Business Strategies for Healthcare Institutions Essay - 191

Business Strategies for Healthcare Institutions - Essay Example The employed strategies should subsequently take into account key stakeholders in the institution, organizational efficiency, and financial sustainability in the healthcare environment (Ginter, Duncan, & Swayne, 2013). Aligning healthcare reform with organizational operations is a key strategy. In essence, the idea is to make sure that the resultant reforms promote the relevance of the hospital. To do this, the director and all other key parties could undertake care transitions, where hospital operations are redefined or redesigned to accommodate key benefits realized from healthcare reform. It is important for hospital management to create healthcare value through payor relationships and revenue models. In other words, hospitals could create value and promote patient welfare through bundled payments, offering low-cost incentives, and enhancing the quality of care (Pynes & Lombardi, 2011). While the objective is to improve the performance of finance, human resource, and patient care departments, it is critical to account for all stakeholders influential to the institution. On the same note, it is important to note that the priority focuses on patient care, over and above striving to improve the long-term welfare of the healthcare institution. Efficiency, sustainability, and strong relationships in the healthcare environment translate to affordable care, increased access to services, and community engagement in hospital operations (Olden, 2011). Both internal and external hospital environments play an influential role in healthcare matters. When the community becomes engaged, the hospital builds an environment of loyalty and trust. Subsequently, the community becomes an ambassador of the hospital in selling its operations and performance.

14.Public Diplomacy has become increasingly important in recent years Assignment

14.Public Diplomacy has become increasingly important in recent years. Why Discuss and illustrate with empirical examples - Assignment Example Murrow’s Centre for Public Diplomacy, Edmund Gullion takes public diplomacy as â€Å"Through public diplomacy people understand the means by which private groups, governments, and individuals influence the opinions and attitudes of other people and governments in a manner to exercise impact on their foreign policy conclusions.† What stands out in these two definitions for Public diplomacy is that it has to involve mechanisms that will affect the attitudes as well as opinions of other people, countries and governments. This paper will examine the reasons that have led to the clamour for public diplomacy especially in recent times during the 21st century by looking at specific examples. Public diplomacy becomes the next frontier in the study and practice of diplomacy. The â€Å"ancient† diplomacy style has been supplanted with â€Å"fresh†, free American-style diplomacy (United States. (1987)Several states have advanced beyond upholding open diplomacy on the face of the world to using public to secure and promote their national interest overseas. Public diplomacy was a principally salient government quest during the Cold War era when ideologies contest, communism versus democracy, was at the peak. Bipolar quality of public diplomacy throughout the period of the cold war has been replaced by several nations involved in public diplomacy as central securities in soft power have risen. Wang (2011) outlines the theory of soft power as an international image, specifically highlighting the values underlying the interest of a particular government. For instance, United States soft power is the capacity to convince others through the acceptability of its actions. The connection with public diplomacy rests between the concept of theoretical international relations of several â€Å"forms† of power and the concrete elements of the manner in which states improve or expand the capacity of their soft power. In as much as public diplomacy has materialized to be

