Chang Yu-i’s Struggle With Identity Essay -- Chinese Culture China Ess

Chang Yu-i’s Struggle With Identity Are you are confused as to where you are going in life? Do you sometimes feel like you just do not know who you are, or who you want to be? Do not worry, this is not uncommon. In fact, according to psychoanalyst Erik Erickson (1902-1994), most young people ages fifteen to twenty years of age feel the same way. Erickson, a psychoanalytic theorist, took the human life cycle and categorized it into eight stages. One such stage would be identity versus role-confusion. During this stage, adolescents begin to truly form who they are in life. They form their present off of the good and bad experiences of their past. Erickson believes that the stages in the life cycle apply to nearly everyone. It does not matter where or what era you are from. Take, for example, a character from Bound Feet & Western Dress by Pang-Mei Natasha Chang. Chang writes a dual memoir of her and her great-aunt’s lives. In her novel, Chang tells the story of her great aunt, Chang Yu-i, growing up in a chang ing world. Even though Yu-i is born and raised in China during the early 1900s, she still faces the conflicts of trying to find herself. The psycho social crisis called ‘identity versus role-confusion’ occurs mainly during adolescence, although it is not restricted to this period in life. It is usually the fifth stage in the life cycle, although it may overlap with the stages before and after it. Major circumstances can also later change the outcome of this stage. Throughout this stage, a person finds himself bringing together parts of his life and combining them to form who he wants to be in life. Outside factors, such as the community or family, tend to play an indirect, but important role in forming an identity. This is true in any culture, although family plays an even more significant role in a collectivist culture, such as Yu-i’s. Chang Yu-i grows up in a family of twelve children in a small county outside Shanghai, China. Born into changing times, the struggle for finding herself is perhaps even harder and more confusing than it would be for people born today. Yu-i is born into a time when China is torn between holding on to the old traditions and adopting the ways of the western world. Throughout the early 1900s, China was in political turmoil. China had to deal with the Boxer Rebellion, the revolution against the Manchu dyna... ..., Yu-i’s family decides she will marry Hsu Chi-mo at age fifteen. Yu-i does not want to get married yet, but instead wants to continue her education at the Academy. However, she does not have a say in who or when she will marry. Because it is time for her to get married, her education is discontinued. She is pulled from her schooling before she is finished with it, neither her parents nor her in-laws feel that this is important. Although the fact that her education was cut short is not something she is pleased with, it is still something she has to accept, and it still a part of who she is. It is a difficult and long process to find yourself. Erickson tells us that is is a natural stage in life to question who you are. Everyone goes through it, regardless of age, sex, race, or time. Take Chang Yu-i for example. She pulled good experiences in her life, such as having unbound feet and getting some education, and used them to help form who she was becoming But she also took the experiences she did not like, such as discontinuing her education as such a young age to get married, and accepted them as part of who she was. She grew up strong, and eventually became her own person.

A Comparison of Vistor Frankenstein and Henry Jekyll Essay -- Papers C

A Comparison of Vistor Frankenstein and Henry Jekyll Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and Robert Louis Stevenson's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are two horrific tales of science gone terribly wrong. Shelley?s novel eloquently tells the story of a scientist, Victor Frankenstein, who creates a living monster out of decomposed body parts, while Stevenson?s novel describes the account of one, Henry Jekyll, who creates a potion to bring out the pure evil side to himself. Although the two scientists differ in their initial response and action to their creations, there are strong similarities between their raging curiosity to surpass human limitation, as well as their lack of responsibility concerning their actions. These similarities raise an awareness of human limitation in the realm of science: the further the two scientists go in their experiments, the more trouble and pain they cause to themselves and to others. In Frankenstein, Victor is extremely excited about his creation, but once the monster becomes animated with life, he is horrified and abandons his work. Dr. Frankenstein, upon seeing the reality of what he had created, had a moment of realization, ? . . . when those muscles were rendered capable of motion, it became a thing such as Dante could not have conceived? (Shelley 57). In the previous quotation, we, the reader, see Victor?s utter shock and abandonment of the project. When Victor notices the creature?s muscles twitching, his eyes are opened to what he has really done: ?Oh! No mortal could support the horror of that countenance? (Shelley 57). He had not thought about the consequences of creating a being, only the actual task. Unlike Dr. Frankenstein?s abandonment, Dr. Jekyll finds his experiment intriguing eve... ...ankenstein is horrified of what he is done, whereas Jekyll seems to be virtually proud of his scientific accomplishment and murderous ruse. Both scientists discover that all of their pride and knowledge cannot conquer the unknown and unimaginable. For this and other reasons, despite their differences, Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll are both captivating literary characters that attempt to create and conquer the human mind. By investigating their similarities, we, as readers, critics, and scholars, can more fully understand the mode of scientific thinking and rationale in the nineteenth century. We also observe the consequences of two characters that overstep the bounds of reality and human conscience. Bibliography: Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: Penguin, 1983. Stevenson, Robert Louis. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. New York, Penguin, 1978.

