Responce lettr Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Responce lettr - Essay Example Therefore, the meaning family tends to be on an individual basis because each individual could be living in a unique household. The increase in divorce rates is relatively alarming and the changes in sexual preferences have influenced families to adopt different family structures across many of the civilized nations. The implication of this is that this concept is not a unique challenge because the occurrence of broken families applies in mostdeveloping and developed societies. However, parents have the responsibility of helping their children to understand that these challenges exist rather than leaving them to suffer because of the sour relationship that may exist between them and their estranged spouses. In this case, this response letter will seek to explain how best individuals can express themselves without harming the feelings of other family members using the Johari window of disclosure. Further, it will also focus on the ways of easing dialect tension that may exist between family members using the dialect tension theory and the possible ways of communicating with them in order to avoid such tensions in the future. 1. Self-disclosure As per this scenario, the advancements made in technology such as social media helped in establishing a relationship with a sibling from the father that abandoned his family years back.The challenge here is that how does one remain loyal to the family that provides them with shelter and the other necessities of life andalsoseek to establish a bond with siblings from the other parent without hurting their feelings. One feels as though they have the obligation to lay out the facts straight before both parties, but this has a high likelihood that one of the parties might be hurt in this process (Rotenberg, 2006). Essentially, this can be challenging to the self-disclosure aspect in which one feels that developing a relationship with a family that their parents do not approve of makes them disloyal and ungrateful. Self-disclos ure is the most advisable way of handling such a situation as compared to lying, secrecy, or making hints that may suggest disloyalty to family. However, no options for maintaining a healthy relationship between family members are without consequences, but the outcome has not been as severe in the event that one comes out clean about the situation. In this case, an individual seeks to know the other family members that they share a lineage with the mistakes committed in the past are hindering the prosperity of this newfound relationship. However, the secret conversations that began without intending any harm could have been the beginning of this stalemate, but this does not mean that anyone is to blame for this situation. In this case, the mother and the stepbrother appear to be of importance, but the question that begsis to what extent. There is also the opportunity to know the stepbrotherbetter and develop a lasting relationship or maintaining the good mother-child relationship th at has existed for a much longer time. In order to establish whether the self-disclosure process is worth the risk, it is pertinent to ascertain whether it is substantive to do so or whether it is worth the risk. On the contrary, the execution ofself-disclosure should be with caution especially on the sibling met via Facebook because their personality is still a mystery. The Johari Window model of self-disclosure 1. Open/ free

Response Paper on On Being an Atheist, by H. J. McCloskey From a Essay

Response Paper on On Being an Atheist, by H. J. McCloskey From a Christian Viewpoint - Essay Example While to some this position on face value may seem to have credibility, a careful analysis of the theories from a Christian perspective shows his arguments lacking. The first thing that strikes is McCloskey’s choice of beginning his discourse with a usual and chronically pleading argument that would appear to make sense and put the entire onus of â€Å"believing† or of â€Å"faith† on a human need to want to believe, rather than a spiritual analysis of why we do. McCloskey puts forth that many theists take the position that â€Å"atheism is a cold, comfortless position,†1, and quotes one Christian as saying, â€Å"It’s harder if you don’t believe in God.† 2 McCloskey’s argument, which he extracts totally from this position, is a tired one at best, tied to a humanistic era [the 1960s] that overly promoted, at the exclusion of the spiritual founded in the intellectual, the concept of science, be it the science of human psychology or otherwise. â€Å"Proof† is the buzzword, a strange choice since proof of this overriding human need to feel comfortable in an uncomfortable world has neve r been proven, but is itself founded on the â€Å"discoveries† suggested by psychologists and sociologists and hardly based in solid scientific irrefutable fact. Much of McCloskey’s so called scientific approach falls far short of anything resembling proof. Consider McCloskey’s cosmological argument as examined by Privette (2009). â€Å"McCloskey argued that the cosmological argument was an argument from the existence of the world, as we know it.    He stated that believing in an uncaused first cause of the universe is a problem because nothing about our universe forces us to that conclusion.†3 I agree with Privette and would use the following argument, as she has, with a few of my own thoughts added on the concept of contingencies. If