A Thinking Man

Socrates - A Great Thinker

Relevance of  his Ideas 

1. They’ve Never Been Rendered Obsolete

For starters, it’s crucial to note that, unlike many other intellectual disciplines of the ancient Greek period such as, say, ancient Greek astronomy, Socrates’ philosophies remain just as pertinent as the day they were conceived (or at least the day they were recorded by his student Plato).Socrates and his disciples’ theories are a crucial foundation of modern Western philosophical thought – all others since have basically been constructed upon them.

2. He Taught Us to Question Everything

“The highest form of Human Excellence is to question oneself and others,” Socrates once said. His dialectic method of inquiry – breaking a subject down into a dialogue between two or more people with differing views, both mutually in search of the same truth – taught us to assume nothing and to scrutinize everything, and gave us a system by which to do it. It remains a key element of scientific study today – beginning with a hypothesis and then distilling it until a definitive conclusion is reached.

3. He Taught Us That Life is Worthless Without Happiness

Socrates asked – what’s the point in battleships and city walls, unless the people building them and protected by them are happy?

If we aren’t in pursuit of happiness and understanding in our daily lives, then we’re basically akin to ants toiling at an ant-hill. Sure, we go about our practical tasks instinctually. But we also need to step back and develop an awareness of the world, and form a conscious relationship with our existence.

Socrates asked – what’s the point in battleships and city walls, unless the people building them and protected by them are happy? The same remains true today – unless we’re mindful of spiritual well-being in our daily toil, we’re little better off than insects. As he famously put it: “The unexamined life is not a life worth living for a human being.”

Socrates believed that the universal aspiration for all men should be was virtue. However, virtue must be known before it can be desired and achieved, which requires attention and commitment. This aspiration to a higher state, ideal and disposition could only be achieved by constant self improvement, the pursuit of which was Socrates’ sole goal in life. In the Apology, Socrates proves his commitment to the virtuous improvement of Athenians by referring to his negligence of his private concerns to concentrate on his divinely bestowed task of advising in people publicly or privately to aim to virtue. As a result of his diligent performance in his duty, he was on trial charged with leading astray the youth. The fruits of his labors were many powerful enemies and his own poverty. According to Socrates, Examination of life is aspiring to improvement of the soul, absolute honesty, desire for knowledge, discernment of the known and the unknown (wisdom) and correct priority in attending to matters .

4. He Taught Us to Ask if There’s Such a Thing as a Just War

“It is better to suffer wrong than to do wrong,” believed Socrates. As a soldier in the Greek army during the Peloponnesian War, one who distinguished himself several times for his bravery, Socrates saw enough of military conflict to understand first hand the suffering and devastation it caused.

His was one of the first voices in history to ponder whether there really is such a thing as a just war – a war for a cause so true it was worth bloodshed on a mass scale.

5. He Advocated True Freedom of Speech

Athens was one of the first polities in the world to allow freedom of speech –all from lowly shoemakers and merchants to rich nobles were allowed to address the Athenian Assembly. Yet they had to speak with aidos – “a sense of shame, a ‘knowing-your-placeness’” as Hughes describes it in The Hemlock Cup.

Socrates rebelled against this convention, by developing a system of true free-speech through his dialogue. Athens was uneasy was this, but he spoke his mind anyway (and ultimately paid the price for it). He was way ahead of his time in standing-up for the free expression of ideas – something that remains a cornerstone of democratic society today.

6. He Invented Philosophical Ethics

“What is the right way to live?” pondered Socrates. He was one of the very first philosophers in history to encourage scholars and common citizens to turn their attention from the outside world to the condition of humankind – and to ask a simple, honest and undoubtedly critical question: what is right and what is wrong? With it, he effectively created philosophical ethics – the debate between good and evil – which has shaped moral and legal codes throughout the Western world.

7. He Was a Champion of Human Virtue

Shaped probably by some of the terrible sights he witnessed on the battlefields at Potidaea, Amphipolis and Delium during his military service, Socrates developed a notion of human virtue at odds with the then-prevailing attitude of lex talionis – an eye for an eye. He believed in a mixture of temperance, justice, piety and courage – all of which led ultimately to wisdom. He had seen so much bad, he wanted to search for something good.

Socrates was a firm believer in friendship and community, and common threads between all of mankind. “Virtue,” he said, “is the most valuable of all possessions.” We can always benefit from being a bit nicer to each other.

8. He Warned Us of the Follies of Materialism

Socrates typically cut a pretty down-trodden figure when he wandered the streets of Athens – he never wore shoes, and sported the same tattered woolen cloak all year round. He was mocked for it by his contemporaries, but he didn’t care – his humble attire was a physical reflection of his belief that the pursuit of plenty could only bring mindless materialism.

