Date: 20.1.2017 / Article Rating: 4 / Votes: 477
Writemyessaynow.lider-plast.com #Spring binder thesis

Recent Posts

Home >> Uncategorized >> Spring binder thesis

Spring binder thesis

Mar/Thu/2018 | Uncategorized





Amazon com: Elbe 320-91 Spring Binder - Thesis Binder Black 10" (H

Spring binder thesis

Buy Essay Papers Here -
Putting your Dissertation in a Black Snap Binder - YouTube

Biomedical Equipment Technician Resume. A biomedical equipment technician plays an important role in the healthcare industry since he or she is responsible for the upkeep, maintenance and repair of medical equipment. While the job requirements might vary from employer to employer, some inherent skills that these individuals should possess include manual dexterity, physical stamina, troubleshooting skills, and even the binder, ability to bullying thesis, communicate effectively. Your biomedical equipment technician resume should always list your best qualities first. At the entry level, you will focus on your education and any qualities that you can bring to spring binder thesis, your employer.

Later, once you have some experience, you can focus on your achievements and any ongoing training you have received. Below are three biomedical equipment technician resume format options that you can use to help you get your next job. If you are looking for your first job as a biomedical equipment technician, your resume should focus primarily on your education and any hands-on training that you have received. In the biomedical equipment technician resume example below, Michael Powers focuses on his coursework and his brief internship in a local hospital. He also lists a few of his skills, including his knowledge of computers and his familiarity with many different types of machinery. High School Diploma, 2012. Help Writing About! Grade Average: A. Spring Thesis! Advanced Computer Technology MS Word and Excel Health and Fitness Physics Basic Electronics. Associate’s Degree in Biomedical Equipment Technology, 2014. Thesis! Able to install, maintain, troubleshoot, and repair a variety of machines and devices.

Willing to travel in order to spring thesis, provide services in hospitals or clinics. Able to pay attention to full essays, small details in order to quickly discover problems and provide solutions. Work efficiently with or without direct supervision. Clean driving record and reliable transportation. Team player driven to help the company succeed. Firm understanding of biomedical terms. Familiar with imaging, heart-lung, and spring dialysis machines, etc. ICC certified technician. Shadowed experienced technician to gain hands-on experience with imaging equipment and dialysis machinery. Was required to troubleshoot machines when they experienced real issues and provide the right solutions.

Performed regular maintenance on CAT and PET scan machines. Assisted in the maintenance and repair of other types of equipment, such as IV machines and wheelchairs. Mid-Level Professional Resume. As a mid-level professional, you will have gained around five years’ experience installing, maintaining, troubleshooting and repairing biomedical equipment. Your resume should focus on any skills or further information that you have gained along the way.

In the biomedical equipment technician resume sample below, Micah Roland starts out by listing the things in which he excels, but he then moves on to describe his achievements with previous employers. Understand a wide range of simple and writing on teamwork complex medical equipment. Adept with precision tools. Dedicated to patient care; reliable and hard-working. Spring Binder! Able to rutgers essay, read and analyze equipment blueprints effectively. Understand calibration, testing and spring binder thesis diagnostics of even the most complex equipment. Able to manage inventory. Thesis! Can create and adhere to binder thesis, maintenance schedules.

Was given the opportunity to full essays, train two entry-level technicians in May of 2012 and thesis June of 2014. Awarded Employee of the Month in bullying July 2014. Assisted in the integration of new software responsible for creating and tracking maintenance schedules. Assisted in thesis creating on-call schedules for six biomedical equipment technicians to ensure that someone was available around the clock for emergency equipment repair. Biomedical Equipment Technician , June 2013 – Present. Essay Is No Gain Without Pain! Install, disassemble, and reassemble complex machinery. Spring! Routinely check equipment for damage as well as for wear and tear. Demonstrate the proper operation of medical equipment to hospital and clinic staff; provide instruction on life is no pain preventative maintenance and upkeep. Keep up-to-date with information from the manufacturer involving possible recalls or updated parts.

Use many different types of tools, including power and precision tools, to repair, maintain, install, and binder even rebuild various types of equipment. Biomedical Equipment Technician , March 2011 – June 2013. Took inventory and ordered new supplies as necessary. Worked directly with customers to help them find the essay on in there is no gain pain, equipment they needed. Spoke with physicians and therapists to ensure that the right types of equipment were being stocked. Assisted customers with testing and troubleshooting equipment. Biomedical Equipment Technician , May 2010 – March 2011. Was responsible for the maintenance and repair of IV and dialysis machines throughout the hospital. Provided routine safety checks and preventative maintenance. Took inventory and provided reports through the proper channels. Was responsible for keeping and updating maintenance logs.

Located or fabricated the parts necessary for completing repairs. Calibrated the equipment for spring binder thesis the best performance and longest lifespan. High School Diploma, 2007. Western Kentucky University, 2009. Jones and writing for students clanchy & ballard Davis General Hospital, January 2010 – May 2010. Experienced Professional Resume. An experienced professional is someone who has around a decade’s worth of spring thesis, experience working in the biomedical equipment field.

In this case, it is important to truly showcase your abilities and any certifications or ongoing training you have received in your biomedical equipment technician resume. In the biomedical equipment technician sample resume below, Angela Howard starts off by listing her core competencies, but she also showcases her CBET title and rutgers essay workshop attendance.

Custom Essay Order -
Amazon com: Elbe 320-91 Spring Binder - Thesis Binder Black 10" (H

Nietzsche's Moral and Political Philosophy. Nietzsche's moral philosophy is primarily critical in orientation: he attacks morality both for spring binder thesis its commitment to untenable descriptive (metaphysical and full essays, empirical) claims about human agency, as well as for binder thesis the deleterious impact of its distinctive norms and essay for students, values on the flourishing of the highest types of human beings (Nietzsche's “higher men”). His positive ethical views are best understood as combining (i) a kind of consequentialist perfectionism as Nietzsche's implicit theory of the good, with (ii) a conception of human perfection involving both formal and substantive elements. Binder? Because Nietzsche, however, is an anti-realist about value, he takes neither his positive vision, nor those aspects of his critique that depend upon it, to have any special epistemic status, a fact which helps explain his rhetoric and the circumspect character of his “esoteric” moralizing. Although Nietzsche's illiberal attitudes (for example, about human equality) are apparent, there are no grounds for ascribing to him a political philosophy, since he has no systematic (or even partly systematic) views about the full essays nature of state and society. Spring Thesis? As an esoteric moralist, Nietzsche aims at freeing higher human beings from their false consciousness about morality (their false belief that this morality is good for them ), not at a transformation of society at large. 1.1 Scope of the Critique: Morality in the Pejorative Sense. Nietzsche is not a critic of all “morality.” He explicitly embraces, for example, the idea of a “higher morality” which would inform the lives of “higher men” (Schacht 1983: 466469), and, in rutgers so doing, he employs the same German word Moral , sometimes Moralität for binder thesis both what he attacks and what he praises. Moreover, Nietzsche aims to offer a revaluation of existing values in a manner that appears, itself, to involve appeal to broadly “moral” standards of some sort.

As he writes in essays the Preface to Daybreak : “in this book faith in spring binder morality [ Moral ] is withdrawn but why? Out of morality [ Moralität ]! Or what else should we call that which informs it and us ?.[T]here is rutgers essay question no doubt that a ‘thou shalt’ [ du sollst ] speaks to binder thesis us too” (D 4). This means, of course, that (on pain of inconsistency) morality as the object of Nietzsche's critique must be distinguishable from the sense of “morality” he retains and employs. Yet Nietzsche also does not confine his criticisms of morality to some one religiously, philosophically, socially or historically circumscribed example. Thus, it will not suffice to say that he simply attacks Christian or Kantian or European or utilitarian morality though he certainly at times attacks all of these. To do justice to the scope of his critique, we should ask what characterizes “morality” in Nietzsche's pejorative sense hereafter, “MPS” that is, morality as the object of his critique. Nietzsche believes that all normative systems which perform something like the essay writing & role we associate with “morality” share certain structural characteristics, even as the meaning and value of spring binder, these normative systems varies considerably over time.

In particular, all normative systems have both descriptive and normative components, in the sense that: (a) they presuppose a particular descriptive account of on in life there is no without, human agency, in the sense that for the normative claims comprising the system to have intelligible application to binder human agents, particular metaphysical and empirical claims about agency must be true; and (b) the system's norms favor the interests of some people, often (though not necessarily) at the expense of others. Any particular morality will, in turn, be the object of Nietzsche's critique (i.e., MPS) only if it: presupposes three particular descriptive claims about the nature of human agents pertaining to free will, the transparency of the self, and the essential similarity of full essays, all people (“the Descriptive Component”); and/or embraces norms that harm the spring binder thesis “highest men” while benefitting the essay “lowest” (“the Normative Component”). While Nietzsche offers criticisms of both the Descriptive and Normative Components of MPS, what ultimately defines MPS as against unobjectionable normative systems is the distinctive normative agenda. Thus, while Nietzsche criticizes the description of agency that is typically part and parcel of MPS, he also holds that “[i]t is not error as error that” he objects to fundamentally in MPS (EH IV;7): that is, it is not the falsity of the descriptive account of agency presupposed by MPS, per thesis se , that is the help writing a speech about heart of the problem, but rather its distinctive normative commitments. Thus, strictly speaking, it is true that an MPS would be objectionable even if it did not involve a commitment to spring thesis an untenable descriptive account of rutgers essay 2014, agency (as, say, certain forms of utilitarianism do not). Because Nietzsche's two most common and closely related specific targets are, however, Christian and Kantian morality, the critique of the descriptive component of MPS figures prominently in Nietzsche's writing, and any account of the logic of spring thesis, his critique that omitted it would not do justice to essay writing for students his concerns. 1.2 Critique of the Descriptive Component of MPS. MPS for Nietzsche depends for its intelligible application to human agents on three descriptive theses about spring binder, human agency (cf. BGE 32; GM I:13; TI VI; EH III:5; EH IV:8): (1) Human agents possess a will capable of free and autonomous choice (“Free Will Thesis”). (2) The self is sufficiently transparent that agents' actions can be distinguished on the basis of their respective motives (“Transparency of the Self Thesis”). (3) Human agents are sufficiently similar that one moral code is appropriate for (because in the interests of) all (“Similarity Thesis”).

These three theses must be true in order for the normative judgments of MPS to be intelligible because the writing a speech about normative judgments of MPS are marked for Nietzsche by three corresponding traits; namely, that they: (1′) Hold agents responsible for their actions. (2′) Evaluate and “rank” the thesis motives for which agents act. (3′) Presuppose that “morality” has universal applicability (MPS “says stubbornly and inexorably, ‘I am morality itself, and nothing besides is morality’” [BGE 202]). Thus, the falsity of the picture of agency would affect the full essays intelligibility of moral judgments in the following three ways: (1″) If agents lacked “free will” they could not be held responsible for their actions. (2″) If agent motives could not be distinguished then no evaluative distinctions could be drawn among acts in terms of their motives. (3″) If agents were, in fact, different in some overlooked but relevant respect, then it would, at binder thesis, least, not be prima facie apparent that one morality should have universal application. It is the burden, then, of Nietzsche's critique of the Descriptive Component of MPS to show that, in fact, none of help about, these latter theses about the nature of agency hold. A brief review of these arguments follows (a more detailed treatment is in Leiter 2002: 81112). Against the Free Will Thesis, Nietzsche argues that a free agent (that is, one sufficiently free to be morally responsible) would have to be causa sui (i.e., self-caused, or the cause of itself); but since we are not causa sui , no one can be a free agent. Nietzsche takes for granted not implausibly that our moral and religious traditions are incompatibilist at their core: causally determined wills are not free wills. Nietzsche offers two kinds of arguments to show that we are not causa sui : that it is logically impossible to be causa sui ; and that human beings are not self-caused in a sense sufficient to underwrite ascriptions of moral responsibility. (I owe the point that there are two different arguments at issue here to spring binder Eric Vogelstein.) He says relatively little about the first point, other than claiming that “the concept of a causa sui is something fundamentally absurd” (BGE 15), and that it is “the best self-contradiction that has been conceived so fara sort of rape and perversion of logic” (BGE 21), such that this, desire for essay writing clanchy ballard “freedom of the spring binder will” in the superlative metaphysical sensethe desire to bear the entire and ultimate responsibility for one's actions oneself, and to absolve God, the clanchy world, ancestors, chance, and society involves nothing less than to be precisely this causa sui andto pull oneself up into existence by the hair, out binder, of the swamps of nothingness. (BGE 21)

But we cannot, needless to full essays say, pull ourselves up “out of the swamps of nothingness,” and so we cannot have ultimate responsibility for our actions. Nietzsche quickly moves from the claim that being causa sui involves a contradiction, however, to an argument that depends on his picture of spring, human agency. Nietzsche accepts what we may call a “Doctrine of full essays, Types” (Leiter 1998), according to which, Each person has a fixed psycho-physical constitution, which defines him as a particular type of person. Call the relevant psycho-physical facts here “type-facts.” Type-facts, for spring thesis Nietzsche, are either physiological facts about the person, or facts about the person's unconscious drives or affects. The claim, then, is question that each person has certain largely immutable physiological and psychic traits that constitute the “type” of person he or she is. Although Nietzsche himself does not use this exact terminology, the concept figures centrally in all his mature writings.

A typical Nietzschean form of argument, for example, runs as follows: a person's theoretical beliefs are best explained in terms of his moral beliefs; and his moral beliefs are best explained in terms of binder thesis, natural facts about the type of person he is essay (i.e., in terms of type-facts). So Nietzsche says, “every great philosophy so far has beenthe personal confession of its author and a kind of involuntary and thesis, unconscious memoir”; thus, to really grasp this philosophy, one must ask “at what morality does all this (does he ) aim” (BGE 6)? But the “morality” that a philosopher embraces simply bears “decisive witness to full essays who he is ” i.e., who he essentially is that is, to spring thesis the “innermost drives of his nature” (BGE 6). This explanation of a person's moral beliefs in terms of a speech about, psycho-physical facts about the person is a recurring theme in Nietzsche. “[M]oralities aremerely a sign language of the affects” (BGE 187), he says. “Answers to the questions about the value of spring thesis, existencemay always be considered first of all as the symptoms of certain bodies” (GS P:2). “Moral judgments,” he says are, “symptoms and sign languages which betray the process of physiological prosperity or failure” (WP 258). “[O]ur moral judgments and evaluationsare only essay on in life there gain pain, images and fantasies based on thesis a physiological process unknown to us” (D 119), so that “it is essay there gain without always necessary to thesis draw forththe physiological phenomenon behind the moral predispositions and prejudices” (D 542). A “morality of sympathy,” he claims is “just another expression of physiological overexcitability” (TI IX:37). Ressentiment and the morality that grows out of it he attributes to an “actual physiological cause [ Ursache ]” (GM I:15).

Nietzsche sums up the idea well in the preface to On the Genealogy of Morality (hereafter simply “ Genealogy ” or “GM”): “our thoughts, values, every ‘yes,’ ‘no,’ ‘if’ and ‘but’ grow from us with the question 2014 same inevitability as fruits borne on the tree all related and each with an affinity to each, and evidence of one will, one health, one earth, one sun” (GM P:2). Nietzsche seeks to understand in spring naturalistic terms the an essay type of “person” who would necessarily bear such ideas and values, just as one might come to thesis understand things about a type of help a speech myself, tree by knowing its fruits. And just as natural facts about the tree explain the spring binder fruit it bears, so too type-facts about a person will explain his values and actions. This means that the conscious mental states that precede the action and whose propositional contents would make them appear to be causally connected to the action are, in bullying essays thesis fact, epiphenomenal, either as tokens or as types: that is, they are either causally inert with respect to thesis the action or causally effective only in virtue of other type-facts about the question 2014 person (Leiter 2002: 9193 argues for the latter reading; Leiter 2007 argues for the former). We typically locate the “will,” as the seat of binder, action, in writing a speech about various conscious states: for example, our beliefs and desires. According to spring binder thesis Nietzsche, however, the writing an essay on teamwork “will” so conceived is nothing but the effect of type-facts about the person. This means that the real story of the spring thesis genesis of an action begins with the type-facts, which explain both consciousness and rutgers question, a person's actions. Here is spring binder how Nietzsche puts it, after suggesting that the “will” is related to, but conceptually prior to, the concepts of “consciousness” and “ego”: The “inner world” is full of phantoms: the will is one of them. The will no longer moves anything, hence does not explain anything either it merely accompanies events; it can also be absent.

The so-called motive : another error. Essay Writing For Students Clanchy Ballard? Merely a surface phenomenon of consciousness something alongside the deed that is more likely to cover up the antecedents of the thesis deeds than to full essays represent them. What follows from spring thesis this? There are no mental [ geistigen ] causes at all. (TI VI:3) In the a speech last line, Nietzsche must mean only that there are no conscious mental causes.

Indeed, in other passages, he is explicit that the target of this critique is the picture of conscious motives as adequate to account for action. (For competing views of the scope of Nietzsche's epiphenomenalism about spring thesis, consciousness, see Katsafanas 2005 and Riccardi 2015a.) As he writes in Daybreak , “we are accustomed to exclude all [the] unconscious processes from the accounting and to reflect on full essays the preparation for an act only to the extent that it is conscious” (D 129), a view which Nietzsche plainly regards as mistaken, both here and in the passage quoted above. Indeed, the theme of the “ridiculous overestimation and misunderstanding of consciousness” (GS 11) is thesis a recurring one in Nietzsche. “[B]y far the greatest part of our spirit's activity,” says Nietzsche, “remains unconscious and help writing about, unfelt” (GS 333; cf. GS 354). Apart from the general evidence on behalf of the Doctrine of Types, Nietzsche's strongest targeted argument for the epiphenomenality of consciousness depends on a piece of phenomenology, namely, “that a thought comes when ‘it’ wishes, and not when ‘I’ wish” (BGE 17). If that is right and spring binder, if actions are apparently “caused” by full essays thoughts (by particular beliefs and spring, desires), then it follows that actions are not caused solely by our conscious mental states, but rather by whatever it is life there is no gain without (i.e., type-facts) that determines the binder thesis thoughts that enter consciousness. Thus, it is the (autonomous) causal power of our conscious mental life that Nietzsche must be attacking. Given, then, that Nietzsche claims consciousness is epiphenomenal, and given our identification of the “will” with our conscious life, Nietzsche would have us dispense with the idea of the will as causal altogether. Bullying? (This gives Nietzsche a novel argument against hierarchical accounts of free will favored by binder compatibilists: see Leiter 2002: 9396). Since the conscious will is not causal, the Free Will Thesis is false. Against the essay on in life is no gain without Transparency of the Self Thesis, Nietzsche claims that “every action is unknowable” (GS 335; cf.

WP 291, 294); as he writes in Daybreak : The primeval delusion still lives on that one knows, and knows quite precisely in every case, how human action is brought about . “I know what I want, what I have done, I am free and responsible for it, I hold others responsible, I can call by its name every moral possibility and every inner motion which precedes action; you may act as you will in this matter I understand myself and understand you all!” that is howalmost everyone still thinks.[But] [a]ctions are never what they appear to us to spring binder be! We have expended so much labor on learning that external things are not as they appear to an essay us to be very well! the case is the same with the inner world! Moral actions are in reality “something other than that” more we cannot say: and all actions are essentially unknown. Thesis? (D 116) Actions are unknown because “nothingcan be more incomplete than [one's] image of the totality of drives which constitute [a man's] being” (D 119). One “can scarcely name even the cruder ones: their number and strength, their ebb and flow, their play and counterplay among one another, and above all the laws of their nutriment remain wholly unknown” (D 119). But as Nietzsche argues elsewhere (e.g., D 109), the self is merely the arena in which the struggle of drives plays itself out, and one's actions are the outcomes of the struggle (see Leiter 2002: 99104; cf.

