Expository Essay on Texas Hold Em Poker - 1239 Words

To any sports fan, names such as Babe Ruth and Joe Namath are synonymous with gods, geniuses and pioneers in their respective sports. However, amongst poker players; the name Doyle Brunson can often be referenced in the same manner as the Lord in Church. Brunson, now an old man with gray balding hair and more money than he could count, is still to be found at one of the many poker tables in the oasis in the desert we call Las Vegas. In fact, Brunson is so good, about twenty years ago he wrote a book to strengthen his competition. The book Super System is considered to be the poker bible as well as the foremost learning tool used by professional poker players. To this day it is the greatest publication on No Limit Texas Hold `em†¦show more content†¦Community cards are cards that the whole community can use and there is five of them. Together will your two hole cards whoever makes the best five card hand wins. In regards to the community cards, they are dealt face up i n the middle of the table. The first three cards dealt are known as the flop, then the turn and finally the river. The river is your last chance to catch the card you have been waiting for to make your hand a winner. Before and after the flop as well as before and after the river there are rounds of betting. The first two people to the left of the dealer must place a forced bet called the blind. Blinds are to assure there is always money in the pot. In order to see the flop everyone must call the amount of the blind or fold depending on their hole cards. There are four ways to bet, Check, Raise, Fold and Call. Checking means you are betting nothing and passing bet to the next player. Raising is obvious, it means you are putting more money into the pot. Folding is when you do not want to call or your cards are so bad you dont even want to check. And finally, calling is when you match the raise made by another player to see the next card. You have all four options to choos e from except when a player has bet before you and then you cannot check. In order to make the best five-card hand you must take a minute to learn how the hands rank. All of these can be winning hands but I will list

Book Report Of Preparing Missionaries Or Intercultural

Book Report of Preparing Missionaries or Intercultural Communication This book was written by Lyman E. Reed. â€Å"Preparing Missionaries or Intercultural Communication† is a book for missionaries who want to prepare for being a cross-cultural missionary and provides the necessities for adequate preparation of missionaries. One of the clearer imperative for missions was pronounced and is recorded in Matthew 28: 19-20: Go, therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. Missionaries should be less ethnocentric and more appreciative of national believers and their culture. If we always think our culture is the†¦show more content†¦Being a cross-cultural missionary need to learn more than others because when we leave the environment, which we are used to, we will face a lot difficulties may beyond your imagination. Missionaries should have a heart for Christ and are able to be a bicultural person. We need to open our heart to adapt the new life and try to learn the language, which is spoken the country you are in. I think when people see missionaries try to use themselves to be a witness that is really touching. At the same time, they will have a desire to know about your story. For me I think personal witness is the best way to share the gospel and to make people believe God’s presence. Learning a new culture and a new language not just can be a witness as yourself, and it also can make you know more about the people who are surrounde d. When you know more about the people’s thinking, you will know what the people really need and you will have the best idea to prepare your message. Empathy is really important for missionaries to care and to pray for people because if we don’t know their feeling it will be harder to make people rely on you. Sometimes people just need someone to talk and to share their burden. I have an example for this: I live in Taiwan, but our missionaries are from the United States. You know it is impossible that everyone can speak English, so most people they need a translator to help them. The biggest problem is when our own words are translated by others; it may have some