He even had the gall to suggest to Athenians that they might be better themselves pursuing well-being rather than wealth – words that ring truer than ever in consumerist modern society.

9. He Taught Us the Value of Civil Disobedience

Socrates was known as the “gadfly” of the Greek state – he saw it as his responsibility to sting the government into action in areas where it could improve its conduct. He wasn’t frightened to publicly speak his mind on the subject of bad governance, no matter the cost. One illustrative quote goes: “It seems strange enough to me that a herdsman who lets his cattle decrease and go to the bad should not admit that he is a poor cowherd; but stranger still that a statesman when he causes the citizens to decrease and go to the bad, should feel no shame nor think himself a poor statesman.”

As a famous modern advocate of civil disobedience Martin Luther King put it in a letter from an Alabama Prison in 1963: “Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths… so we must see the need for non-violent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism.”

10. He Taught Us to Stand Up For What We Believe

Socrates lived and breathed his philosophies – however much they were scorned, ridiculed, laughed at or feared – and he ultimately died by them. The state swatted its gadfly, by trying him as a “corrupter of youth” and forcing him to commit suicide by poisoning himself.

He could have renounced his beliefs, and made a groveling defence during his trial – but he chose instead to stand tall to the last and accept his punishment, even turning down an opportunity to escape. There was undoubtedly a degree of recklessness and martyrdom to Socrates death, but the lesson it teaches us about standing up for what we believe in to the very end remains powerful and enduring.

Socrates’ criticism of democracy

Socrates’ analysis of the hatred he has incurred is one part of a larger theme that he dwells on throughout his speech. Athens is a democracy, a city in which the many are the dominant power in politics, and it can therefore be expected to have all the vices of the many. Because most people hate to be tested in argument, they will always take action of some sort against those who provoke them with questions. But that is not the only accusation Socrates brings forward against his city and its politics. He tells his democratic audience that he was right to have withdrawn from political life, because a good person who fights for justice in a democracy will be killed. In his cross-examination of Meletus, he insists that only a few people can acquire the knowledge necessary for improving the young of any species, and that the many will inevitably do a poor job. He criticizes the Assembly for its illegal actions and the Athenian courts for the ease with which matters of justice are distorted by emotional pleading. Socrates implies that the very nature of democracy makes it a corrupt political system. Bitter experience has taught him that most people rest content with a superficial understanding of the most urgent human questions. When they are given great power, their shallowness inevitably leads to injustice.

If the majority of the people are too uninformed, lackadaisical, or apathetic to make the democratic process rational and effective, then they just reveal their inherent nature It is not an upper class that keeps the demos unenlightened, but it is the people's own disposition that makes them eschew enlightenment, and thus dependent on some sort of rulers. If people did not naturally have the disposition they display in a dysfunctional democracy, other people would not be able to exploit and mislead them the way they do. (Plato)

Development as Freedom

Poverty As Capability Deprivation

Women's Agency and Social Change

Men of Rock

Professor Iain Stewart traces the story of how the landscape of Scotland revealed to the world how the planet works. A band of pioneer geologists in Scotland were the first to work out the true age of the Earth, measure earthquakes, understand supervolcanoes, discover the ice ages and explain how continents move around the surface of the planet. This new three-part series takes us through the latest science about the Earth and shows how these early mavericks and visionaries came up with revolutionary ideas that changed scientific understanding of the world forever.

Deep Time

Iain Stewart follows in the footsteps of the founding father of geology, James Hutton. This Scottish rogue was a profound and original thinker who, 250 years ago, overturned ancient beliefs about how and when the world was formed. His ideas clashed with those of the most eminent scientist of his day. Lord Kelvin was determined to prove Hutton wrong. 

Moving Mountains

Geologist Iain Stewart retraces the steps of a band of maverick pioneers who made ground-breaking discoveries in the landscape of Scotland about how our planet works.Iain finds out how gung-ho geologist Edward Bailey discovered Scotland was once home to super volcanoes. And how unsung hero Arthur Holmes solved the mystery of what makes continents move across the surface of the globe.

The Big Freeze

Geologist Iain Stewart retraces the steps of a band of maverick pioneers who made ground-breaking discoveries in the landscape of Scotland about how our planet works.In the final episode, Iain finds out about daredevil scientist Louis Agassiz, who first imagined the world had been gripped by an ice age. Plus, the story of humble janitor James Croll, who used the planets to work out the natural rhythms of the earth's climate.

