Morality Towards Animals Kantian Vs Utilitarian

Morality Towards Animals Kantian Vs Utilitarian Historically, there has been some debate between Kantian and Utilitarian philosophers on the moral status of animals. This great debate over whether or not moral consideration should be granted to non-human animals deserves to be rectified at some point. Many argue that there is a resolution to this debate that can be used via a distinction between the two to clearly distinguish human beings from all other animals on the planet. But, as shall be shown in this paper, the evidence thus far for such a distinction is seriously doubtful at best. Unfortunately without such a distinction, it becomes increasingly difficult to argue, with a straight philosophical face, that non-human animals should be afforded less than equivalent moral considerations to that of human beings. After all, if no meaningful distinction between human beings and non-human animals, than we ultimately are arguing from an uncertain position that says one group should receive better treatment than the other. This paper shall examine the debate over this issue, primarily through Kantian and Utilitarian perspectives, and hopefully enlighten the problems in both positions, though particularly the Kantian one. Although the Utilitarian position on the issue of moral concerns for non-human animals is far from perfect, it represents a more justifiable position than the Kantians. Its not surprising that many of the people who argue are the very same people who are most interested in justifying and continuing practices towards non-human animals that cause pain, suffering and death to non-human animals (Gruen, 2003). Often the welfare opposed to the rights of non-human animals is more widely accepted which can often confuse the debate in question. People tend to argue that humans unlike animals have characteristics that clearly distinguish the differences those of which include rationality, autonomy, moral agency, language capability, free will and self-consciousness among others (Garner, 2010). Interestingly, Act Utilitarians believe that regardless of human beings and non-human animals, any action toward these is only permissible if it follows the balance of pleasure outweighing pain (Garner, 2010). Not all claims can say as much. The hope, no doubt, is that philosophical wrangling can justify and absolve them of practices that are largely recognized to be cr uel and harmful to non-human animals. Unfortunately for the groups still largely oblivious to the moral considerations for non-human animals, we find that there is no meaningful way, morally or philosophically, to separate humans from non-human animals. The result, in the hopes of being intellectually consistent, is that we need to give consideration to the suffering and moral position of non-human animals equally, as we would also do for human beings. Of course, supporters of the above position immediately argue that there is a clear division between human beings and non-human animals based on speciation alone. In this belief, we might give moral consideration to a fellow human being, but a cow or chicken? A chicken for instance, is not considered a human being (for those who have doubts) and cannot lay claim to the species-specific moral considerations that humans enjoy according to this claim. But, for the philosopher, membership in one species over the other is of utmost irrelevance, especially when considering morality. It is, in essence, considered a non-issue if we cannot in-turn provide evidence for why such species differentiation translates into a differing of moral consideration (Garner, 2010). Ultimately it would be like arguing that any accident of birth is reason enough to deny certain individuals moral concern: perhaps leaving out entirely all women, overweight people, short people or Japanese people. The division be tween human beings and non-human animals must be demonstrated on some other plain other than purely biological grounds. In as such, many have turned to the idea that human beings differ due to their possession of abilities that are unique to our species and that are concrete us firmly in place to that of the rest of the outside non-human world. But, it seems that this argument has fallen flat too. As stated in Gruen (2003), human behaviour and cognition share deep roots with the behaviour and cognition of other animals. There have been numerous examples in the non-human animal world of behaviours that are very similar, if not identical to behaviours that most humans would consider to be uniquely human. In any socially complex non-human animal species, there is evidence of what one would consider to be altruistic or familial behaviour. Family ties are often seen in many of the primate species. Primate mothers often stay with their offspring for extended periods of time. Singer (2009) notes that not only do humans have intelligence and language comprehension, but so do great apes, border collies and grey parrots. A famous gorilla named Koko has scored between 70 and 95 on human IQ tests as well as being able to understand approximately one thousand different signs. In addition, Alex the African grey parrot was able to grasp m ore than a hundred words and was able to answer novel questions presented to him on top of being able to understand basic concepts involving shapes and colours (Singer, 2009). Evidence exists of Meerkats who will risk their own safety to