Critical Analysis of Arguments System †Free Samples to Students

Question: Discuss about the Critical Analysis of Arguments. Answer: Introduction: The initial premise of the argument says that the fundamental Management concept of the Liberal humanitarians about Burqa is not acceptable as they only views the presence of Burqa to be a symbol of female repression and an example of the cultural diversity in Australia. According to the argument, the aforementioned perceptions should not be considered with high amount of priority though have not given any firm explanation about why the views should not be considered. Further, the assertion presented by the first premise regarding the greatness of the nation is rather vague, as it does not stand for any particular meaning. However, the most significant and considerable fact presented by the premise is that there is a growing awareness among the fair-minded Australians who believe that Burqa is a threat for the society. The second premise asserts with evidence that Burqa has now become a successful veil for committing crimes. The case of robbing in Mainbrace provides enough proof of the fact that through wearing Burqa people are now deceiving themselves and attempting criminal acts. However, the evidence is not as stronger as required to establish the fact that Burqa has become a tool for crime because the readers require more such evidences. Therefore, the generalization is not proved potential to contemplate that Burqa has become a threat though it is a fact worth admitting that the attempt to make disguise with the apparel has made it difficult for the Police to catch the criminals. Moreover, the claim that police department is now in need of political power needs more explanation and evidences from other cases. The third premise presents relatively stronger approach as it talks about the negativity brought by Burqa and its purpose and its potentiality to impose harm on the core Australian value. However, it is to argue also that while talking about core values of Australia, there should have been mentions of some of the fundamental socio-cultural values of Australia. The argument has only mentioned that the equality of women is one of the core values of Australia. The particular statement requires more evidences and constitutional supporting statements. However, the argument has asserted a very fundamental fact that says immigrants should not recreate their own values and embrace the culture of the foreign nation. However, the argument that burqa has become a predicament for the integration is not completely acceptable, as no supportive statement has given about the fact that the Muslim inhabitants of Australia are opposing other Australian constitutions. The final premise interprets a poll result though in a brief manner, which is not expected. However, the interpretation is relevant as per the reason that the result that indicates that 81% of the Australians are against Burqa, therefore it should be banned. Analysis of the language and rhetoric used in Ban the Burqa The argument presented under the name Ban the Burqa asserts that there is an immediate need to ban the apparel called Burqa as it suppress women empowerment and has become a convenient veil for committing criminal acts. There has been found several chosen language and rhetoric while presenting the argument. Moreover, fallacious language games have been also there in the argument. In the initial paragraphs, there are some annoying words like Liberal do-gooders, which directly attacks the Management philanthropists and their humanitarian concepts. The categorization of the word falls under the argumentum ad hominem fallacy and it has helped the argument to oppose the mindset of those who have a somewhat optimistic opinion about Burqa. On the other hand, by putting words like fair-minded Asutralians, which falls under the argumentam ad populam fallacy, the argument is indicative of the fact that those who think Burqa is not a piece of threat are not fair minded. Most significantly, the third paragraph suffers from the particular fallacy of oversimplification. It is because the paragraph has generalized the fact that he Burqa is an aspect of repression though the argument should have considered the fact that not all Muslim women are forced to wear the apparel. The oversimplification has been misused, as there is the need to consider the fact that there are several women who wear the apparel by their own consent. Moreover, there can be seen use of varied vague, equivocal as well as emotional words like wishy-washy, great nation and old world. At the same time, there are found two more fallacies, which are circular reasoning and begging the question, through which, the argument has asserted that the multicultural society of Australia is great without the potential contribution made within the nation. The language that is full of vague and