Is good and evil can exist side by side in nature? Essay

I believe that good and evil can co-exist in nature. Good and evil are two contrasting words, both of these words can be defined differently depending on the persons views and lifestyle although the overall definition of these words will be along the same lines of killing is evil and helping others is good . I also believe that good and evil work together in nature, to survive in the wild animals must prey upon one another in order to survive. Animals survive on their natural instincts that they have developed since birth to survive in the wild, in order to live one must kill something weaker to feed on. Nature is bound by the law survival of the fittest, the strongest and fastest animals eat the smaller and weaker creatures, to say it is evil for a wolf to kill a sheep is saying nature itself is evil. If a predator does not kill anything he cannot support himself or his family and will eventually perish, this is like the Nazi in the concentration camp at Belsen, mentioned in the poem(lines 30-50). The commandant is mercilessly killing Jews in order to support his family. In his own mind the Nazi is doing the right thing by supporting his family, but it is at the cost of annihilating thousands of innocent people which tips the scales towards the Nazi doing more evil than good. On lines 32-35 it says fumes of human roast clinging rebelliously to his hairy nostrils will stop† These lines symbolise the Nazi s conscience, he is trying to forget about all the death he has caused and momentarily thinks of himself as evil, but he then tries to repent to all the killing on lines 35-40 at the wayside street-shop and pick up a chocolate for his tender offspring waiting at home for Daddy s return by buying his child sweets and reminding himself that he has a family to support, and they(like the animals in the wild) without the support will die. The pair of vultures create a lot of irony in this poem, it shows the good and evil sides of these birds. On lines 7-8 the poem says nestled close to his mate an on lines 11-13 a dump of gross feathers, inclined affectionately to hers. Both these quotes show the strong companionship of the two birds and how in love, dependant and committed they are to each other. Those lines make me think that two creatures so devoted to each other could never do something evil. The poem then turns to the other face of the birds on lines 13-17 Chinua has written Yesterday they picked the eyes of a swollen corpse in a water-logged trench and ate the things in its bowel that shows them in a darker lighting. Vultures arebirds known throughout the world for their unattractiveness and their taste for eating rotting corpses. Most people do not assume that something so foul and hideous can find love and feel compassion towards another,this is where the irony is created. A lot more irony is also on lines 23-28 â€Å"Indeed how love in other ways so particular will pick a corner in that charnel-house tidy it up there, perhaps even fall asleep this quote shows irony because the two vultures decide to nestle together affectionately in a house that stores human bones. The poems structure is written in free verse, suggesting the freedom that the Nazi s(lines 30-50) had in the concentration camps, it can also symbolise the freedom of the two vultures that are mentioned in thefirst half of the poem(lines1-29). The poem also reflects the poets feelings of war, they have considered both sides of the war and of each person, on one hand they are killing people and on the other hand they are following orders and protecting their country and family. The vultures show that the people fighting wars have to let go of their emotions during the war and how they are still the same person no matter what. To conclude, I strongly believe that good and evil can exist together in nature, good and evil balance one another out, when one animal dies another is born in it s place, when someone has suffered from a traumatic experience they can use it to help others in the same crisis, when a country is suffering due to war or natural disaster other countries unite to help re-build that country. You can always find something good from an evil occurrence.