Xenophon Essay Example for Free

Xenophon Essay Xenophon, the author of the document, The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians, was born in 434 BC and became a middle-class Athenian but was later exiled to Spartan land (pg. 81). This document was written in order to keep record of the way life was lived back in Sparta where he fulfilled his exile. The law maker, Lycurgus, was a very creative and intuitive man but additionally he was fair and just. Lycurgus made laws that would honestly benefit everyone in Sparta to the fullest extent and differ from the old ways of the other Greeks. The new ways of Sparta stunned the other Greeks by how different and irregular they were. I believe that Xenophon too was fascinated by the laws he now had to abide by and wrote it all down so that others could analyze it as well. In the document Xenophon writes, â€Å"I not only admire [Lycurgus], but consider to have been in the fullest sense a wise man† (pg 82). Xenophon was so fond of Lycurgus and his way of ruling that wanted to save these rules to be studied forever and wrote them down. This can be considered one of the first real constitutions written down in history which gives it such great significance along with the fact that it is a direct account from that time period originally written in a language we code decode. This document was written for any politically involved or scholarly person who wanted to study the ways of the Spartans. Xenophon believed that Lycurgus was as most genius law maker and thought that if he shared his ways maybe everyone else could be as good as Sparta. Lycurgus’ laws were â€Å"contrary to those of most governments† (pg 82) which is why it needed to be written down and spread around. I strongly feel that when Xenophon was exiled he tried to seek out the flaws in the governmental system that had done wrong and subconsciously abandoned all of the beliefs that the old government he used to follow cherished. In order to show their flaws, Xenophon wanted to compare both ways of life. As shown in The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians, Xenophon compares the jurisdiction between the overall Greek and the more sophisticated Spartans. For example, when he writes about the boys as objects of affection, he states that among the other Greeks such as the Boeotians and Eleians, a man and a boy may enter a union and attempt to gain favor of the young boys however, it is sometimes prohibited for them to converse. As learned in lecture, in ancient Greece, during Xenophon’s time, it wasn’t unusual for older men to be attracted to the younger Greek boys however it was not something someone would share in the open. It was referred to in another Greek writing, The Birds by Aristophanes, the two main characters imagine a land where it would be rude for a family friend not to grope another man’s son. This shows just how prevalent the phenomenon of these relations between older and younger men had become in Xenophon’s home. Lycurgus however did not agree that it should have to be so hidden and stated that an older man liked a boy because of his personality and not only due to lust and physical attraction, that it was an excellent thing and should be celebrated (pg 85). Xenophon definitely wrote to inform the general Greek population of this new way of life to those who thus far did not follow and believe in the ways that Lycurgus did. This is probably one of his greatest works not only because it is our best explanation of Spartans rules and community life, but also because it stirred up the governments around Sparta. They tried to get rid of him through exile because of his wrongdoings while he exploits their faulty governmental regulations through his writing which spread much further. Using evidence from the document, it is obvious that Xenophon was not only a true follower of Lycurgus but is a strong ancient day liberalist. Xenophon believed in all of the rules Lycurgus set up which were, at the time, contrary to popular beliefs of those in the other Greek societies. For example, Lycurgus set up a food system in which people were only to take enough to survive. It states that they should â€Å"take only such a quantity as never to be oppressed with repletion, and not to be strangers to living somewhat frugally† so that they would be â€Å"more satisfied with any kind of food† (pg 84). I feel that this shows Xenophon as a warrior or strong willed because he believes that suffering in the end will bring good fortune. This is also shown in the document when he agrees with Lycurgus’ law that one should not wear shoes in order to toughen their feet so they can become stronger and more agile. As a liberalist with a strong warrior background, Xenophon celebrated the strength and intuitive creativity of the Spartan way of life. His attitudes toward all other nations were that they were weak; the way they were set up would not be beneficial to their people. However, after being raised in Athens for all those years, how is it that he just now is changing his views? After being exiled for fighting under the rule of the Spartan king, Xenophon began living his new life as a respectable member of the Spartan community. He wrote a lot and became an active member as well as studied under Socrates, which I believed helped him to see the ways of life from a new point of view. Since the Spartans rules were so different from the others it makes sense that Xenophon would be compelled to write about their lifestyle, which was a powerful and virtuous one at that. I think the fact the these rules seemed to try to push everyone to be the best they could be in every category including virtue (honours paid to old age encouragement of virtue 91), honor (infamy and penalties of cowardice 90), to be humble (obedience to the magistrate and laws 89), and last but definitely not least, physical strength. The environment around them seems to be one with an availability of steep terrain but it is also a city. When