S Belser Essays - Libertarian Theory, John Locke, Empiricists

S Belser Human Nature and Self Government Thomas Hobbes and John Locke developed theories on human nature and how men govern themselves. Despite their differences, Hobbes and Locke, both became two of the most influential political theorists in the world. Their ideas and philosophies spread all over the world, influencing the creation of many new governments. These philosophers both recognize that people develop a social contract within their society, but have differing views on what exactly the social contract is and how it is established. Hobbes and Locke each developed differing versions of the social contract, but both agreed that certain freedoms had been surrendered for societys protection and that the government has definite responsibilities to its citizens. Both philosophers agree that before men came to govern themselves, they all existed in a state of nature. The state of nature is the condition men were in before political government came into existence, and what society would be if there was no government. Hobbes and Locke created a revolutionary idea of the state of nature. They did not believe government should be organized through the Church therefore abandoned the idea of divine right, where power of the King came directly from G-d. Starting from a clean slate, with no organized church, they needed a construct on which to build society. The foundation of society began with the original state of nature. Hobbess perception of the original state of nature is what would exist if there were no common power to execute and enforce the laws to restrain individuals. In this case, the laws of the jungle would prevail where only the strongest survive. Hobbes felt that everyone should live in peace, but you should protect yourself by all means necessary. Resources are scarce and humankind is naturally competitive. This inevitably created jealousy and hatred, eventually leading to war. This constant state of war is what Hobbes believes to be mans original state of nature. According to Hobbes, man cannot be trusted in the state of nature. Limits must be put on freedom and inalienable rights, when there is an excess of freedom and power it is easily and often abused. Hobbes lived in the 17th century, and wrote during the time of the English Civil War. I believe that his political views could have been influenced by the war. Hobbes perceived that by bringing back the monarch; there would be an end to the civil war. On the other hand, John Locke believes the original state of nature is a state of perfect freedom where men do whatever it is in their will and ability to accomplish. Every man has the liberty to arrange his life in the manner he chooses, however no man has the liberty to kill himself. Unlike Hobbes nature of constant war, Lockes state of nature is peaceful, based on the fact that men do not want to risk their lives by constantly fighting. All men desire the right to live and respect that everyone is after the same thing. Man, according to Locke, is governed by reason in the state of nature. Locke was influenced by the revolutionary upheaval in a different way than Hobbes. The war caused Locke to dislike violence and extremes. Stability was the central assumption of his thinking. Hobbes reasoning was derived from the assumption that man was naturally vicious or wicked, while Lockes era was more optimistic about mans nature and reasoning. Preservation of mankind is the law of nature established by Hobbes and Locke. In order to abide by this law, man enters into an agreement, forming the social contract. The social contract is a theory that views the foundation of morality being founded solely on uniform social agreements that serve the best interests of those who make the agreement. It is an agreement by which men are said to have abandoned the state of nature in order to form the society in which they now live. Hobbes believes that people surrender their natural rights and submit to the absolute authority of a sovereign, who attained power through the collective submission of the people. Even though the power of the sovereign is accumulated from the people, the sovereign has absolute power. Locke, however argued that agreement to

Prescribed Forest Fires and Controlled Burns

Prescribed Forest Fires and Controlled Burns The very foundation of fire ecology is based on the premise that wildland fire is neither innately destructive nor in the best interest of every forest. Fire in a forest has existed since the evolutionary beginning of forests. Fire causes change and change will have its own value with direct consequences that can be both bad or good. It is a certainty that some fire-dependent  forest biomes benefit more from wildland fire than others. So, change by fire is biologically necessary to maintain many healthy ecosystems in fire-loving plant communities and resource managers have learned to use fire to cause changes in plant and animal communities to meet their objectives. Varying fire timing, frequency, and intensity produce  differing resource responses that create the correct changes for habitat manipulation. A History of Fire Native Americans used fire in virgin pine stands to provide better access, improve hunting, and ridding the land of undesirable plants so they could farm. Early North American settlers observed this and continued the practice of using fire as a beneficial agent. Early 20th Century environmental awareness introduced the notion that the Nations forests not only were a valuable resource but also a place of personal revitalization - a place to visit and live. Forests were again satisfying a human desire long pent-up to return to the forest in peace and in the beginning so wildfire was not a desirable component and prevented. An encroaching modern wildland-urban interface developed on the edges of North American wildlands and millions of acres of new trees being planting to replace harvested timber called attention to the wildfire problem and led foresters to advocate the exclusion of all fire from the woods. This, in part, was due to the wood boom after WWII and the planting of millions of acres of susceptible trees that were vulnerable to fire in the first few years of establishment. But all that changed. The no burn practices of a few park and forestry agencies and some forest owners proved to be, in itself, destructive. Prescribed fire and understory fuel pile burning are now deemed necessary tools for controlling the damaging unbridled wildfire. Foresters found that destructive wildfires were prevented by burning under safer conditions with the necessary tools for control. A controlled burn that you understood and manage would reduce fuels that could feed potentially dangerous fires. Prescribed fire assured that the next fire season would not bring destructive, property-damaging fire. So, This exclusion of fire has not always been an acceptable option. This was dramatically learned in Yellowstone National Park after decades of excluding fire resulted in catastrophic property loss. As our fire knowledge has accumulated, the use of prescribed fire has grown and foresters now include fire as an appropriate tool in managing the forest for many reasons. Using Prescribed Fire Prescribed burning as a practice is well explained in a well-illustrated written report entitled A Guide for Prescribed Fire in Southern Forests. It is a guide to using fire applied in a knowledgeable manner to forest fuels on a specific land area under selected weather conditions to accomplish predetermined, well-defined management objectives. Although written for Southern forests, the concepts are universal to all of North Americas fire driven ecosystems. Few alternative treatments can compete with fire from the standpoint of effectiveness and cost. Chemicals are expensive and have associated environmental risks. Mechanical treatments have the same problems. Prescribed fire is much more affordable with much less risk to the habitat and destruction of site and soil quality - when done properly. Prescribed fire is a complex tool. Only a   state  certified fire prescriptionist  should be allowed to burn larger tracts of forest. Proper diagnosis and detailed written planning should be mandatory before every burn. Experts with hours of experience will have the right tools, have an understanding of fire weather, have communications with fire protection units and know when conditions are not just right. An incomplete assessment of any factor in a plan can lead to serious loss of property and life with serious liability questions to both the landowner and the one responsible for the burn.​

Solar power for the state of Nevada Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Solar power for the state of Nevada - Essay Example Interestingly, GIS offer a powerful way of establishing this through analysis of terrain as well as other geographical data. This project will attempt to establish the suitability of solar power for Nevada with the help of GIS. The hypothesis of this project will be "Solar energy is the most suitable option for fulfilling Nevada's power requirements" while the project will seek answer to the question "Is the use of solar energy the most suitable option for fulfilling Nevada's power requirements?†. This project will include use of ArcGIS software in modeling and analysis of geographical data. The project will also compare the suitability of solar energy with other renewable energy resources and how the use of solar option would transform Nevada. The research done is this project is expected to be useful for Nevada authorities in their attempt to seek the best alternative energy source.