Photoelectric Effect and Einsteins 1921 Nobel Prize

Photoelectric Effect and Einsteins 1921 Nobel Prize The photoelectric effect posed a significant challenge to the study of optics in the latter portion of the 1800s. It challenged the classical wave theory of light, which was the prevailing theory of the time. It was the solution to this physics dilemma that catapulted Einstein into prominence in the physics community, ultimately earning him the 1921 Nobel Prize. What Is the Photoelectric Effect? Annalen der Physik When a light source (or, more generally, electromagnetic radiation) is incident upon a metallic surface, the surface can emit electrons. Electrons emitted in this fashion are called photoelectrons (although they are still just electrons). This is depicted in the image to the right. Setting Up the Photoelectric Effect By administering a negative voltage potential (the black box in the picture) to the collector, it takes more energy for the electrons to complete the journey and initiate the current. The point at which no electrons make it to the collector is called the stopping potential Vs, and can be used to determine the maximum kinetic energy Kmax of the electrons (which have electronic charge e) by using the following equation: Kmax eVs The Classical Wave Explanation Iwork function phiPhi Three main predictions come from this classical explanation: The intensity of the radiation should have a proportional relationship with the resulting maximum kinetic energy.The photoelectric effect should occur for any light, regardless of frequency or wavelength.There should be a delay on the order of seconds between the radiation’s contact with the metal and the initial release of photoelectrons. The Experimental Result The intensity of the light source had no effect on the maximum kinetic energy of the photoelectrons.Below a certain frequency, the photoelectric effect does not occur at all.There is no significant delay (less than 10-9 s) between the light source activation and the emission of the first photoelectrons. As you can tell, these three results are the exact opposite of the wave theory predictions. Not only that, but they are all three completely counter-intuitive. Why would low-frequency light not trigger the photoelectric effect, since it still carries energy? How do the photoelectrons release so quickly? And, perhaps most curiously, why does adding more intensity not result in more energetic electron releases? Why does the wave theory fail so utterly in this case when it works so well in so many other situation Einstein's Wonderful Year Albert Einstein Annalen der Physik Building on Max Plancks blackbody radiation theory, Einstein proposed that radiation energy is not continuously distributed over the wavefront, but is instead localized in small bundles (later called photons). The photons energy would be associated with its frequency (ÃŽ ½), through a proportionality constant known as Plancks constant (h), or alternately, using the wavelength (ÃŽ ») and the speed of light (c): E hÃŽ ½ hc / ÃŽ » or the momentum equation: p h / ÃŽ » ÃŽ ½Ãâ€  If, however, there is excess energy, beyond φ, in the photon, the excess energy is converted into the kinetic energy of the electron: Kmax hÃŽ ½ - φ The maximum kinetic energy results when the least-tightly-bound electrons break free, but what about the most-tightly-bound ones; The ones in which there is just enough energy in the photon to knock it loose, but the kinetic energy that results in zero? Setting Kmax equal to zero for this cutoff frequency (ÃŽ ½c), we get: ÃŽ ½c φ / h or the cutoff wavelength: ÃŽ »c hc / φ After Einstein Most significantly, the photoelectric effect, and the photon theory it inspired, crushed the classical wave theory of light. Though no one could deny that light behaved as a wave, after Einsteins first paper, it was undeniable that it was also a particle.

The Benefits of Learning Latin

The Benefits of Learning Latin Erras, mi Lucili, si existimas nostri saeculi esse vitium luxuriam et neglegentiam boni moris et alia, quae obiecit suis quisque temporibus; hominum sunt ista, non temporum. Nulla aetas vacavit a culpa. Seneca Epistulae Morales XCVII You probably wouldnt be reading this Ancient/Classical History feature if you thought classical culture should be confined to museums and dusty tomes. But taking the next step, reading the classics in the original, demands commitment and can take years. Latin Grammar is the Best Grounding for Education Unlike their parents, your school-aged children have time to devote to acquiring a skill that will last them a lifetime. But why should they learn Latin? Dorothy Sayers says it best: I will say at once, quite firmly, that the best grounding for education is the Latin grammar. I say this not because Latin is traditional and medieval, but simply because even a rudimentary knowledge of Latin cuts down the labor and pains of learning almost any other subject by at least 50 percent. From the National Review. Latin Helps With English Grammar While neither the language nor grammar of English derives from Latin, many of our grammatical rules do. For instance, since you CANT have a dangling preposition in Latin, certain purists consider it bad form in English. Latin Makes You More Careful in English In Latin, you have more to worry about than whether a plural pronoun refers to a singular noun (as in the politically correct - grammatically incorrect: each student has their own workbook). In Latin, there are 7 cases with which not only pronouns  but adjectives - not to mention verbs -   must agree. Learning such rules makes the student careful in English. But more important is the fact that traditional study of Latin starts out with a grammatical framework... As American students begin Latin, they become acquainted with the Latin grammar system, which they can indirectly transfer to their work in English. What it gives them is a standardized set of terms in which to describe words in relations to other words in sentences, and it is this grammatical awareness which makes their English writing good.William Harris Latin Helps You Maximize SAT scores This sells Latin programs. Through Latin, test takers can guess at the meanings of new words because they already know the roots and prefixes. But its not just enhanced vocabulary. Math scores also increase. Latin Increases Accuracy This may be due to the increased accuracy Professor Emeritus William Harris notes:​ From another point of view, the study of Latin does foster precision in the use of words. Since one reads Latin closely and carefully, often word by word, this focuses the students mind on individual words and their usage. It has been noticed that people who have studied Latin in school usually write quite good English prose. There may be a certain amount of stylistic imitation involved, but more important is the habit of reading closely and following important texts with accuracy.