addressing that the children should not wear shoes he specifies that it will allow them to go up steep inclines with greater ease so I feel that there are either many steep steps leading towards their great buildings in the city or possibly rough terrain. Another thing I noticed is that the Spartas are very set on being powerful, strong and ready to battle so it is very likely that the warriors in Sparta must be equipped to walk over far, steep distances in order to battle. The surrounding areas of Sparta are possibly spread out from city to city do that one city is not directly touching another Greek city even though they may be close. Again, while addressing the wear of the Spartans, Xenophon states that they need to wear only one outfit so that they can become accustomed to both the cold and heat which leads me to believe that the general climate there was about the same as it would be over here in North America today. As far as the people in Sparta, they are all accustomed to joining in competitions, becoming stronger and becoming the best of the best. Sparta differs a lot from Athens not only based upon its laws but the way the people act and react to one another. In Sparta the women we to be equal to the men; â€Å"the female should practice bodily exercises no less than the male sex †¦expecting that when both parents were rendered strong, a stronger offspring would be born from them. † (pg 82). Not only does this show that the people of Sparta were all about toughness and strength but it goes back to support the idea that Xenophon too was like them and had a warrior like personality about him. Also, they are trying to spread equality between the men and women in ancient Sparta which is something that women are still struggling with today. In the other Greek nations the women are to sit and spin wool, to be sedentary, which would be parallel to the old ideas in American history which would not let women hold places in many jobs, institutions or positions in war. Sparta believes that men and women should both become strong and sturdy, ready for war. Although the women were not completely equal to men, this coincides with the way American women in modern day have worked so hard to become equal to men. One rule in particular that seems very odd is a part of a rule previously mentioned; Citizens are to be frugal when it comes to food. The second part of the rule is that if one does become hungry, it is â€Å"honorable to steal as many cheeses as possible† (pg 84) but on the contrary, if caught doing so, one will be greatly punished. It is like saying that it is not illegal unless caught like in today’s society how underage drinking is one of the most common problems but unless you get caught there won’t be a problem. This rule was likely created in order to make the Spartan people more cunning and creative in order to make them more useful in battle. Also, survival of the fittest may come into play in this situation; It is clear that the Spartan’s were mainly concentrated on being strong and warriors so if one was not smart enough to find ways to steal cheese and felt as though he did not have enough to eat, he would either have to leave Sparta or he may perish. Either way the Spartans would have lost one of their weak links and would become stronger as a whole. This document most clearly tells us that Lycurgus was a very great leader and a liberalist of his days going against all that the other Greeks believed to be true. Not only that, but Lycurgus created one of the strongest nations in which Xenophon quickly felt at home. Although he may not directly state it, Xenophon conveys a sense of bitterness towards the other Greeks by judging everything they do. He makes it seem ridiculous that the rules the follow were ever thought to be substantial laws when he makes remarks that nearly make fun of their way such as when he says things like â€Å"a man should feel ashamed†(83), â€Å"how can we expect women treated thus way should produce†(82), or â€Å"Instead of being rendered effeminate†(84). Although it may be easily miss ed, after given a bit of thought it is clear that Xenophon is, in a way, making fun of the others by calling their men feminine, men shameful and telling them they do not even know how to treat their women. He shoots small phrases and insults to the others in order to diminish their power and pull support over to their side. Clearly he was very successful in using his persuasion technique as the Spartans rules spread to the â€Å"modern ruling classes of England and continental Europe† which both have based their education on the Greek classics (82). This document is a very scholarly piece and gives one of the greatest accounts of history back in ancient Greece on not only the Spartan side but also on the side of all of the other Greek. It gives a good overview of multiple ways of life and sets up a time period in which new laws were being created which would eventually take over the old ways that the others used to follow. It reminds me of when the American’s first made their laws apart from the British rule, although they were a small nation compared to Great Britain, they were powerful and thoughtful in their rule making. Based on the rules that Lycurgus placed on his people, I believe the Spartans could be considered the original revolutionaries. I feel during this time the Athenians looked at the Spartans with distaste and thought they were much smarter than the Spartans who were trying to enforce new, unorthodox rules which would make them stronger. It probably also scared the Athenians a little because their people were not strong and built like the Spartans, instead they had the intelligence, which Xenophon and Lycurgus found to be insufficient anyway as they criticize the way of education used in Athens in the constitution. This document is of great importance as it set up the new way of life and set apart the Spartans from all other Greeks which is part of the reason they are so famous today.