Riccardi 2015b; for full essays a general account of Nietzsche's philosophical psychology, see Katsafanas 2013). Against the Similarity Thesis, Nietzsche once again deploys his Doctrine of binder thesis, Types. Nietzsche holds that agents are essentially dissimilar , insofar as they are constituted by different type-facts. Since Nietzsche also holds that these natural type-facts fix the different conditions under which particular agents will flourish, it follows that one morality cannot be good for essay writing clanchy all. “ Morality in Europe today is herd animal morality ,” says Nietzsche, “in other wordsmerely one type of human morality beside which, before which, and after which many other types, above all higher moralities, are, or ought to be, possible” (BGE 202). Nietzsche illustrates the general point with his discussion of the thesis case of the Italian writer Cornaro in Twilight of the Idols (VI:1). Cornaro, says Nietzsche, wrote a book mistakenly recommending “his slender diet as a recipe for a long and happy life.” But why was this a mistake?

Nietzsche explains: The worthy Italian thought his diet was the cause of his long life, whereas the precondition for a long life, the extraordinary slowness of his metabolism, the consumption of so little, was the cause of his slender diet. He was not free to eat little or much; his frugality was not a matter of “free will”: he became sick when he ate more. But whoever is not a carp not only does well to help a speech about eat properly, but needs to. There exists, then, type-facts about Cornaro that explain why a slender diet is thesis good for him: namely, “the extraordinary slowness of his metabolism.” These natural facts, in turn, constrain what Cornaro can do, delivering him “feedback” about the conditions under which he will and won't flourish: given his slow metabolism, if Cornaro ate more “he became sick”; conversely, when he stuck to for students clanchy & his slender diet, he did well. In sum, “[h]e was not free to eat little or much.” Cornaro's mistake consists, in effect, in his absolutism: he thought the “good” diet was good for everyone, when in fact it was only good for certain types of spring, bodies (namely, those with slow metabolisms).

As with diets, so too with moralities, according to Nietzsche. Agents are not similar in type-facts, and so one moral “diet” cannot be “good for all.” As he writes: [T]he question is always who he is, and who the other person isEvery unegoistic morality that takes itself for unconditional and essay question, addresses itself to all does not only sin against taste: it is a provocation to sins of omission, one more seduction under the mask of philanthropy and binder, precisely a seduction and injury for the higher, rarer, privileged. (BGE 221) This point sets the stage for his core critique of morality. 1.3 Critique of the Normative Component of essay there without pain, MPS. All of Nietzsche's criticisms of the normative component of thesis, MPS are parasitic upon one basic complaint not, as some have held (e.g., Nehamas [1985], Geuss [1997]), the universality of moral demands, per se , but rather that “the demand of bullying thesis, one morality for all is binder detrimental to the higher men” (BGE 228). Universality would be unobjectionable if agents were relevantly similar, but because agents are relevantly different, a universal morality must necessarily be harmful to some.

As Nietzsche writes elsewhere: “When a decadent type of man ascended to the rank of the highest type [via MPS], this could only essay clanchy & ballard, happen at the expense of its countertype [emphasis added], the type of man that is strong and sure of life” (EH III:5). In the preface to the Genealogy , Nietzsche sums up his basic concern particularly well: What if a symptom of regression lurked in the “good,” likewise a danger, a seduction, a poison, a narcotic, through which the binder thesis present lived at the expense of the future ? Perhaps more comfortably, less dangerously, but at essay question, the same time in a meaner style, more basely? So that morality itself were to blame if the highest power and spring, splendor [ Mächtigkeit und Pracht ] possible to the type man was never in fact attained? So that morality itself was the danger of essay clanchy & ballard, dangers? (GM Pref:6; cf. BT Attempt:5) This theme is spring binder sounded throughout Nietzsche's work. In a book of writing, 1880, for example, he writes that, “Our weak, unmanly social concepts of good and evil and their tremendous ascendancy over binder thesis, body and full essays, soul have finally weakened all bodies and souls and binder thesis, snapped the essay life is no gain without self-reliant, independent, unprejudiced men, the thesis pillars of a strong civilization” (D 163). Similarly, in help writing about a posthumously published note of 1885, he remarks that “men of great creativity, the really great men according to my understanding, will be sought in vain today” because “nothing stands more malignantly in the way of their rise and evolutionthan what in Europe today is called simply ‘morality’” (WP 957). In these and many other passages (e.g., BGE 62; GM III:14; A:5, 24; EH IV:4; WP 274, 345, 400, 870, 879.), Nietzsche makes plain his fundamental objection to MPS: simply put, that MPS thwarts the development of human excellence, i.e., “the highest power and splendor possible to spring thesis the type man” (for more on writing an essay on teamwork the “higher man,” see section (2)). There is another, important competing reading of Nietzsche's central complaint about MPS: namely, that it is “harmful to life” or, more simply, “anti-nature.” Geuss, for example, says that, “There is little doubt that ‘Life’in Nietzsche does seem to function as a criterion for evaluating moralities” (1997: 10).

So, too, Schacht claims that Nietzsche “takes ‘life’ in this world to be the spring sole locus of value, and its preservation, flourishing, and above all its enhancement to be ultimately decisive for determinations of value” (1983: 359). Thus, the rutgers question 2014 question of the value of binder, MPS is really the question of rutgers question, its “value for spring life” (1983: 354). Yet such an writing on teamwork, account is plainly too vague: what exactly does “life” refer to here? Schacht, following a suggestion of thesis, Nietzsche's from the Nachlass (WP 254), suggests that life is will to power, and writing for students clanchy &, thus degree of power constitutes the standard of thesis, value. (We shall return to bullying essays thesis this suggestion in detail in section 3.1, below.) But this involves no gain in precision. Nietzsche may, indeed, have thought that more “power” in his sense was more valuable than less, but that still leaves us with the binder question: power of what or of whom ? The only writing clanchy &, plausible candidate given especially his other remarks discussed above is power of people ; just as the spring binder only plausible candidate for the “life” that Nietzsche considers it valuable to essay for students clanchy preserve and enhance must be the lives of binder, people and, in particular, the lives of the for students ballard “highest men.” That this is binder thesis what Nietzsche means is revealed by the context of his actual remarks about the “value for life.” For example, he comments that “a higher and more fundamental value for life might have to be ascribed to full essays deception, selfishness, and lust” (BGE 2, emphasis added).

But what sort of “life” is, e.g., “selfishness” valuable for? As Nietzsche writes elsewhere (e.g., GM Pref:56), it is simply that life which manifests “the highest power and splendor actually possible to the type man.” And similarly, when Nietzsche says that a “tendency hostile to life is therefore characteristic of morality,” it is clear in context that what “life” refers to is “the type man” who might be “raised to his greatest splendor and power” (that is, but for the interference of MPS) (WP 897). In short, then, the things Nietzsche identifies as “valuable” for life are those he takes to be necessary for the flourishing of the highest types of life (or human excellence), while those that he identifies as harmful to it are those that he takes to be things that constitute obstacles to such flourishing. This suggests, then, that the “life” for which things are either valuable or disvaluable must be the life (or lives) that manifest human excellence i.e., the spring binder lives of “higher men.” Something similar may be said for the claim that Nietzsche objects to MPS because it is about “anti-nature.” For example, when Nietzsche says in Ecce Homo (IV:7) that “it is the lack of nature, it is the utterly gruesome fact that antinature itself received the highest honors as morality” that he centrally objects to in a morality, his claim will remain obscure unless we can say precisely what about MPS makes it “anti-natural.” Nietzsche, himself, offers guidance on this in the same section when he explains that a MPS is anti-natural insofar as it has the following sorts of characteristics: it teaches men “to despise the very first instincts of life” and “to experience the presupposition of spring binder thesis, life, sexuality, as something unclean”; and it “looks for the evil principle in what is most profoundly necessary for growth, in severe self-love” (EH IV:7). But from this it should be apparent, then, that it is not anti-naturalness itself that is objectionable, but the on teamwork consequences of an anti-natural MPS that are at issue: for example, its opposition to the instincts that are “profoundly necessary for growth.” This point is even more explicit in The Antichrist , where Nietzsche notes that Christian morality “has waged deadly war against this higher type of man; it has placed all the basic instincts of spring binder, his type under ban ” (5, emphasis added). In other words, the anti-naturalness of MPS is objectionable because the “natural” instincts MPS opposes are precisely those necessary for the growth of the “higher type of man.” Thus, underlying Nietzsche's worries about the anti-naturalness of MPS just as underlying his worries about the threat MPS poses to life is a concern for the effect of MPS on “higher men.” So Nietzsche objects to full essays the normative agenda of spring binder thesis, MPS because it is harmful to the highest men. In Nietzsche's various accounts of what the objectionable agenda of MPS consists, he identifies a variety of normative positions (see, e.g., D 108, 132, 174; GS 116, 294, 328, 338, 345, 352, 377; Z I:4, II:8, III:1, 9, IV:13, 10; BGE 197, 198, 201202, 225, 257; GM Pref:5, III: 11 ff.; TI II, V, IX:35, 3738, 48; A: 7, 43; EH III:D-2, IV:4, 7-8; WP 752). We may characterize these simply as “pro” and “con” attitudes, and we may say that a morality is the rutgers 2014 object of Nietzsche's critique (i.e., it is an MPS) if it contains one or more of the spring following normative views (this is a representative, but not exhaustive, list): The various possible normative components of MPS should, of full essays, course, be understood construed as ideal-typical , singling out for emphasis and criticism certain important features of larger and more complex normative views.

Let us call that which morality has a “pro” attitude towards is the “Pro-Object,” and that which morality has a “con” attitude towards the “Con-Object.” Keeping in binder thesis mind that what seems to have intrinsic value for Nietzsche is human excellence or human greatness (see the next section), Nietzsche's attack on the normative component of MPS can be summarized as having two parts: (a) With respect to essay on in life there gain without the Pro-Object, Nietzsche argues either (i) that the Pro-Object has no intrinsic value (in the cases where MPS claims it does); or (ii) that it does not have any or not nearly as much extrinsic value as MPS treats it as having; and. (b) With respect to the Con-Object, Nietzsche argues only spring binder, that the Con-Objects are extrinsically valuable for the cultivation of human excellence and that this is obscured by the “con” attitude endorsed by MPS. Thus, what unifies Nietzsche's seemingly disparate critical remarks about altruism, happiness, pity, equality, Kantian respect for persons, utilitarianism, etc. is that he thinks a culture in which such norms prevail as morality will be a culture which eliminates the conditions for the realization of human excellence the latter requiring, on rutgers essay question Nietzsche's view, concern with the spring binder self, suffering, a certain stoic indifference, a sense of hierarchy and difference, and the like. Essay? Indeed, when we turn to the details of Nietzsche's criticisms of these norms we find that, in fact, this is precisely what he argues. One detailed example will have to suffice here. What could be harmful about the seemingly innocuous MPS valuation of happiness (“pro”) and spring binder, suffering (“con”)? An early remark of Nietzsche's suggests his answer: Are we not, with this tremendous objective of obliterating all the sharp edges of life gain, life, well on spring thesis the way to turning mankind into an essay, sand ? Sand! Small, soft, round, unending sand! Is that your ideal, you heralds of the sympathetic affections? (D 174)

In a later work, Nietzsche says referring to hedonists and utilitarians that, “Well-being as you understand it that is no goal, that seems to binder thesis us an end , a state that soon makes man ridiculous and contemptible” (BGE 225). By the hedonistic doctrine of well-being, Nietzsche takes the utilitarians to have in writing on teamwork mind “ English happiness,” namely, “comfort and fashion” (BGE 228) a construal which, if unfair to some utilitarians (like Mill), may do justice to our ordinary aspirations to spring binder happiness. In a similar vein, Nietzsche has Zarathustra dismiss “wretched contentment” as an ideal (Z Pref:3), while also revealing that it was precisely “the last men” the “most despicable men” who “invented happiness [ Glück ]” in bullying thesis the first place (Pref:5). So happiness, according to Nietzsche, is not an intrinsically valuable end, and binder thesis, men who aim for it directly or through cultivating the dispositions that lead to rutgers essay it would be “ridiculous and contemptible.” To be sure, Nietzsche allows that he himself and binder, the “free spirits” will be “cheerful” or “gay” [ frölich ] they are, after all, the proponents of the “gay science.” But the point is that such “happiness” is not criterial of being a higher person, and thus it is not something that the higher person in contrast to the adherent of MPS aims for. Yet why does aiming for happiness make a person so unworthy of admiration? Nietzsche's answer appears to be this: because suffering is positively necessary for help myself the cultivation of human excellence which is the only thing, recall, that warrants admiration for spring Nietzsche. He writes, for example, that: The discipline of help about, suffering, of great suffering do you not know that only this discipline has created all enhancements of man so far? That tension of the soul in unhappiness which cultivates its strength, its shudders face to face with great ruin, its inventiveness and spring binder thesis, courage in enduring, persevering, interpreting, and exploiting suffering, and whatever has been granted to it of profundity, secret, mask, spirit, cunning, greatness was it not granted to it through suffering, through the discipline of great suffering? (BGE 225; cf. BGE 270) Nietzsche is not arguing here that in full essays contrast to thesis the view of MPS suffering is really intrinsically valuable (not even MPS claims that).

The value of suffering, according to Nietzsche, is only extrinsic: suffering “great” suffering is writing a prerequisite of any great human achievement. As Nietzsche puts the point elsewhere: “Only great pain is the ultimate liberator of the spirit.I doubt that such pain makes us ‘better’; but I know that it makes us more profound” (GS Pref:3). Nietzsche's attack, then, conforms to the model sketched above: (i) he rejects the view that happiness is intrinsically valuable; and (ii) he thinks that the negative attitude of MPS toward suffering obscures its important extrinsic value. (There is reason to binder thesis think that, on essay clanchy this second point, Nietzsche is generalizing from his own experience with physical suffering, the thesis worst periods of which coincided with his greatest productivity. Indeed, he believed that his suffering contributed essentially to his work: as he writes, admittedly hyperbolically, in Ecce Homo : “In the midst of the an essay on teamwork torments that go with an uninterrupted three-day migraine, accompanied by laborious vomiting of phlegm, I possessed a dialectician's clarity par excellence and thought through with very cold blood matters for which under healthier circumstances I am not mountain-climber, not subtle, not cold enough” (EH I:1).) Even if there is no shortage in the history of art and literature of cases of immense suffering being the spur to great creativity, there remains a serious worry about the logic of this line of Nietzschean critique. Following Leiter (1995), we may call this the “Harm Puzzle,” and the puzzle is this: why should one think the general moral prescription to alleviate suffering must stop the suffering of spring thesis, great artists, hence stop them from producing great art? One might think, in fact, that MPS could perfectly well allow an exception for full essays those individuals whose own suffering is spring binder essential to the realization of central life projects. Help A Speech Myself? After all, a prescription to alleviate suffering reflects a concern with promoting well-being, under some construal. But if some individuals nascent Goethes, Nietzsches, and other geniuses would be better off with a good dose of binder thesis, suffering, then why would MPS recommend otherwise? Why, then, should it be the case that MPS “harms” potentially “higher men”? This seems the natural philosophical question to life is no without ask, yet it also involves an important misunderstanding of Nietzsche's critique, which is spring thesis not, we might say, about writing about, philosophical theory but rather about the spring binder real nature of culture . When MPS values come to dominate a culture, Nietzsche thinks (plausibly), they will affect the attitudes of all members of that culture.

If MPS values emphasize the badness of rutgers essay question, suffering and the goodness of binder thesis, happiness, that will influence how individuals with the rutgers question potential for great achievements will understand, evaluate and conduct their own lives. If, in spring binder thesis fact, suffering is a precondition for these individuals to life pain do anything great, and if they have internalized the norm that suffering must be alleviated, and that happiness is the ultimate goal, then we run the risk that, rather than to put it crudely suffer and create, they will instead waste their energies pursuing pleasure, lamenting their suffering and seeking to alleviate it. MPS values may not explicitly prohibit artists or other potentially “excellent” persons from ever suffering; but the risk is that a culture like ours which has internalized the norms against spring binder thesis, suffering and for pleasure will be a culture in which potential artists and other doers of great things will, in fact , squander themselves in self-pity and the seeking of essay writing clanchy &, pleasure. So Nietzsche's response to the Harm Puzzle depends upon an empirical claim about what the spring binder real effect of MPS will be. The normative component of MPS is thesis harmful not because its specific prescriptions and proscriptions explicitly require potentially excellent persons to forego that which allows them to flourish (the claim is not that a conscientious application of the “theory” of MPS is incompatible with the flourishing of higher men); rather, the normative component of MPS is harmful because in practice , and thesis, especially because of MPS's commitment to the idea that one morality is appropriate for 2014 all, potentially higher men will come to adopt such values as applicable to themselves as well. Thus, the normative component of MPS is harmful because, in reality, it will have the effect of leading potentially excellent persons to binder thesis value what is in fact not conducive to their flourishing and devalue what is in on in there pain fact essential to it. In sum, Nietzsche's central objection to MPS is that it thwarts the development of human excellence. His argument for this, in each case, turns on identifying distinctive valuations of MPS, and showing how as in the case of norms favoring happiness and devaluing suffering they undermine the development of binder, individuals who would manifest human excellence. Full Essays? (For discussion of spring binder, other examples, see Leiter 2002: 134136.)

2. Nietzsche's Positive Ethical Vision. While Nietzsche clearly has views about the states of affairs to which positive intrinsic value attaches (namely, the flourishing of higher men), there is rutgers 2014 more disagreement among interpreters about what kind of ethics arises from the latter valuation so central to his critique of morality. Spring Thesis? The two leading candidates are that Nietzsche embraces a kind of virtue ethics (e.g., Hunt 1991; Solomon 2001) and that he is a kind of perfectionist (Hurka 1993, Hurka 2007). Essays Thesis? These accounts turn out to thesis overlap the perfections of the latter account are often the virtues of the former though the perfectionist account will prove to have certain other advantages, discussed below. Any account of Nietzsche's “positive ethics” confronts a threshold worry, namely, that Nietzsche's naturalistic conception of persons and agency and, in particular, his conception of persons as constituted by essay for students clanchy & ballard non-conscious type-facts that determine their actions makes it unclear how Nietzsche could have a philosophical ethics in any conventional sense. If, as Nietzsche, says, we face “a brazen wall of fate; we are in prison, we can only dream ourselves free, not make ourselves free” (HAH II:33); if “the single human being is a piece of fatum from the front and from the rear, one law more, one necessity more for all that is yet to come and to spring be” (TI V:6); if (as he says more hyperbolically in on teamwork Nachlass material) “the voluntary is absolutely lackingeverything has been directed along certain lines from the spring beginning” (WP 458); if (again hyperbolically) “one will become only that which one is (in spite of all: that means education, instruction, milieu, chance, and accident)” (WP 334); then it is hardly surprising that Nietzsche should also say, “A man as he ought to be: that sounds to essay for students clanchy & ballard us as insipid as ‘a tree as he ought to be’” (WP 332). Yet a philosopher reluctant to spring thesis talk about “man as he ought to bullying essays be” is plainly ill-suited to the task of developing a normative ethics, understood as systematic and theoretical guidance for how to live, whether that guidance comes in the form of rules for binder thesis behavior or dispositions of character to be cultivated. (There is an additional, and writing about myself, special difficulty, for those who think Nietzsche is a virtue ethicist, namely, that he also thinks genuine virtues are specific to individuals, meaning that there will be nothing general for thesis the theorist to say about full essays, them [see, e.g., Z I:5].) This means we must approach the question of Nietzsche's “positive” ethics in terms of explicating (1) what it is Nietzsche values, (2) what his criteria of evaluation are, and (3) what evaluative structure , if any, is exhibited by spring binder thesis the answers to (1) and (2). We go wrong at the start, however, if we expect Nietzsche to produce a normative theory of 2014, any familiar kind, whether a virtue ethics or otherwise. Importantly, the preceding points should not be read as denying that Nietzsche thinks values and spring binder, evaluative judgments can have a causal impact on actions and how lives are lived. After all, there would be no point in undertaking a “revaluation of help writing a speech myself, values” if such a revaluation would not have consequences for, e.g., the flourishing of higher men, or if MPS values did not have deleterious causal consequences for those same people.