stay with family members who are ill or injured (Gruen, 2003). The usage of tools is also common in the non-human animal world, as is the ability to understand symbolic representations, the basis for language. Some non-human animals even possess some of humanitys less pleasing cognitive abilities, such as the ability to engage in manipulative or deceptive behaviour (Gruen, 2003). The sum of this evidence is not to argue that non-human animals are identical to humans but rather it is to show that the unique behaviours and abilities that we as human beings cling to are actually found throughout the non-human animal kingdom as well, albeit in less complex forms. Some philosophers have turned to metaphysical characteristics as a way to draw the line between the human and non-human animal worlds. Kant puts forth one of the most notable examples of this position. Kants argument is based on the idea that humans are distinguishable from the non-human animal world by power of their personhood and are thus morally considered. In his 1785 Groundwork, Kant proposed that: Every rational being, exists as an end in himself and not merely as a means to be arbitrarily used by this or that will [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦] Beings whose existence depends not on our will but on nature have, nevertheless, if they are not rational beings, only a relative value as means and are therefore called things (Kant 1785, 428 as quoted in Gruen, 2003). Essentially what Kant believed is that the rational ego of human beings distinguishes us from all other non-human animal life. In less distinct terms, a human being has the capability of seeing himself not only as an individual, but as a rational being able to differentiate the world that grants personhood to human beings and thus affording them moral consideration. What Kant is trying to say is that human beings are rational whereas non-human animals are not. With that being said, Kant believes that irrational animals may be dealt with and disposed of at ones discretion (Kant, LA, 7, 127 as quoted in Gruen, 2003). Kantians argue that it is the ability of human beings to question the source of their desires rationally that separates humans and animals. Whereas the non-human animal is focused only on its sensory perceptions, human beings are not only able to perceive, but question the very nature of their perceptions. According to Kant and his followers, this rational ability is the v ery reason we can justify relegating non-human animals to a lower moral position. As is obvious, there are problems with the Kantian position. Beyond the realization of an artificially imagined separation between man and beast (which is after all, the point in question), Kants position on the matter embarrassingly has difficulties with the matter of what is considered marginal humans, or human individuals that do not possess Kants rational capacity that is a prerequisite for personhood. As understood by many and supported by Singer (2009), there are some humans that fall under categories of mental retardation. For instance, the mentally challenged would have to be excluded from moral consideration by Kants logic, as they are incapable of expressing rational self-awareness that his personhood demands (Gruen, 2003). Singer (2009) demonstrates that some people with profound mental retardation have IQs lower than 25; have an ability to understand that exceeds their ability to speak and may only have the capacity to follow basic directions, and yet these people would c ertainly never be passed over for moral consideration. Whereas, dogs, horses, dolphins and pigeons have been trained to follow basic directions and perform useful work, have IQs over 25 and have an ability to understand that which exceeds their ability to speak, are. Kantians have responded to this concern in a variety of ways; as human beings, we could consider our behaviour towards these marginal individuals as indicative of our own moral sense. Or perhaps, these individuals, because they possess the capacity to become rational individuals, must be treated with the same moral consideration as all other human beings. But, by far the strongest response to the Kantian position comes from the Utilitarians, who reject rationality outright as a marker of moral consideration just as we have already rejected other supposedly unique human attributes (Garner, 2010; Gruen, 2003). Utilitarians argue that the only moral consideration worth considering is one that focuses on promoting happiness and the satisfaction of individual interests, and reducing suffering and interest frustration (Gruen, 2003). Jeremy Bentham was one of the strongest supporters of this position on moral concern. He wrote in 1781: Other animals, which, on account of their interests having been neglected by The insensibility of ancient jurists, stand degraded into the class of things [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦] What else is it that should trace the insuperable line [between humans and nonhuman animals]? Is it the faculty of reason, or perhaps, the faculty for discourse? [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦] The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk, but, Can they suffer? (Gruen, 2003). According to the Utilitarian position, our moral concerns for non-human animals should be extended as far as the animals capacity to suffer and experience pain in all the ways they are capable of