Micro Macro Dilemma Essay

I have read and fully understand the article Racial Microaggressions in Everyday Life: the Implications for Clinical Practice. However, I must admit the article does not sit well with me and I have learned I have been a microaggressor since my early days; specifically, I have offered microinsults many times over without even realizing it. Through the years, I have thought of myself as one who consciously believes in equal rights for “all”; not just the American people, but people of all races across the entire globe. Granted, I have never

Microaggressions are subtle verbal or nonverbal, intentional or unintentional insults toward a target group or person that may be unconscious or automatic (Neville, Spanierman, & Lewis, 2012). Microaggressions can be expressed in three different forms: microassault, microinsult, and microinvalidation (Neville, Spanierman, & Lewis, 2012). Microassaults are obvious racial derogations. Microassaults are mainly categorized by a violent environmental, nonverbal, or verbal occurrence that is intentionally meant to hurt someone. Microassaults can occur and be portrayed through intentional racial discrimination, avoidant behaviors, or name calling. Microassaults are explicit

Microaggression is a form of negative communication in which the speaker is targeting a certain group of people. This could be the female gender, people of a different race, or lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender (LGBTs). The speakers behave, talk, or act in manners belittling others. For example, when men whistle or laugh as a woman passes by, they are insinuating that the body of that woman is used to give them entertainment. Similarly, an indigenous American who tells a customer not to ‘Jew’ intends to communicate that the customer should not behave stingily as Jews do. Although this form of behavior is seen as a pure form of an act of hatred, psychologists believe that there is a connection between personality and microaggressions. It is a mental condition reflecting how the perpetrators view the world in four ways; dominance/inferiority,

While nuclear energy can generate plenty of electricity, it can easily be abused. Nuclear energy plants can unfortunately be preferred targets for terrorists, also producing nuclear waste. Nuclear waste is bad for the environment because it requires a dumping ground due to the fact that it cannot be processed. If this continues, there will eventually be no more

Lewis Munford, an analyst, once wrote, "Too much energy is as fatal as too little, hence the regulation of energy input and output not its unlimited expansion, is in fact one of the main laws of life." This is true when dealing with nuclear power. Because our societies structure and processes both depend upon energy, man is searching for the most efficient and cheapest form of energy that can be used on a long term basis. And because we equate power with growth, the more energy that a country uses, -the greater their expected economic

In “Why I Still Support Nuclear Power, Even After Fukushima” writer William Tucker argues that even though Nuclear power is dangerous and risky compared to coal, natural gas, hydro, wind and solar energy, its more powerful and efficient than any other energy resource. There have been incidents like Fukushima where nuclear power caused destruction, but it doesn’t mean we should stop using it. There have been multiple incidents caused by coal mining and natural gas that has been deadly, but they are still being produced and used. Then why is nuclear power being avoided. Energy produced by hydro, wind and solar sources needs too much space in order to create large volume of energy.

Chernobyl, Fukushima and Three Mile Island — all known as major nuclear power disasters. Nuclear power might be a good source of power, but in the long run it can be a real hazard and should be banned. If we rely on nuclear power to be our primary power source, it will cause major problems to humans and the environment. Nuclear power is hard to dispose of, expensive to run, and the reactors can easily be disrupted and cause the release of massive amounts of radiation.

In 2013, a study conducted by NASA shows that nuclear energy has “prevented 1.84 million deaths from 1971 to 2009 with an average of 79,000 deaths (prevented)/ year from 2000 to 2009 (Kharecha and Hansen, 3). Even if one were to include the death tolls from both Chernobyl and Fukushima, nuclear energy ranks last in death per unit generated per year (see fig. 2). And although nuclear waste is toxic and harmful to humans (as it can cause cancer and death), it is usually stored in a safe location away from other resources and most importantly, away from humans. On the other hand, the toxic byproducts of fossil fuels are being released into the air every day. And by reducing the amount of fossil fuels burned, countless cases of cancer and lung disease as well as coal mining accidents have been avoided. For as long as nations use fossil fuels, nuclear energy saves much more lives than it

The potential and economic effects of Nuclear power can be devastating. Just look at Chernobyl. And everywhere that has Nuclear power. Where does all the radioactive and toxic waste go? We just put it in a huge barrel, and bury them in deep caves. It doesn’t get rid of the problem, it makes a bigger one. What happens if there’s an earthquake, and all of that spills and gets into our water system, or our oceans, or kills off our animals? It’s not safe.

