How to Be a Successful Working Student Essay Example for Free

How to Be a Successful Working Student Essay How to Be a Successful Working Student To work while studying is something that will really stress you out if you don’t know how to manage your time and settle your priorities. Your life, your work, your relationships all seem to conspire to deny you the time needed to do the reading, the writing, and the classes needed to complete your course of study, or so it seems. However, it doesn’t mean that you have to punish yourself and neglect the enjoyment that is offered by student life. As for me, now that I have to balance my work and my studies, I follow some guiding principles so that as much as possible I would not sacrifice my performance in school and in my work. There are a lot of things to consider before I decide on how I will spend an hour, a minute, or a moment of my day but to manage time does not mean about getting more time, it is about using it more effectively. We can’t control time, but we can always settle what to do with it. Planning my day ahead and knowing what my limitations are, I try to follow a scheduled time so that I won’t be trapped in a situation that is already out of my control. And with other obligations, I know that I have less study time than those students who can spend full-time on study. So, I know that I have to maximize it. There are times here and there which I use to maximize my time. For example, reading a course material on the commute, during the meal break at work, while waiting for the class to start, or in other spare minutes. Since these pockets of times are short-spare time in between tasks, I make my reading materials in a handy format. Then, as much as possible, I try to connect with others. I know that I should not take it all by myself. A good way to combat stress and loneliness is to seek out the company of people whom you know you can have a good time and share your problems with. Those â€Å"pieces of gold†, or the positive and enjoyable moments could lift up my spirits and help me to begin to see things in a new and balanced way. And lastly, I learn to always see things positively. That is a rule of thumb, because if I allow myself to be consumed by negative thoughts, it will only leave me depressed and would not be able to cope up with what my schedule asks of me. To always ask GOD for guidance and acknowledging that I cannot do things by my own. I just always remind myself that I am a student who is working, not a worker who is studying. I always put my studies first before anything because I know that it is one thing that I can hold on in the long run. To work while studying is one opportunity that I know I should be thankful, so now that I am already in this situation and is handling more responsibility, I just see this as a chance to grow and become more of a better, mature person. Any working student may agree with me that it is really hard to balance school and work, so to those who are committing their time fully to their studies, do not envy us when we receive our salaries. Just be grateful because time cannot be bought. That’s one thing that I have learned since I started to become a working student.

Like Water for Chocolate Essay Example for Free

Like Water for Chocolate Essay Suggests that the soup has made her feel like a baby again given that while she is still in her mom’s belly she cries very hard when onions are chopped and it suggest the impact of food to Tita. After drinking the soup Tita has miraculously recovered from the loss of pigeons which she kept as pet and that triggered her sense of loosing Pedro and R erself to cook she fell in love with it and got a part time job as an assistant to a cooking teacher. Even though she has a lack of precision she was hired because she wasn’t afraid to fail and has a passion to cook unlike the others and getting hired made her feel confident, hence gaining control of life through cooking. The protagonist, Tita in Like Water for Chocolate gains control through cooking as well. Cooking is the only thing Tita love to do because Mama Elena bans her from doing a lot of things; the kitchen is the area where she can retreat from Mama Elena’s demands. When she cooked quail in rose petal sauce she controlled and triggered a lot of peoples emotion. Her sister Gertrudis was the first on affected by the dish, it aroused her sexual desire. She fled naked from her burning shower and when on a horse, galloping away with a soldier. Another incident where she gained control is the Chabela wedding cake she made for her lover Pedro and Rosaura. Even though she couldn’t stop the wedding, she made everyone cry. She made people cry for her tragic experience not only the guests cried, Mama Elena cried as well. She lost control of her life but through cooking she gain control of people’s emotions. In Like Water for Chocolate, food is not just a nutrition it acts as a very important nurturing role. The ox-tail soup Dr. John gave Tita has recalled the best moments of her life and brought back memories of her and Nacha making ox-tail soup together, chopping onions. It suggests that the soup has made her feel like a baby again given that while she is still in her mom’s belly she cries very hard when onions are chopped and it suggest the impact of food to Tita.