Introduction to Ethics

"Ethics is the activity of man directed to secure the inner perfection of his own personality.”
~ Albert Schweitzer

"In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so."
— Immanuel Kant

"Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do."
- Potter Stewart

"The first step in the evolution of ethics is a sense of solidarity with other human beings."
- Albert Schweitzer

"Ethics and equity and the principles of justice do not change with the calendar."
- David Herbert Lawrence

“A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon this world.”
-Albert Camus

“Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.”
― C.S. Lewis

“Educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all.”
― Aristotle

“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.”
― Voltaire

“I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies, for the hardest victory is over self.”
― Aristotle

Philosophical Ethics could be called the study of what is good and bad.

The pursuit of moral knowledge dates back to Ancient Greek philosophers, but it is mostly the influence of Enlightenment moral thought that continues to shape ethics today. There are many well-known figures in the history of ethics, including the Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle, but some of the most important modern influences include such people as Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, D.W. Ross, C.L. Stevenson, Alasdair MacIntyre, and John Rawls.

In ethics, a premium is placed upon defining "the good". Different approaches to defining the good, the nature of moral properties, the source of moral knowledge, and the status of moral facts have played an important role in shaping various branches of moral theory. The three major divisions of ethical philosophy may be called Virtue Ethics, Deontology, and Consequentialism.

Ethics stem from the question "What is right?" Whoever decides the answer to that question is a law maker.

Ethics is the philosophical attempt to answer Socrates' question of how one should live. This is a very general question, which could for any individual translate to "How should I live?" It is important however to note that not all answers to this question are answers of the ethical type. One could conclude that one should live a self-indulgent life without any kind of logical contradiction. Moral philosophers study this idea, known as “egoism,” as well, and the question "Why be moral?" is because of this distinct from Socrates' question.

It is also important to note that Socrates' question not only allows for non-ethical answers but also answers from different ethical theories. His question is not the same as Kant's question "What is my duty?" or the egoist/utilitarian question of "How can we be happy?" There are many different ways of answering Socrates' question, and answers from the Categorical Imperative to the imperative "Sit on the couch and watch television" are equally answers to it, but Ethics attempts to find through reason the best answer to the question.

Ethics, often called Morality interchangeably, tries to answer "How should one live?" given that we already live in a society. Everyone is born with a place in society even if it is only "Stranger," and accordingly everyone has expectations for action placed upon them. One is expected to act a certain way as a brother, a friend, and a passer-by. Ethics primarily concerns itself with this realm of individual action. For the most part, ethical theories attempt to develop a system of obligations that we have towards others. Obligations that are common among different theories are the obligation to tell the truth, the obligation to help those in distress, and the obligation not to murder. Of course, most of the theories allow for flexibility based on the situation such as the ability to help in this circumstance and whether one has any other, higher obligations.

The ethical theories of the past have been of many types. Aristotle proposed a theory of virtue, a notion that was already a part of Greek culture. He espoused the view that the good man is one who lives in a way as to allow him to move towards the goal of man-as-such, the telos, and the way to reach the telos is to live a life of virtue.

Another prominent theory has been consequentialism. This theory includes John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism, and its focus is, from its name, on the consequences of one’s actions. General consequentialism will say we have obligations to help people because helping people produces a better result than not helping people. Utilitarianism goes beyond this to mathematize ethics. It quantifies the utility, which it defines as “happiness” or “pleasure,” a given action will produce and weighs that number against the amount of utility produced by another action. Whichever action produces the most utility is the one that is obligated.

A third common ethical theory is deontology, and its main supporter has been Kant. Deontology is the study of obligations in a very narrow sense. It attempts to divine from reason alone the obligations every man holds simply because he is a rational being. Kant first argues for what he calls the Categorical Imperative, and from that it is possible to derive other universal maxims, which follow the formula “When in situation X, do Y.” Kant has two formulations of his Categorical Imperative. The first is Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. The second, which Kant claims carries the same meaning, is "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end."

When considering ethics, it is also important to note that the Enlightenment project of justifying morality is judged by some prominent contemporary moral philosophers to have been a failure. These contemporary philosophers take it to be that morality cannot be grounded in reason alone. Three important alternatives are the philosophies of Alasdair MacIntyre, Richard Rorty, and Bernard Williams. MacIntyre advocates a return to the Aristotelian tradition of living out the virtues in reference to the telos, or goal, of man. Rorty is a pragmatist and argues that the question we must ask of every moral obligation is “Is this useful?” He would argue that treating strangers with distrust and keeping promises are good moral principles because they are primarily useful for building a better society. Finally, Williams critiques ethical theory on the whole and the notion of obligation. He also asks why ethics is taken to be a better answer to Socrates’ question than non-ethical answers.

Types

Normative ethics deals with questions of what we ought to do, or what things are good to do.

