Log in
HomeClass Notes1,200,000CA670,000

GNED 1202 Lecture Notes - Egyptian Temple, Legato, Control Character

10 views3 pages
abma4000
13 Dec 2022
School
Mount Royal University
Department
General Education
Course
GNED 1202
Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

The magic flute was one of wolfgang amadeus mozart"s final and best compositions, written during the classical period of music. The classical period refers to european music from the late 18th and early 19th centuries, a time period that coincides with the enlightenment, an influential philosophical movement. European intellectuals of the enlightenment believed that morality derived from nature and thoughtful reasoning could address issues like class inequality and produce a just society. The major topic of the magic flute, as is typically the case in opera, is love. Sarastro is the guy that stands between prince tamino and princess pamina. Tamino and pamina adore each other, although sarastro first forbids their love. The head of the college of priests at an unnamed. Egyptian temple where isis and osiris are worshiped, sarastro, is also a ruler. Still, he is also a ruler who administers justice and, briefly, allows the possibility of love to enter his mind.

Get access

Grade+
$40 USD/m
Billed monthly
Grade+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
10 Verified Answers
Class+
$30 USD/m
Billed monthly
Class+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
7 Verified Answers

Related Documents

MUSI 3400 Lecture Notes - Lecture 1: Figured Bass, Le Devin Du Village, Intermedio
salmontoad246

Related Questions

Please help wtih these economics questions. I'll give the best answer to the person who justifies their answer.. or someone who does well in economics and knows the subject area well.

Which of the following statements is not true about Say's Law?

A. People produce more goods than they want for their own use only if they seek to trade them for other goods.

B. Markets would be regularly hit by severe shortages and surpluses.

C. Desired expenditures will equal actual expenditures.

D. Surpluses will be eliminated by falling prices and shortages will be eliminated by increasing prices.


Which of the following is not an assumption of the classical model?

A. Buyers and sellers react to changes in relative prices.

B. Households want to maximize economic well being.

C. Wages and prices will move freely in the upward direction but not the downward direction.

D. No single buyer or seller of a commodity can affect its price.


Money illusion is

A. when people think they are better off when their income increases even though prices have increased by the same amount.

B. when people are motivated by self-interest.

C. could not exist if the economy did not have competitive markets.

D. a basic condition that all classical economists assume people have.


Saving is not a problem in the classical model because

A. interest rates were flexible and savings were channeled into investment.

B. savers and investors were the same people.

C. the classical economists assumed that saving was beneficial to people for retirement.

D. saving would be spent by consumers eventually.


Which of the following statements is true?

A. There is an inverse relationship between investment and the interest rate.

B. There is no relationship between investment and the interest rate.

C. There is a direct relationship between investment and the interest rate.

D. Investment is always less than savings.


In the classical model, high unemployment due to either a demand or a supply shock

A. will return to its normal level quickly as wages adjust.

B. will persist if due to a supply shock but not if due to a demand shock.

C. can persist for an indefinite period of time.

D. never exists because unemployment can never deviate from its normal level.


The classical model makes little distinction between the long-run and short-run because

A. the model has not been fully developed yet.

B. prices adjust so fast that the economy is quickly moving towards the long-run.

C. the classical economists knew that we are always operating in the short run.

D. current changes influence the long run, so it is not possible to plan for the future.


In the classical model

A. the level of real GDP per year does not depend on the level of aggregate demand.

B. the level of GDP is demand determined.

C. the level of GDP determines prices independent of demand.

D. changes in aggregate supply affect the price level, not real GDP.


Which of the following is a true statement?

A. Classical economists believed output adjusted more than prices when aggregate demand fell while Keynes believed prices adjusted more than output.

B. Classical economists believed price adjusted more than output when aggregate demand fell while Keynes believed output adjusted more than prices.

C. A decrease in aggregate demand has no short-run effects according to the classical economists, but had significant effects according to Keynes.

D. A decrease in aggregate demand was not possible according to the classical economists, but was possible according to Keynes.