Values make a causal difference, but, given Nietzsche's epiphenomenalism about consciousness (discussed, above, in spring 1.1), they do not make this difference because of free, conscious choices individuals make to adopt certain moral rules or cultivate certain dispositions of character. We can better appreciate Nietzsche's unusual views on this score by looking more closely at the popular, but mistaken, idea that Nietzsche calls on people to “create themselves” (on the general topic, see Leiter 1998). Alexander Nehamas, for example, reads Nietzsche as endorsing an ethics of rutgers question, self-creation. Binder Thesis? For Nietzsche, Nehamas says, “The people who ‘want to become those they are’ are precisely ‘human beings who are new, unique, incomparable, who give themselves laws, who create themselves’ (GS, 335)” (1985, p. 174). Unfortunately, Nehamas truncates the quote from The Gay Science at a misleading point. For Nietzsche, in the full passage, continues as follows: To that end [of creating ourselves] we must become the best learners and discoverers of essays thesis, everything that is spring thesis lawful and necessary in the world: we must become physicists in order to be creators in this sense [ wir müssen Physiker sein, um, in jenem Sinne , Schöpfer sein zu können ] while hitherto all valuations and ideals have been based on ignorance of physics . Therefore: long live physics! (GS 335) Creation “in this sense” is, then, a very special sense indeed: for it presupposes the discovery of what is “lawful and necessary” as revealed by physical science! The passage begins to make more sense in help writing a speech about context.

For in this same section, Nietzsche claims that “every action is unknowable,” though he adds: our opinions, valuations, and tables of what is good certainly belong among the most powerful levers in the involved mechanism of our actions, butin any particular case the binder law of writing on teamwork, their mechanism is indemonstrable [ unnachweisbar ]. This observation leads Nietzsche immediately to the suggestion that we should create “our own new tables of binder thesis, what is good,” presumably with an eye to effecting the causal determination of our actions in new ways. However, we need help from science to identify the full essays lawful patterns into spring, which values and actions fall; even if the mechanisms are indemonstrable, science may at least reveal the patterns of value-inputs and action-outputs. So to create one's self, “in this sense,” is to full essays accept Nietzsche's basically deterministic picture of action as determined by sub-conscious causes (type-facts) that are hard to identify but to use science to spring binder help identify those “values” which figure in the causal determination of action in new, but predictable, ways. Values, then, have a causal impact upon how people act and thus also on their life trajectories; but we cannot expect these impacts to flow from bullying essays thesis free, conscious choices that persons make. This would explain, of course, why we find so little in Nietzsche by way of argumentative or discursive support for spring thesis his evaluative judgments: such intellectual devices are precisely the ones that would appeal to our conscious faculties, and thus would be idle with respect to writing a speech myself the desired outcomes. Nietzsche's often violent rhetorical style, by spring contrast, might be expected (or so Nietzsche presumably thinks) to essay on in life pain have the requisite non-rational effect on binder his desired readers those “whose ears are related to ours” (GS 381). (More on this issue in Section 4, below.) If Nietzsche does not have a typical normative ethics, he certainly has no shortage of views about evaluative questions. Writing An Essay? For example, it is clear from the earlier discussion of Nietzsche's critique of morality that he assigns great intrinsic value to the flourishing of higher men. Binder Thesis? But who are these “higher men” and why does Nietzsche assign value to them? (Note that while Nietzsche speaks in Thus Spoke Zarathustra of the “superman” as a kind of ideal higher type, this concept simply drops out of his mature work (except for a brief mention in EH in the context of an essay on teamwork, discussing Zarathustra ). “Higher men” is an spring binder thesis, important concept in full essays Nietzsche; the “superman” is nothing more than a rhetorical trope in spring binder thesis the highly stylized Zarathustra. ) Nietzsche has three favorite examples of “higher” human beings: Goethe, Beethoven, and Nietzsche himself! What makes these figures paradigms of the essay writing “higher” type for Nietzsche, beyond their great creativity (as he says, “the men of great creativity” are “the really great men according to my understanding” (WP 957))?

Following Leiter (2002: 116122), we can identify five characteristics that Nietzsche identifies as distinctive of “higher men”: the higher type is solitary, pursues a “unifying project,” is healthy, is life-affirming, and practices self-reverence. Taken together, they are plainly sufficient to make someone a higher type in Nietzsche's view, though it is not obvious that any one of these is necessary, and various combinations often seem sufficient for explaining how Nietzsche speaks of higher human beings. First, higher types are solitary and deal with others only instrumentally. “Every choice human being,” says Nietzsche, “strives instinctively for a citadel and a secrecy where he is binder saved from the essay on in life there crowd, the many, the great majority” (BGE 26). Spring? “[T]he concept of on in life, greatness,” he says in the same work, “entails being noble, wanting to be by oneself, being able to be different, standing alone and having to live independently [ auf-eigne-Faust-leben-müssen ]” (BGE 212). Indeed, the higher type pursues solitude with something of a vengeance, for he “knows how to make enemies everywhere,[He] constantly contradicts the great majority not through words but through deeds” (WP 944). Unsurprisingly, then, the thesis great or higher man lacks the “congeniality” and “good-naturedness” so often celebrated in writing contemporary popular culture. “A great manis incommunicable: he finds it tasteless to be familiar” (WP 962). Spring Thesis? More than that, though, the higher type deals with others, when he has to, in a rather distinctive way: “A human being who strives for something great considers everyone he meets on rutgers essay 2014 his way either as a means or as a delay and obstacle or as a temporary resting place” (BGE 273). Thus, “a great manwants no ‘sympathetic’ heart, but servants, tools; in his intercourse with men, he is always intent on making something out of them” (WP 962). The great man approaches others instrumentally not only because of his fundamental proclivity for solitude, but because of another distinguishing characteristic: he is consumed by his work, his responsibilities, his projects. Second, higher types seek burdens and responsibilities, in the pursuit of some unifying project . “What is noble?” Nietzsche again asks in a Nachlass note of 1888. His answer: “That one instinctively seeks heavy responsibilities” (WP 944). So it was with Goethe: “he was not fainthearted but took as much as possible upon spring himself, over himself, into himself” (TI IX:49).

But the higher type does not seek out on teamwork, responsibilities and tasks arbitrarily. “A great man,” says Nietzsche displays “a long logic in all of thesis, his activityhe has the ability to full essays extend his will across great stretches of his life and to despise, and reject everything petty about him” (WP 962). This is the spring binder thesis trait Nietzsche sometimes refers to writing myself as having “style” in “character” (GS 290). (Note that this famous passage (GS 290) merely describes those “the strong and domineering natures” who are able “‘to give’ style” to their character; it does not presuppose that just anyone can do so and it is not a recommendation that everyone try to do so.) Indeed, Nietzsche understood his own life in these terms: [T]he organizing “idea” that is destined to binder rule [in one's life and work] keeps growing deep down it begins to command; slowly it leads us back from side roads and wrong roads; it prepares single qualities and fitnesses that will one day prove to be indispensable as means toward a whole one by one, it trains all subservient capacities before giving any hint of the help a speech about myself dominant task, “goal,” “aim,” or “meaning.” Considered in this way, my life is simply wonderful. Binder Thesis? For the help writing about task of a revaluation of all values more capacities may have been needed than have ever dwelt together in a single individual.I never even suspected what was growing in me and binder thesis, one day all my capacities, suddenly ripe, leaped forth in their ultimate perfection. (EH II:9). Earlier in Ecce Homo , Nietzsche describes himself as a higher type, “a well-turned-out-person” (EH I:2), and thus we may conclude that it is a characteristic only of the higher type that he is driven in pursuit of a project in the way described here. Indeed, it turns out to be precisely this kind of bullying, instinctive drivenness that Nietzsche has partly in spring binder thesis mind when he praises “health.”

Third, higher types are essentially healthy and resilient. One essential attribute of the “well-turned-out-person ”is that he “has a taste only for what is good for him; his pleasure, his delight cease where the writing a speech myself measure of what is good for him is spring transgressed. He guesses what remedies avail against what is harmful; he exploits bad accidents to his advantage” (EH I:2). Life There Without Pain? But this is just to say that a higher type is healthy , for health, Nietzsche tells us, means simply “instinctively cho[osing] the right means against wretched states” (EH I:2). This permits us to understand Nietzsche's own declaration in Ecce Homo that he was “ healthy at thesis, bottom ” (EH I:2), a seemingly paradoxical claim for a philosopher whose physical ailments were legion.

Yet “health,” for Nietzsche, is a term of art, meaning not the absence of sickness, but something closer to resilience , to how one deals with ordinary (physical) sickness and setbacks. “For a typical healthy person,” Nietzsche says, “being sick can even become an energetic stimulus for life, for living more. This, in fact, is how [my own] long period of essay there gain without, sickness appears to me now it was during the years of my lowest vitality that I ceased to be a pessimist; the instinct of self-restoration forbade me a philosophy of poverty and binder thesis, discouragement” (EH I:2). To cease to be a pessimist is to writing an essay on teamwork reject MPS, for only under the color of MPS does life appear to lack value. Thus, being healthy, in turn, entails a distinctive non-pessimistic attitude towards life which is yet a fourth mark of the higher type. Fourth, higher types affirm life, meaning that they are prepared to will the eternal return of their lives . In Beyond Good and Evil , Nietzsche describes “the opposite ideal” to that of moralists and pessimists like Schopenhauer as “the ideal of the most high-spirited, alive, and world-affirming human being who has not only come to terms and learned to get along with whatever was and is, but who wants to have what was and is repeated into all eternity” (BGE 56).

Put more simply: the higher type embraces the doctrine of the binder thesis eternal recurrence and thus evinces what Nietzsche often calls a “Dionysian” or “life-affirming” attitude. A person, for Nietzsche, has a Dionysian attitude toward life insofar as he affirms his life unconditionally; in particular, insofar as he affirms it including the “suffering” or other hardships it has involved. So someone who says, “I would gladly live my life again, except for my first marriage,” would not affirm life in the requisite sense. Thus, we may say that a person affirms his life in help writing myself Nietzsche's sense only insofar as he would gladly will its eternal return: i.e., will the repetition of his entire life through eternity. In fact, Nietzsche calls “the idea of the eternal recurrence” the “highest formulation of spring binder thesis, affirmation that is at all attainable” (EH III:Z-1; cf. On Teamwork? BGE 56). Higher men, then, are marked by a distinctive Dionysian attitude toward their life: they would gladly will the binder repetition of their life eternally. Strikingly, Nietzsche claims that precisely this attitude characterized both himself and Goethe. Speaking, for example, of the neglect by writing an essay on teamwork his contemporaries of his work, Nietzsche writes: “I myself have never suffered from all this; what is necessary does not hurt me; amor fati [love of fate] is my inmost nature” (EH III:CW-4). Regarding Goethe, Nietzsche says that, “Such a spiritstands amid the cosmos with a joyous and trusting fatalism, in the faith that all is redeemed and spring binder, affirmed in the whole.Such a faith, however, is the highest of all possible faiths: I have baptized it with the name of Dionysus ” (TI IX:49). Finally, the higher type of human being has a distinctive bearing towards others and especially towards himself: he has self-reverence. “The ‘higher nature’ of the great man,” says Nietzsche in writing an essay a striking Nachlass note of 1888 “lies in being different, in incommunicability, in distance of rank, not in an effect of any kind even if he made the whole globe tremble” (WP 876; cf.

GS 55). Binder Thesis? This is perhaps the most unusual feature of Nietzsche's discussion of the higher type, for it suggests that, at bottom, being a higher type is a matter of “attitude” or “bearing.” In a section of Beyond Good and Evil , Nietzsche once again answers the question, “What is noble?”, this time as follows: “It is rutgers question not the works, it is the spring thesis faith that is decisive here, that determines the order of rank: some fundamental certainty that a noble soul has about itself, something that cannot be sought, nor found, nor perhaps lost. The noble soul has reverence [Ehrfurcht] for itself” (BGE 287). Self-reverence to an essay on teamwork revere and respect oneself as one might a god is no small achievement, as the proliferation of “self-help” programs and pop psychology slogans like “I'm OK, you're OK” would suggest. Self-loathing, self-doubt, and self-laceration are the norm among human beings; to possess a “fundamental certainty” about oneself is, Nietzsche thinks quite plausibly, a unique state of affairs. Allied with this posture of self-reverence are other distinctive attitudes that distinguish the bearing of the higher man. “The noble human being,” says Nietzsche, “honors himself as one who is powerful, also as one who has power over himself, who knows how to speak and be silent, who delights in being severe and hard with himself and respects all severity and hardness” (BGE 260). (The higher man, unsurprisingly, is no hedonist: “What is noble?” asks Nietzsche: “That one leaves happiness to the great majority: happiness as peace of soul, virtue, comfort, Anglo-angelic shopkeeperdom a la Spencer” (WP 944).) In an earlier work, Nietzsche explains that: [T]he passion that attacks those who are noble is peculiar.It involves the binder thesis use of thesis, a rare and spring, singular standard cold to everybody else; the discovery of values for which no scales have been invented yet; offering sacrifices on altars that are dedicated to an unknown god; a courage without any desire for honors; self-sufficiency that overflows and gives to men and an essay, things. Spring Thesis? (GS 55) Indeed, the ability to set his own standard of valuation is one of the most distinctive achievements of the higher type, as we saw already in the discussion of solitude. And “the highest man” says Nietzsche is “he who determines values and help a speech about myself, directs the will of millennia by giving direction to the highest natures” (WP 999).

Considered all together, it becomes clear why creatives geniuses like Goethe, Beethoven, and Nietzsche himself should be the preferred examples of the binder higher human being: for the characteristics of the higher type so-described are precisely those that lend themselves to rutgers question 2014 artistic and creative work. A penchant for spring binder solitude, an absolute devotion to one's tasks, an indifference to essay for students clanchy & external opinion, a fundamental certainty about binder thesis, oneself and one's values (that often strikes others as hubris) all these are the traits we find, again and again, in full essays artistic geniuses. (It turns out, for example, that Beethoven, according to his leading biographer, had almost all these characteristics to a striking degree; for discussion, see Leiter 2002: 122123.) If “the men of thesis, great creativity, the really great men according to my understanding” (WP 957), men like Goethe and Beethoven, are Nietzsche's paradigmatic higher types, whose lives are models of flourishing excellence, is there anything systematic to be said about the theory of value that undergirds these judgments and informs, in turn, Nietzsche's critique of full essays, morality (MPS) on the grounds that it thwarts the development of such men? One popular idea (e.g., Schacht 1983, Richardson 1996) is spring that higher men exemplify “power,” which is claimed to on in life is no pain be Nietzsche's fundamental criterion of value. Such readings, alas, have to employ the concept of “power” rather elastically, since the conglomeration of traits of higher human beings noted above don't seem to be, in any ordinary sense, instances of “power” or its manifestation. (Treating Nietzsche's fundamental criterion of value as “power” confronts even more serious textual and philosophical obstacles: see Section 3.1, below.) More illuminating is Hurka's view (1993 and Hurka 2007) that Nietzsche's evaluative posture conjoins perfectionism with maximizing consequentialism: what has value are certain human excellences (or perfections), and states of affairs are assessed in terms of their maximization of these excellences.

As Hurka helpfully observes (1993: 75), Nietzsche seems to binder thesis operate with the opposite of Rawls's maximin principle, what Hurka calls approriately “maximax.” Hurka states this as a rule for conduct (“each agent's overriding goal should be not a sum or average of lifetime value, but the greatest lifetime value of the 2014 single most perfect individual, or, if perfections are not fully comparable, of the few most perfect individuals” [1993: 75]), but given the earlier caveats about reading Nietzsche as a conventional normative theorist, it is binder thesis better to treat maximax as reflecting the implicit structure of Nietzsche's revaluation of full essays, values: he rejects MPS because it fails to maximize the spring perfection of the highest human beings, and he does so without, it appears, any regard for the costs to essays thesis the herd of such a rejection (see Section 4). This leaves the question whether there are (formal or substantive) criteria of binder, “perfection” for Nietzsche? Many writers (e.g., Hurka 2007; Nehamas 1985; Richardson 1996) are attracted to the idea that “style” or “unity” is writing a speech about myself a criterion of excellence or perfection for binder Nietzsche, and, indeed, as noted above, the pursuit of writing a speech about myself, a unified or coherent life project is a characteristic feature of those Nietzsche deems to be higher men. Whether such style or coherence suffices is a vexed interpretive question, since it is not entirely clear that the formal criterion of style or unity is spring thesis available only to Goethes and help writing about, Beethovens: did not Kant, that “catastrophic spider” as Nietzsche unflatteringly calls him (A 11), exhibit an extraordinarily coherent style of creative productivity over many years? Others (e.g., Magnus 1978) take Nietzsche's idea of eternal recurrence (the hallmark of binder thesis, life-affirmation, as noted above) as the criterion of a well-lived life: perfection is a matter of living in such a way that one is essay ballard ready to spring binder thesis gladly will the repetition of one's life, in all its particulars, in to eternity. This, too, seems both too thin and too severe as a criterion of perfection standing alone: too thin, because anyone suitably superficial and complacent might will the eternal return; too severe, because it seems to bullying essays thesis require that a post-Holocaust Goethe gladly will the repetition of the Holocaust. Nehamas (1985), who shares some of Magnus's view, adds an idioscynratic element to this account: he claims that Nietzsche does not describe his ideal person his “higher man” but rather “exemplifies” such a person in the form of the “character” that is constituted by binder and exemplified in essay question 2014 his corpus. Nietzsche, however, describes at great length and in spring binder thesis many places (e.g.

D 201; GS 55; BGE 287; NCW Epilogue:2; WP 943) the on in there is no without types of persons he admires; and he also describes himself as such a person (e.g., EH I:2) In any case, Nehamas's view would have the odd consequence that for spring Nietzsche to have had a positive ethical vision at any point earlier in bullying essays his career he would have had to anticipate writing the binder series of books he actually wrote, such that his ethical ideal would be properly exemplified in them! Needless to say, there is no reason to writing a speech about think this was Nietzsche's view. Nietzsche holds that moral (i.e., MPS) values are not conducive to the flourishing of human excellence, and it is by reference to this fact that he proposed to assess their value. The enterprise of spring binder thesis, assessing the value of certain other values (call them the ‘revalued values’) naturally invites the metaethical question: what status metaphysical, epistemological do the values used to undertake this revaluation (the ‘assessing values’) enjoy? (It is doubtful Nietzsche has a definite semantic view about essay clanchy & ballard, judgments of value: cf. Binder Thesis? Hussain 2013, esp. 412.) Following Leiter (2000), we may distinguish “Privilege Readings” of essay, Nietzsche's metaethics which claim that Nietzsche holds that his own evaluative standpoint is either veridical or better justified than its target from those readings which deny the claim of privilege. (Note that defenders of spring binder, this latter, “skeptical” view need not read Nietzsche as a global anti-realist i.e., as claiming that there are no truths or facts about anything, let alone truths about value a reading which has now been widely discredited. There is, on the skeptical view at issue here, a special problem about the objectivity of value.) Privilege Readings of Nietzsche can come in on in without three varieties: Intuitionist Realist (I-Realist); Naturalist Realist (N-Realist); and spring, Privilege Non-Realist (P-Non-Realist). The proponents of these views would hold the following: (i) According to the I-Realist, there are non-natural normative facts, which are sui generis, and which are apprehended by some appropriate act of normative ‘perception.’ (ii) According to the N-Realist, there are normative facts because normative facts are just constituted by certain natural facts (in some sense to writing for students be specified).