Critique on Plato’s Apology of Socrates Essay Essays

Critique on Plato’s Apology of Socrates Essay Essays Critique on Plato’s Apology of Socrates Essay Paper Critique on Plato’s Apology of Socrates Essay Paper Socrates was a great philosopher of his clip. There came a point in his life when his beliefs were questioned and his instructions doubted. He was charged for evil workss and incorrect behaviors. His accusers said he made people see the worse as better and passed them on as truths. They besides said that he corrupted the young person and that he did non believe in the Gods recognized by the province. Socrates addressed the Athenians in defence of his philosophical life. He appealed to the Men of Athens to hear him out and exert cautiousness in judging him because he had all the replies for them. He said he was a wise adult male and his wisdom came from the prophet. He believed in Gods contrary to what they accused him of. He taught the young person of virtuousnesss and denied he corrupted them. He neer feared decease every bit much as he feared the unjust†¦ The Athenians wanted to cognize how Socrates became a celebrated wise adult male and where he got his wisdom from. A philosopher like Socrates engaged people in treatments. He gave learned sentiments and replies to the most enigmatic and hard inquiries that frequently confronted ordinary heads. When these people were convinced and enlightened they went off with nil but congratulationss and esteem for Socrates. grounds why they called Socrates. a wise adult male. Many people came to him to larn more. It can non be said that wisdom is something one is born with. In the instance of Socrates his wisdom came from the prophet. He had godly counsel in his instructions. One with a godly counsel taught non merely what was good and what was right but besides lived by those dogmas. The prophet was besides what kept Socrates from haughtiness. Socrates knew he was wise because he knew that the wisdom he possessed meant small or was nil compared to God’s infinite wisdom. A philosopher may be wiser than any adult male. but is neer wisest. as lone God is. Socrates was asked why he did non portion his wisdom with the province and gave it sound advice. The prophet was the interior voice or the scruples of Socrates. When he was a kid the prophet prevented him from making what he intended to make. The prophet neer ordered him to make anything which was why he neer entertained the ideas of going a politician. He will neer be any good to the province by going one. Good and righteous work forces in political relations did non populate long to make more good. Towards the terminal of the test. when Socrates was sentenced to decease. Socrates mentioned the prophet once more. The prophet did non oppose what he said or stopped him from go forthing the house which was unusual if something bad was to go on. In the terminal. Socrates was happy to decease because the prophet had meant it for him. A philosopher was sought after for wise advocate and Socrates who sought the advocate of the prophet. The prophet symbolized the Divine Guidance which was the beginning of wisdom of Socrates. It strengthened his defence because it proved that his wisdom came from the Godhead and non from immorality. Socrates tested to convert the Athenians that he believed in Gods. At the start of the test began with a mention to God under whose name he said he will do his defence. God symbolized the highest authorization that Socrates subjected himself to. He respected a merely and righteous authorization. Socrates warned the Athenians that should they harm him. they will transgress against God. God had a intent for him in the Athenian personal businesss of the province. He was to agitate the province up whenever it was in daze. If they killed him after the test the province will everlastingly be in stupor as there will be no 1 to agitate it up. He was non one to travel against the province over any affair because God meant him to assist maintain order and non chaos. He must to talk up whenever that province was in disregard of its responsibilities. He knew what his duties were to the province and knew that he must maintain them. for God. God was the authorization over and above the province. Socrates gave the province its due topographic point. an authorization under God and originated from God. God was acknowledged by everyone as merely and righteous. To believe in God meant that Socrates conformed to the ways of God and it followed that he was merely and righteous besides. The impact of this in his defence was that Socrates. foremost of all was non an atheist as alleged by his accusers. Second. he was respectful of authorization. God and the province. Third. he was a good adult male who kept the ways of God. God as the Supreme Being is the symbol of the highest. merely and righteous authorization. Socrates was given the opportunity to travel free on the status that he stopped learning and talking to people. He refused outright because he would be negligent of his authorization from the prophet to travel and learn Virtues to work forces. Virtues symbolized cognition. It is a virtuousness to cognize right and incorrect and to do enlightened picks of right over incorrect. He had promised God that he will go on to learn for every bit long as he was able. He taught the people to set more value on the enrichment of the psyche. the chase of truth and wisdom alternatively of deriving material wealth. celebrity and glorification. A individual with virtuousness knows his existent worth. he neer underestimates neither does he overrates himself. He reminded them that their psyches must take precedency over their individuals and their ownerships. He taught virtuousnesss to anyone who came to him. immature or old. bad or good. rich or hapless. As a instructor he counseled them to take good and righteous lives. He was like a caring parent or brother. Those among the immature who had heard him talk became reasonable grownups. The charges against him were incorrectly. He neer corrupted the young person with the sort of learning he did. There was nil greater for him than to obey the bid of God to learn the people about virtuousnesss. The cognition that a philosopher portions with his pupils is a good defence for the philosophical life. while confuting that he was a corruptor of the young person. Virtues or cognition that he shared should convert the Athenians that Socrates was a virtuous adult male who sought the enlightenment of others. Teaching others so that they may non be nescient and so that they may take virtuous lives can non be said as evil workss. Taking others to the way of righteousness can non be called corruptness. Socrates should be vindicated of the charges against him as they were groundless and strictly prevarications. Socrates was neer sorry for the sort of life he lived even if it finally led him to his decease. Death was symbolic of the good for Socrates. Death to salvage a friend. decease in defence of a right. decease for one’s moral strong beliefs was all good deceases. A individual who feared decease lacked wisdom. because he feared the unknown. Socrates feared perpetrating unfairness and incorrectly more than he feared decease. When he was a senator. the generals were on test for go forthing the organic