Segmentation Targeting and Positioning of Vodafone

Segmentation Targeting and Positioning of Vodafone Vodafone is one of the biggest names in wireless technology, and is continuing to grow a solid, loyal customer base because the company offers excellent product along with excellent customer service. Vodafone has a an interesting history, back to 1984, when it was still a subsidiary of the well-known Racal Electronics Plc. In September 1991, the Vodafone Group Plc decided to separate itself from Racal Electronics Plc, they later merged with another company, the Air Touch Communications Inc, in July 2000. In 2001, this wireless company first introduced instant messaging on their networks, to provide for a faster way to communicate among their users. The company also launched the first ever 3G service in Europe with their innovative mobile connect GPRS/3G data card in 2004. In February 2007, the company had another major milestone when it partnered with Yahoo and Microsoft in order to launch instant messaging services that can easily be accessed using either a personal computer or a mobile phone. This is one of the milestones that made it into the wireless giant it is today. The company continues to offer a variety of services, including data, messaging, voice and broadband. Its continuous advancement in the data services, they offer by developing its 3G networks and the capabilities of various handsets. Its a mobile service thats easy to use, with low-cost telephone line and even DSL broadband connection.It also provides you monthly billing cycle,pre-paid agreement or even a contract.And is known for its best customer services. BACKGROUND:-(INTERNATIONAL EXPANSION STRATEGIES). Vodafone Group Plc is the worlds leading International mobile telecommunications Group, with a major presence in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Asia Pacific and the United States through the Companys subsidiary undertakings, joint ventures, associated undertakings and investments. The basic concept of this case is to look at Vodafones future expansion, growth and global strategies within the concept of internationalization and competitive advantage issues.The reason to launch Vodafone in Mexican market is to gain profitibility,gaining high revenues by doing better business in more areas or internationally.Because if Vodafone will not be launched in Mexico some other mobile company will do the same.Being one of the worlds largest company its easy for Vodafone to enter the Mexican market and capture it. PESTEL ANALYSIS:- It is the technique of environmental scanning of any industry on the basis of factors like political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental. PESTLE analysis uses a framework of external factors for macro-environmental scanning of the industry to help in taking advantage of opportunities and making contingency plans for threats. SEGMENTATION, TARGETING AND POSITIONING:- It together comprise a three stage process; Segmentstion (identifying meaningfully different groups of customers) Targating (selecting which segment to serve) Positioning (implementing chosen image and appeal to chosen segment) it furthur includes product,price,distribution and promotion. SEGMENTATION:- Segmentation is the process of splitting (segmenting) the entire market into smaller groups. Demographics is the most common variable of market segmentation that includes age, gender, income, geographic, psychograhpic and behavioural.For launching a Vodafone in Mexican market, the product is for both the genders ,of evry area with variaing ages and incomes. Markets are made up of many distinct groups of people who have common characteristics as consumers. Some of those groups may not be immediately obvious. All of them command tremendous buying power. But they direct it to products and services that address them as a highly individual subdivision or segment of the market. Define those market segments right and you may even end up dominating the market. Because the more you know about a market segment: The better you can provide a product or service that attracts it. The better you can create marketing materials that appeal to it. The more cost-effectively you can direct them at the markets that respond the best. The easier it is to position your company and product and build brand loyalty. Its hard to successfully address a large, vague, undifferentiated market. Its easy to address a tightly focused, highly individualized group of people with clearly defined preferences and needs. Market segmentation isolates those groups, and makes them accessible. It helps your organization understand them and reach them and profit too. TARGETING:- In this step one or more segment is targeted.Generally depend on several factors. How well are existing segments served by other manufacturers? How large is the segment, and how can we expect it to grow? Do we have strengths as a company that will help us appeal particularly to one group of consumers? It will be more difficult to appeal to a segment that is already well served than to one whose needs are not currently being served well.Mexican market is already being served well but Vodafone being a giant can capture the market by providing equally better or more advanced services. POSITIONING:- Positioning basically involves implementing the targeting. Product (premium,basic) Price (premium,low price,value) Distribution (intensive,selective,exclusive) Promotion (prestige,fun,powerful) Being operationally excellent firm,by maintaing exceptional efficiency,the firm providing reliable service to the customer at a significantly lower cost. Vodafone can capture the market.Its customer intimate firm which excel in serving the specific needs of the individual customer quiet well. Technologically it is prodviding the most advanced products currently available. COMPETATOR ANALYSIS AND MARKET ENTRY STRATEGY:- Its a critical part of firms activities.Competitor analysis has several important roles in strategic planning; It helps management to understand their competitive advantages/disadvantages relative to competitors. It generate understanding of competitors past, present andfuture strategies. It gives an informed basis to develop strategies to achieve competitive advantage in the future. Also help forecast the returns that are made from future investments i.e how will competitors respond to a new product or pricing strategy? Entering a new market is always a challange.The size of the country, number of opportunities and geographical size matters precisely.Solid market entry strategy needs proper market research to know existing opportunities, understand the competitive landscape and to know about potential clients.A market entry strategy has to be developed that fits companies objectives, timelines and budget. A successful Market Entry Strategy includes, assessing the feasibility of the product in market, what are the industry trends, what potential competitors are doing and what pains clients are facing that can address. If the market research reveals a robust opportunity, then it is time to develop your market entry strategy with a trusted partner that can not only write the strategy, but also help you implement it, in market.