suffering. With the rise in populations, the need to provide mass quantities of food has created an animals nemesis. Factory farming is the most common method used to produce food for human beings, and it is done at an alarming rate. An estimated 8 billion animals in the United States are born, confined, biologically manipulated, transported and ultimately slaughtered each year in methods that create great amounts of suffering (Gruen, 2003). This position has been highly defended by modern Utilitarians who continue to argue that there is no morally justifiable way to separate humans from non-human animals when non-human animals are clearly capable of suffering. Any being capable of suffering should have its interests taken into account and should be granted the same moral consideration regar dless of being human or non-human. Sometimes the Utilitarian position is mistaken for more of an animal rights position than a morals position. Although both positions are similar, the animal rights position believes that there is no circumstance under which an animal should be subject to the will and whim of human beings. As Garner (2010) points out, the animal rights position is more for the equality between the species. One thing to note, however, is that this is not entirely the Utilitarian position. In regards to the Utilitarians belief that non-human animals should not suffer and be extended moral consideration, the Utilitarians also believe that the same would be extended to a human being. But the Utilitarian position allows for the satisfaction of the greater good in all moral matters. If, for instance, more good is done than harm by a particular action, then the Utilitarian would take up the position that the action is morally justifiable. A simpler way of perceiving this is that the Utilitarian could morally justify killing human or non-human animal, if it would save the lives of two other people. Ultimately, the Utilitarians goal is to always reduce harm and suffering, but they unfortunately (when it comes to non-human animals) are not vegetarians. Utilitarians believe that If an animal lived a happy life and was painlessly killed and then eaten by people who would otherwise suffer hunger or malnutrition by not eating the animal, then painlessly killing and eating the animal would be the morally justified thing to do (Gruen, 2003). Seemingly is seems that there are some good and some bad to both positions. Take for example the Kantian position; Emmanuel Kant did not support cruelty towards non-human animals, he just believed that they did not warrant the same moral considerations that human beings do. According to Kant, non-human animals were non-rationally thinking creatures and thus not afforded moral consideration but, he did argue that for the human beings that cause unnecessary suffering to animals. Kant believed that non-human animals were subject to the will and whim of human beings but that when they were put to work for us, they should not be strained beyond their capacities, he also believed that human beings had the right to kill non-human animals as long as it was done quickly and without pain (Kant Gregor, 1996). In essence, Kant felt that although non-human animals did not merit moral consideration, human beings had some type of a duty to them. Clearly, like the Kantian theory, the Utilitarian approach of moral concern for non-human animals is not without its own flaws. The Kantian argument fell apart because of a false distinction between human beings and non-human animals. The Utilitarians, base the fate of individuals and their relative happiness on a type of mathematical equation. Though contrary to some degree, at least on the question of extending moral concern to non-human animals, the Utilitarians recognize that there is no meaningful distinction at play between human beings and the rest of the animal kingdom. In this regard, the Utilitarians will always win out in this philosophical debate, at least for this author. Basing an arbitrary distinction between human and non-human animals just to justify cruelty and suffering is utterly beyond defence from a moral perspective. To ignore suffering because it challenges human beings imagined superior position in the world is not acceptable. Where, then, does that leave the argument of whether to extend moral concern and consideration to non-human animals. Clearly this author rejects the unsubstantiated evidence for drawing a distinct line between human beings and non-human animals, but cannot quite accept the extreme Utilitarian position that all matters of moral concern can be written like a equation. Perhaps it would be wise to investigate the work of other philosophical theories, such as ecological feminists, who argue that the entire approach to the issue is flawed because it fails to grasp the institutional culture of dominance upon which our actions are built (Gruen, 2003). Within this larger context, both the Kantian and Utilitarian positions can be seen as justifications (to vastly different degrees) for a culture that projects its will onto the entire world with dominant force. The bigger question for future consideration of this issue is to not simply question whether or not non-human animals are deserving of the same moral considerations that are granted to human beings, but whether or not human beings have moral authority in the first place to dictate such concerns and arbitrarily impose their will on the rest of the world.