Which of the following is not a reason why GDP can be expanded beyond a level consistent with its long-run growth path in modern Keynesian analysis?

A. Prices and wages are flexible allowing for needed adjustments.

B. In the short-run existing workers can work more hours.

C. The existing capital stock can be used more intensively.

D. Higher prices induce firms to hire more workers.


A recessionary gap can be caused by

A. a decrease in aggregate supply holding aggregate demand constant.

B. an increase in aggregate demand holding aggregate supply constant.

C. an increase in the long run aggregate supply curve holding the aggregate demand constant.

D. a decrease in both aggregate demand and aggregate supply.



First Task: The Exercise for Your Imagination
John Rawls introduces his reader to several concepts fundamental to a thorough account of the idea of justice: Liberty; equality; rights; and fairness. But he is deservedly of philosophical interest because of the way he fulfills his aim, which is “...To present a conception of justice which generalizes and carries to a higher level of abstraction the familiar theory of the social contract as found in Locke, Rousseau, and Kant” (Pojman 620, Lt). Rawls introduces an imaginary device in order to establish the conditions under which “the principles of justice for the basic structure of society...would (be accepted)” (620 Lm). It is these conditions, Rawls’ “initial position of equality,” and his device for establishing them, “the veil of ignorance,” that I would have you think about for your exercise (620 Lm and 620 Rm): “The veil of ignorance...ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of social circumstances” (620 Rm).

As an exercise of the imagination, you are asked, as Rawls asks us all, to imagine yourself in the “initial position of equality” under “the veil of ignorance.” Discover for yourself if doing so is or is not conducive to a genuine sense of fairness, as you prepare to make “one of the most general of all choices which persons might make together, namely ...the choice of the first principles of a conception of justice which is to regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions” (621 Lt).


Second Task: The Writing Assignment
Please number your responses:
1. Describe your experience. Take the time to do so as completely as you are able.
2. How did this exercise affect your understanding of the section titled “The Reasoning Leading to the Two Principles of Justice” (624 Lm). It requires an effort to do so, but try to justify your response with direct reference to your own experience of imagining and reading, not to associations or thoughts gathered from any other source. Provide\ relevant quotations to focus your reader’s attention.
3. Relate your experience to Rawls’ “Two Principles of Justice,” especially concerning his denying “exchanges between basic liberties and economic and social benefits” (624 Rb). Be as descriptive as you are able, using direct quotations as support.
4. What is your opinion of Rawls’ “General Conception” (627 Rb)? Use quotations to assist in your explanation.

Hello, could I get some assistance summarizing this article for a discussion:

Read the articles and discuss the problems of Economic Inequality in the U.S.economy, summarize key points and post in the Discussions area:

Competition police crossing continents

Competition authorities are increasingly reaching beyond their country's borders

Feb 22nd, 2014

WHEN TWO AMERICAN presidents, Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft, embarked on a trustbusting mission a century ago, they were taking government into a new policy area: competition. Industrialization was still relatively new, and any monopolies that had emerged, such as the British and Dutch East India companies, had been created by governments.

The robber-baron companies of the late 19th century were accused of using their industrial muscle to drive competitors out of business. Private monopolies, the argument ran, diminished the benefits of capitalism; by definition, the existence of a monopoly made it impossible for a free market to operate.

Since then, governments have generally had some kind of competition policy, though not necessarily a coherent one. Politicians have tried to juggle several different priorities, among them putting the government in control of "strategic" industries (a category that has always included defense but often also a range of other industries, from airlines to car manufacturing, power generation, and telecoms); shielding domestic businesses from foreign ownership or competition, and protecting consumers from price-gouging.

In the past two decades, a new concern has emerged: that monopolies may be restricting innovation. The technology industry seems to have been particularly prone to creating near-monopolies, from Microsoft in software to Amazon in retailing and Google in an internet search. This is due to network effects. Consumers gravitate to the dominant technology, either because it offers more products or because many of their friends are already using the network concerned. These monopolists, it is feared, will be slow to introduce new technologies that might cannibalize their existing business; and they will be so entrenched that new competitors will find it hard to get a foothold.