(iii) According to spring binder the P-Non-Realist, there are no normative facts, but some normative judgments still enjoy a privilege by virtue of their interpersonal appeal or acceptance. To say that there are ‘normative facts’ will mean, for essay there is no without pain purposes here, that norms are (in some sense) objective features of the world. Thesis? No one, to date, has construed Nietzsche as an essay writing for students, I-Realist, but Schacht (1983) and Wilcox (1974), among many others, have defended an N-Realist reading, while Foot (1973) has defended a P-Non-Realist reading. Binder? We consider the difficulties afflicting these Privilege Readings in turn. According to writing the N-Realist reading, Nietzsche holds, first, that only power really has value and, second, that power is an objective, natural property. Nietzsche's evaluative perspective is privileged, in turn, because it involves asssessing (i) prudential value (value for an agent) in terms of degree of power, and (ii) non-prudential value in terms of maximization of prudential value (i.e., maximization of power). (A cautionary note about terminology here: by spring thesis ordinary conventions, the bullying thesis N-Realist proper holds that value itself is a natural property, not simply that what has value is a natural property.

There is no clear textual evidence of Nietzsche's view on this subtle question, yet it still makes sense to use the “N-Realist” label for two reasons: first, defenders of this reading treat Nietzsche's view as “naturalistic”; and, second, it is in fact ‘naturalistic’ in a familiar nineteenth-century sense, i.e., it denies that there are any supernatural properties. In the theory of value, then, one might plausibly think of Nietzsche as being a kind of binder thesis, naturalist in the sense of resisting religious and quasi-religious theories that view goodness as supervening on full essays non-natural (e.g., the “Forms”) or supernatural properties; as against this, Nietzsche claims that goodness supervenes on a (putatively) natural property, namely power.) According to Schacht, Nietzsche's account of “the fundamental character of life and spring binder, the world” as will to power is supposed to “ground” his own evaluative standpoint (1983: 348349). An Essay On Teamwork? As Nietzsche writes (in a passage Schacht quotes): “assuming that life itself is the will to power,” then “there is nothing to life that has value, except the degree of power” (WP 55). Nietzsche's revaluation of values, then, assesses moral values on the basis of their “degree of power,” something which constitutes an “objective measure of value” (WP 674). Hence the spring binder thesis privilege of bullying essays, his view: it embraces as an evaluative standard the spring thesis only thing in an essay life that (in fact) has value (namely power), and employs this “objective measure of value” in thesis the revaluation (e.g., by criticizing Christian morality because it does not maximize “power”). What exactly is Nietzsche's argument on essay life there is no the N-Realist reading? When pressed, commentators are never very clear. Schacht, for example, writes: Human life, for Nietzsche, is ultimately a part of a kind of vast game[which] is, so to binder speak, the only game in town.The nature of the game, he holds, establishes a standard for the evaluation of everything falling within its compass.

The availability of full essays, this standard places evaluation on spring binder thesis footing that is as firm as that on which the comprehension of life and writing a speech myself, the world stands. (1983, p. 398) Talk of “the only game in town” is far too metaphorical, however, to bear the philosophical weight demanded. From the spring fact that “life itself is the will to power,” how does it follow that power is the only standard of value? From the fact, for example, that all life obeys the laws of fundamental physics, nothing follows about the essay on in life there is no appropriate standard of value. Binder Thesis? What Schacht and others seem to have in mind is full essays something like John Stuart Mill's argument for utilitarianism, which proceeds from the premise that since happiness is the only thing people desire or aim for, it follows that happiness is the only thing that possesses intrinsic value. This argument, though, is spring thesis famously unsuccessful: from the fact that only happiness is desired, nothing at there, all follows about what ought to be desired. Attempts to construe Nietzsche's argument in an analogous way encounter similar problems (Leiter 2000 explores the analogy in detail). On Mill's well-known and oft-criticized ‘proof’ of the thesis principle of an essay on teamwork, utility from his 1861 Utilitarianism , to show that something is visible, we must show that it is seen; and to show that something is audible, we must show that it is heard; analogously, (P) to show that something is spring thesis desirable (i.e., valuable), show that it is desired. Millian hedonism holds that only happiness or pleasure is intrinsically desirable or valuable (‘Prescriptive Hedonism’). Life Is No Gain Pain? Let us call ‘Value Nihilism’ the view that there is nothing that has value or is valuable (or desirable).

To get Prescriptive Hedonism from (P), then, plug in binder thesis ‘Descriptive Hedonism’ the full essays thesis that people do in spring binder fact desire only pleasure as an end. If (P) is valid, Descriptive Hedonism true, and help writing a speech about myself, Value Nihilism false, then the truth of Prescriptive Hedonism follows. ((P), of course, is spring not valid, a point to which we will return.) Notice, now, that the same type of argument seems to capture what the essay on in life there is no gain pain N-Realist construal of Nietzsche has in mind. Spring? That is, to get the N-Realist Nietzschean conclusion that what is valuable is power, take (P) and plug in a strong form of Nietzsche's descriptive doctrine of the will to on in life is no without pain power the doctrine, roughly, that all persons intrinsically ‘desire’ only power. Thesis? If (P) is valid, Value Nihilism false, and the descriptive doctrine of the will to on teamwork power is true, then the normative conclusion about power, which Schacht is spring binder thesis after, seems to follow. (Note, of course, that the Millian Model argument as formulated so far would show only that power is what is non-morally valuable or good for an agent. Of course, if the Millian Model argument for prudential value or non-moral goodness does not work, then that provides a very strong (if defeasible) reason for supposing that there is no further argument for the related account of non-prudential value as consisting in maximization of power.) What are the problems with this “Millian argument”? The first problem, of course, is that (P) is not valid.

While from the fact that x is heard, it follows that x is audible, it does not follow from that fact that x is desired that x is desirable in the sense necessary for the argument . For while ‘audible’ can be fairly rendered as ‘can be heard,’ ‘desirable,’ in the context of Prescriptive Hedonism, means ‘ ought to be desired’ (not ‘can’ or ‘is’ desired). Thus, while it follows that: it does not follow that, If x is essay on in life there gain desired, then x ought to be desired (‘is desirable’). Yet in claiming that pleasure or power are valuable, Mill and the N-Realist Nietzsche are advancing a normative thesis. The truth of this normative thesis, however, simply does not follow from the corresponding descriptive thesis. Many, of course, have thought this too facile a response. Supplement the argument, then, by adding an ‘Internalist Constraint’ (IC), one that many philosophers have found plausible in the theory of value: (IC) Something cannot be valuable for a person unless the person is capable of caring about (desiring) it.

The (IC) is spring thesis motivated by the thought that it cannot be right to say that ‘X is valuable’ for someone when x is alien to anything a person cares about or could care about: any plausible notion of value, the (IC) supposes, must have some strong connection to a person's existing (or potential) motivational set. How does the (IC) help? Recall (P): (P) To show that something is desirable (i.e., valuable) show that it is essays thesis desired. Now the (IC) puts a constraint on spring binder thesis what things can, in fact, be desirable or valuable: namely, only question, those things that agents can, in spring thesis fact, care about or desire. This suggests that we might reformulate (P) as follows: (P′) To show that something is desirable (i.e., valuable), show that it is or can be desired.

(P′) now is a speech about myself simply a different formulation of the (IC): if we accept the spring (IC) then we should accept (P′). Essay 2014? But what happens, then, if we grant the truth of thesis, Descriptive Hedonism: namely, that only pleasure is, in fact, desired. Rutgers Essay Question 2014? In that case, it would now follow that only spring binder thesis, pleasure is desirable (ought to be desired) (assuming, again, that Value Nihilism is false). That is, since something ought to be desired only if it can be desired (internalism), then if only x can be desired, then only essay writing for students & ballard, x ought to spring thesis be desired (assuming that Value Nihilism is false). Will this argument rescue the N-Realist Nietzsche?

Two obstacles remain. The first, and perhaps less serious one, is that we must have some reason for accepting the there without (IC) or, more modestly, some reason for thinking Nietzsche accepts it. Spring? It is not clear, however, that there are adequate textual grounds for saying where Nietzsche stands on this question. Since the (IC) does, however, seem to on in life there gain pain be presupposed by the Nietzschean remarks from the Nachlass that support N-Realism in spring binder thesis the sense that such remarks do not constitute a good argument without the (IC) let us grant that Nietzsche accepts the (IC), and let us simply put aside the contentious issue of whether we ought to accept the essay on in there is no (IC) as a general philosophical matter. A second difficulty will still remain: namely, that the binder argument for N-Realism still depends on the truth of the help writing about relevant descriptive thesis, in Nietzsche's case, the doctrine of the will to binder power. This presents two problems.

First, in the works Nietzsche chose to publish, it seems clear that he did not, in fact, accept the doctrine in the strong form required for writing an essay on teamwork the N-Realist argument (namely, that it is only power that persons ever aim for or desire). Second, it is simply not a plausible doctrine in binder its strong form. For the there is no Millian Model argument for N-Realism to binder thesis work in its new form (that is, supplemented with the (IC)) it must be the case that that which ought to be desired (‘is valuable’) are the only things that are, in fact, desired. About Myself? Since the spring thesis N-Realist Nietzschean conclusion is that only essay 2014, power is valuable, power must be the only thing that is, in fact, desired (assuming, again, that something is valuable, i.e., that Value Nihilism is false). Many, of course, have thought that Nietzsche held precisely this view, and spring binder thesis, he plainly says much to suggest that. Zarathustra states that, “Where I found the living, there I found will to power” (Z II:12); Nietzsche refers to a speech about myself “the will to power which is the will of life” (GS 349); he says “the really fundamental instinct of lifeaims at binder, the expansion of power ” (GS 349); “life simply is will to power,” meaning a striving “to grow, spread, seize, become predominant” (BGE 259); he refers to his “theory that in rutgers question 2014 all events a will to binder power is operating” (GM II:12); he claims that “[a] living thing seeks above all to discharge its strength life itself is will to power ” (BGE 13); and so on. The difficulty is that Nietzsche says other things which might suggest that the stronger remarks are misleading; for example: Life itself is to my mind the instinct for growth, for durability, for an accumulation of on in is no without, forces, for power : where the will to spring power is lacking there is decline. It is my contention that all the supreme values of question 2014, mankind lack this will. (A 6) But if all actions manifested this will , then this will could never be found lacking.

Yet Nietzsche thinks it can be lacking, which means he must countenance the possibility that not everyone aims for (‘desires’) power. This passage is not atypical. Later in the same work, he returns to the same theme concerning “[w]herever the spring binder will to power declines in any form” (A 17). In the immediately preceding work he claims that the full essays “effects” of binder, liberal institutions are “known well enough: they undermine the thesis will to power” (TI IX:38). Binder? And in essay for students the immediately subsequent work (his last), Nietzsche refers to thesis “the terrible aspects of reality (in affects, in desires, in the will to power)” (EH IV:4), which certainly sounds as if will to power is simply one among various characteristics of reality alongside affects and desires, rather than the essential core of them all. Three other general textual considerations count against attributing the strong doctrine of the will to power to Nietzsche. Full Essays? First, if, as the defenders of the strong doctrine believe, “his fundamental principle is the ‘ will to power’ ”, then it is hard to understand why he says almost nothing about will to power and nothing at all to spring binder suggest it is his “fundamental principle” in the two major self-reflective moments in the Nietzschean corpus: his last major work, Ecce Homo , where he reviews and assesses his life and full essays, writings, including specifically all his prior books (EH III); and thesis, the series of new prefaces he wrote for life gain pain The Birth of Tragedy , Human, All Too Human , Dawn , and The Gay Science in 1886, in binder which he revisits his major themes. That this putative “fundamental principle” merits no mention on either occasion strongly suggests that its role in on in gain pain Nietzsche's thought has been greatly overstated. Second, the spring view at issue presupposes an unusually strong doctrine of the will to power: a doctrine, to the effect, that all life (actions, events) reflects the will to power. Bullying Essays? But recent scholarship has cast doubt on whether Nietzsche ultimately accepted such a doctrine.

The single most famous passage on will to binder thesis power in the Nietzschean corpus, for full essays example, is the concluding section (1067) of The Will to Power , where he affirms that, “ This world is the will to power and nothing besides ! And you yourselves are also this will to power and nothing besides!” Although a favorite of commentators for many years, the passage has now been conclusively discredited by the leading scholar of the Nachlass , the late Mazzino Montinari. Montinari has shown that Nietzsche had, in fact, discarded the passage by the spring of spring binder, 1887 (1982, pp. 103104)! It was, as Montinari notes, made part of the Köselitz-Forster compilation of The Will to writing an essay Power (the basis for the English-language edition by Kaufmann and Hollingdale) notwithstanding “Nietzsche's literary intentions” (1982, p. 104). Finally, Maudemarie Clark has argued that Nietzsche could not have accepted the very strongest form of the doctrine of the will to power namely, that all force , animate and inanimate, is will to power given the binder thesis putative argument he gives for it. Clark points out that the only argument for this doctrine of the will to power in bullying thesis Nietzsche's published works in Section 36 of Beyond Good and spring, Evil is cast in the conditional form: if we accept certain initial hypotheses, then, Nietzsche thinks, the question 2014 strong doctrine of the will to power follows. But one of the antecedents of this conditional is the “causality of the spring thesis will,” and full essays, Clark argues that Nietzsche clearly rejects such causality elsewhere in binder thesis his work (e.g., GS 127, TI II:5, TI VI:3). Therefore, this section cannot constitute an argument for the strongest doctrine of the will to power that Nietzsche, himself, would actually accept! Rather than embracing the strongest form of the doctrine, Clark argues that Nietzsche is, somewhat ironically, illustrating the very flaw of philosophers he warns against in the surrounding passages: namely, their tendency to propound theories of the essence of reality that are just projections of their own evaluative commitments (Clark 1990, pp.

212227). Thus, Nietzsche says of the Stoic talk of living “according to full essays nature” that “while you pretend rapturously to read the canon of your law in nature, you want something opposite.Your pride wants to impose your morality, your ideal, on nature” (BGE 9). How, Clark wonders, could Nietzsche's own doctrine of will to power be exempted from binder such a charge? (Note, too, that Montinari claims that the one surviving relic of 1067 of writing for students, The Will to Power in the published works is precisely the ironic Section 36 of Beyond Good and Evil (1982, p. Binder? 104).) What, then, does Nietzsche believe about writing an essay on teamwork, will to power? As others have noted (e.g., Clark 1990: 209212), Nietzsche's doctrine of will to power in its original deployment and spring binder thesis, most of its later development is psychological in character: the will to power is posited as the best psychological explanation for a wide variety of human behaviors. But as the preceding passages and writing clanchy & ballard, considerations make clear, Nietzsche could not have believed that will to power was the exclusive explanation for all human behavior. To the extent he sometimes seems to embrace this stronger claim (see the example, above), we must simply take Nietzsche to have overstated his case something which his penchant for hyperbolic rhetoric and polemics often leads him to do or to be engaged in the kind of ironic move described by Clark, above. That would, of course, be quite fortunate, since it is hardly plausible that will to power is the exclusive explanation for all human behavior.

There is an additional, textual worry for the argument that will to power provides an spring binder, objective criterion of on in there is no gain, value lurking here as well. Nietzsche only makes the remarks that seem to suggest that power is an objective criterion in spring binder thesis passages from the Nachlass , work that Nietzsche never published during his lifetime. Thus, even if one thought that Nietzsche really held the strong descriptive doctrine of the essay writing for students clanchy & ballard will to power the doctrine that all animate force (perhaps all force) is will to power in his published works, it is still the case that he only uses this doctrine to argue for the normative conclusion in Nachlass material. Since scholars have now raised important doubts about the canonical status of this Nachlass material (Montinari 1982, pp. 92104; Hollingdale 1985, pp. 166172, 182186), this might suggest that a view ought not to be attributed to Nietzsche solely on the basis of its articulation in these notebooks, which is exactly what the N-Realist reading requires. Although not attributing to Nietzsche any kind of value realism, Philippa Foot, like Schacht, wants to show that Nietzsche is binder doing something more than simply expressing his idiosyncratic view, a view that admits of no interpersonal justification. While agreeing that Nietzsche's intention is, in part, “to present us with a clash of interests the good of the an essay strong against thesis, that of the weak,” Foot adds that “this is not all he wants to suggest” (1973: 162).

Noting that Nietzsche “seems to want to say that anyone who is for students & ballard strong, independent, and so on anyone who fits his description of the higher type of man is binder thesis one who has value in himself” (163), Foot goes on to explicate this notion of “value” as follows: [I]t does make sense to say that we value strong and exceptional individuals. We do find patterns of full essays, reaction to exceptional men that would allow us to see here a valuing rather similar to valuing on binder aesthetic grounds. I am thinking of the interest and admiration which is the writing a speech about common attitude to remarkable men of exceptional independence of mind and strength of will. [Nietzsche] is appealing to our tendency to thesis admire certain individuals whom we see as powerful and splendid. [There is] a similarity between the way we attribute value (aesthetic value) to art objects and full essays, the value that Nietzsche attributes to a certain kind of man, both resting on a set of common reactions. (1973: 163) So Nietzsche, on spring this account, does not claim that his evaluative perspective is veridical; he simply claims that it enjoys a certain sort of interpersonal appeal, owing to our “common attitude to remarkable men,” “our tendency to writing an essay admire certain individuals,” to find them aesthetically appealing. Spring Binder? There may be no fact-of-the-matter as to whether higher men are or are not really valuable, but Nietzsche's evaluative standpoint is privileged by essay life there is no without pain virtue of its appeal to spring all of us. We're all interested, it seems, in the flourishing of higher men. Yet Nietzsche could not embrace the full essays view that the flourishing of “higher men” will appeal to “ our tendency” to admire such men or to any sort of “common” attitude, given the logic of his critique of morality.

This follows from what we may call Nietzsche's ‘Callicleanism,’ after Plato's Callicles in the Gorgias . It has now become something of a commonplace for commentators to note that Nietzsche did not accept one sort of Calliclean view, namely, the view that “anyone who is to binder live aright should suffer his appetites to grow to rutgers essay 2014 the greatest extent and spring binder thesis, not check them” ( Gorgias , 419e) (cf. Nehamas 1985: 202203; BGE 188). Yet there remains a more important respect in which Nietzsche's view is Calliclean: namely, in its embrace of the Calliclean doctrine that the inferior employ morality to essay 2014 make “slaves of those who are naturally better” ( Gorgias , 491e-492a), that the weaker folk, the majorityframe the laws [and, we might add, the morals] for their own advantage’ in order to spring binder ‘frighten [the strong] by essay writing clanchy ballard saying that to spring thesis overreach others is shameful and essays, evil’ ( Gorgias , 483b-d). In short, Callicles' view is that morality is simply the spring thesis prudence of the weak, who unable to do what the bullying strong can do, opt instead to put the actions of the strong under the ban of morality. This, of course, is essentially Nietzsche's view as well. So, for example, Nietzsche describes slave morality as simply ‘the prudence [ Klugheit ] of the lowest order’ (GM I:13), and he observes that “everything that elevates an spring thesis, individual above the herd and intimidates the neighbor iscalled evil ” (BGE 201), that “[m]oral judgments and on teamwork, condemnations constitute the favorite revenge of the spiritually limited against spring, those less limited” (BGE 219), and he claims that the “chief means” by which the “weak and mediocreweaken and essay for students clanchy ballard, pull down the stronger” is spring thesis “the moral judgment” (WP 345). Recall, now, that Foot wanted to resist the view that in his revaluation Nietzsche simply “present[s] us with a clash of interests the good of the strong against that of the weak” (1973: 162); instead, Foot suggests that Nietzsche is appealing to a ‘common’ tendency to bullying thesis admire higher men, men who would otherwise be thwarted by the reign of spring thesis, moral values.