Rise of Hitler :: World War II WWII WW2 Nazi Germany

Origins of the Nazi Party The Nazi Party was formed in January 1919 by Anton Drexler. Originally it was named the German Workers Party (DAP). Hitler joined in Autumn of 1919. He quickly rose to become the leader of the party. The party was transformed by Hitler and became a political party rather than the discussion group that it had been when he joined. The SA (Brownshirts) was formed to protect Hitler and other party leaders at meetings. It also disrupted the meetings of the Nazi’s political opponents. Appeal of the Nazi Party The military uniform of the SA appealed to many former soldiers. The aggressive berating of the Weimar leadership for signing the treaty of Versailles appealed to the disaffected and to former soldiers. Use of force and the parties strict discipline appealed to those who longed for a return to the old, militaristic rule that had preceded the First World War. Munich Putsch The party attempted to take control of the government by force. This failed as the Nazi’s did not enjoy widespread support at the time. The government was capable of controlling the armed forces and police. Hitler was imprisoned as a result of the Putsch (Uprising). In Prison Hitler thought about the methods he had used to try and take control. He realised that the Nazi’s would need to use legitimate, electoral means to assume power and that the appeal of his party would need to be widespread in order to achieve this. As a result he wrote â€Å"Meine Kampf†. This book outlines Hitler’s beliefs. Upon being released from prison Hitler started to reorganise the party. The SS (Blackshirts) were introduced as his own personal bodyguard: they later became a much larger organisation with many functions. People were employed within the party to work on strategy and the delivery of an aggressive advertising campaign (propaganda). This included Goebbels. Campaigning and the Rise to chancellorship The Nazi’s rise can be linked with the economic problems faced by Germany. They offered radical solutions to the economic crisis. Ignoring the treaty of Versailles and protecting the country from communism appealed to a wide range of people. Other policies included, but were not restricted to: Public works, anti-semiticism, reorganisation of the labour corps (workers), redistribution of wealth (welfare policies, how they help those in need). Economic policy was focussed on big business and manufacturing. The majority of the policies were populist (appealed to many people). The policies were advertised on the radio, at rallies, through leaflet distribution and through a show of strength. Rise of Hitler :: World War II WWII WW2 Nazi Germany Origins of the Nazi Party The Nazi Party was formed in January 1919 by Anton Drexler. Originally it was named the German Workers Party (DAP). Hitler joined in Autumn of 1919. He quickly rose to become the leader of the party. The party was transformed by Hitler and became a political party rather than the discussion group that it had been when he joined. The SA (Brownshirts) was formed to protect Hitler and other party leaders at meetings. It also disrupted the meetings of the Nazi’s political opponents. Appeal of the Nazi Party The military uniform of the SA appealed to many former soldiers. The aggressive berating of the Weimar leadership for signing the treaty of Versailles appealed to the disaffected and to former soldiers. Use of force and the parties strict discipline appealed to those who longed for a return to the old, militaristic rule that had preceded the First World War. Munich Putsch The party attempted to take control of the government by force. This failed as the Nazi’s did not enjoy widespread support at the time. The government was capable of controlling the armed forces and police. Hitler was imprisoned as a result of the Putsch (Uprising). In Prison Hitler thought about the methods he had used to try and take control. He realised that the Nazi’s would need to use legitimate, electoral means to assume power and that the appeal of his party would need to be widespread in order to achieve this. As a result he wrote â€Å"Meine Kampf†. This book outlines Hitler’s beliefs. Upon being released from prison Hitler started to reorganise the party. The SS (Blackshirts) were introduced as his own personal bodyguard: they later became a much larger organisation with many functions. People were employed within the party to work on strategy and the delivery of an aggressive advertising campaign (propaganda). This included Goebbels. Campaigning and the Rise to chancellorship The Nazi’s rise can be linked with the economic problems faced by Germany. They offered radical solutions to the economic crisis. Ignoring the treaty of Versailles and protecting the country from communism appealed to a wide range of people. Other policies included, but were not restricted to: Public works, anti-semiticism, reorganisation of the labour corps (workers), redistribution of wealth (welfare policies, how they help those in need). Economic policy was focussed on big business and manufacturing. The majority of the policies were populist (appealed to many people). The policies were advertised on the radio, at rallies, through leaflet distribution and through a show of strength.

