the ruins of the city, the Germans met heavy resistance from a variety of fortified buildings and near a large grain silo. In late September, Paulus began a series of attacks against the citys northern factory district. Brutal combat soon engulfed the area around the Red October, Dzerzhinsky Tractor, and Barrikady factories as the Germans sought to reach the river. Despite their dogged defense, the Soviets were slowly pushed back until the Germans controlled 90% of the city by the end of October. In the process, 6th and 4th Panzer Armies sustained massive losses. In order to maintain pressure on the Soviets in Stalingrad, the Germans narrowed the two armies front and brought in Italian and Romanian troops to guard their flanks. In addition, some air assets were transferred from the battle to counter the Operation Torch landings in North Africa. Seeking to end the battle, Paulus launched a final assault against the factory district on November 11 which had some success. Soviets Strike Back While the grinding fighting was taking place in Stalingrad, Stalin dispatched General Georgy Zhukov south to begin building up forces for a counterattack. Working with General Aleksandr Vasilevsky, he massed troops on steppes to the north and south of Stalingrad. On November 19, the Soviets launched Operation Uranus, which saw three armies cross the Don River and crash through the Romanian Third Army. South of Stalingrad, two Soviet armies attacked on November 20, shattering the Romanian Fourth Army. With Axis forces collapsing, Soviet troops raced around Stalingrad in a massive double envelopment. Uniting at Kalach on November 23, the Soviet forces successfully encircled 6th Army trapping around 250,000 Axis troops. To support the offensive, attacks were conducted elsewhere along the Eastern Front to prevent the Germans from sending reinforcements to Stalingrad. Though the German high command wished to order Paulus to conduct a breakout, Hitler refused and was convinced by Luftwaffe chief Hermann Gà ¶ring that 6th Army could be supplied by air. This ultimately proved impossible and conditions for Paulus men began to deteriorate. While Soviet forces pushed east, others began tightening the ring around Paulus in Stalingrad. Heavy fighting began as the Germans were forced into an increasingly smaller area. On December 12, Field Marshall Erich von Manstein launched Operation Winter Storm but was unable to break through to the beleaguered 6th Army. Responding with another counter-offensive on December 16 (Operation Little Saturn), the Soviets began driving the Germans back on a wide front effectively ending German hopes for relieving Stalingrad. In the city, Paulus men resisted tenaciously but soon faced ammunition shortages. With the situation desperate, Paulus asked Hitler for permission to surrender but was refused. On January 30, Hitler promoted Paulus to field marshal. As no German field marshal had ever been captured, he expected him to fight to the end or commit suicide. The next day, Paulus was captured when the Soviets overran his headquarters. On February 2, 1943, the final pocket of German resistance surrendered,  ending over five months of fighting. Aftermath of Stalingrad Soviet losses in the Stalingrad area during the battle numbered around 478,741 killed and 650,878 wounded. In addition, as many as 40,000 civilians were killed. Axis losses are estimated at 650,000-750,000 killed and wounded as well as 91,000 captured. Of those captured, fewer than 6,000 survived to return to Germany. This was a turning point of the war on the Eastern Front. The weeks after Stalingrad saw the Red Army launch eight winter offensives across the Don River basin. These helped further compel Army Group A to withdraw from the Caucasus and ended the threat to the oil fields. Sources Antill, P. (Feb. 4, 2005),  The Caucasus Campaign and the Battle for Stalingrad June 1942–February 1943HistoryNet, Battle of Stalingrad: Operation Winter TempestYoder, M. (Feb. 4, 2003), Battle of Stalingrad