What behavior (or intentions) are good or bad?
What kind of things can be adduced as moral justifications ("justifying reasons") for certain kinds of behavior?
Is killing another human being (murder) morally acceptable? Killing an enemy in war? Ethnic cleansing?
Killing a person in self-defense? Executing a convicted murderer? Assisting a terminally ill person to die?
Killing yourself? Abortion? Abortion of a deformed fetus? Killing of an animal?
Do animals have rights? Do women? Children? Mentally handicapped people?
Is torture ever justified? Theft? Lying? Promise-breaking?
What is the best way for human beings to lead their lives?
What are the justifying reasons for war? Is there such a thing as a "just war"?
Can the cultural practices of other times and societies be condemned as immoral? How about American slavery? Segregation and apartheid? Chinese footbinding? African female genital mutilation? Mormon or Muslim polygamy?
What are the proper bounds for the toleration of diversity, or the respect for personal privacy? Is there a point at which the (proper) toleration of diversity or respect for privacy becomes (improper) passive acceptance of immorality? What is that point?

Meta-ethics deals with questions about the nature of ethics.

What do ethical words such as "good", "right", "wrong", "ought" mean?
What makes a judgment a moral judgment as opposed to, say, an aesthetic judgment, or an etiquette judgment, or a simple personal preference?
What is the basis of moral law? Divine command? Natural law? Human nature? Custom?
Why should we be moral? What is the motivational basis of moral behavior? What "motivating reasons" (as opposed to "justifying reasons" can be made for moral behavior?
Why do people act morally?
Is it possible for some behavior to be right in one society/culture, and wrong in another?
What is the moral basis for law? Is there a moral basis for laws? Should there be a moral basis for law? Should we try to enforce moral behavior by legal means?

History of Ethics deals with the study of what philosophers have written in the past on the subject of ethics.

The boundary is not always sharply-drawn between questions of normative ethics and meta-ethics. Ethical questions can easily shade off into other areas of philosophy, for example into philosophy of law and philosophy of religion. And of course the study of the history of ethical thought is inter-twined with all topics in ethics: almost all ethical questions have been discussed in the past, and ethics continues to progress as an ongoing conversation between living and historical thinkers.

Source : wikibooks

Emotional Intelligence

What is Emotional Intelligence ? 

Emotional intelligence is the ability to identify, assess, and control the emotions of oneself, of others, and of groups.Emotional intelligence refers to the ability to perceive, control and evaluate emotions.The earliest roots of emotional intelligence can be traced to Charles Darwin's work on the importance of emotional expression for survival and, second, adaptation.

Since 1990, Peter Salovey and John D. Mayer have been the leading researchers on emotional intelligence. In their influential article "Emotional Intelligence," they defined emotional intelligence as, "the subset of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one's own and others' feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this information to guide one's thinking and actions" .Following their continuing research, their initial definition of Emotional intelligence was revised to "The ability to perceive emotion, integrate emotion to facilitate thought, understand emotions and to regulate emotions to promote personal growth."

Substantial disagreement exists regarding the definition of  Emotional intelligence,with respect to both terminology and operationalizations. Currently, there are three main models of Emotional intelligence :

1. Ability model
2. Mixed model
3. Trait model 

Ability model : Salovey and Mayer

The model proposes that individuals vary in their ability to process information of an emotional nature and in their ability to relate emotional processing to a wider cognition. This ability is seen to manifest itself in certain adaptive behaviors. The model identified four different factors of emotional intelligence:

Perceiving emotions – the ability to detect and decipher emotions in faces, pictures, voices,body langauge and cultural artifacts—including the ability to identify one's own emotions. Perceiving emotions represents a basic aspect of emotional intelligence, as it makes all other processing of emotional information possible.

Using emotions – Using emotions to promote thinking and cognitive activity. Emotions help prioritize what we pay attention and react to; we respond emotionally to things that garner our attention.The emotionally intelligent person can capitalize fully upon his or her changing moods in order to best fit the task at hand.

Understanding emotions – the ability to comprehend emotion language and to appreciate complicated relationships among emotions. For example, understanding emotions encompasses the ability to be sensitive to slight variations between emotions, and the ability to recognize and describe how emotions evolve over time.

Managing emotions – the ability to regulate emotions in both ourselves and in others, responding appropriately and responding to the emotions of others are all important aspect of emotional management. Therefore, the emotionally intelligent person can harness emotions, even negative ones, and manage them to achieve intended goals.

Mixed model : Daniel Goleman

The model introduced by Daniel Goleman focuses on Emotional Intelligence as a wide array of competencies and skills that drive leadership performance. Goleman's model outlines five main Emotional Intelligence constructs :

Self-awareness – the ability to know one's emotions, strengths, weaknesses, drives, values and goals and recognize their impact on others while using gut feelings to guide decisions.( (emotional self-awareness, accurate self-assessment and self confidence)

Self-regulation – involves controlling or redirecting one's disruptive emotions and impulses and adapting to changing circumstances.(emotional self-control, transparency, trustworthiness, adaptability, achievement orientation, initiative, optimism, conscientiousness)

Social skill – managing relationships to move people in the desired direction.

