Centralia No. 5 Essay Example for Free

Centralia No. 5 Essay The obvious problem with Centralia No. 5 is that an explosion killed 111 people. However, prior to the actual explosion, the problem is less obvious, especially since Centralia No. 5 was similar to so many mines that did not explode. In this analysis, I will examine the possible roles and responsibilities of Driscoll O. Scanlan, the mine inspector, given the corruption of modern administrative enterprises prior to the accident. From this perspective, the perspective of a public official in the field, the problem is that a potential danger exists and the regulatory machinery in place to address the danger is ineffective. As an expert, Scanlan recommended that the mine be dusted with non-explosive, pulverized stone to diminish the possibility of the coal dusts exploding. However, his expert advice alone was not enough to motivate a response. History The chronology of the case shows a progression of appropriate action within the existing law and according to organization or bureaucratic norms. On an organiza ¬tional level, the players include the State of Illinois, the U.S. Government, the Centralia Coal Company, the United Mine Workers of America, and the miners themselves, who could hardly be said to have been well represented by any of the others. Beginning in 1941, Scanlans reports of excessive coal dust in the Centralia No. 5 mine were sent to Robert Medill, the Director of the Department of Mines and Minerals, and handled as routine by Robert Weir, the Assistant to the Director. All three positions were appointed by the Governor, Dwight H. Green. Also in 1941, the U.S. Bureau of Mines began making inspections of mines. The first inspection of Centralia No. 5 was in September 1942. However, only the State of Illinois had any power to enforce compliance, and reports from the Bureau there ¬fore had primary significance as further documentation in the hands of the Department of Mines and Minerals and the Governor. Scanlans reports were forwarded to the Centralia Coal Company, owned by Bell Zoller, with a letter requesting that the Company comply with the inspectors recommendations. Needless to say, the Coal Company did not comply, which is predictable given the lack of any attempt to enforce the requests and the high demand during the war. The mine workers eventually began working  through Local Union No. 52, led by William Rowekamp, recording secretary. Throughout the course of events, the mine workers sent correspondence to the State of Illinois, at first to Medill and then directly to the Governor. The letters consistently and emphatically requested attention to the danger present in the mine as documented by Scanlans extensive reports. The seriousness of the situation seemed to fade within the bureaucratic and political routine within the Department of Mines and Minerals. Alternatives Scanlan was faced with several logistical alternatives, but the motivations behind action were of two sorts. As I said before, all of the players followed paths of appropriate action within the existing law and according to organizational or bureaucratic norms. The only exception, perhaps, was the Centralia Coal Company. But the coal company clearly recognized a difference between a routine infraction and a serious infraction, at least as it concerned the correspondence from the Department of Mines and Minerals, and they had no indication that Scanlans reports on Centralia No. 5 were anything unusual. Scanlans performance was no exception. He did precisely what was required of him by his position. Even the Department itself complied with the letter of the law. Because the Director of the Department of Mines and Minerals has some discretion, it is not a requirement of law that every technically enforceable infraction actually be enforced. This is a matter of judgment. Scanlan was clearly motivated by attention to law and bureaucratic norms, but he was also pulled by an obvious obligation to the public welfare, in this case the miners lives at Centralia No. 5. The problem confronting Scanlan was not so much a moral conflict as the need to recognize that compliance with his designated role was inadequate as a response, both as public official and as expert, to the greater responsibility to the public. And because Scanlans reports were extensive and thorough, including every infraction, he had a responsibility to make sure that the decision makers understood the gravity of the danger, perhaps by highlighting the more serious problems. However, given that the system failed to recognize the danger, there were two possible paths of action: (1) work within the system, possibly in ways beyond the designated role of mine inspector; or (2) work outside the system and mobilize public concern, through the union or otherwise. There is a sense in which staying  within the system would preserve Scanlans conformity with legal and organizational norms while still addressing the public welfare. However, there is ample evidence that the organizational players would be unresponsive or at least politically difficult. Solution I think that Scanlan could have effected a response within the system, although he would certainly have had to abandon a passive stance. First, the obligation to the general welfare clearly trumps any mere compliance with organizational norms and in this case the spirit of the law, never mind the letter of the law, is in the name of such general welfare. Second, the role of mine inspectors is to police the mine operators. This could be construed as a responsibility to report infractions and leave enforcement to the Director of the Department. However, because the Director allows his subordinates to handle so much of the routine, it seems reasonable to expect the inspectors to handle cases like Centralia No. 5 more pro-actively. Third, there is a responsibility left on Scanlans shoulders as an expert and a professional. His technical expertise allows him to distinguish apparent and real dangers. And because his role in the field puts him in close proximity to the mines, he is perhaps the only individual with such responsibility in a situation where serious problems are apparent. Costs/Benefits The costs for Scanlan are evident. Because his position is a political patronage job, any aggressive pursuit of his responsibilities runs the risk of getting him removed from his position. Of course, this is as much a matter of how one negotiates the political terrain as of what one is trying to accomplish. I have no doubt that interesting correspondence, emphasizing the prudence of avoiding deaths in the mines, could have been sent to Governor Green, with the assistance and political experience of the Director of the Department of Mines and Minerals, of course. Even if Scanlan loses his job, the clear benefits are 111 lives. There are hidden benefits as well, though. By generating a relationship with the Director and the Governor, Scanlan is creating a mechanism for handling this sort of issue—a sort of policy formation from below. Given that Centralia No. 5 appears no  different from the other mines, this may be the more pressing issue anyway.