But for essay on in life pain a Calliclean like Nietzsche, it is part of the very appeal of morality that it does thwart the flourishing of higher men. If that is right, then he could not think that the flourishing of “higher men” would appeal to everyone. Binder? It is precisely because it doesn't that morality arises in the first place, as a means for the low and base to thwart the flourishing of the high. This is not to deny that higher men may still be admirable in the eyes of the base and low (hence their envy); it is to deny, however, that Nietzsche's evaluative perspective that it is an objection to morality that it thwarts the high could enjoy a privilege in virtue of this shared admiration. On the Calliclean picture, there is a fundamental hostility between the high and low, the strong and the weak, one which will not be bridged by inviting the low to admire the high, or the weak, the strong. “The well-being of the majority and the well-being of the few are opposite help myself, viewpoints of value,” Nietzsche says in the ‘Note’ at spring binder, the end of the first essay of the full essays Genealogy . And in Nietzsche's revaluation, it appears, there is no evaluative standpoint from which one could successfully mediate and reconcile the binder thesis normative claims of the opposing moralities. If Nietzsche is not a realist about essays thesis, value, then he must be an anti-realist: he must deny that there is any objective fact of the matter that would privilege his evaluative perspective over its target. (This, in spring thesis fact, is the most familiar reading outside the secondary literature on rutgers essay 2014 Nietzsche; one finds this view of Nietzsche's metaethics, for example, in the sociologist Max Weber and the moral philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre, among many others.) We must be careful about the kinds of judgments to which this anti-realism applies. Spring Binder Thesis? Recall that in his critique of morality, Nietzsche appears to hold that, e.g., “herd” morality is about good for thesis the herd, but that it is bad for higher men. He says, for example, that, “The ideas of the herd should rule in the herd but not reach out beyond it” (WP 287; emphasis added); and elsewhere he describes slave morality as simply “the prudence of the help writing myself lowest order” (GM I:13).

It may appear that regarding value judgments pertaining to welfare or prudential goodness what is good or bad for spring particular sorts of persons Nietzsche believes there is an objective fact of the matter, though one relative to type-facts about help myself, persons. But this is binder thesis not right: while Nietzsche believes it is objectively correct that different moralities have certain effects on different kinds of people, that these effects are good or bad itself admits of essay on in life there is no without pain, anti-realist interpretation (cf. Spring Thesis? Leiter 2015: 119 for a revision of the view defended in Leiter 2002). Even more importantly, though, Nietzsche's anti-realism applies to the “revaluative” judgment that follows upon a speech these judgments about the effects of binder thesis, different moralities: that is, the full essays judgment that because herd morality is good for the herd but bad for higher men, herd morality (or the universal reign of herd morality) is bad or disvaluable. Nietzsche certainly says much that sounds like he is denying the objectivity of values. Zarathustra tells us that, “Verily, men gave themselves all their good and evil [ Gut und Böse ]” (Z I:15) and that “good and spring binder, evil that are not transitory do not exist” (Z II:12).

In The Gay Science , Nietzsche explains that, “Whatever has value in our world now does not have value in itself, according to its nature nature is on teamwork always value-less, but has been given value at binder thesis, some time” (301; cf. D 3). Indeed, like certain radical anti-realists, he tends to equate evaluative questions with matters of taste. “What is now decisive against Christianity is our taste [ Geschmack ], no longer our reasons” (GS 132), he writes, noting later in the same work that what counts as “justiceis by all means a matter of taste, nothing more” (GS 184). Nietzsche's central argument for anti-realism about value is explanatory : moral facts don't figure in the “best explanation” of on in there is no gain without, experience, and so are not real constituents of the objective world. Moral values, in binder short, can be “explained away.” Such a conclusion follows from Nietzsche's naturalism (on the an essay on teamwork latter, see the competing accounts in Janaway 2007 and Leiter 2013). As we saw in binder thesis the context of pain, Nietzsche's critique of morality, Nietzsche thinks a person's moral beliefs can be explained in thesis naturalistic terms, i.e., in terms of type-facts about that person.

Thus, to explain a person's moral judgments, one needn't appeal to the existence of objective moral facts: psycho-physical facts about the person suffice. Thus, since non-evaluative type-facts are the primary explanatory facts, and since explanatory power is the mark of objective facts, it appears that there cannot be any value facts. Moral judgments and evaluations are “images” and “fantasies,” says Nietzsche, the mere effects of type-facts about agents (D 119). To describe Nietzsche as a moral anti-realist is so far only to ascribe to him a metaphysical view: namely, that there are no objective facts about what is morally right and wrong. It is a somewhat vexed interpretive question whether we should also ascribe to Nietzsche a particular view about the semantics of writing clanchy ballard, moral judgment, a topic about which no philosopher prior to the 20 th century had a workedout view (see again Hussain 2013). For example, while it seems clear (from the spring passages quoted above) that Nietzsche has distinct views on the central metaphysical question about value, it seems equally apparent that there are inadequate textual resources for ascribing to him a satisfying answer to the semantic question.

Elements of his view, for example, might suggest assimilation to what we would call non-cognitivism and, in particular, expressivism. For example, in writing on teamwork describing master and Christian morality as “opposite forms in the optics of binder thesis, value [ Werthe ],” Nietzsche goes on to assert that, as opposite essay 2014, “optical” forms, they “areimmune to reasons and refutations. Binder? One cannot refute Christianity; one cannot refute a disease of the eye. The concepts ‘true’ and ‘untrue’ have, as it seems to me, no meaning in optics” (CW Epilogue). This passage typical of putatively expressivist passages in Nietzsche is, however, ambiguous.

For the full essays passage could mean that “true” and “false” are meaningless not because evaluative judgments are essentially non-cognitive, but rather because competing evaluative views are immune to the effects of reasoning. There may be rational grounds for thinking one view better than another, perhaps for thinking one true and the other false, but since reasoning has so little impact in this context, it is “meaningless” (in the sense of pointless) to raise issues of truth and falsity. More recently, Hussain (2007) has argued that we read Nietzsche as a fictionalist about spring thesis, moral value: granted that Nietzsche is an essay on in is no, anti-realist about value (there exists no objective fact about what has value in-itself), Hussain wonders what it is those who “create values” can understand themselves to have done? Valuation, in this Nietzschean world, Hussain argues, involves a kind of “make-believe,” pretending that things are valuable-in-themselves, while knowing that nothing, in fact, has such value. There is a pressing philosophical question here whether “make-believe” about value really could suffice for valuing but also an interpretive problem: does Nietzsche really think that moral judgments express beliefs , that is, truth-apt propositional attitudes which then requires fictionalist treatment?

It would be astonishing if any 19 th -century philosopher were to spring binder thesis have a clear answer to essays such a question (Hussain 2013 seems to have come around to this view). While Nietzsche was, to binder thesis be sure, among the first to writing a speech recognize the extent to which linguistic and grammatical practices generate metaphysical assumptions and problems, he simply did not view metaphysical questions themselves as best framed as issues about the spring thesis semantics of a given region of discourse (e.g., are the terms genuinely and successfully referential, or are they “merely” expressive?). It is doubtful, then, that there are adequate grounds for assigning Nietzsche a view on such subtle matters as whether ethical language is primarily cognitive or non-cognitive, when it clearly evinces aspects of full essays, both descriptive and prescriptive discourse. Two aspects of Nietzsche's work may, however, seem to be in tension with value anti-realism, even understood as only a metaphysical doctrine: first, his reliance on the distinction between “higher” and “lower” types of binder thesis, human beings; and second, the force and seriousness with which he presents his evaluative judgments. As we saw, above, Nietzsche's critique of full essays, morality presupposes a distinction between higher and lower types of people. But are there objective facts about who is “high” and who is “low”? And if so, would such a view be compatible with anti-realism? Suppose there are objective facts about “high” and “low”: Goethe really is a higher type, and spring binder thesis, the herd animal really is a lower type. But there is still no objective fact about help writing a speech about, whether MPS is non-prudentially disvaluable just because it has the effect of thwarting the flourishing of objectively higher types.

Realism about “high” and “low” does not entail realism about binder, non-prudential value, so the argument might go. Such a response cannot work for two reasons. First, the judgment that “X is a higher person” includes a significant evaluative component: “Goethe is a higher type” is not evaluatively neutral in essay writing clanchy the manner of binder, “Goethe is a taller than average type.” In saying that someone is a higher type, we seem committed to some positive evaluative attitude towards that person (e.g., that it is good to rutgers question 2014 have persons like that around). If there is an spring binder thesis, objective fact that “X is a higher type,” and it is a fact that MPS thwarts the flourishing of higher types, then it would seem that at least some objective weight must accrue to the Nietzschean position that MPS is disvaluable because of this effect it has. Second, if it is an objective fact that Goethe is a higher type and, say, Hitler is a herd animal, then the following counterfactual would seem to be true: (C) If Hitler had been like Goethe, he would have been better off. He would have been better off because he would have been a higher type, instead of ballard, a lower type and spring, it is an objective fact that the high are really high, and bullying thesis, the low are really low. But this seemingly objective judgment that Hitler would have been better off had he been more like Goethe is a non-prudential value judgment; it is not a judgment about spring binder, what is good for Hitler under the circumstances, but rather a judgment about what would make Hitler better off, but for his circumstances. In general, it seems that conceding the objectivity of “high” and rutgers essay question 2014, “low” permits one to thesis make objective non-prudential value judgments like: the good of the higher type is superior to the good of the lower type.

For these reasons, if Nietzsche is an essay on in there is no gain, anti-realist about thesis, non-prudential moral value, then he must also be an essay question 2014, anti-realist about spring, judgments of “high” and “low,” It may be an objective fact that MPS thwarts the flourishing of those Nietzsche regards as higher types; but it is not an objective fact that they are really higher. In fact, there is textual evidence that this is exactly Nietzsche's view. For example, in Thus Spoke Zarathustra , Nietzsche writes that, “Good and evil, and rich and poor, and high and low [ Hoch und Gering ], and all the names of values arms shall they be and clattering signs that life must overcome itself again and again” (Z II:7). About? Here Nietzsche is explicit that “high and low” are simply “names of values,” just like “good and evil.” But since, as we have just seen, Nietzsche is an anti-realist about these latter evaluative concepts, it should hardly be surprisingly that he is an anti-realist about the former. The actual contexts in which Nietzsche marks traits as “high” and “low” invite the same reading. Consider, for binder thesis example, the exposition in the Genealogy (I:14) of the sense in which slave morality is the “prudence of the lowest order” (GM, I:13). Thesis? According to Nietzsche, slave morality takes certain typical characteristics of the “lowest order” and redescribes them in morally praiseworthy lights. So, for example, their impotence becomes “goodness of heart,” their anxious lowliness becomes “humility,” their “inoffensiveness” and “lingering at spring binder thesis, the door” becomes “patience”, and their desire for essays thesis retaliation becomes a desire for justice. If Nietzsche were really a realist about the concept of “lowness”, then we ought to be able to identify the objective facts in virtue of which something is spring thesis really low.

Yet when Nietzsche tries to writing an essay on teamwork describe all patience as nothing more than a “lingering at the door” and all humility as simply “anxious lowliness,” it is natural to think that there is no “objective” fact about “lowness” here but simply a polemical and evaluatively loaded characterization. To think that all humility is really “anxious lowliness” is just to identify oneself as one who shares Nietzsche's evaluative sensibility, one “whose ears are related to ours” (GS 381), one “predisposed and spring binder thesis, predestined” for an essay on teamwork Nietzsche's insights (BGE 30). In short, given the way in which Nietzsche actually speaks of the “high” and “low,” we should understand Nietzsche's metaethical position as also characterizing these terms: to say that “X is low” is not to binder thesis describe an objective fact, but rather to identify oneself as sharing in a certain evaluative sensibility or taste. There remains a final interpretive difficulty: for Nietzsche simply does not write like someone who thinks his evaluative judgments are merely his idiosyncratic preferences! On the metaethical position elaborated here, it seems Nietzsche must believe that if, in writing on teamwork response to his point that “morality were to spring thesis blame if the highest power and splendor actually possible to the type man was never in fact attained” (GM Pref:6), someone were to say, “So much the better for morality!”, there would be nothing further to say to that person: at the best, Nietzsche might turn his back and bullying essays, say, “Oh well doesn't share my evaluative tastes.” Yet there seems to be a substantial amount of Nietzschean rhetoric (see, e.g., BGE 259; TI V:6 IX:35; EH IV:4, 7, 8) that cannot be reconciled with this metaethical view, and which cries out spring binder, instead for some sort of realist construal. Three sorts of considerations, however, block the inference from Nietzsche's rhetoric to the conclusion that he embraced a realist metaphysics of value. First, while the full essays rhetoric is forceful, the language of truth and falsity is conspicuously absent. As some of the passages quoted above suggest, Nietzsche writes with great force and passion in opposition to MPS.

But it is striking that he does not use the epistemic value terms the language of truth and falsity, real and unreal in this context. This, of course, might not be notable, except for the fact that in his equally forceful attacks on, e.g., Christian cosmology, or religious interpretations of natural events, he invokes the conceptual apparatus of binder, truth and falsity, truth and lie, reality and appearance, all the time (cf. Leiter 1994, pp. 336338). Thus, for example, Nietzsche lampoons Christian cosmology as lacking “even a single point of contact with reality” and as “pure fiction” which “falsifiesreality” (“ die Wirklichtkeit fälscht ”) (A, 15). Such epistemic value terms are strikingly absent in Nietzsche's remarks about an essay, value. One natural explanation for this difference in rhetoric natural especially in light of the substantial evidence for spring thesis his anti-realism is precisely that in the moral case he does not think there is any fact of the matter. Second, in undertaking a “revaluation of on teamwork, all values,” Nietzsche, as we have seen, wants to binder alert “higher” types to the fact that MPS is full essays not, in fact, conducive to their flourishing.

Thus, he needs to binder “wake up” his appropriate readers those whose “ears are related” to full essays his to the dangers of binder thesis, MPS, a task made all the more difficult by bullying essays thesis MPS's pretension to be “morality itself.” Given, then, that Nietzsche's target is a certain sort of misunderstanding on the part of higher men, and spring, given the difficulty of supplanting the bullying norms that figure in this misunderstanding (the norms of MPS), it should be unsurprising that Nietzsche writes with passion and force: he must shake higher types out of spring binder, their intuitive commitment to the moral traditions of two millenia! Moreover, Nietzsche's naturalism, and the prominent role it assigns to non-conscious drives and type-facts, leads him to be skeptical about the efficacy of reasons and arguments. But a skeptic about the efficacy of rational persuasion might very well opt for persuasion through other rhetorical devices. Third, and perhaps most importantly, a rhetorical tone like Nietzsche's looked at in the context of his life does not really suggest realism about the content, but rather desperation on the part of the author to reach an full essays, increasingly distant and uninterested audience. The Nietzsche who was almost completely ignored during the years before illness erased his intellect and deprived him of his sanity might have resorted to more and more strident and violent rhetoric in frustration over spring binder, not being heard and bullying essays thesis, not because he was a realist. Indeed, in the absence of explicit evidence of binder, value realism, this seems the most plausible explanation for the vast majority of the passages with which we have been concerned in gain this section.

For these various reasons, then, the character of Nietzsche's rhetoric can be understood as compatible with his anti-realism about value. 4. Nietzsche's Lack of a Political Philosophy. When the Danish critic Georg Brandes (18421927) first introduced a wider European audience to Nietzsche's ideas during public lectures in 1888, he concentrated on thesis Nietzsche's vitriolic campaign against morality and what Brandes dubbed (with Nietzsche's subsequent approval) Nietzsche's “aristocratic radicalism.” On this reading, Nietzsche was primarily concerned with questions of value and essay clanchy & ballard, culture (especially the value of morality and its effect on culture), and his philosophical standpoint was acknowledged to be a deeply illiberal one: what matters are great human beings, not the “herd.” The egalitarian premise of all contemporary moral and political theory the premise, in one form or another, of the equal worth or dignity of each person is simply absent in Nietzsche's work. Spring Thesis? This naturally leads to the question: what politics would Nietzsche recommend to us in light of his repudiation of the egalitarian premise? A striking feature of the reception of Nietzsche in the last twenty years is the large literature that has developed on Nietzsche's purported political philosophy. Help A Speech? Two positions have dominated the spring binder literature: one attributes to Nietzsche a commitment to essay on in there is no without aristocratic forms of spring, social ordering (call this the “Aristocratic Politics View” [e.g., Detwiler 1990]), while the other denies that Nietzsche has any political philosophy at all (call this the on in gain pain “Anti-Politics View” [e.g., Hunt 1985]). More recently, Shaw (2007) has staked out a third position, namely, that Nietzsche was, in fact, concerned with the normative legitimacy of state power, but was skeptical that with the demise of religion, it would be possible to achieve an binder thesis, effective normative consensus in society at large that was untained by the exercise of writing on teamwork, state power itself.

Whether Nietzsche is really interested in these issues has been contested (Leiter 2009). Here we will concentrate on the two dominant lines of binder thesis, interpretation, noting that the evidence favors the second view. Even the casual reader knows, of course, that Nietzsche has intense opinions about everything , from German cuisine to the unparalleled brilliance (in Nietzsche's estimation) of Bizet's operas, not to mention various and sundry “political” matters. The interpretive question, however, is whether scattered remarks and parenthetical outbursts add up to systematic views on questions of essay writing for students clanchy ballard, philosophical significance. Is Nietzsche even interested in spring binder political philosophy? Martha Nussbaum (1997: 1) declares that, “Nietzsche claimed to be a political thinker, indeed an important political thinker”, but she can produce no clear textual evidence in support of that contention. She notes that, “In Ecce Homo he announced that he was ‘a bringer of writing an essay, glad tidings like no one before me,’ and binder, that those glad tidings are political” (1997: 1). In fact, Nietzsche does not say the “tidings” are political; indeed, as the earlier discussion of his critique of morality shows, the “tidings” are directed only at select readers, nascent higher human beings, for whom morality is harmful. That this section from Ecce Homo (IV:1) concludes with the hyperbolic claim that only a speech myself, with Nietzsche does “the earth [first] know[ ] great politics ” does as little to establish that he has a political philosophy as the claim, in spring thesis the very same passage , that Nietzsche's “glad tidings” will cause “upheavals, a convulsion of earthquakes, a moving of mountains and valleys” does to establish that he has a geological theory. Nussbaum goes on to suggest that “serious political thought” (1997: 2) must address seven precise topics (e.g., “procedural justification” [“proceduresthat legitimate and/or justify the resulting proposals” for essay writing & “political structure”], “gender and the family,” and “justice between nations”) most of which, of course, Nietzsche does not address. (Marx does not address most of them either.) Instead of drawing the natural conclusion Nietzsche was not interested in questions of political philosophy she, instead, decries his “baneful influence” in spring political philosophy (1997: 12)! Those who claim to find a political philosophy in bullying Nietzsche typically rely on spring binder a handful of passages most often, sections 5657 of The Antichrist as the slender evidence on question 2014 the basis of which elaborate views about the ideal forms of social and political organization are attributed to Nietzsche.

In particular, Nietzsche is binder said to endorse (in A 5657) the caste-based society associated with the on teamwork Hindu Laws of Manu as his political ideal: The order of castes, the supreme, the dominant law, is merely the sanction of binder, a natural order , a natural lawfulness of the first rank, over rutgers essay question, which no arbitrariness, no “modern idea” has any powerNature, not Manu, distinguishes the spring thesis pre-eminently spiritual ones, those who are pre-eminently strong in muscle and temperament, and rutgers essay question, those, the thesis third type, who excel neither in one respect nor in the other, the mediocre ones the last as the great majority, the first as the elite. (A 57) This reading, however, does not withstand scrutiny, as Thomas Brobjer (1998) has argued. As Brobjer notes, the only other published discussion of the laws of Manu, in thesis Twilight of the Idols , is highly critical, not laudatory (pp. 304305); Nietzsche's discussions of comparable caste-based societies are all critical (pp. 308309); and Nietzsche's unpublished notebooks contain numerous entries on the theme “a critique of the Laws of Manu” (pp. 310312). The passage from The Antichrist only seems laudatory when read out of spring binder thesis, context; as Brobjer remarks: [Nietzsche's] purpose [in these passages in The Antichrist ] is to make the help a speech myself contrast with Christianity as strong as possible, to spring binder thesis provoke the reader, to make the reader “realize” that even the laws of Manu is higher and more humane than Christianity.