elationship between art and society :: essays research papers fc

Relationship Between Art And Society: Mimesis The relationship between art and society: Mimesis as discussed in the works of Aristotle, Plato, Horace and Longinus The relationship between art and society in the works of Plato are based upon his idea of the world of eternal Forms. He believed that there is a world of eternal, absolute and immutable Forms (the world of the Ideal) and thought that this is proven by when man is faced with the appearance of anything in the material world, his mind is moved to a remembrance of the Idea or an absolute and immutable version of the thing he sees. It is this moment of recollection that he wonders about the contrast between the world of shadows and the world of the Ideal. It is in this moment of wondering that man struggles to reach the world of Forms through the use of reason. Anything then that does not serve reason is the enemy of man. Given this, it is only but logical that poetry should be eradicated from society. Poetry shifts man’s focus away from reason by presenting man wit h imitations of objects from the concrete world. Poetry, with its focus on mimesis or imitation, has no moral value. While Plato sees reality as a shadow of a realm of pure Ideas (which in turn is copied by art), Aristotle sees reality as a process of partially realized forms moving towards their ideal realizations. Given this idea by Aristotle, the mimetic quality of art is redefined as the duplication of the living process of nature and its need to reach its potential form. Art then for Aristotle does not become the enemy of society if the artist is loyal in the representation of the process of becoming in nature. Horace, like Aristotle and Plato, also brings to view a theory of poetry as mimesis. He believes that a poet should imitate real life and real manners in a similarly real language of the times. This is because of his belief of the importance of the audience’s response to art. Horace focuses on the conventions that an artist must fulfill so that the expectations of the audience may be met. The audience of that time was composed of both the equites , who expected amusement from art, and the senatores , who expected beneficial lessons from art, and so the artist must know his craft and the conventions of his craft so that art may fulfill its ultimate role in society which is both to create pleasure and to instruct.

Wasteful :: essays research papers

Wasteful Repetition 12 years of our lives are spent learning the basics, 12 years. Yet, after those twelve years of near continuos education, colleges require us to relearn what we already know, knowledge that may be irrelevant to our chosen major. Core Curriulumn is a waste of time and money. Each year for twelve years we wake up on a day around August in order to attend required schooling. We learn english, mathematics, sciences, health, and history. School becomes our lives, almost a career that lasts approximately 120 months. For those 120 months we are taught the same subjects, not a year goes by that we were not required to take an English, Math, Science, and History courses. After successfully completing our â€Å"lower learning† studies and recieving our much awaited diplomas almost two thirds of us go on to college.1 Upon arrival at these institutions of higher learning we come to realize that our â€Å"Basic† learning is not over and we must extend our knowledge of said material before we can move on to things that more directly concern our majors. Colleges are asking us, rather, telling us to relearn the knowledge we, for the most part, already pocess. There are several things we lose when we agree to, or rather are required to retake the basics in college. Most likely foremost of what we lose,in students minds ,espeacially in todays society, is money. We spend outrageous sums of money to attend college for 4 years, individually the cost of tuition possibly ranges between 50,000 to 100,000.As a whole the nation spends in excess of $175 billion each year.2 Money wasted on learning the same material we were educated in for 12 years of our lives. Money that many of us do not have and if we are not fortunate enough to recieve a scholarship or any type, we must look towards students loans. By definition a loan is something that is lent on condition of being returned.3 Zachary Karabell,author of the book What’s College For?, wrote that: In the 1990’s alone, the average debt burden for a   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  college student grew from 8,200 to 18,800. Given that   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  these students, once they graduate, tend to earn   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  between $20,000 and $30,000 a year, those debts are   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  heavy, and some schools have begun efforts to limit   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  borrowing by students. In addition to loans,   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  three-quarters of all students work part time during   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  the school yea, and more than 15 percent work   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  full-time.* For their money, for their investment, for   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  the hours they work in order to pay for their classes,   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  these students expect to be taught something they don’t   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  already know. They expect to learn. And at the end,