unnecessary emotional words have been supported by lack of evidences has made the argument biased and less relevant. A report on Roy Morgan Study The present segment will pursue a brief report on the study of Roy Morgan and the poll result brought by it and the use of the result by Advance Australia. The survey result have been issued in the Roy Morgan website on 6 August 2010. The survey has been conducted upon only 434 people or 0.002% population of Australia. The sample size is not only disappointing but also there has been no mention of the fact that the sample size is homogenous or not. The survey information only indicated that the survey has been conducted through messages and there has been no mention about the particular way of selecting the sample size and the reason behind it. Most significantly, there is no mention either about the fact that whether any differentiation has been made between the urban and rural respondents of Australia or not. In terms of measurement instrument, the survey has used two questions Should women be allowed to wear a burqa in the public places? and Should women be allowed to wear a burqa when giving evidence in court. The questions do not match properly with each other as per the purpose. Both the questions serve a same purpose and the differentiation between public place and court is not acceptable. There has been made no clarification of the fact that whether the all the respondents have been Australian citizens or not. Moreover, Burqa has been generalized and any proper form of the apparel has not been mentioned. Therefore, consequently the poll has acquired a fallacious generalization, which is not expected. As the sample size is not acceptable to determine that Burqa is a social issue, the Advance Australia should not have used the result. Because of the flawed generalization made in the survey, the argument of Advance Australia has also reached to a vague and hasty result. A recommendation briefing on the argument of Advance Australia The rising tension regarding the Muslim and Middle Eastern migrants has not in the Management Mainbrace area has been the primary reason for the political group Advance Australia to run a campaign against Burqa. The following section is attempting to provide recommendations considering the fallacies present in the argument. The claims made by the argument have not been supported with numerous potential evidences and is full with equivocal and vague language and fallacious words. There is the need for having a better understanding about the word Burqa and the concepts related to it (Gray 2014) The report has been made considering the survey made by the Roy Morgans study, which itself has a very week ground as the survey has been pursued only on 0.002% respondents. Therefore, determination of the fact that Burqa should be officially banned, based on the poll result is not acceptable completely. There is a need to have a justifiable liberal perspective on the apparels of Burqa and the culture related to it. Therefore, it would be best; if there will be an expression that will say that Burqa banning would not force the criminals in discarding their appearance (Barker 2016). Moreover, in order to establish the aforementioned expression, a proper survey should be done. If there has been done no such proper, survey yet instead of the study of Roy Morgan, then the emphasis should center on more relevant information related to the issues brought by Burqa (Baehr and Gordon 2013). References Baehr, P. and Gordon, D., 2013. From the headscarf to the burqa: the role of social theorists in shaping laws against the veil.Economy and Society,42(2), pp.249-280. Barker, R., 2016. Rebutting the Ban the Burqa Rhetoric: A Critical Analysis of the Management Arguments for a Ban on the Islamic Face Veil in Australia.Adel. L. Rev.,37, p.191. Gray, A., 2014. The Manifestation of Religious Belief Through Dress.European Journal of Law Reform,16, p.2. Aph.gov.au. 2017.Muslim Australians Parliament of Australia. [online] Available at: https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/archive/MuslimAustralians [Accessed 15 May 2017]. Baehr, P. and Gordon, D., 2013. From the headscarf to the burqa: the role of social theorists in shaping laws against the veil.Economy and Society,42(2), pp.249-280. Barker, R., 2016. Rebutting the Ban the Burqa Rhetoric: A Critical Analysis of the Arguments for a Ban on the Islamic Face Veil in Australia.Adel. L. Rev.,37, p.191. En.wikipedia.org. 2017.Types of hijab. [online] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_hijab [Accessed 15 May 2017]. Gray, A., 2014. The Manifestation of Religious Belief Through Dress.European Journal of Law Reform,16, p.2. Levey, G.B., 2015. Secularism as proto-multiculturalism: the case of Australia. Williams, R.R., 2015. WHY STUDY RELIGION VISUALLY?.Seeing Religion: Toward a Visual Sociology of Religion,146, p.192.