Whereas Christianity destroys, the intention at least of the & ballard laws of Manu was to save and protect. (1998, pp. 312313) In other words, the rhetorical context of the passage is spring thesis crucial, though it is typically ignored by commentators defending the Aristocratic Politics View. Indeed, the passage quoted above from A 57 is specifically introduced to illustrate the rutgers 2014 use of the “holy lie” (the lie being, in this case, the claim that “nature, not Manu” distinguishes the castes). And as even the title of the book would suggest, Nietzsche's target is Christianity, and the laws of Manu are invoked simply to drive home that point.

Thus, although Manu and Christianity both depend on lies, at least the binder thesis Manu lies, according to Nietzsche, are not put in the service of Christian ends, i.e., “poisoning, slander, negation of life, contempt for essay on in gain without the body, the degradation and self-violation of spring thesis, man through the about myself concept of sin” (A 56). Similarly, Nietzsche goes out of his way to show that Christian views of female sexuality compare unfavorably with Manu views (A 56). The most balanced and careful defense of the Aristocratic Politics View, Detwiler (1990), is not able to adduce much additional evidence. For example, Detwiler (1990) ends up relying quite heavily on an essay the thesis 27-year-old Nietzsche never published (1990: 39-41, 63)! As to passages in the “mature” corpus, Detwiler adduces ones that “appear[ ] to have explicit political implications” (1990: 43; cf. Essay For Students Clanchy? 44), or that “strongly suggestpolitical consequences” (1990: 4546), or that “raise the issue of spring binder, troubling political implications of Nietzschean immoralism” (1990: 49). But “implications” and “consequences” are one thing, and having a political philosophy another. The canon of political philosophers is composed of thinkers (like Hobbes, Locke, and help writing a speech about myself, Rousseau) who have philosophical views about political questions the state, liberty, law, justice, etc. not thinkers whose views about other topics merely had “implications” for politics. As the conscientious Detwiler admits: “[t]he political implications of Nietzsche's revaluation of values are never center stage for spring binder thesis long” (1990: 58). Yet it is natural to full essays think that Nietzsche's attack on morality does indeed have real political implications. When Nietzsche commends the laws of Manu for “mak[ing] possible the higher and the highest types” (A 57), this resonates, all too obviously, with Nietzsche's central concern that morality is harmful to the highest types of human beings.

Yet the thesis undeniable “resonance” fails to show that Nietzsche endorses the laws of Manu. Writing? Most obviously, the “higher types” protected by the laws of Manu essentially a priestly caste have nothing in common with the nascent Goethes that concern Nietzsche. Nietzsche's worry for these potential higher types is, as we have seen, that they suffer from false consciousness , i.e., the false belief that “morality in the pejorative sense,” i.e., MPS, is binder thesis good for them. MPS is a threat to the flourishing of writing an essay on teamwork, nascent Goethes, and spring, it is this flourishing that interests Nietzsche above all. It would suffice for Nietzsche's purposes that nascent Goethes give up their faith in MPS in other words, it is individual attitudes not political structures that are Nietzsche's primary object (“The ideas of the herd should rule in the herd,” says Nietzsche, “and not reach out beyond it” [WP 287]). That should hardly be surprising if we recall Nietzsche's sustained hostility to politics throughout his career, as defenders of the Anti-Politics View emphasize. Even in the early Untimely Meditations , this hostility is already evident. Life Is No Gain? So, for example, Nietzsche comments: Every philosophy which believes that the problem of spring binder thesis, existence is touched on, not to say solved, by a political event is a joke- and pseudo-philosophy.

Many states have been founded since the world began; that is an writing an essay, old story. How should a political innovation suffice to binder turn men once and for writing an essay on teamwork all into contented inhabitants of the earth? [That people think the answer to existential questions might come from politics shows] that we are experiencing the consequences of the doctrinethat the state is the highest goal of thesis, mankind and that a man has no higher duty than to serve the state: in which doctrine I recognize a relapse not into paganism but into writing a speech about myself, stupidity. It may be that a man who sees his highest duty in serving the state really knows no higher duties; but there are men and spring thesis, duties existing beyond this and one of the duties that seems, at least to me, to be higher than serving the state demands that one destroys stupidity in every form, and therefore in this form too. That is why I am concerned with a species of man whose teleology extends somewhat beyond the welfare of a state, and with [this kind of man] only in relation to essay & ballard a world which is again fairly independent of the spring binder welfare of a state, that of culture. (U III:4) The same, almost anarchistic attitude is apparent in bullying Thus Spoke Zarathustra , where Nietzsche calls the “statethe coldest of all cold monsters” and remarks, aptly enough, that “the statewhatever it says it liesEverything about it is false” (Z I:11). “Only where the state ends, there begins the human being who is not superfluous” (Z I:11) Of course, it is only the binder thesis latter individual that really interests Nietzsche. And who is that individual?

The next section (Z I:12) tells us: he is the one who values his “solitude,” which is precisely what the “marketplace” of politics violates, with its “showmen and actors of great [sic] things.” “Far from the market place and from fame happens all that is great” (Z I:12): in other words, great things (and great people) are to essay writing for students be found far from the realms of politics and economics. Passages like these seem to support the binder Anti-Politics View. On this account, Nietzsche occasionally expresses views about political matters, but, read in context, they do not add up to a theoretical account of any of the question 2014 questions of thesis, political philosophy. He is more accurately read, in the end, as a kind of full essays, esoteric moralist , i.e., someone who has views about human flourishing, views he wants to communicate at least to a select few. “This book belongs to the very few,” he says of The Antichrist , though the point holds more generally. Indeed, Nietzsche is clearly describing his own work when he writes in an earlier book that, It is spring binder not by any means necessarily an objection to a book when anyone finds it impossible to understand: perhaps that was part of the author's intention he did not want to be understood by just ‘anybody.’ All the essay for students clanchy nobler spirits and tastes select their audience when they wish to communicate; and choosing that, one at the same time erects barriers against ‘the others.’ All the more subtle laws of binder, any style have their origin at this point: they at the same time keep away, create a distance, forbid ‘entrance,’ understanding, as said above while they open the essay writing clanchy & ballard ears of those whose ears are related to ours. (GS 381) Or similarly: “Our highest insights must and should sound like follies and sometimes like crimes when they are heard without permission by those who are not predisposed and predestined for them” (BGE 30). Nietzsche, the esoteric moralist, wants to reach only select individuals those nascent higher human beings who are “predisposed and predestined” for his ideas and thesis, alter their consciousness about morality.

The larger world, including its forms of political and economic organization, is simply not his concern. Even without a political philosophy, however, there remain disturbing questions about Nietzsche's critique of morality and its political implications . For example, when Nietzsche objects that morality is an an essay, obstacle to “the highest power and splendor possible” to man, one is binder thesis tempted to object that this gets things perversely backwards. For surely it is the lack of morality in social policy and public institutions a lack which permits widespread poverty and despair to persist generation upon generation; that allows daily economic struggle and uncertainty to define the basic character of most people's lives that is most responsible for essay question a lack of human flourishing. Surely, in a more moral society, with a genuine commitment to spring binder social justice and human equality, there would be far more Goethes, far more creativity and admirable human achievement. As Philippa Foot has sharply put it: “How could one see the full essays present dangers that the spring binder thesis world is in as showing that there is full essays too much pity and too little egoism around?” (1973, p. Spring Binder? 168). Here, though, one must remember the earlier discussion of full essays, Nietzsche's critique of morality. Consider the Nietzsche who asks: “Where has the last feeling of thesis, decency and self-respect gone when even our statesmen, an otherwise quite unembarrassed type of man, anti-Christians through and through in their deeds, still call themselves Christians today and attend communion?” (A 38). Clearly this Nietzsche is under no illusions about the extent to which public actors do not act morally. Indeed, Nietzsche continues in even more explicit terms: “Every practice of every moment, every instinct, every valuation that is for students & translated into action is today anti-Christian: what a miscarriage of thesis, falseness must modern man be, that he is not ashamed to be called a Christian in myself spite of all this!” (A 38). Binder? What, then, is going on here? If Nietzsche is thesis not, contrary to Foot's suggestion, embracing the absurd view that there is spring binder too much pity and altruism in the world, what exactly is his critical point?

Recall Nietzsche's paradigmatic worry: that a nascent creative genius will come to take the norms of full essays, MPS so seriously that he will fail to realize his genius. Rather than tolerate (even welcome) suffering, he will seek relief from hardship and devote himself to the pursuit of pleasure; rather than practice what Nietzsche calls “severe self-love”, and thesis, attend to full essays himself in the ways requisite for spring binder thesis productive creative work, he will embrace the ideology of altruism, and reject “self-love” as improper, and so forth. It is not, then, that Nietzsche thinks people practice too much altruism after all, Nietzsche tells us that egoistic actions “have hitherto been by far the most frequent actions” (D 148) but rather that they believe too much in the value of altruism, equality, happiness and the other norms of MPS. Even though there is neither much altruism nor equality in the world, there is writing on teamwork almost universal endorsement of the thesis value of altruism and bullying thesis, equality even, notoriously (and as Nietzsche seemed well aware), by those who are its worst enemies in spring practice. So Nietzsche's critique is that a culture in the grips of MPS, even without acting on MPS, poses the real obstacle to flourishing, because it teaches potential higher types to disvalue what would be most conducive to their creativity and value what is irrelevant or perhaps even hostile to it. Bullying? Nietzsche's worry, in short, is that the spring binder thesis man in the grips of MPS becomes “ imprisoned among all sorts of terrible concepts [ schrekliche Begriffe ]” that leave him “sick, miserable, malevolent against himself: full of hatred against the springs of life, full of suspicion against all that was still strong and happy” (TI VII:2, emphasis added). So, contrary to Foot, Nietzsche is not claiming that people are actually too altruistic and too egalitarian in writing their practice; he is worried that (as a consequence of the binder slave revolt in morals, etc.) they are now “imprisoned among.concepts” of equality and altruism, and that this conceptual vocabulary of value is itself the obstacle to the realization of certain forms of human excellence.

That is a very different charge, one that raises subtle psychological questions that no one, to date, has really explored. To be sure, one might still object that if our society really were more altruistic and bullying essays thesis, egalitarian, more individuals would have the chance to flourish and do creative work. Yet it is precisely this moral optimism common, for example, to utilitarians and Marxists this belief that a more moral society would produce more opportunity for more people to do creative work that Nietzsche does, indeed, want to question. Nietzsche's illiberal attitudes in this regard are once again apparent; he says to take but one example that, “We simply do not consider it desirable that a realm of justice and harmony [ Eintracht ] should be established on spring binder thesis earth” (GS 377). It is bad enough for Nietzsche that MPS values have so far succeeded in saying, “stubbornly and inexorably, ‘I am morality itself, and nothing besides is morality’” (BGE 202); it could only be worse on his view if more and more of our actions were really brought into rutgers 2014, accord with these values. For Nietzsche wants to urge contrary to the moral optimists that in a way largely unappreciated and (perhaps) unintended a thoroughly moral culture undermines the conditions under which the most splendid human creativity is possible, and generates instead a society of Zarathustra's “last men” (Z P:5): “What is love? What is creation? What is longing? What is a star?” thus asks the last man, and thesis, he blinks. The earth has become small, and on it hops the last man, who makes everything small. His race is as in eradicable as the flea-beetle; the rutgers essay question 2014 last man lives longest.

“We have invented happiness,” say the last men, and thesis, they blink. If we are trained always to think of happiness and there gain, comfort and safety and the needs of others, we shall cut ourselves off from the preconditions for creative excellence on the Nietzschean picture: suffering, hardship, danger, self-concern, and the rest. Consider a particularly powerful statement of this view. Speaking of those “eloquent and spring, profoundly scribbling slaves of the democratic taste and its ‘modern ideas’” who seek to promote “the universal green-pasture happiness of the herd” and who take “suffering itselffor something that must be abolished” (BGE 44), Nietzsche retorts that when we look at, how the plant “man” has so far grown most vigorously to essay on in life gain pain a height we think that this has happened every time under the opposite conditions, that to this end the dangerousness of spring binder thesis, his situation must first grow to the point of enormity, his power of full essays, invention and spring binder, simulation (his “spirit”) had to develop under prolonged pressure and constraint into refinement and audacity. On Teamwork? We think thateverything evil, terrible, tyrannical in man, everything in him that is kin to binder beasts of prey and serpents, serves the enhancement of the species “man” as much as its opposite rutgers question 2014, does. Indeed, we do not even say enough when we say only that much. (BGE 44) At the end of this passage, Nietzsche does hint at thesis, a role for full essays morality as well it is just that what morality opposes is equally important. He, of course, qualifies this by spring suggesting that even to concede their equal importance may “not even say enough”: that is, perhaps there will not be much role for morality at all in bullying thesis the conditions under which “the plant ‘man’” will grow to its greatest heights.

But notice that, even in this passage, what is called for is not a political transformation, but an individual one, that of the nascent higher human being: it is thesis “his situation” that “must first grow to the point of enormity” and it is “ his power of life there is no without pain, invention and spring thesis, simulation” that “had to develop under prolonged pressure and full essays, constraint into refinement and audacity.” As he writes in a Nachlass note of thesis, 1887, regarding those “human beings who are of any concern to me”: “I wish [them] suffering, desolation, sickness, ill-treatment, indignities I wish that they should not remain unfamiliar with profound self-contempt, the torture of self-mistrust, the wretchedness of the vanquished” (WP 910). This is not the outline of full essays, a political program, but rather a severe regimen for the realization of individual potential at least for thesis the select few. A. Nietzsche's Writings and a speech about myself, Key to Citations. For untranslated material and emendations to existing translations, I have relied on Friedrich Nietzsche, Sämtliche Werke: Kritische Studienausgabe in 15 Bänden , ed. Binder Thesis? G. Colli M. Montinari (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1980); this is cited as KSA, followed by the volume number, a colon, and the fragment number(s). Nietzsche's works are cited as follows, unless otherwise noted: roman numerals refer to on in life there gain major parts or chapters in Nietzsche's works; Arabic numerals refer to sections, not pages. The Antichrist , in The Portable Nietzsche (below). Cited as A. Beyond Good and Evil , trans. W. Kaufmann, New York: Vintage, 1966.

Cited as BGE. The Birth of Tragedy , trans. W. Kaufmann, New York: Vintage, 1966. Cited as BT. The Case of Wagner , trans. W. Kaufmann, New York: Vintage, 1966. Spring Binder? Cited as CW. Full Essays? Daybreak: Thoughts on the Prejudices of spring binder thesis, Morality , trans. R.J.

Hollingdale, ed. Essay On In Life There Gain Without Pain? M. Spring? Clark B. Leiter, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Cited as D. Ecce Homo , trans. W. Kaufmann, New York: Vintage, 1967. Writing Clanchy Ballard? Cited as EH. Spring? The Gay Science , trans. W. For Students Ballard? Kaufmann, New York: Vintage, 1974. Cited as GS. On the Genealogy of binder thesis, Morality , trans.

M. Clark A. Swensen, Indianapolis: Hackett, 1998. Cited as GM. Human, All-too-Human , trans. R.J. Writing? Hollingdale, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Cited as HAH. Nietzsche contra Wagner , in The Portable Nietzsche (below). Cited as NCW.

Philosophy in binder the Tragic Age of the Greeks , trans. M. Help Writing A Speech? Cowan, Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway, 1962. Spring Thesis? Cited as PTAG. Full Essays? Philosophy and Truth: Selections from Nietzsche's Notebooks of the Early 1870's , ed. Spring Binder? trans. Full Essays? D. Spring Binder Thesis? Breazeale, Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1979.

Cited as PT, by page number. The Portable Nietzsche , ed. trans. W. Bullying Essays? Kaufmann, New York: Viking, 1954. Cited as PN, by page number. Thus Spoke Zarathustra , in binder thesis The Portable Nietzsche (above). Help? Cited as Z. Twilight of the Idols , in The Portable Nietzsche (above). Cited as TI. Untimely Meditations , trans. R.J. Hollingdale, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Cited as U. The Will to Power , trans.

W. Binder? Kaufmann R.J. Writing Myself? Hollingdale, New York: Vintage, 1968. Cited as WP. B. Binder Thesis? References and Works on Nietzsche's Moral and help a speech myself, Political Philosophy. Brobjer, Thomas, 1998. Spring Binder Thesis? “The Absence of Political Ideals in there is no gain without Nietzsche's Writings: The Case of the Laws of Manu and the Associated Caste-Society,” Nietzsche-Studien , 27: 300318. Clark, Maudemarie, 1990. Nietzsche on Truth and binder thesis, Philosophy , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. , 1994. Full Essays? “Nietzsche's Immoralism and spring binder, the Concept of Morality,” in Schacht (1994). , 2001. “On the Rejection of Morality: Bernard Williams's Debt to Nietzsche,” in Schacht (2001). Clark, Maudemarie and Brian Leiter, 1997. “Introduction” to Nietzsche's Daybreak , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Detwiler, Bruce, 1990. Nietzsche and the Politics of Aristocratic Radicalism , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Foot, Philippa, 1973. “Nietzsche: The Revaluation of essay clanchy, Values,” reprinted in Richardson Leiter (2001). Gemes, Ken, and John Richardson (eds.), 2013. The Oxford Handbook of Nietzsche , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Geuss, Raymond, 1997. “Nietzsche and Morality,” European Journal of Philosophy , 5: 120. Hollingdale, R.J., 1985.

Nietzsche: The Man and thesis, His Philosophy , London: Ark Paperbacks. Rutgers Question 2014? Hunt, Lester, 1985. “Politics and Anti-Politics: Nietzsche's View of the State,” History of Philosophy Quarterly , 2: 453468. , 1991. Nietzsche and the Origin of Virtue , London: Routledge. , 1993. “The Eternal Recurrence and spring binder, Nietzsche's Ethic of Virtue,” International Studies in Philosophy , 25 (2): 311. Hurka, Thomas, 1993. Perfectionism , Oxford: Oxford University Press. , 2007. “Nietzsche: Perfectionist,” in Leiter Sinhababu (2007). Hussain, Nadeem, 2007. “Honest Illusions: Valuing for Nietzsche's Free Spirits,” in Leiter Sinhababu (2007). , 2013. “Nietzsche's Metaethical Stance”, in Gemes and Richardson (2013). Janaway, Christopher, 2007. Beyond Selflessness: Reading Nietzsche's Genealogy , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Katsafanas, Paul, 2005. “Nietzsche's Theory of Mind: Consciousness and Conceptualization,” European Journal of Philosophy , 13: 131. , 2013. Essay For Students Clanchy? “Nietzsche's Philosophical Psychology,”, in Gemes and Richardson (2013).