Empathy - considering other people's feelings especially when making decisions and

Motivation - being driven to achieve for the sake of achievement.

Emotional Intelligence Traits

The research of Psychologists, Medical Doctors and other researchers have found thirteen key emotional intelligence traits.

EMOTIONAL ENERGY: The amount of energy available to cope with frustration, conflict, or pressure.

EMOTIONAL STRESS: The amount of inner stress experienced.

OPTIMISM: To consider what is positive or right; to be optimistic.

SELF-ESTEEM: To value self and to be self-accepting.

COMMITMENT TO WORK: To work hard; to get things done; to take on responsibility.

ATTENTION TO DETAIL: To think things through; to concentrate on details; to be thorough; to be careful; to strive to be accurate.

DESIRE FOR CHANGE: To create changes or improvements in one's environment; to vary one's patterns of behavior.

COURAGE: To do what is challenging, or unfamiliar; to risk injury, loss, hardship, or discomfort to reach a desired goal.

SELF-DIRECTION: To make decisions/goals; to set priorities; to initiate action.

ASSERTIVENESS: Saying what one thinks. Trying to convince others. Telling others what one wants, needs, requires, or expects. Exercising power and authority. Engaging in interpersonal conflict. Confronting, openly disagreeing, saying no, taking unpopular positions.

TOLERANCE: To be tolerant, patient, accepting, and cooperative.

CONSIDERATION FOR OTHERS: To be considerate, understanding, helpful, honest, and responsible.

SOCIABILITY: To be outgoing and sociable. To seek and to enjoy others' company and conversation.

Facets --------High Scorers in Emotional Intelligence are..

Adaptability --- flexible and willing to adapt to new conditions.

Assertiveness ---.forthright, frank, and willing to stand up for their rights.

Emotion perception (self and others)---clear about their own and other people’s feelings.

Emotion expression --- capable of communicating their feelings to others.

Emotion management (others) --- capable of influencing other people’s feelings.

Emotion regulation --- capable of controlling their emotions.

Impulsiveness (low) --- reflective and less likely to give in to their urges.

Relationships --- capable of having fulfilling personal relationships.

Self-esteem --- successful and self-confident.

Self-motivation --- driven and unlikely to give up in the face of adversity.

Social awareness --- accomplished networkers with excellent social skills.

Stress management --- capable of withstanding pressure and regulating stress.

Trait empathy --- capable of taking someone else’s perspective.

Trait happiness --- cheerful and satisfied with their lives.

Trait optimism --- confident and likely to “look on the bright side” of life.

Application in Administration and Governance 

• Emotional Intelligence has a significant impact on team member relationships and their effectiveness in reaching a team’s goals. Understanding our own EI strengths and weaknesses, as well as those of other team members, provides a means for improving the interpersonal dynamics of teamwork. 
• Since research on Emotional Intelligence began, results overwhelmingly show that people high in various combinations of emotional competencies outperform people who are weak in those areas. When emotional competencies are used in leader selection, for example, performance and retention rates increase significantly.
• Emotional Intelligence significantly influences how we go about solving interpersonal problems. Thus, conflict in organizations often stems from EI differences. Understanding how to use our EI more effectively helps us solve interpersonal problems more effectively and efficiently and increases the overall effectiveness of work teams.
• Employees need consistency from their leaders,they need to know that a leader will respond in a consistent manner to a certain situation, so that they can bring questions, concerns, problems to their leader and know they will get a fair hearing and a consistent response. The best leaders use Emotional Intelligence to manage their emotions so that their responses are consistent, calm, and fair, and not reactive in nature.
• Emotional Intelligence is comprised of intrapersonal skills – understanding yourself, how you react and respond in different situations emotionally; and interpersonal skills – understanding others, and how they react and respond emotionally in different situations. As we think through how certain thoughts, actions, or triggers set off certain emotional responses, we can better manage those thoughts, actions or triggers, so that we respond rather than react. By not allowing the emotional trigger to take over, we maintain control over the situation, and can then create a positive interaction instead of an emotional hijacking.

Some ways for developing Emotional Intelligence 

-Look at yourself honestly and commit to specific areas of self-improvement.
-Think through the possible impact of your words before you speak.
-Avoid judging the actions of others before you have all of the facts.
-Be accountable for what you do and follow through on what you say you will do.
-Listen to opposing viewpoints and admit when you are wrong.
-Praise others and give credit where credit is due.
-Analyze your common emotions in times of stress, and work to control them.
-Be consistently and genuinely respectful.
-Curb negative thoughts and work to foster optimism.
-Work at becoming a better listener.
-Agree to disagree with those who have incompatible beliefs.