Adaptation to Climate Change

Adaptation to Climate Change ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE; AN ISSUE THAT MUST NOT BE OVERLOOKED There are many compelling questions one can ask about how climate science experts and economic experts interpret the change in climate and man’s contribution to it. To argue that our earth is not warming is futile; nonetheless, the risk of trying to prevent it is very high. It is only useful if we try to adapt. In the field of climate change, scientists denounce non-science experts claiming that these are technical questions for those who understand the theories and concepts. The controversy over whether global warming exists or not, is undoubtedly, a scientific question. However, deciding whether we should intervene, and if so, what actions to embrace is clearly not a scientific question. It is an economic question, which puts us firmly in the realm of economic experts. For any continuing event, there are five theory responses: maximizing, inverting, preventing, adapting and ignoring. Supposing we do not want to maximize or ignore global warming, the three applicable options are reversing, prevention (known as â€Å"mitigation† in the climate change idiom) or adaptation. Right up until the present day, the favoured option has been prevention. For a period of twenty-five years, public servants have debated only this response. Margaret Thatchers speech to the UN assembly (in 1989) throws light on the beginning of this approach. Later came Al Gore and Kyoto with the Stern Review adding to the list. Currently, David Cameron and Edward Miliband debate about whether or not climate change is a national security threat and which party is best placed to prevent this threat. There are good scientific reasons to believe that prevention (or even inverting) is a realistic option. Since the `90s there have been tremendous breakthroughs with our ability to reduce chlorofluorocarbons. Despite this, there are those who believe that the past twenty-five years have brainwashed us into believing that our potential and ability to prevent global warming by reducing Carbon emissions is much less compared to some Sulphur emissions and other pollutants. These years of framing tremendous exorbitant prevention schemes only took some few degrees centigrade off global warming, in comparison with the rise of three to four degrees. This puts the minimum price of such vanity at 5 per cent of Gross Domestic Product each year, with some models recommending that the definite cost is realistically more than 20 per cent. Scientific inclined people reply by saying we must increase our attempt to prevent global warming from advancing. However, China and India and America will disagree and in economically desolate Britain there are no chances requesting for more. Considering prevention were realistic, policy analysis recommends it would be dreadful an idea to consider. At the moment, according to government criteria in the UK, there is difficulty in trying to get access to a global warming mitigation scheme that matches cost with benefits. As an example, the rediscovery of the strategy for the renewal of energy having a twenty-year cost of fifty-seven billion pounds to seventy billion pounds but only benefits around four billion pounds to five billion pounds. The problem is so worse that couple of years back the guidance for the ministerial sign-off of policy impact assessments amended the strategy so that ministers no longer proclaim that their assertion that benefits will exceed costs. At the present moment, they sign to acknowledge they solely assume that benefits â€Å"justify† costs. The few analysis that found more positive net profits, such as the Climate Change Act of 2008, reckoned a global consensus that has not been implemented. On that note, it is absurd to recommend that the UK’s doing ten times more to prevent warming proceedings could perhaps be an outstanding scheme, even though it will be possible to work. The economics of preventing global warming has simply not been up to the task. Prior to the famous Stern Review, economic experts observing the sector thought that adapting to the change in climate patterns should be the pivotal strategy. What â€Å"adaptation† will suggest in a practical way is that we cut the risk of spending too much money, and the program will be less complicated. There are some UK Green schemes that influence the public to use extravagant energy and make them pay out incompetent immense sum of capital to cater for insulation. These Green systems also tax their traveling in ways that force them to execute reduced trade and craft which does not only hamper the growth, but also make adaptation very hard and unyielding. In the year 2012 the UK authority acquired forty-five billion pounds from fuel taxes, which corresponds to 2.9% GDP. While UK authorities evaluate green schemes will increase medium-scaled vocation invoice by thirty-eight per cent over the next sixteen years. On the contrary, the most outstanding project is by instigatin g GDP to allow the folks to be more prone to behaving in ways that are friendly to their habitat Moreover, the public should not misuse their wealth, on mitigation attempts while fragmenting capital for adaptation. If the UK authorities do not have enough funds and they should opt between money for energy and money for flooding protection, it must be considered a walkover. There is the need to investigate several ways to adapt to the warming of our globe with likely brutal climate. These strategies should change the methods of supporting our rivers by building flood defence systems, developing of crops that can be tolerant to drought and using water sources that are scarce in a more efficient manner. Adaptation would not be inexpensive or straightforward. However, it will be more attainable than prevention and will cost so much less. Additionally, adaptation is highly safer than prevention on two significant techniques. Firstly, we do expect that global warming will not occur as we presume. Ten years earlier, scientists studying climate patterns have scuffled to explain that the temperature has not sprung in view of the late 80s. They persist it does not make any discrepancy to their indelible tale about whether warming advancement exists, and what their consequential effects are. Moreover, perchance, it could be right. Nevertheless it makes a change to policy assessment.   If, in 1997, it was clear that abstaining from mitigation of climate patterns could not cause any rise in temperatures, there should have been a concern to adjust the way we assess our schemes. Virtually no scheme which has no effect within three to five years is a good one to start, by virtue of how we discount our future. Secondly, adaptation is much safer considering we only know nearly insufficient facts about prevention strategies and may suffer a great loss if they do not function, or they might develop delinquent long duration response. When we adapt only when there is a need, there is a reduction in waste of time and capital that is crucial to sustainable development.   At the point of finality, adaptations make us prosperous and have richer tastes. It seems plausible that we can devise means that can stop global warming from getting out of hand. However, we have wasted twenty-five years in trying to prevent warming of our globe, and have merely scraped the plain. In that initiative, we have lost untold large sums of money and are planning to waste even more. We do not have to disbelief the real existence of climate change to reject the notion that adaptation is a not a good tactic. Our method of prevention has perished, adaptation is the key. WORD COUNT: 1235 BISMARK NTIM-PEASAH KOFI BIBLIOGRAPHY: . Australian Broadcasting Corporation, viewed 28 November 2014, .GOV.UK, viewed November 2014, viewed 28 November 2014, .The Guardian, viewed 2 December 2014, .Scientific American, viewed 4th December 2014, .European Commision, viewed 7 December 2014, .The Telegraph, viewed 7 December 2014, . The Telegraph, viewed 7 December 2014, .Wikipedia, viewed 11 January 2014,