Leiter, Brian, 1994. “Perspectivism in Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals ,” in Schacht (1994). , 1997. Binder? “Nietzsche and the Morality Critics,” Ethics , 107: 250285. Reprinted in Richardson Leiter (2001). , 1998. “On the writing Paradox of Fatalism and Self-Creation in spring Nietzsche,” in C. Janaway (ed.), Willing and Nothingness: Schopenhauer as Nietzsche's Educator , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reprinted in essay on in life is no without Richardson Leiter (2001). , 2000. “Nietzsche's Metaethics: Against the Privilege Readings,” European Journal of Philosophy , 8: 277297. , 2002. Nietzsche on Morality , London: Routledge. , 2007. “Nietzsche's Theory of the Will,” Philosophers' Imprint , 7 (7): 115. , 2009. “Review of Shaw (2007)”, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews , 2009.01.21 [Available online]. , 2013. “Nietzsche's Naturalism Reconsidered,” in Gemes and Richardson (2013). Spring? , 2015. Nietzsche on Morality , 2nd edition, London: Routledge. Leiter, Brian and Neil Sinhababu (eds.), 2007. Nietzsche and Morality , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Magnus, Bernd, 1978. Nietzsche's Existential Imperative , Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

May, Simon, 1999. Nietzsche's Ethics and his “War on Morality” , Oxford: Clarendon Press. Montinari, Mazzino, 1982. A Speech About Myself? Nietzsche Lesen , Berlin: de Gruyter. Nehamas, Alexander, 1985. Nietzsche: Life as Literature , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, esp. Chs. Spring Binder Thesis? 57. Nussbaum, Martha, 1997. Writing &? “Is Nietzsche a Political Thinker?” International Journal of Philosophical Studies , 5: 113. Reginster, Bernard, 2006.

The Affirmation of Life: Nietzsche on Overcoming Nihilism , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Riccardi, Mattia, 2015a. “Nietzsche on the Superficiality of Consciousness”,in M. Dries (ed.), Nietzsche on Consciousness and the Embodied Mind , Berlin, de Gruyter. , 2015b. “Inner Opacity: Nietzsche on Introspection and Agency”, Inquiry , 58: 221243. Richardson, John, 1996. Nietzsche's System , Oxford: Oxford University Press, esp. Ch 3. Richardson, John, and Brian Leiter (eds.), 2001. Nietzsche , Oxford: Oxford University Press. Schacht, Richard, 1983. Nietzsche , London: Routledge, esp. Chs. IV-VII. (ed.), 1994.

Nietzsche, Genealogy, Morality , Berkeley: University of California Press. (ed.), 2001. Nietzsche's Postmoralism , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shaw, Tamsin, 2007. Nietzsche's Political Skepticism , Princeton: Princeton University Press. Solomon, Robert C., 2001. “Nietzsche's Virtues: A Personal Inquiry,” in Schacht (2001). Spring? Wilcox, John, 1974. Essay On In There Is No Without Pain? Truth and Value in Nietzsche: A Study of spring binder, His Metaethics and Epistemology , Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Williams, Bernard, 1993. “Nietzsche's Minimalist Moral Psychology,” European Journal of Philosophy , 1: 414. Reprinted in Schacht (1994). Nietzsche Chronicle, maintained by essay life there pain Malcolm Brown, Dartmouth College Brian Leiter's Nietzsche Blog Journal of Nietzsche Studies. The Encyclopedia Now Needs Your Support. Please Read How You Can Help Keep the spring binder thesis Encyclopedia Free. View this site from another server:

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is for students clanchy ballard copyright 2016 by The Metaphysics Research Lab, Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI), Stanford University.

Order Paper Writing Help 24/7 -
Putting your Dissertation in a Black Snap Binder - YouTube

Write a resume that will land you a programming job. Justin James lays out what he sees on a developer's resume that makes him say wow!. and what makes him say ugh! I usually read 5 - 20 resumes each week. Both my boss and I are extremely busy, so it's important that a programmer's resume grab our attention quickly by thesis providing the right mix of necessary information with something that makes that person stand out from the pack. I've been involved with our hiring process for more than six months, so I feel fairly confident that I can distill what it takes for a programming resume to get me to say, Let's arrange an interview.

Here are my tips for writing and organizing a pitch perfect programming resume. Keep in help writing a speech myself mind: I am not every hiring manager; also, all resumes go through our recruiters and HR department first. Moreover, regular readers know that some of my ideas fall a touch outside the spring binder thesis norm when it comes to what makes a good developer. Reading the in-depth details of how you used mainstream skill XYZ to accomplish typical task ABC is not at the top of writing on teamwork, my agenda. Spring? I want to see your skills up front, so I don't need to rutgers essay 2014 go trolling through your resume to see if you meet my minimum needs. Skip the summary and maybe even the objective. Those summaries are a waste of my time. It is going to say something like seasoned IT pro with great communication skills or proven veteran with 10 years of thesis, programming experience. How do I know this? Because they all say this.

Skip it, please. The objective is full essays, a slightly different story; it is useful only if it informs the interviewer about something that the skills and experience does not. The objective's relevance to spring binder thesis me is essay on in there is no gain without pain, largely a function of spring, whether you wish to keep doing what you have been doing. Bullying Essays Thesis? If I see you have been programming — particularly at the data access layer and the business object layer — and there is no objective, I am going to assume that you are looking for binder thesis more of the same with a different employer or location. Full Essays? If you want to spring binder do more of that work and on teamwork put an objective, you are wasting space. Binder? If you are looking for essay 2014 a change of pace — like getting more into the presentation layer or heading towards a management track — it's important to state that in your resume. Spring Binder Thesis? Otherwise, we may discover during the full essays interview that you are not interested in what we have to offer. Some IT hiring managers put a huge emphasis on certain educations but I do not. I always want you to list your school and binder thesis your major, but I will only ask you about your education if there is something unusual or intriguing.

For instance, a candidate with a Computer Science degree from MIT or with a PhD in Organic Chemistry will draw my eye because these degrees show a level of high intelligence. Life There Is No Pain? On the flipside, an AA in basket weaving or a lack of a degree will not count against you. In most cases, I am not even curious about your education until I have already made up my mind. Binder Thesis? This includes certifications — MCSEs and essay there is no gain without CCNAs do not impress me that much at this point. They matter to spring binder some folks, and they do not hurt you in my opinion, but I will only take that certification into full essays, account if all else is equal. Even if my project is a run-of-the-mill Web-based, data driven application (which it is binder thesis, not), I still want to see that you are more than someone with 10 years of experience writing run-of-the-mill Web-based, data driven applications.

For example, compare these two items: East Coast Power - Programmer 1999 - 2005. Wrote VB applications to control machinery. The hardware interface was handled in essay writing for students a COM library that was written by another team. Application was robust and reliable. Wrote Web-based tool to track system faults. Created Web service to thesis allow partners to consume portions of the essays thesis database. East Coast Power - Programmer 1999 - 2005. Wrote VB applications to control nuclear reactor. Binder? Real-time control and monitoring of systems handling 10,000 unique data inputs per second.

Wrote advanced algorithms in help about C# to spring thesis detect imminent system failure, which were used within a Web-based application. Created Web service in C# to allow partners to on teamwork access data in a secure, reliable, and responsive manner; typical data set was 1,000,000 rows and concurrency challenges needed to be overcome at the database and application layers. See the difference? Control machinery does not help me much — you could have been working on the elevator system for all I know. Programming a nuclear reactor impresses me, especially since there has not been any nuclear reactor disasters during your employment. Binder Thesis? Writing advanced algorithms in C# touches my engineer's heart; whereas writing a mere Web-based tool is ho hum. Essays? And, while writing a Web service is binder thesis, fairly simple, particularly in ASP.Net, it's not so easy to write one that is secure, reliable, and responsive with that size of a data set. Clanchy &? It's also not easy to deal with concurrency issues at two different levels. I am not saying that it needs to be wordy or full of minute details, but if you are doing work beyond what a summer intern could do, I need to know about it.

Every developer has written a Web-based, data driven application. Binder? Show me more. Make sure that your experience highlights your skills. I don't expect your employment history to essay gain without include a list of binder, all your skills. For Students Clanchy Ballard? But if you are looking for work as a .Net developer, show me that you have done some .Net work.

If you do not list that experience, I am going to assume that you have little or no experience with it — even if it is on your skill list. If you have large amounts of experience outside of the workforce, find a way to spring show that on your resume. Keep your resume between two to four pages long. I have struggled through seven-page resumes filled with jargon and boring details that made me want to cry. An overly long resume doesn't necessarily make me rule out a candidate, but why make it hard on help a speech about, me? On the other hand, a resume that tries to stick to the one page rule is not going to cut it for a technical person unless they are new to the field. In my experience, two to four pages is just right. Also, please use some whitespace, so I do not feel like I am drowning. While technical pros' resumes do not need to be pretty, formatting can make a huge difference in spring binder a resume's readability. If you cannot put three pages of text in front of rutgers, me in a readable form, do I really want you touching the UI or writing code that someone else might have to maintain? I recommend that you stick to a larger font size (e.g., 10 - 12 pt.) in a font that reads well onscreen and in spring print (e.g., Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Helvetica).

If you want a slightly fancier font, use it only for section headers. Also, do not mix Serif and writing for students ballard Sans Serif fonts — that is just ugly. Do not use Comic Sans anywhere, especially in hot pink or baby blue (and yes, unfortunately, this needs to be stated). Keep your margins and space between paragraphs large enough to provide the reader some breathing room. I give applicants some slack on binder, employment history. Essay 2014? For instance, five year stints are fairly rare in thesis IT, and I give anyone a lot of leeway if their history includes anything that occurred during the dot com boom/bust. If you are (or were) a contractor or consultant, make sure that is clearly stated; otherwise, I will think that you get fired and/or quit every 3 - 12 months. If you were not a contractor or a consultant, and it looks like you have a hard time staying at a job, I am going to help about myself be very cautious. Binder Thesis? If I see an increasing progression of job titles, mercenary pops into my head. Also, if I see that they are lateral (or worse, negative) moves, bad apple is my first thought.

Of course, sometimes you get hit with a string of writing ballard, employers that go under or get acquired — it happens to the best of us. If that is the case, find a way to binder convey that information so I don't think you are unemployable. It is critical that the writing an essay spelling and grammar in your resume is flawless. I have seen applicants misspell the spring thesis name of their state and the name of their school. Rutgers Essay? If grammar and spelling are not your forte, ask someone to look over your resume for you. While I understand that many IT pros are not native English language speakers (or are English language speakers who paid little attention to those subjects in school), you should still ask someone for help. Binder? In fact, knowing when to rutgers essay question ask for help is a hallmark of the best developers.

If I interview you and realize from thesis, your speech that you had the sense and humility to on in gain pain ask someone for help on your resume, I am going to binder be truly impressed. (For examples of what not to do, check out this list of real-life resume blunders.) Stay out of EEO (Equal Employment Opportunity) territory. In the United States, companies with more than 10 employees need to follow EEO rules. These rules state that an employer cannot discriminate against or show preference for an employee based on certain group membership items or personal lifestyle issues, such as gender, age, ethnicity, nation of writing, origin, religion, sexual orientation, and spring binder so on. Writing? So, do me a favor and try to not expose any EEO-related information to me on the resume. In a face-to-face interview or even a phone interview, some of it will be unavoidable.

But I will never solicit that information. Not only spring binder, do I want to keep my employer and myself out of essay &, trouble, but I personally feel that EEO is important. I can understand that many names (or even college attended) are strongly correlated with ethnicity, religion, or nation (or at least general geographic region) of origin, and college graduation or attendance dates give some age clues. Minimize this as much as possible. Please do not tell me about your church, your family situation, your home life, your parents, and so on. It is not that I am not interested — I would probably love to learn these things about thesis, you if we hire you — but I do not need or want to know them before that you come on rutgers question, board. Outside interests, hobbies, achievements, and activities. I like to spring see these, but only if they are relevant. I really do not need to know about how big of a fan you are of the New York Knicks; but if you wrote a piece of software that can do something nifty with the team's statistics for fun, I would love to know about essays thesis, it. Thesis? People who contribute to open source projects get a huge gold star in my book, but only if I feel like they would be comfortable working on proprietary software with proprietary tools, and not bringing anything GPL'ed into question, my codebase. That is a small caveat there.

Contributed to spring thesis project XYZ in the areas of ABC and DEF is enough to full essays whet my appetite. Show me some outside learning too — don't let me think that you get home at 6;00 and shut off your brain. If this work is not interesting enough for you to read about or experiment with on spring binder, your own time, why would I think that you will be engaged or even interested in the job we would hire you for? Please give me something meaty that we can discuss during the interview. So, where it is relevant, try to for students show me how much of spring thesis, a nerd you are. For instance, try to mention the hovercraft you made from an there gain inner tube and a lawn mower engine. Make note of the iterative, evolutionary game theory system you coded in Lisp that proves that Nash's equilibrium is dead wrong.

Tell me something about your three chess championship victories. I do not want to know that you memorized UHF or that you have a pocket protectors collection that have logos of now defunct minicomputer vendors. I know most of thesis, this falls under the previous section, but it is relevant. Full Essays? I love to binder work with programmers who love technology and essays thesis logic and thesis using their brains. People like that are simply better programmers. Why would I want to hire someone who is intellectually lazy for an intellectually challenging job? Obscure or nonmainstream technologies. I am not hiring Lisp, Prolog, Erlang, APL, Scheme, Clipper, PowerBuilder, Delphi, Pascal, Perl, Ruby, Python (forgive me for including those four in bullying essays this list), Fortran, Ada, Algol, PL/1, OCaml, F#, Spec#, Smalltalk, Logo, StarLogo, Haskell, ML, D, Cobra, B, or even COBOL (which is fairly mainstream) developers. If you show these on your resume, I will want to spring binder interview you just for the sake of slipping in a few questions about these items.

I am serious. A Speech Myself? As part of spring thesis, my secret geekiness, I am really into obscure and almost obscure languages and full essays technologies. Spring? I know that a lot of those items take better-than-industry-average intellect and writing experience to binder do; they also provide a set of an essay on teamwork, experiences that gives their practitioners a great angle on problems. While you will never directly use those skills in my shop, you will be using those ways of thesis, thinking, and it will give us something to rutgers essay talk about on your first day. ( Aside: A coworker was shocked to learn that I played Half Life.

He said, You are such a ‘business person' — I never thought you played video games. I guess I'm camouflaging my secret geekiness too well!) I've given away crown jewels here. In my perspective, these tips will help any programmer write a perfect resume and get them an interview. What do you think gets applicants an interview? If you read resumes as either a hiring manager, a recruiter, or an HR employee, what makes you say wow! or ugh! when you see it on paper? Justin James is the Lead Architect for Conigent. Justin James is the spring binder Lead Architect for Conigent. We deliver the top business tech news stories about the companies, the people, and the products revolutionizing the planet.

Our editors highlight the TechRepublic articles, galleries, and videos that you absolutely cannot miss to stay current on the latest IT news, innovations, and an essay tips.

Write My Essays Today -
Putting your Dissertation in a Black Snap Binder - YouTube

7 Tips for Writing a Killer Executive Resume. Having reviewed and written thousands of resumes over thesis the years, first as a recruiter and now as a professional brand builder, I’ve noticed a significant gap between what most management resumes include, and what recruiters and help a speech about myself, hiring managers actually want to see. I’ve spent years working to spring binder thesis, close this gap, perfecting the modern resume by leveraging recruitment, branding, and essay on in life there is no without pain, marketing principles to raise the bar and enable my clients to spring, win in the rapidly changing modern job search market. With competition for top posts higher than ever, your goal in writing preparing your resume is to communicate a clearly defined brand promise, which leaves no doubt about the value you bring to thesis, the table. Essay Life Is No? If you’re a management professional, here are 7 resume tips which will set you apart from spring thesis your competition. We’ve all met those people everyone wants to bullying thesis, see succeed. Your resume’s job is to cement your position as that person, ensuring the recruiter, hiring manager, and everyone else is rooting for your success. Think of your resume as your own diplomatic envoy, going forth into unknown organisations to lay the spring groundwork before your official visit. While your resume has to bullying essays, communicate the spring binder thesis skills and writing, competencies required for the job, it has an even bigger job which most candidates never consider: building a team of champions, and getting recruiters and binder, hiring managers on­side to support your candidacy above all others.

The key to doing this is being likeable, and while it takes time and practice to master the art of putting personality to paper, the best place to start is on teamwork with a Professional Summary section. Forget the “objectives” section from decades past, and tell me a story about who you are, what you do, and what makes you different. Write in the first person, using “I” language to spring, make it relatable, and mix up the content with information about your story, relevant keywords, and your professional approach and leadership style. Think of all the ways you’re communicating your personal brand on a daily basis: sending your resume and cover letter for a job; sharing your thoughts and experience via social media or blogs; networking at a conference; just chatting with other parents at your son or daughter’s swim class. Now imagine how powerful it would be if you always said the same thing. On Teamwork? Even better: what if others – your colleagues, clients, and recruiters – started describing you in the same way? There’s not as much pressure on early career professionals to binder thesis, know their key value because it’s understood that they may still be discovering it. Management professionals, however, need to be able to communicate what makes them different. This is where key messaging comes in.

Skilful use of rutgers 2014, key messages is thesis one of the most effective ways to launch you from candidate to thought leader, but it takes time and a concerted effort. If you’re just starting to build your professional brand, take the time to define your key messages before you write your resume, using the essay & following questions to guide you: What drives you? What makes you different from other candidates or leaders in spring thesis your industry? What’s your professional mantra? What are the underlying themes supporting your success? Once you have a clear understanding of the value you add, communicate it throughout your resume and full essays, the other platforms that support your professional brand: cover letters, LinkedIn, social media posts, websites, and elevator pitches. Most of the thousands of spring binder, resumes I’ve reviewed over my career have taken a full meal deal approach to communicating experience, with details about day-­to­-day duties taking up most of the page. This approach works for help myself, early and spring thesis, mid­career professionals who are expected to execute as part of their job. For management professionals, however, it distracts from what recruiters really want to know: role mandate, strategic priorities, and scope, as well as how you met your targets, contributed to organisational objectives, and applied strong commercial acumen to full essays, add value. Replacing the full meal deal with a taster approach is much more effective – think four or five bullet points for duties, and four or five relevant accomplishments. Spring Thesis? This delivers a powerful, undiluted message showcasing your skills, experience, and ability to help, meet key performance indicators.

It’s also much harder to thesis, execute. When every word matters, use the full essays first bullet point to describe the role mandate and strategic objectives, followed by several bullets that communicate role scope and remit, such as size of team and department, PL or budget accountability, and reporting and binder, business partnering relationships. Whereas some recruiters specialise by industry or function, many are generalists ­ particularly at the management and executive level. A common complaint among candidates is that recruiters don’t have enough specialised knowledge about the writing about role or industry, and to a large extent this is spring binder a fair observation. Help Writing A Speech About? Like journalists, non-­specialist recruiters focus on building a knowledge base that’s an inch deep and spring, a mile wide. In other words, they know just enough about a lot of different industries and functions. For professionals at all career levels, it’s wise to full essays, stick to thesis, common business language rather than specialist jargon or acronyms.

Don’t assume the recruiter will know you have particular skills, competencies, or knowledge simply by seeing your job titles and education. And don’t assume they’ll know what it is, even if you list a technology or process name. For management professionals, it’s important to writing, keep the main body of the resume at that 30,000­foot level, focusing on role mandate, strategic priorities, and binder thesis, scope. Add technical information – where jargon and full essays, specialist terminology typically shows up – in a summary the end. Take it one step further by listing skills in spring a functional group, such as programming languages or project management methodologies. This way, you communicate your qualifications without forcing the question 2014 recruiter to do extra research, which may be a deciding factor in whether your resume moves forward. Thesis? There’s a fine line between including the bullying essays SEO­-friendly keywords you expect the recruiter to binder, look for, and using hackneyed terms that are so overused, they’ve lost all meaning. Resumes are notorious for being laden with cliches, and management professionals who operate at a high­-level are often the worst offenders for relying upon stale, high­-level terms like “driving success.” When every word matters, you need to replace non-­specific cliches with specific details, facts and figures, and examples. Rutgers Essay 2014? The best rule I’ve come up with is to apply this classic piece of writing advice: show, rather than tell. In practice, this means expanding on phrases such as “worked to achieve positive commercial outcomes” by explaining what working and positive outcomes really meant in that context, as in this example: “Allocated human, financial, and manufacturing assets to increase factory output and profitability, enabling the business to meet sales demand, improve customer satisfaction, and capture increased market share from key competitors.” Be as specific as possible, and spring binder thesis, after you’ve completed your first draft, go back through each and every bullet point, asking yourself, “Did I really define what that means?” The world’s best brands know that design, presentation, and experience matter as much as the product itself.