The brink of extinction for every living organism is coming to its deadline. Having any sort of nuclear power is a possible chance of having a nuclear disaster. There are numerous places that suffered from nuclear disasters throughout the world. Ranging from power plant breakdowns all the way to nuclear explosions. The use of nuclear weapons is an extreme threat to the whole world. One bomb can wipe out a city effortlessly and leave dangerous chemicals in the air. The sheer volume of resources just to obtain nuclear power is just bearable; the fact that the majority of the resources are nonrenewable resources. Therefore all of the treats is a tremendous hazard to the people, the environment, and the entire world and which is why nuclear power

The world's natural resources are being consumed at an alarming rate. As these resources diminish, people will be seeking alternative sources by which to generate electricity for heat and light. The only practical short-term solution for the energy/pollution crisis should be nuclear power because it is available, cleaner and safer.

People have used nuclear power as their energy sources. Some people like using nuclear power because it produces more electricity while releasing less carbon dioxide. Others, despise using nuclear power since it’s perilous. Nuclear power could be our solution to lowering global warming and saving the polar caps, however good things comes with bad things. The waste could seep through the grounds, contaminating our water. Not to mention, the marine animals and plants will become contaminated as well. Therefore, nuclear power should not be used.

One of the pros of Nuclear power is that, if we use Nuclear Power then we will use Fossil Fuels a lot less than we normally use them, and this would help stop the greenhouse gases from going into the air. (CO2 and others.) Also, another good thing about Nuclear power is that it is low operation costs, nuclear power produces very inexpensive electricity. Also, even though the expense of setting up nuclear power plants is moderately high, the expense of running them is quite low. These Nuclear plants can be shut down if other resources are to be very high and when they are not in high demand then the Nuclear plant can be up and running again. But then again, Nuclear power gives us new ways to defend ourselves for wars for the future since we have used it in the past. However, the normal life of nuclear reactor is anywhere from 40-60 years, depending on how often it is used and how it is being used. Even if we run out of Nuclear power then we might be able to still use the fission reaction to make more reliable resources in the future

There are many forms of energy that we may use everyday ,but one of the most important types of energy is nuclear energy. While one can not use nuclear energy to power a lawnmower, it is used on a much larger scale. There are countless ways to obtain energy, but nuclear energy is obtained in a somewhat unique way compared to other forms. In this way nuclear energy is differentiated from other forms of energy like hydro and geothermal energy. This along with many other reasons like nuclear energy produces more energy with fewer resources and being better for the environment is why many governments and their scientist prefer nuclear energy.

One of the pros of Nuclear power is that, if we use Nuclear Power then we will use Fossil Fuels a lot less than we normally use them, and this would help stop the greenhouse gases from going into the air. (CO2 and others.) Also, another good thing about Nuclear power is that it is low operation costs, nuclear power produces very inexpensive electricity. Also, even though the expense of setting up nuclear power plants is moderately high, the expense of running them is quite low. These Nuclear plants can be shut down if other resources are to be very high and when they are not in high demand then the Nuclear plant can be up and running again. But then again, Nuclear power gives us new ways to defend ourselves for wars for the future since we have used it in the past. However, the normal life of nuclear reactor is anywhere from 40-60 years, depending on how often it is used and how it is being used. Even if we run out of Nuclear power then we might be able to still use the fission reaction to make more reliable resources in the