Finite Evidence and Universal Propositions :: Ampliative Logic

Finite Evidence and Universal Propositions There is a lot of empirical evidence supporting the proposition '‘All metals expand when heated’. For example on many, many occasions we have observed metals expanding when heated. Because of this large amount of evidence we take the proposition to be true (or highly likely to be true). The proposition '‘All metals expand when heated’ is caled a universal proposition. A universal proposition mentions al things of a certain kind. The proposition '‘Al metals expand when heated’ is about al metals, not just some of them; it is about al pieces of metal, not just some pieces. Any piece of metal, any kind of metal, according to this proposition, wil expand when heated. Now as we have said there is a great deal of evidence supporting this universal proposition; it is not a proposition that many would doubt. But however large the body of evidence supporting this proposition, and whatever the variety, this body of evidence is finite. Our experience is finite, even our colective experience. But the proposition is universal: it refers to al metals, not just this bit or that bit, nor this kind or that kind. Any bit of metal at al, whatever kind, wil expand when heated. This is what the proposition says. The proposition does not just say, only those bits of metal that we have observed, expand when heated. Those bits we have observed, they expand when heated; but the proposition also says, even those bits that we have not observed expand when heated. This is what the '‘al’ means; this is why we cal the proposition universal. The evidence which supports ‘Al metals expand when heated’ is finite. The proposition which draws support from this evidence is universal. How can finite evidence support a universal proposition? A universal proposition, even when supported by evidence, goes wel beyond evidence. There are infinitely many bits of metal. Compared to the many bits of metal in the universe the bits we have observed is only a tiny fraction. How can a tiny fraction support such a large number? When we have no evidence for a proposition we would not take the proposition to be true. When we have only a litle evidence for a proposition we stil would not take it to be true. If we are to take a proposition to be true, or likely to be true, we require a large amount of evidence.

First let’s define externality Essay

As an example of the above definition: Pollution from a factory can affect the health of nearby residents – negative The same factory can provide jobs to nearby residents – positive Negative externality is two part: production and consumption. I will be using both these externalities in my following discussion on pollution. Companies pollute on three different platforms: air, water and land. Air pollution is caused by: †¢Factories †¢Power plants †¢Vehicles †¢Solvents †¢Domestic/industrial chemicals †¢Military †¢Natural causes – volcano, wildfires (ref: aboutairpollution.co.za) Water pollution is caused by: †¢Urbanization oLand disturbed from construction oChemical pollution from mines, industries, etc oInadequate sewage and treatment †¢Deforestation †¢Damming of rivers †¢Destruction of wetlands (ref: www.randwater.co.za) Land pollution is caused by: †¢Domestic, nuclear wastes and industrial wastes, †¢deforestation †¢human sewage †¢mining and other factories †¢increased mechanization †¢ Sewage discharged into rivers instead of being treated properly †¢ Sanitary/hazardous landfill seepage †¢ Cemeteries †¢Scrap yards (waste oil and chemical drainage) (ref: www.wikianswers.com) You will note from the above that pollution is a hot topic and one of the most commonly used to define negative externality. The above causes of pollution serve as a grim reminder of the visible and mostly invisible effect on the consumers. And it certainly is not calculated into the economy. The costs and benefits of pollution can be calculated by economists but this will not reduce its impact, merely factor into the cost of production of goods. What will impact on the economy is the demand for pollution free living and the purchasing decision that will allow this. The following few examples come from my own ‘green’ list: †¢Diesel instead of petrol †¢Switching of unnecessary electricity sources †¢Organic foods within my budget †¢No smoking †¢Living in a ‘leafy’ suburb A lot of South Africans (and world) citizens are making conscious buying decisions to reduce the effects of global warming and the depletion of the ozone layer. The costs of living ‘green’ is higher than average and the economy will see the impact of this as consumers demand ‘cleaner’ living conditions. How can governments help reduce or eliminate negative externality? †¢Increase taxes on domestic pollutants such as cigarettes, solvents, etc †¢Pollution tax for industries †¢Pollution limits on emissions †¢Focus on residential and business zoning and the effect on the surrounding environment †¢New commercial/residential buildings must include ‘green’ technology and utilities †¢Providing separate bins for proper product recycling – domestic, commercial and industrial †¢The abolishment of ‘shanty towns’ for proper housing (source Ref: www.factsanddetails.com, www.statssa.gov.za, www.thinkquest.org, Economics: Global and South African Perspectives, Michael Parkin )

Essay on Ethics and Law for Administrators

Essay on Ethics and Law for Administrators From the scientific point of view it is impossible to prove the beginning of life from the moment of conception. The question of when human life begins, is a question theological, legal or philosophical, as many people argue, only not scientific and biological. It is also favorite tactics of the groups supporting performing abortions. They constantly claim what cant be learned when life begins and that we at all never learn about it. However we eventually could define the beginning of life. It begins during conception, and since then the fruit is a human being. There is no such jump, transformation from nothing into something, from not being in a being. Life is a smooth range from the beginning till the end. And permission to abortions means no other than planned, not forbidden destruction of human life. Deadly violence abortion is an inexcusable evil. I agree that undesirable pregnancy is a very difficult dilemma. However to look for the decision her in destruction of life means shameful approval of violence. Hospice and palliative care are very common nowadays. Some believe that it is the way to go, however, many argue that it is a waste of time and money since the results are known ahead. According to National Caregivers Library, palliative care is the way to go as it is have more benefit. According to the advance directive law, â€Å"every patient has the right to refuse or accept medical treatment. In case the patient loses the ability to make decisions, health providers or immediate family can make the decision. The law includes right to attorney for health choices, however it does not include the living will. Overall, I consider hospice and palliative care very beneficial for both relatives and the patient as the loved ones know that the patient’s pain is at its lowest if not gone completely