Budget Cuts in Education Essay

Drastic cuts in Florida’s educational system are in resulting increasing class sizes, the elimination of music, art, and other elective classes, the significant reduction in extracurricular activities, and a diminished ability to provide incentives for teachers to continue teaching. The effect of these changes will be a long term negative impact on teacher’s ability to teach and decrease our students’ ability to learn. Budget cuts are forcing qualified teachers out of the classroom where they are most effective and causing them to pursue other careers or academic endeavors. As stated in State Impact, because of the shortage of funds of over $170 million, Broward County alone has laid off more than 2,400 employees and most of them have been teachers (O’Connor, 2011). Andy Ford, president of the Florida Education Association, the statewide teachers union, said the union is expecting about 20,000 teacher layoffs (Castro, 2011). As a result of these layoffs, and current graduating teaching students, school districts are left with a surplus of teachers. Many have the opportunity to come back to work before the next school year begins but may not be at the same school or even teaching the same grade level. Because this is based on seniority, those teachers who have been laid off and unfortunately are not one of the chosen to go back to work, have been forced to go back to school to either continue to pursue their education career or pursue a completely different major. Recent layoffs have resulted in, expanded classroom sizes with potentially disastrous effect on student performance. There once was a time classrooms had a maximum of 20 students. In some states, classroom sizes have expanded to as much as 36 students in one class. According to Science Daily, reports show that students in small classes in grades four through six consistently have better results than students in large classes. Those in small classes that had better cognitive and non-cognitive skills, had better scores on standardized national tests in grades six and nine, and perceived themselves as developing more self-confidence and greater patience (Expertanswer, 2012). Budget cuts that result in inreased class sizes need to be made with these considerations in mind. Many people are not aware of the effect of music on students’ ability to learn and retain information, yet as documented previously, music classes are one of the first programs to be cut in this environment. According to Science Daily, there is now definitive proof of different brain development and improved memory of students who take music lessons when compared to those who do not (Press, 2006). â€Å"Not only do the brains of musically-trained children respond to music in a different way to those of the untrained children, but also that the training improves their memory as well. After one year the musically trained children performed better in a memory test that is correlated with general intelligence skills such as literacy, verbal memory, visuospatial processing, mathematics and IQ† (Press, 2006). If it costs $2. 5 million to have an art program, music program, and physical education program, one can see why school are making these cuts, however; in the light of this research provided, we can see that these cuts will be coming at the expense of our students cognitive abilities. As the budgets get smaller, and the expenses are getting bigger, specials and elective classes are being cut. Music and art have been eliminated in some schools. In others, it is just part time. Students are not getting the basic musical and artistic education, which were once available years ago. Teachers who used to teach elective classes are forced to teach core subjects if they still want a job. Physical education classes have also been cut in some schools or have been reduced significantly. Some teachers work at two different schools. For example, three days out of the week, they may work at an elementary school and the other two days; they may work at a middle or high school. As a result to physical education being reduced or eliminated, childhood obesity may be more of a concern. Because physical activity has been extremely reduced in many households because of television, it is important that students have physical education in school. Teachers do not have many incentives to continue teaching. There is no money to purchase simple materials for the classroom. As said in Public Good, Public Cuts; elementary schoolteachers have resorted to asking students to buy supplies at the beginning of the school year (Economists, 2011). A suggested list is available for the parents and these supplies are what the students will need for the duration of the school year. Many teachers spend their own money to purchase supplies as well. Students in middle school and high school do fundraisers to raise money for special events at their schools. The effects of these budget cuts are impacting every area of students’ academic experience including the frequency of the update in the school textbooks. Schools typically updated their textbooks every few years, however; with these budget cuts; this researcher has found that students may be using the same textbooks for 10-15 years due to the lack of funds. Although this may not be an issue with some subjects, there are subjects, such as History and Social Studies that are subjects that require updated information as years go on. If students used the same textbook for 15 years, a History book would be missing three presidents. Textbooks are an essential part of student’s education and if there are no funds to purchase new ones, students in the United States will be behind compare to other countries are much more advanced concerning education. Field trips and extracurricular activities have been reduced or eliminated. Students do not have the chance to go on all the field trips that were once upon a time offered. Field trips that are now taken tend to be at the cost of the parents. Parents have been forced to come out-of-pocket for the entire cost of field trips. Schools also sponsor fundraisers to assist these parents in paying for some of those costly trips. For example, fifth grade students who are going on their end of the year trip may sell donuts or candy boxes in efforts to raise money to pay for that trip. Some schools do not have funding to continue specific sports. Fees have increased and parents are having pay out-of-pocket for student’s uniforms and to travel to games in order to continue these sport teams. Budget cuts are now negatively affecting the actual physical environment in which students learn. According to State Impact, future possible district budget cuts in efforts to save jobs include â€Å"eliminating art, music, technology and/or reading teachers to save up to $4. 1 million, eliminating middle and high school athletic programs and saving $2. 2 million, and raising thermostats one degree to 78 degrees, the highest allowed by state law, saving $500,000† (O’Connor, 2011). With increasing class sizes and increase in temperatures, students will now be forced to learn in cramped, potentially uncomfortable conditions that will impact negatively student learning. Given the negative impact of described these budget cuts, it would be wise to consider alternative options to deal with budget shortfalls. Other options of saving money are available, such as teachers taking extended holidays without pay. School district saved millions of dollars by closing all public schools two extra days during thanksgiving break. Schools should only have been closed Wednesday through Friday but the district managed to get approval to close Monday and Tuesday as well. The economic condition has affected drastically the public schools due to the budget cuts they have faced. It has caused major setbacks because there is no money available to supply the materials these students need to learn effectively. At this rate, schools eventually will begin to shut down. Teachers have already begun to retire early because they can only foresee it getting worse. Something has got to give at this point, but it should not be at the expense of student’s education. If schools cannot teach students the simpler things, such as what encyclopedias are which may be an opportunity for parents to spend more bonding time with their children and take them to the library to learn new things. Sooner than later, students in Pre-kindergarten and kindergarten will be attending school for half a day only instead of a full day in efforts to save money. It is imperative that parents encourage educational activities at home as well as physical activities. Broward County Schools are suffering drastically. Although they seem to have it figured out, cutting art, music, physical education, and other special programs may not be what is best for the students.