structures of the slain in a conflict. They were all tried at the same clip. which he opposed because it was illegal. He was the lone 1 in resistance. In malice of the menaces of impeachment and apprehension he stood his land. He took the hazard for jurisprudence and justness. Those were in the yearss of democracy. His resoluteness neer wavered even during the oligarchy. When Leon from Salamis was to be executed he with four others was ordered to convey the Salaminian to the rotunda. He refused and alternatively went place. He faced possible decease without fright. What he feared most so was to side with unfairness. When threatened with decease or temptation of being saved from decease even if it meant making incorrect. he would instead decease a thousand times. For Socrates decease is good. He philosophized that it was a province of deep slumber or one of blankness. Either manner it is a reposeful province. It is a province that we neer experience in most of our darks. He likened it to a journey which all of us will take at some point in our lives. In decease we will one time once more see those friends and heroes who have gone before us. There will besides be those victims of destiny worst than his with whom he will be able to compare notes with. In the test of Socrates. decease was associated with good. Socrates was neer afraid to decease for he was certain something good was bound to go on to him. That should stifle the desire of his accusers to inquire decease for Socrates. Why wish the best for person whom you wanted punished for misbehaviors. The prophet symbolized godly counsel. It proved hard for Socrates to claim that his wisdom came from the prophet from the God of Delphi. His lone believable informant was a dead adult male. A brother of the dead adult male was present in tribunal but he did non volunteer as informant. Socrates did non name him as informant to confirm his narrative. The prophet called him wise. His wisdom was come-at-able for the ordinary adult male. He did non claim that he had extraordinary wisdom for that would non be true. The instruction of Socrates was about righteousness. justness and humbleness. These are plants of goodness that logically will arise merely from the Godhead. God is a symbol of authorization. What God commanded Socrates to make he followed. Between the God and province. Socrates placed God foremost. A philosopher has regard for authorization and that should convert the Athenians that Socrates was a good adult male. He would really likely base on balls on this virtuousness to others. Virtue is a symbol of cognition. Socrates shared his doctrines with others so that they may be enlightened. He taught merely the good as his wisdom was from the Godhead beginning. In his test he made the Athenians know that his accusers know nil of what they were impeaching him of. As they were non-believers. with whom he had non shared his wisdom. his accusers remained nescient. Death is the symbol of something good and pleasant. something one should non fear merely like Socrates. The Work force of Athens will see Socrates as a adult male of bravery who was non scared of decease and an enlightened adherent of the Godhead who treated decease as a journey. a deep sleep or a crossing over. In the test of Socrates we found a adult male with a strong religion in God. despite accusals of godlessness. He chose right over incorrect all the clip even at the menace of decease and injury. He lived what he preached carried a meaningful and purposeful life. He wanted to convert the Athenians that learning the right values and lauding the virtuousnesss in people was no corruptness. An evil actor would make no such thing. No sum of force per unit area or menace or temptation would compromise his values. He kept God’s bid to him to go on learning at all cost to him. This came from a true truster of God and non from an atheist as Meletus had accused him to be. A philosopher would learn merely things that would be of value to people every bit good as those things that will make the individual tremendous good. A philosopher’s step of value puts the religious over and above the physical and the stuff. That is what separates the ordinary adult male from the philosopher. The wants of the ordinary adult male is of this universe and the philosopher’s is of the higher kingdom. There were many lessons learned from the statements of Socrates in his defence. They let us into the head of a philosopher with its deepness. wit. fluency. play and humor. It is hard to understand a philosopher because he is in a degree all by himself. His logic is simple and clear at the start but he can be confusing towards the terminal. It is diverting how they turn one’s statement against his ain like what he did to Meletus. Socrates’ statements are excessively profound for the ordinary head to follow. A philosopher’s life is excessively dull to wish for oneself and excessively unsympathetic to want. He goes for the simple and unsophisticated. He is non attached to the stuff. He can work with no wage and treasures the fulfilment in making the occupation for God and fellowmen. It is adequate wage for a philosopher that others learn of truth and wisdom from him. Socrates helped us understand the life of a adult male for others. as a philosopher really is. Socrates was a adult male with a strong religion in God. He placed God above all else. God represented the authorization in his life. He would make anything God commanded him to make. out of great regard. A philosopher who regards God in such high regard is worthy of trust. He could feign to cognize so much because people hold his every word as truth. Socrates was non that sort of philosopher. He could presume power like a God but Socrates did non. He thought of himself as wise because he accepted that his wisdom and power were non the ultimate. Philosophers have all the replies. Their cognition is deep and expansive. They can speak about anything and everything. They spoke with authorization. They have the gift of cognition. They derive their wisdom from the Supreme Being who is all-knowing. As such they speak merely of the merely and the righteous. They portion the cognition with the people who go to them for their good advocate. They lead simple lives without the unneeded furnishings. They care for their psyche more than their physical and material concerns. The portion with their fellow work forces what they valuable ownership. cognition. Socrates was all the above. The Philosophers were brave work forces who fear incorrectly more than they fear decease. There was no manner they would be swayed from their strong beliefs because of the menace of penalty. Neither will they halt from making what is right to be saved from injury. They will decease for a friend. be hanged for a good cause and crush for their beliefs. The Philosophers were no ordinary persons. They endured because of their religion. their doggedness and wisdom. They may hold been misunderstood but they have been understood more. Their bequests live on. long after they are gone. â€Å"Socrates’ Defense. † 1994-2000. Apology by Plato. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. 10 May 2008 hypertext transfer protocol: //classics. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. edu/Plato/apology. hypertext markup language.