Critically analyze Brandom and Haugeland’s views regarding Cartesianism

The concept of Cartesianism is that every and/or any thing that can be doubted must be discarded, and ideally formulated anew in order to be cemented in truthfulness. Doubting is the first way of determining whether something is useful, and if it isn’t, you discard what you know and basically reinvent it in such a way that is useful. We apply this Cartesianism in a social context when we look at society, politics and the interactions of people on any communicative grounds.This would include linguistics, thinking and any other forms of interaction that form any kind of groundwork for social and societal interaction. Using Cartesianism, we can draw distinctions between such things. We will look at the notions of language, reasoning and thinking, in terms of the works of two philosophers, Robert Brandom and John Haugeland, with the emphasis on comparing and contrasting their unique views. Brandom: Freedom, Norms, Reason and ThoughtRobert Brandom’s views on personal freedom were rooted in the difference between how he perceived his forerunners on the subject matter; he compared and contrasted Kant and Hegel in his work ‘Freedom and Constraint by Norms’. In this work, he critically observes the foundation from which Kant and Hegel analyzed the ideas of personal freedom, as expressed – or refuted – by norms. In order to set out these principles – freedom and norms – we must first define them. Brandom had this to say about Kant’s viewpoint:One of the most suggestive responses to the first set of concerns has been developed by the Kantian tradition: the doctrine that freedom consists precisely in being constrained by norms rather than merely by causes, answering to what ought to be as well as what is. (1979, p. 187). We assume the fact here that norms are things which become established over time by society/community, and that they determine and decide how things should be done, by the individual and by the community.Where Kant pragmatically argued that society used norms to determine the individual’s actions, Brandom also included how Hegel proposed a different approach, from a different angle: The central feature determining the character of any vision of human freedom is the account offered of positive freedom (freedom to) – those respects in which our activity should be distinguished from the mere lack of external causal constraint (freedom from) †¦ (1979, p. 187). Brandom furthers his argument by taking his proposed solution into the domain of the linguistic.He argues that the basis of norms, with regards to their use in regulating society and the individual’s role therein, requires creative expression from individuals in order to promote the Hegelian concept of idealistic, ‘positive’ freedom. Ultimately, Brandom proposes a post-Hegelian solution, one which builds on Hegel’s initial statements and ideally assists the advancement of ind ividuals within a communal setting. In ‘A Social Route from Reasoning to Representing’, Brandom further explores the generally held principles that individual beings are capable of reasoning and reasonable thought processes.Because of this inherent trait, fostered in the upbringing of each individual, truth by inference or deductive reasoning becomes a cornerstone of the thoughts and actions of every individual. The exploration of the difference between actually thinking and thinking about something is established and represented by the accepted standard that individuals move in social circles, and so influence each other’s ideas and notions of reason. Common ground is found in these motions, or as Brandom qualifies, â€Å"the representational dimension †¦ reflects the social structure †¦ in the game of giving and asking for reason.† (2000, p. 183). Haugeland: Truth, Rules and Social Cartesianism John Haugeland approaches the idea behind the soci al establishments in much the same way as Brandom. He explores the same set of topics in his work ‘Truth and Rule-following’, where he mentions the idea of norms as being bound to rules and how the social circle comprised of unique individuals see such institutes. These rules are divided into factual and governing, with factual being held as understood and upheld by all and governing as normative; â€Å"how they ought to be† (Haugeland, 1998, p. 306).Haugeland also argues that these norms are upheld by a communal motion to associate and create similarities between individuals: conformity. He further proposes that social normativity can be grounded in biological normativity – the same principles and arguments can be applied, but only insofar as human beings are capable of reason, and that a biological body by contrast follows certain predetermined, preprogrammed sets or rules, while a reasoning mind can necessarily adapt around or expand on conditions and w ork beyond them, as a biological preset cannot.This supports the idea of governing norms being changeable, separate from objective truth. Also, social norms are enacted through the input of others, in a sense promoting a system where one member of the community checks up on the others, and vice versa. Haugeland’s case is concluded with an emphatic argument for the similarity and union between norms of reason (governing norms) and objective truth (factual norms) boiling down to being