Nativism Essay -- essays papers

Nativism All so called "Native Americans," were once immigrants. There were two waves of immigration between the early 1800’s through the early 1900’s. The first wave of immigrants called the "old immigrants" came to America between 1890-1897. They were primarily from Northern Europe: Great Britain, Germany, and Scandinavia. The second wave of immigrants called the "new immigrants" came to America from 1897-1924. The "new immigrants" primarily came from Southern and Eastern Europe countries such as Poland, Russia, and Italy. Nativist parties, like the Know-Nothings and the Order of the Star Spangled Banner verbalized their distaste and disapproval of immigrants. Actions and regulations against immigration did not begin until near the end of the "old immigration" and the beginning of the "new immigration." Nativists had many fears and concerns regarding immigrants. These concerns included being socially ill-suited to live with the older stock Americans, stealing jobs from the nat ive work force, and bringing new, radical ideas to the country. These fears and concerns caused nativists to come up with schemes to keep immigrants out of the country. These strategies had a great impact on immigration in our country. Nativists had many concerns regarding immigrants. They feared that immigrants would take the jobs of "native Americans" because they were willing to work for very low wages. When the native work force went on strike many workers feared that many immigrants would displace them in the workplace. Another concern was that immigrants were hard to "Americanize." These people came to American with their own culture, traditions, and language; many of them didn’t even know English. Many nativists resented immigrants because they permeated the city and made it unsafe and dirty. Their slums were breeding grounds for disease and violence. Nativists regarded immigrants as an inferior class of people. One of the theories to support this dispute was eugenics. Eugenics is the study of human heredity, aimed at "improving" the genetic quality of the human stock. The eugenics movement was an effort to grade races and ethnic groups according to their genetic qualities. Eugenicists claimed that immigrants were inferior to Anglo-Saxons and were polluting the "pure" American bloodstream. The sheer number of immigrants entering the country also scared many people. A. P.. . ...ch made it so intelligent immigrants were allowed into the country. In 1921, the Emergency Immigration Act was passed. This act made it so the number of aliens of any nationality admitted to the U.S. in a year could not exceed 3 percent of the number of foreign-born residents of that nationality living in the U.S. in 1910. Even though this heavily cut down the number of immigrants entering the country, the majority of the immigrants were "new immigrants." This led to the National Origins Act in 1924. This act was harsher than the act of 1921 because it decreased the percentage of immigrants from 3% to 2%, and pushed the year from 1910 to 1890, thus making the majority of immigrants "old immigrants." It is quite ironic that these "nativists" came to America for the same reasons as the immigrants who came in the time period of 1880-1925; however, they do not accept the immigrants who came in that period, just as they had once wanted to be accepted. Emma Lazarus’ "The New Colossus", which is on the Statue of Liberty, reads "Give me you tired, your poor, Your huddled mass yearning to breathe free," but in fact, many Americans, nativists, did not want these poor, huddled mass at all.