Microsoft bundled its Internet Explorer browser with its dominant Windows operating software on personal computers. America's Department of Justice saw this as an attempt to force Netscape, a rival browser, out of the market. In a long court case that began in 1998, Microsoft was initially ordered to break itself in two. This ruling was overturned on appeal and a less onerous settlement was arrived at.

At the time many commentators felt that the authorities had overreached themselves. Internet Explorer was provided free of charge, so it was hard to see how consumers were being harmed. But this is a tricky area. On the one hand, rapid technological change can cause once-dominant companies to lose their position very quickly if they do not adapt; look at Nokia's and BlackBerry's mobile-phone businesses. Some argue that if the market is capable of such adjustment, governments should not get involved. The fact that some consumers make the wrong decision some of the time is not the basis for intervention, as long as all consumers are not being ripped off,  says Simon Bishop of RBB Economics, a consultancy. On the other hand, such rapid change makes it hard to tell whether monopoly positions are being exploited, or whether a more competitive market would have produced more innovations.

Competition authorities have also had to rethink their role in cross-border deals. If one multinational takes over another, that might not create a monopoly in the country where the two groups have their headquarters, but it could do so in another country. A proposal for a merger between General Electric and Honeywell, announced in October 2000, was cleared by America's Department of Justice but blocked by the European Commission the following year. That objection appeared to herald a new era of transatlantic takeover disputes; in fact, it remains the only deal so far to have been cleared in America but blocked on the other side of the Atlantic.

However, there have been other instances of transatlantic disputes. In 2009 the European Commission imposed a 1.06 billion ($1.4 billion) fine on Intel, a chipmaker, after a complaint brought by an American rival, AMD. The ruling seemed to suggest that multinationals faced the prospect of double jeopardy because of inconsistent international rules.

We do it our way

There are some philosophical differences between Europe and America. Europe has a long tradition of state ownership of industry; even after privatization, many such companies retain dominant positions, at least in their national markets. In America, by contrast, market leaders have got there the hard way, by having superior technology or being more efficient. In Europe competition policy tends to be rules-based, with the European Commission issuing guidance for future mergers to follow; in America merger decisions tend to be hammered out in the courts, establishing legal precedent.

But multinationals also have to deal with competition policy in emerging markets. China is a particular challenge. The Chinese use competition policy to achieve other ends to keep out foreign firms or attack existing foreign businesses says, one expert. Latin American countries have tended to adopt the American model of competition policy, whereas eastern Europe has followed the example. Merger authorities from different countries have set up the International Competition Network to share the experience. Such efforts may reduce the double-jeopardy problems in international mergers, if only because rules may be applied more consistently.

In the longer term, the question is whether national competition policies will prove adaptable enough to cope with a globalized economy. It may make economic sense for global companies to exploit economies of scale and bring down prices for consumers, but national governments may be reluctant to accept the loss of control involved. In air travel, for example, fares have been reduced under pressure from low-cost airlines, but these newcomers are still being held back by policies that favor flagship carriers. If regulators in rich countries were to prove more zealous than their counterparts in emerging markets in restricting the size of multinationals, Western firms might be put at a competitive disadvantage.

New concerns for competition authorities are emerging all the time. Chris Walters, the acting chief economist of Britain's Office of Fair Trading (OFT), cites the practice of pay-for-delay, whereby a firm that holds a drug patent pays a generic manufacturer not to launch a rival drug to preserve the patent-holders monopoly profits. And David Currie, the chairman of the Competition and Markets Authority (which will take over from the OFT in April), recently pointed to a vast new potential problem, which he described as the growing collection, processing, and use of consumer-transaction data for commercial ends. This is proving an increasingly important source of competitive advantage; we need to be alert to the possibility that it will be an increasing source of consumer detriment.