Attitude - Content , Structure , Function

What is an Attitude?

The word attitude crops up often in our everyday conversation.We speak of having attitude about something.In this usage,attitude usually implies feelings that are either positive or negative.We also speak of someone who has a "bad attitude".We may for example think that a colleague has an "attitude problem".In this usage,attitude implies some personality characteristic or behaviour pattern that offends us.Attitude is a mental and neural state of readiness,organized through experience,exerting a directive or dynamic influence on the individual's response to all objects and situations with which it is related.

Psychologists define attitudes as a learned tendency to evaluate things in a certain way. This can include evaluations of people, issues, objects or events. Such evaluations are often positive or negative, but they can also be uncertain at times. For example, you might have mixed feelings about a particular person or issue.

Attitude structure 

Researchers also suggest that there are several different components that make up attitudes

Affective component: this involves a person’s feelings / emotions about the attitude object(refers to the emotional reactions or feelings an individual has towards an object, person, group, event or issue.). For example: “I am scared of spiders”.

Behavioral (or conative) component: the way the attitude we have influences how we act or behave ( refers to the way in which an attitude is expressed through our actions.) .For example: “I will avoid spiders and scream if I see one”.

Cognitive component: this involves a person’s belief / knowledge about an attitude object(refers to the beliefs we have abou an object, person, group, event or issue.). For example: “I believe spiders are dangerous”.

This model is known as the ABC model of attitudes. The three components are usually linked. However, there is evidence that the cognitive and affective components of behavior do not always match with behavior. This is shown in a study by LaPiere (1934).

Attitudes can also be explicit and implicit. Explicit attitudes are those that we are consciously aware of and that clearly influence our behaviors and beliefs. Implicit attitudes are unconscious, but still have an effect on our beliefs and behaviors.

How are attitudes formed?

Attitudes form directly as a result of experience. They may emerge due to direct personal experience, or they may result from observation. Social roles and social norms can have a strong influence on attitudes. Social roles relate to how people are expected to behave in a particular role or context. Social norms involve society's rules for what behaviors are considered appropriate.Process of socialization influences the attitude formation.

Attitudes can be learned in a variety of ways. Consider how advertisers use classical conditioning to influence your attitude toward a particular product. In a television commercial, you see young, beautiful people having fun in on a tropical beach while enjoying a sport drink. This attractive and appealing imagery causes you to develop a positive association with this particular beverage.(Classical conditioning or Pavlovian conditioning is a reflexive or automatic type of learning in which a stimulus acquires the capacity to evoke a response that was originally evoked by another stimulus.)

Operant conditioning can also be used to influence how attitudes develop. Imagine a young man who has just started smoking. Whenever he lights up a cigarette, people complain, chastise him and ask him to leave their vicinity. This negative feedback from those around him eventually causes him to develop an unfavorable opinion of smoking and he decides to give up the habit.(Operant conditioning ,sometimes referred to as instrumental conditioning is a method of learning that occurs through rewards and punishments for behavior.It is the learning based on direct experience with the object. Through operant conditioning, an association is made between a behavior and a consequence for that behavior.)

Finally, people also learn attitudes by observing the people around them. When someone you admire greatly espouses a particular attitude, you are more likely to develop the same beliefs. For example, children spend a great deal of time observing the attitudes of their parents and usually begin to demonstrate similar outlooks.

Details :

Theories of attitude formation and change :

Functionalist theory:

Daniel Katz proposed a functionalist theory of attitudes. He takes the view that attitudes are determined by the functions they serve for us. People hold given attitudes because these attitudes help them achieve their basic goals. Katz distinguishes four types of psychological functions that attitudes meet.

A. Instrumental - we develop favorable attitudes towards things that aid or reward us. We want to maximize rewards and minimize penalties. Katz says we develop attitudes that help us meet this goal. We favor political parties that will advance our economic lot - if we are in business, we favor the party that will keep our taxes low, if unemployed we favor one that will increase social welfare benefits. We are more likely to change our attitudes if doing so allows us to fulfill our goals or avoid undesirable consequences.

B. Knowledge - attitudes provide meaningful, structured environment. In life we seek some degree of order, clarity, and stability in our personal frame of reference. Attitudes help supply us with standards of evaluation. Via such attitudes as stereotypes, we can bring order and clarity to the complexities of human life.

C. Value-expressive - Express basic values, reinforce self-image. EX: if you view yourself as a Catholic, you can reinforce that image by adopting Catholic beliefs and values. EX: We may have a self-image of ourselves as an enlightened conservative or a militant radical, and we therefore cultivate attitudes that we believe indicate such a core value.