Mad Cow Disease :: essays research papers

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy or Mad Cow Disease (BSE), degenerative brain disorder of cattle. Symptoms in cows include loss of coordination and a typical staggering gait. Affected animals also show signs of senility, for example, lack of interest in their surroundings, the abandonment of routine habits, disinterest in feed and water, or unpredictable behavior. Affected cattle show symptoms when they are three to ten years old. First identified in Britain in November 1986, over 170,000 cases have since been recorded there. Sporadic incidences have been confirmed in other European countries, with Switzerland (over 260 cases) and Ireland (over 260 cases) identifying the largest number. It has also been recognized in Canada, where cases are confined to dairy cows imported from Britain. BSE has not been officially confirmed in the United States or any other major milk-producing country. Autopsies of affected cattle reveal holes in the brain tissue that give it a spongy, or spongiform, texture. Similar spongiform diseases have been recognized in humans (for example, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease or CJD) for over a century and in sheep (scrapie) for over 200 years. The cause of BSE is unproven, although there is strong evidence that prions, which may be infective proteins, are the agent. Other hypotheses suggest that prions work with an as yet undetected virus to cause the infection. Recycled animal tissue, which had been routinely fed to British dairy cows as a protein supplement, was identified as the source of the infection. The European Commission's Scientific Veterinary Committee and the world control body, the Fà ©dà ©ration Internationale des Epizooties (FNE) believes that BSE was originally spread from sheep's brains infected with scrapie and that its spread was accidentally accelerated by the ingestion of brain tissue taken from cows that had become infected with BSE. Following through with this fodder transmission theory, the British government introduced compulsory destruction of suspect animals and their carcasses beginning in 1988. The feeding of animal tissue to cows was banned in Britain in July 1988 and since mid-1992, monitors working for the United Kingdom Ministry of Agriculture have recorded a persistent decline in the number of confirmed cases. It is estimated that the program will eradicate BSE in Britain by the end of 1999. Since the initial report of the disease, there has been fear and speculation that it might be transferable to humans through milk or beef products. The appearance of CJD in several dairy farmers in Britain in the early 1990s heightened the alarm.