While content is king, when it comes to your resume, the formatting, details, and overall experience often make up the “queen” ­ and we all know that she often rules the household. Help A Speech About Myself? Consider this: I once had a candidate fax his resume to me. In 2013. Thesis? For a tech role. His candidacy didn’t move forward, largely because his delivery was so out of touch with what the client needed: an is no gain pain early adopter comfortable with the latest technology. In my experience, many management professionals are playing by the same rules that governed the hiring process during their early career years.

Practices that were expected 15 years ago no longer apply, and can actually hurt your candidacy by making you look old fashioned, or open you up to silent age discrimination. Don’t send a physical resume, unless it’s specifically requested. Remember that old gem of binder thesis, advice to print your resume on full essays heavy, cream paper and thesis, drop it off in person? It’s long dead. Most recruiters need an electronic version, which allows them to search for essay life is no pain, key words and share with their team and client.

Don’t bother with a residential phone number, unless you’re actually home during business hours when a recruiter might call. List your mobile number, and change your message to spring binder thesis, indicate it’s a personal and on in without, confidential voicemail box so the recruiter can confidently leave a detailed message without worrying about prying ears. Choose your email address carefully. Most recruiters won’t care if you use your current work email, but it’s quite possible your future employer will. Skip straight past options like Gmail and invest in binder a personal domain name and help writing, email address, like ian@ianthompson.com, which immediately increases your credibility as a modern, tech­ savvy manager. Cull your technology skills to include relevant, current software only, forgoing a laundry list of every technology you’ve ever used. Think long and hard before listing “Microsoft Office” as a skill, as it is a given that you know how to use word processing software. The exception is Microsoft Excel: if you have advanced Excel skills that allow you to manipulate and analyse large data sets, it’s worth listing. Use a modern font and design, staying far, far away from Microsoft Word templates. If you’re not confident with basic design principles, hire a designer, or better yet engage a personal branding agency to binder, lead you through the end­-to-­end process.

The days of being good enough are long gone. Things that used to make management professionals stand out, like an MBA, professional designation, or experience in top tier organisations, often form the bare minimum today. Conducting comprehensive internet searches for senior candidates is now standard practice, with recruiters looking for anything that detracts from an essay on teamwork or reaffirms what you said in your resume. If you don’t know what recruiters will find, it’s time to start paying attention. A well ­executed personal brand strategy is your greatest opportunity to influence recruitment outcomes in spring thesis 2015. Bullying Essays? Imagine how powerful it would be if a recruiter received your resume and Googled you, only to binder thesis, find: a personal, professionally ­designed website, with engaging copy that tells your story, and a blog that positions you as a thought leader; news results with trade and popular media mentions, both as an expert to journalists and full essays, a guest author in binder thesis key publications; a robust social media presence that gives insight into who you are and what you do, positioning you in a way that aligns with the cultures of bullying thesis, your target organisations; professional portraits that portray you as an approachable and competent leader. Fair or not, the candidates who have the spring thesis most success in job search are the ones who are the there is no gain best at marketing themselves. While your resume is thesis a critical tool in writing the job search toolbox, it’s only one of many tools you should be using to communicate your value as a management professional. Spring Thesis? Author: Irene McConnell runs Arielle Careers, Australia’s #1 executive personal branding agency. They specialize in crafting executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles and digital career assets. This post is bullying essays written by a guest author.

If you are interested our sponsored content options, check out the the Advertising Page - we look forward to hearing from you!

Write My Essay : 100% Original Content -
SPRING THESIS 1" BINDER 11"x8 5" BLACK | Thesis Binders

essay on spring binder bulleh shah ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ????, ???? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ? ???? ??? ?????? ????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??, ???? ???? ??? ????? ? ??? ????? ?? ??? ?????, ???? ???? ????? ? ??? ????? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??? ????? ?? ???? ? ????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ????-??? ?? ???? ? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ? ???? ? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ???, ???? ???? ???? ??????? ? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ?????, ??? ??? ??? ????? ? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ????, ???? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ? ?? ????? ???? ????, ??? ?? ??? ???? ?? ? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????, ???? ??? ????? ?? ? ???? ???? ??? ??????, ??????? ??????? ?? ? ???? ????? ???? ???, ????? ??? ??? ????? ?? ? ???? ????? ???? ???, ???? ??? ?? ???? ?? ? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ??? ???, ?????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ? ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???? ? ??? ????? ???? ???? ????, ????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ??????, ??? ????? ??? ?? ???, ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ? ?? ??? ???? ???? ????, ??? ?????? ?? ???? ???, ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???? ? ? ??? ?? ??? ?????, ???? ???? ???? ? ? ??????? ?????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ??? ???? ? ? '???-?-????' ??? ????, ???? ?? ?????? ? ? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????, ?? ????? ?????? ? ? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ?????? ? ? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ???, ??? ??????? ?????? ? ? ?? ??? ?? ???? ????, ???? ??? ????? ? ? ???? ??????? ??? ???? ??, ????? ????? ?????? ? ? ???-?-????? ???? ????, ?? ???-??? ????? ? ? ??-????? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ? ? ??? ?????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ????? ? ? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ? ??, ??? ????? ???? ? ? ? ??? ?? ??? ?????, ???? ???? ???? ? ? 5. Essay Question 2014. ?? ?? ???? ???, ????? ??? ?? ????. ?? ?? ???? ???, ????? ??? ?? ???? ? ???? ?? ??? ??? ???? ???, ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ? ???? ???? ????? ?? ???, ??? ??? ?????? ? ??????? ??? ?? ????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ??? ? ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ??, ??? ?????? ?? ?? ?????, ?? ???? ???? ????? ?? ; ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ??? ????? ??? ???????, ???? ?????? ????? ?????, ??? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ; ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ??? ????, ??? ????? ????? ?? ; ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??, ?? ?? ????? ?? ?? ???, ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ; ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ???? ??? ??? ???????, ??? ?? ??? ??? ????, ?? ?? ?? ?????? ?? ; ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ??? ?? ????? ?? ?? ????, ???? ?????? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? ???? ?? ; ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ?????? ???? ???? ????, ?? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ; ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ????? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??, ??? ?? ??? ????? ????, ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ; ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ? ?? ?? ???? ?? ?? ???? ? ???? ??? ???? ???? ????, ??? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??? ???? ???? ???? ? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???? ? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ????, ??? ???? ???? ????? ? ???? ????? ???? ????, ??? ??? ??? ???? ????, ???? ?? ??? ???? ????, ??? ???? ???? ????, ??? ?? ??? ??? ??, ???? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ? ??? ?????? ?? ?? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ? ???? ???? ??? ????? ?????, ??? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ? ???? ??? ????? ????, ??? ????? ????? ?? ? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???, ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ? ?? ??? ??? ??? ????, ??? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ? ????? ??? ????? ????, ??? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ? ????? ??? ??? ???? ??????, ????? ?? ?????? ? ? ??? ?????? ?????? ?. ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ? ????? ?? ?????? ?. ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ? ????? ????? ?????? ?. ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ? ???? ??? ????? ?. ????? ??? ??? ???? ??????, ??? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????, ????? '??' ?? ??? ?? ??? ? ????? ??? ?? ??? ???? ? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ?? ??? ??? ????? ?? ? ????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ??, ????? ?? ????? ? ???? ????? ???? ???????, ?? ?? ?? ???? ? ???? ???? ?????? ????, ???? ??? ?????? ????? ? ??? ??????? ????? ?????, ???? ???? ??? ? ??????? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ???? ???? ?? ??? ? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ?? ??? ??? ????? ?? ? 13. Spring Binder. ???? ??? ????? ?????, ???? ??? ?????. ???? ??? ????? ?????, ???? ??? ????? ? ?????? ????? ????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ???? ? ??? ???? ? ?? ???? ???? ? ???? ?? ?????? ? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????, ???? ??? ????? ? ???? ???? ?? ?????????? ???? ??? ????? ? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ? ??? ???? ?? ?? ?? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ? ?? ?? ????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ? ??????? ??? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ????? ?????? ? ???? ??? ????? ?????, ???? ??? ????? ? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ??? ? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ? ?? ?? ???? ????? ??? ????, ???? ???? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ? ????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?????? , ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ? ?? ??? ??? ? ???? ??? ??????, ??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ????? ???? ? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ? ???? (?????) ?????? ???? ??? ??? ????, ???? ??? ????? ??? ???????? ?? ???? ? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ? ????? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??????, ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?? ??? ? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ??? ???? ? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ? ???? ????? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?????, ?????? ????? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ?? ????? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????, ???? ????? ??? ???? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ????, ?? ?? ???? ?? ????? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ?????? ?? ???? ????? ?????, ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????, ?? ?????? ???? ???? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ????, ???? ?? ?? ??? ????? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ????? ???? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ??? ????? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??, ?? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?? ? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ??, ??? ??? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ? ??? ?????? ?? ?? ?????? ??, ??? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???? ??, ??? ??? ?? ????? ??? ?? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ? ???? ?? ?? ??????? ???? ???, ??? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ? ????? ????? ???? ???, ???? ???? ? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???, ???? ???? ? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???????,?? ??? ????? ????? ???, ???? ???? ? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???, ???? ???? ? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ??, ??? ??? ??? ?? ?????, ???? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ????? ??? ??????, ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ? ??? ??? ???? ??? ?????, ??? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ? ??????? ??? ?? ??? ????, ??? ???? ?? ??-?????, ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ? 19. Essays Thesis. ????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ????? ? ?? ????. ????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ????? ? ?? ???? ? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ? ?? ???? ? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ????? ? ?? ???? ? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?? ????? ? ?? ???? ? ????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????? ? ?? ???? ? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ? ?? ???? ? ?? ???? ??-?????? ?? ? ???? ???? ??? ???????, ?? ???? ???? ??????? ? ?????? ?? ????? ?????,???? ???? ??? ????? ?? ? ???? ??????? ??????, ??? ????? ??? ?????? ? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??????, ??? ?? ?? ??? ?????? ? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???,??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ? ?? ??? ???? ??? ??????, ?? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ?? ??? ????? ??? ??????, ?? ??? ???? ?? ???? ? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ??????, ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??? ? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????, ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??? ? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?????, ?? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?????, ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??? ? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ? ????? ??? ?? ??? ?????, ?????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ??? ? ?? ????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ???? ??? ? ??? ?? ????? ??? ???, ????? ??? ?????? ? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?????,?? ???? ???? ????? ? ??????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??, ???? ??? ?? ???? ? ?? ????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ???? ??? ? 23. Thesis. ??????? ??? ?????? ????, ????? ?? ???????. ??????? ??? ?????? ????, ????? ?? ??????? ? ??? ?? ???????? ???? ?????, ??? ?? ???? ????? ? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???, ??? ?? ????? ????? ? ????? ????? ???? ????, ???? ???? ?????? ? ?? ??? ????? ???? ???, ??????? ?????? ????? ? ???? ???? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?????????? ? ??????? ????? ?????? ?? ??, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??????, ???? ?? ?? ????? ? ??????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ??, ???? ?? ?????? ? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ???, ?????? ????????? ?? ??? ?? ? ???? ? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??? ????? ?, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ?? ?? ??? ? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ?, ???? '???? ????' ?????? ?, ???? ??? '???-????-???' ? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ???, ?? ????? ??? ?? ???? ???, ????? ?? ?? '???-????-??' ? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?, ????? ????? ????? ????? ?, ?????? ??? ?? ???? ????? ??, ??? ????? ?? ?????? ??, ?? '????????-???? ???????' ? ?????? ????????? ?? ??? ?? ? ???? ? ??? ????? ??? ?? ?????? ??, ??? ???? ??? ?? ????? ??, ??? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??, ??? ????? ??? ????? ??? ? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?, ???? ????? ????? ???? ??? ? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ?, ??? ?????? ??? ????? ??? ? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ? ??? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ???, ???? ????? ????? ???? ??? ? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ? ??? ??? ??? ????, ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ????, ??? ???? ??????, ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??, ????? ???? ?????, ??? ?? ?????? ???? ???, ??? ?? ??? ??? ?????, ??????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ???, ???? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ????? ????? ? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ???. ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ? ??????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??????, ?? ??????? ??????? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ???, ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ? ?? ? ???? ????? ???, ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ???, ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ? ?? ???? ???? ??? ????? ? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?? ??? ? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????, ???? ??? ????? ??? ????? ? ???? ??? ????? ?????, ??? ??? ????? ?? ???? ? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????, ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?????, ??? ????? ??? ???? ????? ? ?? ????? ?? ??? ???, ??????? ??? ?? ??? ????? ? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?? ??? ? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???, ??? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???? ? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ? ??? ??? ??? ???? ??? ???? ? ??? ?? ??? ????? ????? ? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??????? ? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????? ? ??? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???? ? 30. Essays. ????? ????-?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ???. ????? ????? ???? ??? ?? ????, ?? ?????? ?? ??? ? ??? ? ????? ????-?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ??? ? ???? ?? ???? ??? ? ??? ? ????? ????-?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ??? ? ???? ??? ??? ??? ? ??? ? ????? ????-?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ??? ? ?????? ????? ??? ? ??? ? ????? ????-?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ??? ? ??? ???? ??? ??? ? ??? ? ????? ????-?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ??? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ??? ????? ???? ??, ??? ??? ????? ?? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????, ???? ???? ???? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ???? ??? ???? ????, ????? ???? ???? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ????, ??????? ?? ??? ???? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ???? ??? ?? ??? ??????, ???? ??? ??? ?? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ????? ?? ?? ?? ????, ??? ??? ?? ?? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??????, ???? ????? ??? ???? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??????? ??? ?? ??? ???, ?? ??? ???? ????? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ?? ???? ??? ?????, ??? ??? ??? ???? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??, ?????? ?? ????? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ?, ??? ??? ??? ?? ??? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????, ?? ?? ??? ???? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ???? ???? ??? ?????, ??? ???? ??? ????? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ?? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ?????? ??? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ??? ????? ??????, ?? ????? ??? ????? ? ? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ? ???? ?? ?? ??? ?? ????, ????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??????, ?? ????? ??? ???? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????, ??? ???? ???? ????? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ? ?? ??? ???? ?? ???? ????, ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ? ??? ?? ??? ???? ????, ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ? ????? ????? ??? ?? ????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ? 33. Binder. ?? ??? ???? ?? ????, ?? ??? ???? ??. ?? ??? ???? ?? ????, ?? ??? ???? ?? ? ??? ????? ?? ????, ??? ??????? ? ?? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ????? ? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?????, ???? ??? ?????? ? ???? ????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ? ??????? ?? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ???? ??? ???? ? ?? ??? ???? ?? ????, ?? ??? ???? ?? ? 34. Essay 2014. ????? ???? ? ????, ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ???? ????? ?? ???? ????, ?????? ?? ?? ??? ?????, ??? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???, ?? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ? ????? ???? ? ????, ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ?? ? ???? ?? ?? ???? ??????, ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ? ????? ???? ? ????, ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ?? ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?????, ????? ?????? ?????? ?? ? ????? ???? ? ????, ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ?? ? ???? ????? ??? ?? ????, ??? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ? ????? ???? ? ????, ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ?? ? ????? ???? ?? ???? ???????, ??? ?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ?? ?? ??? ??? ??????, ??? ??? ????? ??????? ??? ? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????, ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ??? ? ???? ?? ??? ???? ???, ????? ??? ?? ????? ???, ??? ??? ?? ???? ???, ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ? ? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ? ? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??, ??? ??? ?? ????? ???? ? ? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ? ? ???? ????? ???? ?? ??????, ?? ????? ???? ???? ? ? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ? ? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??????, ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ? ? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ? ? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ?, ?? ???? ????? ???? ? ? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ? ? ????? ????? ??? ??????, ?? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ? ? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ? ? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?????, ???? ???? ???? ????, ???? ?? ??? ????? ????, ???? ???? ??? ?????, ????? ??? ??????? ????, 38. Spring. ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??, ??? ????? ????? ?? ????.

??? ???-?????? ?? ????, ????? ????? ???? ???????, ???? ??? ?? ?? ?? ?????, ??? ????? ?????, ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??, ??? ????? ????? ?? ???? ? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ?????, ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??, ??? ????? ????? ?? ???? ? ?????? ??? ???? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??, ??? ????? ????? ?? ???? ? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ?????, ???? ????? ????, ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??, ??? ????? ????? ?? ???? ? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??????, ???? ??? ???? ??? ????, ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??, ??? ????? ????? ?? ???? ? ?? ???? ?? ??? ??? ???????, ??? ????? ?? ????, ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??, ??? ????? ????? ?? ???? ? 39. An Essay On Teamwork. ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ?? ???? ???-??-??????, ???? ??? ????????, ?? ???? ?????? ?????, ??? ??? ????????, ??? ????? ?????? ?????, ??? ?? ??? ?????????, ?? ??? ??? ?? ????, ???? ?? ?????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ??? ?? ? ?? ???? ????? ???? ??? ?????????, ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ?? ???, ????? ?? ????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????, ??? ?????? ????? ?, ???? ??? ?? ???? ????, ????? ??? ?? ???????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ??-?????? ????? ?? ???, ??? ?? ???? ???? ??, ???? ??? ??????? ?????, ???? ??? ????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ???? ???? ???? ????, ????? ??? ????? ?, ???? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????, ???? ?? ?????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????, ??? ???? ???? ?, ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??, ???? ?? ?? ???????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ??? ????? ??, ??? ??? ?? ???? ?????, ???? ?? ?? ????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ????? ??? ???? ??? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?, ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ????, ????? ?? ?????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ????? ?????? ????? ???, ???? ?? ?????? ??, ?? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ??????, ?? ?? ?? ?????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ????-????? ????? ?????, ????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????, ??? ???? ???????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ??? ??? ???-??? ??? ????, ??? ?? ?? ???????, ?? ??? ???? ??? ??? ????, ???? ?? ???? ???????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ???????, ??? ??????? ????? ??? ????, ??????? ?????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ??? ??? ???? ??? ?????, ????? ?? ?????????, ????? ?? ?? ???? ??????, ?? ??? ?? ???????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ????, ???? ????? ??? ?, ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ???? ???? ?? ????, ??? ????? ???? ??? ?, ???????? ?? ??? ??? ?, ?? ?? ??? ?????????, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, ?? ?? ???? ???????? ? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ? ???? ??????? ?? ?????? ? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ? ????? ???? ???? ????? ? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ??????, ??? ?????? ??? ??????, ?? ????? ???? ?????-??????, ???? ??????? ??? ???????? ? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?? ????, ?????? ?????, ???? ??????? ??? ???????? ? ????????? ????? ?? ??? ????, ??? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ??????? ??? ???????? ? ???? ?? ?? ???? ?????, ??? ?????? ??????? ? ???? ??????? ??? ???????? ? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ????, ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ? ???? ??????? ??? ???????? ? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?? ????, ??? ??????-???? ????, ??????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??, ???-??-?? ???? ? ???? ??????? ??? ???????? ? ???? ?????? ?? ??????? ??, ???? ????? ??? ?????? ??, ???? ??? ????? ????? ??, ???? ???? ???? ?????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ??, ???? ??? ??? ?????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ???? ??? ??? ?? ????, ??? ????? ?? ???? ????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ?? ?? ???? ?? ??????, ??? ?????? ?? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???? ??, ?? ????? ??? ??? ??????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???, ??? ??? ??? ?????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?, ??? ??? ??? ???? ??? ?? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?????? ??, ??? ?? ?? ?? ??????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ?? ??? ?????? ???????, ???? ????? ??? ?? ????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ??? ??? ????? ??? ??, ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ??? ????? ??? ??????, ??? ???? ??? ??????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??, ??? ??? ????? ?????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??, ??? ???? ??? ???????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ???? ???? ??? ?????, ??? ????? ??? ???????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??, ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???? ? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ??, ?? ???? ?? ?? ???? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????? ??, ??? ?????-??? ???? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ??? ?? ?? ????? ???, ????? ?? ????? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ??? ?? ??? ??? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ???? ??? ???? ???? ??????, ??? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ?? ????? ?? ???? ????, ?? ??? ???? ?? ????? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? ??? ????? ??? ????, ??? ??????? ?? ????? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ? 44. Spring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