D. Ego-defensive - Some attitudes serve to protect us from acknowledging basic truths about ourselves or the harsh realities of life. They serve as defense mechanisms. EX: Those with feelings of inferiority may develop attitude of superiority.

Katz's functionalist theory also offers an explanation as to why attitudes change. According to Katz, an attitude changes when it no longer serves its function and the individual feels blocked or frustrated. That is, according to Katz, attitude change is achieved not so much by changing a person's information or perception about an object, but rather by changing the person's underlying motivational and personality needs.

EX: As your social status increases, your attitudes toward your old car may change - you need something that better reflects your new status. (For that matter, your attitudes toward your old friends may change as well).


Learning theory 

There are several means by which we learn attitudes.

a. Classical conditioning- EX: A father angrily denounces the latest increase in income taxes. A mother happily announces the election of a candidate she worked for. These parents are expressing opinions, but they are also displaying nonverbal behavior that expresses their emotions. For a child watching the parents, the association between the topic and the nonverbal behavior will become obvious if repeated often enough. And the nonverbal behavior will trigger emotional responses in the child: the child feels upset and disturbed when listening to the father and happy when listening to the mother.

This is an example of classical conditioning: when two stimuli are repeatedly associated, the child learns to respond to them with a similar emotional reaction. In this case, the stimuli are the attitude topic and the parental emotion. Through repeated association, a formerly neutral stimulus (the attitude topic - taxes or politicians) begins to elicit an emotional reaction (the response) that was previously solicited only by another stimulus (the parental emotion). Whenever tax increases are mentioned, the child feels an unpleasant emotion; when the elected official is mentioned, the child feels a pleasant emotion.

EX: Pavlov's dogs. Bell was rung when dogs received food. Food made dogs salivate. Then whenever a bell was rung, dogs salivated even when food was not present.

EX: When you were a child, parents may have cheered for N.D. football. You may not have even known what N.D. football was, but you liked your parents happy attitude. Now N.D. football evokes that same response in you.

EX: Men with bow ties. Meet a bad man who wears bow ties, and you may come to hate all bow ties.

COMMENT: This explains why behaviors can persist even after reinforcement is withdrawn. Also helps explain self-reinforcement.

b. Instrumental, or operant, conditioning-Behaviors or attitudes that are followed by positive consequences are reinforced and are more likely to be repeated than are behaviors and attitudes that are followed by negative consequences.

c. Observational learning-Children watch the behavior of people around them and imitate what they see. EX: If a young girl hears her mother denounce all elected officials as crooks, she may repeat that opinion in class the next day. Whether she continues to repeat that opinion depends on the responses of her classmates, teacher, and parents. That is, observations determine the responses we learn, but reinforcement determines the responses we express.


Cognitive-Dissonance theory

 Cognition means individuals perception of own attitudes, beliefs, behaviors. Cognitive dissonance means feelings of tension that arise when one is simultaneously aware of two inconsistent cognitions. For example, when we act contrary to our attitudes; or, when we make a decision favoring one alternative despite reasons favoring another.


Dissonance theory says relationships among two cognitions can be either consonant, dissonant, irrelevant.Cognitive dissonance is a noxious state. It produces unpleasant physical arousal.Individual will attempt to reduce or eliminate dissonance - and will try to avoid things that increase dissonance.People can change their attitudes when they have conflicting beliefs about a topic. In order to reduce the tension created by these incompatible beliefs, people often shift their attitudes.


Theory of persuasion

This theory suggests that people can alter their attitudes in two ways. First, they can be motivated to listen and think about the message, thus leading to an attitude shift. Or, they might be influenced by characteristics of the speaker, leading to a temporary or surface shift in attitude. Messages that are thought-provoking and that appeal to logic are more likely to lead to permanent changes in attitudes.


Other theories include balance theory, originally proposed by Heider (1958), and the self-perception theory, originally proposed by Daryl Bem.


Functions of Attitude :


Attitudes can serve functions for the individual. Daniel Katz (1960) outlines four functional areas:

• Knowledge: Attitudes provide meaning (knowledge) for life. The knowledge function refers to our need for a world which is consistent and relatively stable. This allows us to predict what is likely to happen, and so gives us a sense of control. Attitudes can help us organize and structure our experience. Knowing a person’s attitude helps us predict their behavior. For example, knowing that a person is religious we can predict they will go to Church.

• Self / Ego-expressive: The attitudes we express (1) help communicate who we are and (2) may make us feel good because we have asserted our identity. Self-expression of attitudes can be non-verbal too: think bumper sticker, cap, or T-shirt slogan. Therefore, our attitudes are part of our identify, and help us to be aware through expression of our feelings, beliefs and values.