Compare and Contrast Sherman Alexie and Frederick Douglass

Different Worlds Same Struggle Sherman Alexie and Frederick Douglass both grew up in different time periods, in different environments, and ultimately in different worlds. They both faced different struggles and had different successes, but in the end they weren’t really all that different. Although they grew up in different times they both had the same views on the importance of an education. They both saw education as freedom and as a sense of self-worth and though they achieved their education in different ways they both had a strong will and a strong sense of self-motivation.Frederick Douglass and Sherman Alexie both grew up in different times and environments. Frederick Douglass was born in 1818 and was raised on a plantation as a slave, Alexie was born in 1966 and was raised on an Indian reservation, but being raised in different worlds didn’t make either of their struggles any different or easier than the others. They both faced judgment and discrimination agains t their races. Due to their different races they were both considered stupid, illiterate, and were thought to doing nothing with their lives besides working on a plantation or becoming an alcoholic and drug addict.Getting out of those types of environments and doing better things than what they were thought to do was just one of the many things that motivated them into getting an education. Both men had different ways of achieving their education. Sherman Alexie had Superman, his dad, as a guide for him. Alexie watched his dad do better for himself and his family than what a typical Indian was supposed to do. Watching his father read and educate himself was Alexie’s initial motivation for him to want to get his education.Frederick Douglass was one step ahead of Alexie in the fact that he had street smarts. Douglass self-educated himself, he had no one to look up to or to help him. Douglass essentially used the system to gain his education. He not only tricked white boys into teaching him how to spell and write, but he also used his own master’s, who did not want him to have an education in the first place, tools to help him get an education. In ways Douglass was already very smart and had already beaten the system that put him down. No matter the ifferent ways of obtaining their education or the different environments they grew up in, both men wanted the freedom that education offered them and had the same self-motivation to get it. Education was the key to their freedom, and not just physical freedom but mental freedom. With their education they were able to escape and unlock the chains of judgments that held them back and were able to give them a sense of self-worth. People listened to them and cared what they had to say and they became strong men of education.Alexie mentioned his father as being his Superman, but the true Supermen are him and Douglass. No one gave them the self-motivation to get an education they did it on their own. No one co uld force them into wanting to do better for themselves, they had to want it for their selves and they did. Alexi and Douglass were different but similar in so many ways. They both grew up in very different times, but faced all the same hardships. The both achieved things in different ways but they both made the same types of differences for their lives and did better for themselves.They showed people that no matter what you may grow up with or deal with in life, you can make a difference for yourself. Be your own Superman like Douglass and Alexie. No one handed them the key to unlock their success they did that on their own, and they taught people they could only do that for themselves. They obtained self-worth and freedom by their motivation for education, and they are people to look up to today. Dear Professor Smith, I think my writing has become better as I have moved along through your class. I was surprised on how much more comfortable I was with my writing.I really enjoyed wr iting about this topic; I thought it was very interesting. I felt pretty good about my topic paragraphs. TEAL has helped me a lot, and I tried my best to incorporate TEAL in my writing of this paper. I also really enjoyed the links for the websites that you posted on blackboard; I made good use of those and thought they defiantly helped me out with writing this paper. The most frustrating part of my paper was my thesis. I have trouble trying to make a specific, non-obvious, and debatable thesis. I try hard to make a argumentative thesis, but I have a lot of trouble with that.For this essay I was trying to use the point-by-point method that you had shown us. I liked how that method worked and thought it was pretty easy. I felt as though I did good using the point-by-point method and thought it helped to keep my paper from jumping around everywhere. I would defiantly like insight on my thesis because I mostly had trouble with that. Putting all three of those elements into a thesis is really messing me up because I have never had to do that before. Any insight you can give on my paper would be great, I want to continue to keep improving with my writing. Thank you, Katie Holt