Operations Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 2

Operations Management - Essay Example They get all their ship manufacturing outsourced therefore we cannot say that its operations are concerned with manufacturing of ships. Management of RM at beginning economic downturn determined that time of market decline will last for about three-month. These assumptions were wrong and management does nothing to prepare the company for a new market situation. Financial statements for 2009 do not indicate company’s 711 million USD outstanding because this project is being financed by Mother Company instead of RM. In the following chapter we discuss and analyze how strategic vision of RM combined with its operational strategy and quality of people has proved to provide a sustainable competitive advantage; enabling RM to make right decisions at the right time. The focus will to understand RM focus on quality and different aspects of its operations. Rickmers has always emphasized on quality from the very initiation of its operations. There is a Quality control department which has a number of responsibilities. The quality assurance is not only limited to conduction of operations but the emphasis on a stable financial performance and conduct of sound operations are also important quality variables. The most important aspect of operational performance at Rickmers is certification of quality from highly respected authorities. On 20th February 2008 Rickmers received the Singapore award organized by the Business Times in affiliation with Singaporean government. This was a merit commendation in the best investor relations category. This award signifies the long standing corporation disclosure transparency of Rickmers. Increasingly the quality of operations is being judged by the affect on environment. This is usually termed as the corporate social responsibility. This category of disclosure is usually used as a marketing tool by companies but in fact is an operational aspect of doing business. Rickmers Marinetime has displayed