• Adaptive: If a person holds and/or expresses socially acceptable attitudes, other people will reward them with approval and social acceptance. For example, when people flatter their bosses or instructors (and believe it) or keep silent if they think an attitude is unpopular. Again, expression can be nonverbal [think politician kissing baby]. Attitudes then, are to do with being apart of a social group and the adaptive functions helps us fit in with a social group. People seek out others who share their attitudes, and develop similar attitudes to those they like.

• The ego-defensive function : refers to holding attitudes that protect our self-esteem or that justify actions that make us feel guilty. For example, one way children might defend themselves against the feelings of humiliation they have experienced in P.E. lessons is to adopt a strongly negative attitude to all sport. People whose pride has suffered following a defeat in sport might similarly adopt a defensive attitude: “I’m not bothered, I’m sick of rugby anyway…”. This function has psychiatric overtones. Positive attitudes towards ourselves, for example, have a protective function (i.e. an ego-defensive role) in helping us reserve our self-image.

The basic idea behind the functional approach is that attitudes help a person to mediate between their own inner needs (expression, defense) and the outside world (adaptive and knowledge).






More Info :Click Here

Indo-Japan relations

Throughout history, India–Japan relations have always been strong. For centuries, India and Japan have engaged in cultural exchanges, primarily as a result of Buddhism which spread indirectly from India to China and then to Japan. During the Second World War, Subhas Chandra Bose's Indian National Army and the Japanese Imperial Army fought together in battles against the British forces.India is the largest recipient of Japanese official development assistance (ODA).

Political relations between the two nations have remained warm since India's independence. Japanese companies, such as Sony, Toyota, and Honda, have manufacturing facilities in India, and with the growth of the Indian economy, India is a big market for Japanese firms. Japanese firms were, in fact, some of the first firms to invest in India. The most prominent Japanese company to have an investment in India is automobiles giant Suzuki, which is in partnership with Indian automobiles company Maruti Suzuki, the largest car manufacturer in the Indian market and a subsidiary of the Japanese company.

In December 2006, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Japan culminated in the signing of the "Joint Statement Towards Japan-India Strategic and Global Partnership". Japan has funded many infrastructure projects in India, most notably the Delhi Metro system. Also, in the year 2007, the Japanese Self-Defence Forces took part in a naval exercise in the Indian Ocean, known as Malabar 2007, which also involved the naval forces of India, Australia, Singapore and the United States. The year 2007 was declared "India-Japan Friendship Year."

According to a 2013 BBC World Service Poll, 42% of Japanese people view India positively, with only 4% expressing a negative view.

Prime Minister visit to Japan - 2013

Highlights 

The main message covered by PM during his range of activities in Tokyo is that India looks forward to expanding the strategic and global partnership with Japan.This covers political exchanges, economic interactions and strategic affairs.

 On Tuesday, March 26, Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr. Fumio Kishida held the Seventh Japan-India Foreign Ministers’ Strategic Dialogue with  Mr. Salman Khurshid, External Affairs Minister of India, during the latter’s visit to Japan.The two Ministers affirmed that Japan and India will continue to move forward with talks on this issue of Civil Nuclear Energy Cooperation.Minister Kishida expressed his intention to hold the second round of the Japan-India Cyber Dialogue and the Japan-India Maritime Affairs Dialogue within this year.

India and Japan have agreed to institutionalize bilateral naval exercises, to conduct them regularly and with increased frequency.

The Japanese Government has offered to sell the US-2 amphibious aircraft to India.Japan’s unwavering support for India’s development process, and the DMIC, the Western Dedicated Freight Corridor, and now what is emerging as a new area of cooperation which is the Chennai-Bengaluru Industrial Corridor are all symbols of this commitment of Japan.

Co-finance a joint feasibility study on the possible introduction of high-speed railways or Shinkansen on the Mumbai-Ahmedabad route in India.

India and Japan are also cooperating in the field of rare earths. A government-to-government memorandum was signed by the Ambassador last November and it is already in place. Companies from India and Japan – the Indian Rare Earths Limited and Toyota Tsusho – are negotiating the sale of rare earth oxide.

The Genesis programme under which Prime Minister Abe said he would like to have more than a thousand young Indian people come and visit Japan

Japan’s contribution to the Nalanda University, which is coming up, through the Faculty of Peace Studies .

Prime Minister Singh appreciated the pledge by Prime Minister Abe for the Campus Development Project of Indian Institute of Technology, Hyderabad (Phase 2) for 17.7 billion yen and the “Tamil Nadu Investment Promotion Programme” for 13 billion yen.

More Info : Joint Statement on Prime Minister's visit to Japan