the same thing: both are in fact changeable, if in different, subjective ways.With ‘Social Cartesianism’, Haugeland explores the work of three other philosophers, objectifying the reason for his assumptions based on the use of philosophy in language, which all three works – the works of Goodman, Quine and Wittgenstein/Kripke – explore in some form. The reason for this analysis is Cartesian in origin. The first work, by Goodman, is an argument based on defining predicates – accepted rules – and testing the limits of their acceptability, in true, doubtful, Cartesian style.The work of Quine focuses on the elements of translation, of taking personally accepted norms and placing them over a culture with differing norms, thereby defining that culture according to our own way of doing things. Lastly, the debate ventured by Wittgenstein/Kripke is one of skepticism that proposes that all norms are social, not private: â€Å"In sum: if meanings must be normative, but individuals can’t impose norms on themselves, then private, individual meanings are impossible† (Haugeland, p. 219).Haugeland extrapolates that each one of these arguments is fundamentally flawed, based on the conclusion he draws regarding each of the three works’ shortcomings: they all fail to account for the real world, the world that everyone lives in and is affected by. Brandom versus Haugeland Perhaps the most obvious similarity between Brandom and Haugela nd’s individual accounts and reasoning is the fact that they approach the same kinds of topics: social situation, individuality, freedom, language and thought.Despite various approaches and held viewpoints, both are compelled to a certain Cartesian way of doing things, of discarding everything or anything that is not beyond doubt and recreating these things anew by using sound reasoning. Brandom is fond of referencing Kant and Hegel and placing them in opposition against each other, most notably in stating their viewpoints from necessity and polarity: Kant held the view that norms dictated freedom and individuality, whereas Hegel was more positive in expressing his views on freedom ultimately determining norms.In a similar fashion, Haugeland approached the subject of norms and normativity, and how they affected individuals, both linguistically and thoughtfully. We will look at the comparison of norms and normativity first, and then spread outward into linguistics and thought. The view of normativity being a deciding factor, most notably on a linguistic basis, for representing the two polarities of norms and facts, is upheld by both philosophers.Brandom sees norms as something which is instituted based on reason, on the idea that they are something that is held by a communal mindset and imposed on the individual. Facts in turn are things which are accepted as a given by not only individuals but also by the community. Focusing on linguistics, Brandom draws on translation, on the action of placing or transposing one set of accepted norms – from, say, one community’s point of view – onto another community’s point of view. Note here that Haugeland also referenced the idea of translation in his critique of Quine’s work.This poses the first real contrast between Brandom and Haugeland’s points of view: Brandom poses the idea that translation promotes assimilation: By translating, rather than causally explaining some per formance, we extend our community (the one which engages in the social practices into which we translate the stranger’s behavior) so as to include the stranger, and treat his performances as variants of our own. (1979, p. 191). The act of making something your own, drawing something or someone in from outside your boundaries, speaks of a shift of norms.Logically it can be argued that assimilating something new forces your way of thinking about something to be altered to accommodate what is new, even if what has been absorbed becomes a representation of something completely new and different. In this we see Brandom’s shift to the Hegelian idea of the novel, the new, being created in a positive sense in order to advance and enhance the communal whole. Haugeland contrasts by referencing Quine: â€Å"†¦ although the translations are different, there is no fact as to which of them is the ‘right’ one, because there is no ‘objective matter to be right or wrong about’.† (cited from Haugeland, ). Haugeland would seemingly disagree with Brandom’s use of translation as a means of successfully integrating norms, of taking norm and transforming it into fact. Translation still argues for something similar, not new: it presupposes a universal component that stretches through all languages. Judgment is another key concept, one bound to reason and thought. Brandom cites Kant once more in bringing to the fore the sense that one must act from thought, and that judging and acting requires a commitment, â€Å"staking a claim – undertaking a commitment† (1979, p. 164).Brandom repeats the basis of linguistics, of the game played between people, based on inference and the inherent ability to deduce and conclude. An individual can naturally deduce something spoken or gestured from another individual by making a commitment to do so. This commitment relies heavily on the shared understanding between individuals, th e factual norms that are referenced again and again as a means of