Process essay about how to be a mind reader Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Process about how to be a mind reader - Essay Example Scientific methods or tricks are often used to understand or know another person’s thoughts. In this paper, some basic techniques of mind reading will be presented to show how mind reading can both be scientifically intriguing and mentally entertaining. For the first kind of mind reading that mainly involves scientific procedures, one needs a basic understanding of both the verbal and non-verbal cues that a person gives off. There are no materials needed to do this kind of mind reading other than knowledge of scientific theories that govern how people behave and communicate. Knowledge in the fields of communication and psychology greatly helps in this matter. Additionally, knowledge in effectively using the senses is also necessary (â€Å"Mind Reading† 1723). On the other hand, the other kind of mind reading that involves tricks might need a couple of materials before one can actually perform the mind reading process. Some of the most basic things to use are paper, penc il, scissors, ruler, and stapler. In addition, one needs an assistant to do the mind reading trick. This trick should be done in a place where the mind reader can be safely isolated from the others at certain times during the mind reading process (Clark 75-6). ... Third, the mind reader can then throw in suggestive remarks that will elicit more hints from the participant. Fourth, the mind reader will merge all these verbal and non-verbal cues and form them into an observation that the participant can believe as successful mind reading. From this, the mind reader can go on and do more mind reading from the added clues, from the participant, or end the process entirely. The mind reader should be careful enough, though, to make sure that the observations thrown at the participant are vague and general enough to stay on the safe side, yet phrased in almost a personalized way. If the process is successful, the participant will believe the mind reader can truly read his or her thoughts. For the other type of mind reading, there is not much mental calisthenics required. First, the mind reader should acquire the help of the assistant. Second, both the mind reader and the assistant will reveal to the group that the mind reader can actually read minds, and is willing to perform for them. They should explain the mechanics of the mind reading presentation, wherein the group members will choose a particular object from the table. This materials stated above --- paper, pencil, scissors, ruler, and stapler --- may be used as choices. Third, the mind reader will leave the room while the group chooses a preferred object without physically touching it. Once an object is chosen, the mind reader can go back with the group. Fourth, the mind reader will correctly identify the object that the group chose. This will be done through a previous understanding between the mind reader and the assistant. Each object will be associated with a specific phrase. For example, if the group chooses the pencil, the assistant will

Foundations of property (How useful is the idea of ownership to an Essay

Foundations of property (How useful is the idea of ownership to an understanding of property in law) - Essay Example He and his students turned the legal profession decisively towards the second. Hohfeld fired a barrage of influential arguments that sunk the old property is things conception within the legal profession.2 Hohfeld argued that lawyers had often been misled by the contrast between the rights in rem and rights in personam to think that property rights were actually rights "against things," which is absurd since practically all rights are against people. Hohfeld and his followers objected that regarding property as things leaves intellectual property unaccounted for. They also complained that regarding property as a thing led to a misplaced focus on physical possession of an object instead of on the complexes of rights that form the stuff of modern property law.3 And most importantly, Hohfeldian analysis was thought to give the fatal blow to property is things by proving it incapable of handling divided or multiple ownership. Bruce Ackerman describes the standard "divided control" object ion to property is things and the legal orthodoxy that formed around it: "Instead of defining the relationship between a person and 'his' things, property law discusses die relationships that arise between people with respect to things. More precisely, the law of property considers the way rights to things may be parceled out amongst a host of competing resource users."4 This thinking is pivotal for understanding the concept of property and ownership, their essences and characteristics. From the critical perspective, it is widely emphasised in literature that the property as concept can be easily confused with property-regarding actions. For instance, there is an evident the danger of confusing property with possession, which ideas are as different from each other as marriage and mating. Property and possession change can occur at the same time. For instance, there are cases where someone acquires a thing by taking hold of it and where a transfer is affected by something "changing hands," and where a person abandons property by letting it go. Yet changes in possession are neither necessary nor sufficient for changes in ownership, because property and possession have no necessary relation. A thief, for example, has possession but no property. As Bentham puts it, the relation that constitutes property "is not material, it is metaphysical": "a piece of stuff which is actually in the Indies may belong to me while the dress I wear may not. The aliment which is incorporated into my very body may belong to another, to whom I am bound to account for it."5 The property relation is not a physical relation between a person and a thing, but a normative (moral or legal) relationship between persons with respect to things. Property, unlike possession, is a matter of rights. One only loses track of the distinction sometimes because the two concepts frequently go together in everyday life. For instance, property and possession are easily conflated because possession is often conventionally or legally connected with the establishment of property rights. By laws, the first person to possess an unclaimed object usually (but not always) becomes the owner of the object; and a