Diet and Brain Development essays

Diet and Brain Development essays The relationship between diet and brain development are key to the evolution of hominids. Larger brains mean a greater capacity for thought. The ability to think and work out problems led to the development of tools and of language that distinguish hominids from primates and other organisms. With language, individuals are able to communicate with one another and work cooperatively in a way that gives them an advantage over solitary organisms. The development of a community and a society results in a complex culture with rituals for burial and forms of expression like art that help to distinguish the individual in a group. Larger brains and a greater capacity for thought also mean a prolonged period of brain development during which skills must be passed from more knowledgeable individuals to those still developing. This period, known as childhood, is one during which individuals are not capable of caring sole for themselves and it is the role of fully developed individuals to instill wisdom upon these young individuals while protecting them and providing the necessary elements that are key to their survival. The development of larger brains extended this period of childhood and makes hominid childhood one of the longest of any organisms. The development of larger brains go hand in hand with diet because it is nutrition that allows for the development of larger brains and larger brains that provide the capacity to find better forms of nutrition. The relationship between diet and brain development was first examined in Austalopithecenes. Australopithecenes can be divided into two subspecies known as robust and gracile. The gracile Australopithecenes were similar in body and brain size to the robust Austalopithecenes. They, however, had large grinding teeth, even larger than those of the robust. The most likely inhabited woodland areas and ate nuts and roots. While similar in brain size to the gracile, robust Australopithece...

Louisa May Alcott essays

Louisa May Alcott essays Louisa May Alcott was born in Germantown, PA, on Nov. 29, 1832, and she was the second daughter of Abigail May and Amos Bronson Alcott. She had an older sister Anna and two younger sisters Elizabeth and May. The family moved to Boston, MA in 1834, where her father set up an experimental school that failed because of the lack of students. Since the Alcotts were relatively poor, Ralph Waldo Emerson financially supported them while they moved to Concord, MA. Amos and Abigail were both progressive educators and part of the Transcendental Movement in America so they instructed Louisa and her three sisters in this progressive educational style. Her father advised Louisa to keep a journal. She began this journal at a very young age and kept with it until her last days on earth. The journal was open to inspection by her father and mother. Mrs. Alcott would often write little notes to her daughter. Louisa included poetry and letters in her entries, as well as comments to her sisters and moth er. This journal helped lead her into her literary career. Louisa wrote poems, novels, and short stories most of which were published. Some of her early work was written under the pen name, Flora Fairchild. Her most well known work was Little Women, which was based on her own life. "Marmee" is her mother, "Meg" is her sister Anna, "Jo" is Louisa herself, "Beth" is her younger sister Elizabeth, and "Amy" is her youngest sister May. In real life the sisters would act out elaborate scenes in an old barn or by the stream just like they did in Little Women. Louisa May Alcott's career was not restricted to writing. Beginning in her late teens, she worked as a teacher for several years and off-and-on as a seamstress. In 1867, Louisa became the editor of Merry's Museum, a children's magazine. Louisa Alcott also was an avid social reformer. Abolition, temperance, and educational reform were among her chosen causes. But being a feminist at heart, she especially...

Organizational culture is fundamentally about symbolic meaning and as Essay - 7

Organizational culture is fundamentally about symbolic meaning and as such cannot be managed. Discuss - Essay Example In each organisation, there exist patterns of symbols, beliefs, myths, rituals, and practices that have been developed over time. These, in turn, form general understandings among the organisation’s personnel as to what the organisation represents and how its affiliates should conduct themselves. Organisational culture refers to the behavioural norms as well as values of the members of the organisation. There are two basic kinds of values: the instrumental and the terminal. Terminal values have to do with the preferred effects or outcomes that workers endeavour to achieve. Instrumental values, on the other hand, refer to the esteemed types of behaviours. Organisational culture exists on two levels. The first level is in external expressions of the culture, which are observable and able to make some type of interpretation. The symbols of the cultures of any organisation are evident in communication patterns, the configuration of work spaces and the methods through which authori ty is expressed. Organisational cultures can also be observed during organisational ceremonies. The other level of organisational culture can be observed in the deeply held beliefs, values, attitudes, assumptions, and feelings that lie beneath the behaviour of personnel (Jaffe 2001). Assumptions as well as organisational principles at this stage are not so easy to discern, interpret and comprehend. It is only the level of culture that is in evidence that can be assessed or changed. This level is the one that is often at the centre management activity. The Significance of Organisational Culture Organisational culture is the bond that structures the different organisational settings and makes it possible for personnel to be able to draw meaning from their duties, and also work easily alongside people who have different values from them (Drummond 2000). Strong organisational cultures are those that are clearly ordered, and have personnel that have identical core values. These kinds of cultures usually flourish in military as well as religious organisations. Strong organisational cultures also encourage behavioural consistency by letting the workers know about exactly which behaviours they should adopt. On the negative side, strong organisational cultures can foster implicit control of workers and function as an alternative for formalisation. In Schein's view, organisational culture is a contributor to internal integration as well as the exterior adjustment of the organisation to its settings (Fineman, Sims and Gabriel 2005). For an organisation to be effective, any organisation’s strategies, culture, technology and environmental concerns have to be united to realise the organisation’s objectives. Usually, when managers or other high ranking personnel try to alter organisational cultures, the resultant changes are usually erratic and sometimes even objectionable. For instance, forced changes can make workers become cynical towards all change programs in general. This does not mean that managers should avoid even the suggestion of possible organisational cultural changes. However, they should be ready to allow workers to engender the necessary changes without being coerced (Clegg, Kornberger and Pitsis 2008). Organisational culture should be viewed as a framework for fostering the desired meanings. It is important for managers not to attempt to forcibly effect organisational cu