achieving the communal awareness of similarity. Haugeland agrees here; linguistically, words must have a normal, generic meaning in order for the speaking individual to be understood.There must be common ground. He continues by saying that â€Å"meanings, by their very nature, are normative rules,† and emphasizes this dilemma by citing this example: And the essential problem is that individuals cannot impose norms on themselves. For that would be like taking a dictator, with absolute legal authority, to be bound by her own law. But she can’t really be bound by her own law since, given her authority, if she changes her mind and does something different, that just changes the law – which is equivalent to saying that the law did not bind her in the first place.Similarly †¦ an individual cannot, on his own authority, bind himself by his private norm. (Haugeland, , p. 219). The crux of this compar ison between Haugeland and Brandom is that both agree on the fact that law, in a sense, and rules, must be used to bind a norm, albeit a governing one – a norm based on reason. A person cannot be subject to his/her own norms, therefore the norms must be implemented from outside the individual; from the communal.Coming back to the linguistic component again, we can logically assume that language as a means of communication forms a regulating basis here. The words, actions and judgment of others forces a certain conformity, a means whereby an individual can operate and coexist within a community. Thought has always been at the core of the human need to define him/herself. The adage cogito ergo sum (I think therefore I am) has been advanced to more complex statements. Rene Descartes advanced dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum (Latin for I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am) (Persaud, p. 259).Cartesian philosophy dwells deeply on thought processes, so it should be unsurprising t hat both Brandom and Haugeland spent some thought on the dynamics of applying Cartesian methods on the thought process. Haugeland praised Descartes’ input, going further than the original assumptions made by Descartes and stating that â€Å"The determinacy that matters here concerns not the formal reality of those ideas †¦ but rather their objective reality (roughly their intentional content as representations. ) (Haugeland, , p. 224). In other words, Haugeland implies that human individuals in isolation, as subjectively separate, is fairly unimportant.What matters ultimately is the collective, the union of all individuals in an objective community, not necessarily defined by the community but by their place in it, and their unique contributions to it. Brandom seems to agree by stating: The social dimension of inference [deduction] involved in the communication to others of claims that must be available as reasons [common ground] both to the speaker [individual] and to the audience [collective, community], in spite of differences in collateral commitments, is what underlies the representational dimension of discourse [communication]. (2000, p. 183).Summed up, the previous statement can be matched to Haugeland’s assumptions: the community is not the only important thing, but in order for norms, rules and laws to make sense regarding thought, language and freedom, the community or collective needs to operate on a standard of shared understanding, so that each unique individual can still function and interact with others despite the individuality. Conclusion Through using Cartesian principles regarding the discovery of usefulness, we have come to the conclusion that, with regards to using doubt as a means of determining an outcome or a reality, pragmatism is in fact a necessary element.Reality, as Haugeland would have us believe, is not simply determined by the individuals, communities and their norms only, but rather arises from the world we live in first, before casting a shadow of effects over the individual and the rest. We have argued that Brandom and Haugeland, though often different in their modes of expression and discourse, are nevertheless in agreement on many of the key aspects regarding norms, whether factual or governing, subjective or objective.At the end, Cartesian doubt influences thought, and thought influences language and interaction between people, yielding a collected sense of understanding and finally yielding a system of laws, rules and judgments that govern and regulate society and community. However, in conclusion it is perhaps better to emphasize Hegel’s idealism – as opposed to Kant’s pragmatism: that freedom be positive, to allow for creativity within the system and to not be bound by external causes such as rules and laws only. References Brandom, R. B. (2000). A Social Route from Reasoning to Representing.Articulating Reasons: an Introduction to Inferentialism. Cambridge , Harvard University Press. Brandom, R. B. (1979). Freedom and Constraint by Norms. American Philosophical Quarterly, Volume 16, 13, 87-196. Haugeland, J. (). Social Cartesianism. 213-225. Haugeland, J. (1998). Truth and Rule-following. Having Thought: Essays in the metaphysics of mind. Cambridge, Harvard University Press. Persaud, R. (2002) Ten Books. The British Journal of Psychiatry, Volume 181, 258-261, Retrieved May 17, 2008, from http://bjp. rcpsych. org/cgi/content/full/181/3/258.