Journal of the Plague Year and Frankenstein

The Plague and Frankenstein The quest for knowledge is eternal and almost never-ending. People devote their lives to studying and advancing their knowledge, but their advancement is always held in check by society and the people who studied before them. Several novels have been written which explore the effect knowledge and its limitations can have on society. This paper will focus on Defoe’s Journal of the Plague Year, and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus. Even though these two novels were written about 100 years apart, they still exemplify many aspects as to why knowledge has limitations. While Defoe’s Journal centers on how to prevent and cure the plague, with a heavy emphasis on religion, Shelley’s Frankenstein has little to no religious affiliation, and focuses on how science and knowledge can potentially lead to evil and misfortune. The plague was a severe and devastating disease which affected Europe multiple times throughout history; each time killing every person who came down with the disease. People are fortunate enough today to have a cure for this disease, but during the 1700s, there was no cure and very little knowledge about proper medical practices. Defoe mentions how signs were posted throughout London, claiming of people who knew of a cure or treatment for the plague, however some of these treatments â€Å"prepared their bodies for the plague, instead of preserving them against it. †1 Thieves and pick-pockets robbed and cheated poor people out of their money with scams, sometimes even poisoning their victims with tonics or â€Å"physicks† that could include such poisons as Mercury in them. These scammers were all throughout the city, appealing to the desires and abundance of the poor. There was no regulation of such business practices and advertisements made ridiculous claims of free help, only to deceive the poor once they got there, forcing them to pay for what may (or may not) help them. These practices were quite cruel and unjust, but people were so scared for their lives that they were willing to do anything which would allow them to live. Not every person in the city fell victim to these scams. Many people once they heard news that the plague had reached London decided to flee and head to some far off town where they might be able to avoid catching the disease. This plight from the city was not only a rational decision, but a religious one as well. Much debate between people in London was sparked about the religious justification for staying in the city, and trusting in God to protect them where they were, or to leave London and â€Å"trust God with [their] safety and health†. 3 For the main character in this novel, H. F. struggles with this decision because he can leave London and live with his relatives, and risk losing all of his possessions, but he ultimately decides to stay, viewing his decision as remaining faithful to God. Upon informing his brother of this decision, he learns that the person, who he was going to entrust with his property during his leave, became ill with the plague, only enforcing H. F. ’s feelings that he made the correct decision to stay in God’s faith. 4 Once the plague hit London with full force, the city was forced to find a new way in which to contain this disease. Instead of looking to the filth with which people lived in, and regarding that it could be carried by animals such as rats, the town determined that each house was to be inspected by doctors, and if the plague should be found within a home, the inhabitants would be locked inside the house, only to come out if they died or the disease had passed. Each home which the plague was found in had a red cross painted on the door, marking it for all to see, and a Watchman was assigned to make sure nobody went in or out of the house, and to run errands for the family if need be. This cruel idea caused many families to parish in their own homes, while others tried to escape by either sneaking out or attacking/threatening the watchmen. In the book Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus, by Mary Shelley, the underlying theme is how knowledge and power can lead to misery and destruction. In the book, Victor Frankenstein goes off to college and becomes obsessed with several different types of philoso phy and science. He becomes absorbed in â€Å"the secret of life† and he ultimately tries to recreate it. He is successful and brings life to a monster so hideous that even he cannot bear to be around. Frankenstein tries to desert the monster which he created, but he is never fully able to, as the monster follows and spies on Frankenstein and kills part of his family. Frankenstein is appalled that his creation could have begun to cause such horror and pain to people around him, but is worried that if he tells anyone about the monster which he has created, then he himself will look like a madman. The monster himself is eager for affection from humans, but everywhere he goes, he is shunned and forced away from the town due to people being in fear of him. The monster spends much time watching the actions of a family of peasants, where from his hiding place he is able to learn how to speak French as well as read. After some time he ultimately decides that they are a very compassionate family and that he should reveal himself to them, upon doing this, they are disgusted and chase him away. The monster vows to get revenge on Frankenstein and first begins by killing his little brother whom he stumbles across in the forest in Geneva. He then plants the child’s necklace on a friend of Victor’s, to make her appear as the murderer. She is tried for the crime and hung for it. The monster realizes that his only chance for happiness lies within Frankenstein creating him a female companion. He persuades Frankenstein to create him a female saying that he will leave mankind alone forever and go live in some distant land if he has a companion to go with him. 7 As Frankenstein has begun work on his second monster in Scotland, he is reminded of how crazy he became when creating his first monster, and upon catching a glimpse of his monster watching him through the window, Frankenstein freaks out, and destroys the second body which he is creating. The monster upon seeing this is enraged and promises to kill the rest of Frankenstein’s friends and family. This promise holds true, for Frankenstein loses his best friend that night, his wife on his wedding night, and his father. Rather than heed to the monster’s wishes and create a wife for him, Frankenstein was overcome with the guilt of the deaths of his monsters first two victims. He worries that in creating another, he will be creating a duo of evil that will wreak havoc upon the human race. For it was his fault in the first place which let his imagination get a hold of himself and he wanted to create life for himself. This intense lust for knowledge which Frankenstein has ultimately leads to his demise. He becomes mad in his quest and ends up destroying everyone dear to him as well as himself in the end. Both The Journal of the Plague Year and Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus have heavy themes about knowledge. Defoe’s Journal specifically focuses on how disease was treated and what the methods were to try to cure it. The Journal also has a heavy religious force in it as well. The people in the story as well as the main characters, look towards Bible versus and quotes for guidance in their decision making. This is not the same as in Frankenstein where the main character becomes god-like himself with his creation of life. This major difference is most likely due to the fact that the novels were written about 100 years apart from each other and people’s views how religion affected their daily lives had greatly changed. There is very little mentioned in Frankenstein about religion at all. In each novel, there is excess knowledge than what people have the capacity for; therefore in The Journal, London makes the harsh decision to lock people in their own homes in order to prevent the spread of the plague; while in Frankenstein, his ever persistent quest for knowledge winds up killing him and those dearest to him. The novels are almost a warning as to what effect knowledge can have on society and suggest, that as Socrates said, â€Å"the only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing. †