The Governments and States of Locke, Aquinas, and Essay Example For Students

The Governments and States of Locke, Aquinas, and Essay St. AugustineIn John Lockes Second Treatise of Government, he identifies a government that is of the peoples consent with his essential raison d;#900;etre being the preservation and protection of personal property. This type of government is extremely comparable with the type of government that St. Augustine describes in his work City of God, while at the same time contrasts the views of Aquinas in the ways a state should operate. The end goal of how each of these philosophers states purposes presents the greatest split between each of their philosophies. To understand how each of these philosophers states are similar and different from each other, a deeper analysis is necessary. The first and possibly most striking similarity between the states that both Locke and St. Augustine propose lies in the fact that both see the state as a necessary evil. Locke describes the perfect life as one in the state of nature, where there are limitless boundaries to freedom. Within these limitless bo undaries to do whatever you want lays the ability for others to do harm to you and your property, because they have complete freedom as well. In order to overcome this lack of security, Locke describes the state as a necessary evil which one must give up certain freedoms in order to be protected under the rule of law. This is similar to St. Augustine in the respect that within the world there are evil men who will do harm to others. Augustine argues that laws are necessary to make sure that people can live with the peace of mind that they are protected from the sins of others. We will write a custom essay on The Governments and States of Locke, Aquinas, and specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now One of the contrasting points the states of Aquinas and Locke possess is rooted in how each state should set up and decide their laws. Aquinas argues that we should set up our laws based on high morals, which all men could agree on, and on the high ideals of natural law. Locke disagrees with this in the respect that all men are Tabula Rasa, which begin life as blank slates and develop their views and ideas based on the experiences they are exposed to. According to Locke the men in the state of Aquinas would all have different experiences and place importance on different morals and ideals. Therefore, Locke argues that in order to have a legitimate set of laws, they must be based on very solid foundations which cannot be subject to argument. Such foundations would be the protection of property, as well as the preservation of an individuals personal rights and freedoms. The role of the government in the eyes of Locke is very simple. It is to protect the peace, safety, security, and pub lic good of the people. Locke arrives at this conclusion from the reasoning behind leaving the state of nature and entering civil society. We leave the state of nature (perfect freedom and perfect equality) in order to be free from being infringed upon by others. Although we must give up some of our freedoms for protection, they are small compared to the benefits of protection that we receive from civil society. To simplify things, we can simply refer to the role of government as to protect our private property. This private property includes our lives, personal rights, and physical objects. In order for the government to be doing its job correctly, Locke believes that all three of these must be protected. Aquinas is contrary to Locke in the respect that he believes the primary role of the government is to make its citizens better people. Aquinas believes that the citizens of a state will become moral if they are repeatedly forced to abide by laws that are based on virtue. According to Aquinas, man is a being that succumbs to sin. In order to make man more moral he needs to be constantly reminded of rules that are virtuous in their own right. The purpose behind these virtuous rules is that if man is forced to encounter them of a regular basis, eventually they will rub off of him and he will become virtuous himself. Aquinas would even say that the virtues that would be made into laws are divine, and to go against them would be to go against God himself. This idea that no one can oppose the government because of its divinity is a point that Locke opposes drastically. .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da , .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .postImageUrl , .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da , .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da:hover , .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da:visited , .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da:active { border:0!important; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da:active , .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u74f171aba53da4f7edc58504994ba3da:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Science Essay TopicLocke views all men in the state as equal on all levels, with no man in a state of inequality. This differs from Aquinas and St. Augustine whom believe that the leader (even a tyrant) was one which god placed above all others. In the government created by Locke, the citizens have every right to revolt against an oppressive tyrant. Locke believes this because the government is a body that is composed of the desires of the majority. If the government or tyrant is not abiding by the majoritys desires, then the people have a fundamental responsibility to install a new government. Obviously, this Lockean idea of majority rule is completely contrary to the div ine rule in the writings of Aquinas and St. Augustine. Overall, the main difference between the states that are presented by the three theorist lies in how they believe the citizens will bind to the political community. Locke believes that the preservation of rights and protection of property binds the citizens together. On the other hand, Aquinas and St. Augustine believe that the citizens will group around the idea that they are following the wishes and desires of a superior divine power, with ideological unison among the people. These two different views create rather different societies, each with its strengths and weaknesses. Arguments can be made on either side of the coin that one of the states is more durable than the other. When looking at them from an individual standpoint, it can be safe to say that people are more prone to siding with the Lockean state. The root of this resting in all individuals desire to have their ideas and opinions respected among others. The Lockean state provides a contingency for this with majority rule and freedom being placed above all others. The state outlined by Aquinas and St. Augustine does not; in the respect that the people in their state would be forced to follow the divine laws laid out for them with no contingency for personal beliefs. When looking at practical historical examples of these two states, we can see the Lockean version in the United States. Although still arguably young in respect to the rest of the world, the U.S. is a mixing pot of peoples from a plethora of different backgrounds and ideals. Within this melting pot everyone seems to get along because individual freedoms are not stepped on. Rather, the state and government is more concerned with protecting each individuals freedoms. People do not want to be told that there is only one version of right and wrong, which is exactly what the opposing state proposes. Examples of the type of state that Aquinas and St. Augustine present can be seen in some of the failed regimes of the past century. Prime examples of states that attempted to strive for the better good of its people, and failed, can be seen in both Nazi Germany and communist Russia. These states attempted to take each individual and force them into an ideal mold of what they wanted their citizens to become. Even though these societies succeeded for some amount of time, both have since collapsed and states in the Lockean from have arose out of their ashes. As aforementioned, both of the types of states presented have strong and weak points to ponder on. Both have rose to power at one point in time or another, although the Lockean state has remained where others have fallen. Overall, an argument can be made that in our modern world with globalization and a never ending mixing of cultures; the only way for a state to succeed is to put ideological ideals behind and look to protect the greater good by looking out for the peace, safety, and public good of its people.