A Failure to Identify A Look at United States Cyber Policy - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 3 Words: 946 Downloads: 6 Date added: 2019/03/18 Category Analytics Essay Level High school Topics: Failure Essay Did you like this example? The old adage that history repeats itself is ever so present in Fred Kaplans Dark Territory: The Secret History of Cyber War. There is a recurring theme in the United States (US) government of implementation lag, policy lag, and a lack of proper oversight in this rapidly changing technology age. The problem is 3-fold: (1) the lack of an implementation plan makes the policy just a piece of paper with ink, (2) the absence of policy hinders the ability for entities to protect critical cyber infrastructure in a systematic manner, (3) the lack of proper oversight allows entities the opportunity to utilize technology with little to no accountability, on the fringe of ethical use in some instances. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "A Failure to Identify: A Look at United States Cyber Policy" essay for you Create order The reader finds these exact cases when you strip away the minutia of Kaplans book. Kaplan does well at setting the tone for the book. He paints a picture of science fiction becoming science fact with the introduction of a 1983 movie, WarGames, about a tech-whiz teenager who unwittingly hacks into the main computer at NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (Kaplan 8). What followed 15-months later, after President Ronald Reagan inquired his staff on the validity of the movie, was National Security Decision Directive Number 145: National Policy on Telecommunications and Automated Information Systems Security (NSDD-145), signed on 17 September 1984, which marked the first of many national policies involving the emerging cyber landscape. This, however, was short-lived as the issue vanished, at least in the realm of high-level politics, and [w]hen it reemerged a dozen years later, after a spate of actual cyber intrusions during Bill Clintons presidency [1993 2001], enough time had passed that the senior officials of the day were shocked by the nations seem ingly sudden vulnerability to this brand-new threat. The technology climate, at the time of signing, was nowhere near as robust as today. Kaplan notes that, the first public Internet providers wouldnt come online for another few years. This climate clearly shapes the apathy by senior officials. While the prescient nature of the policy showed that the US government understood the impending threat, this meant nothing without proper implementation. The recurring theme of lag, this time policy, continues in a 1990 study by the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, a congressional advisory group, called [the] Physical Vulnerability of Electric Systems to Natural Disasters and Sabotage. The study details a concerning picture of which power stations and switches, if disabled, would take down huge chunks of the national grid. Kaplan walks the reader through a timeline of subsequent events, culminating with Presidential Decision Directive â€Å" 63 (PDD-63), titled Critical Infrastructure Protection, signed 22 May 1998. Kaplan does not explicitly note any protective actions occurring in the 8-years between the publishing of the 1990 study and the directive in 1998. The issue only compounded when the directive called for an additional 5-years to achieve and maintain the protection of these critical infrastructures. This inaction would soon change with the leak of classified documents from the infamous NSA analyst, Edward Snowden. Snowdens 2013 leak of a treasure trove of amounting to tens of thousands of highly classified documents. Of those documents, the most damaging concerned a program known as PRISM in which the NSA and FBI tapped into the central servers of nine leading American Internet companies†Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple, and Paltalk†extracting email, documents, photos, audio and video files, and connection logs (131). The NSA released a statement shortly after the leak made headlines, stating that PRISM was the most significant tool in the NSAs arsenal for the detection, identification, and distribution of terrorist threats to the US and around the world. Kaplan goes on to show how NSA lawyers even altered plain definitions [with the FISA Court (a.k.a. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court), so that doing this [type of surveillance] didnt constitute collecting data from American citizens [which is illegal]. Under the new definition the NSA was just s toring data; the collecting wouldnt happen until an analyst went to retrieve it from the files. Here is a depiction of gross manipulation in order to put the agencies goals over rights granted by the 4th amendment. Kaplan makes it clear that the restraints had been put up from the inside, and they could be taken down from the inside as well. There were no external auditors for checks and balances. Furthermore, what would have happened if a rogue NSA director or a different president, like Richard Nixon, were in power? The potential for abuse would be staggering. From the first national level policy on cyber warfare, NSDD-145, to the political aftermath of the Edward Snowden leaks, the author presents a coherently weaved pieces of work, while providing the reader with first-hand accounts of the significant events throughout the US growth in the computer age. He sprinkles well-known characters (e.g. Edward Snowden, President Barack Obama) and federal agencies (e.g. FBI, CIA, NSA), while breaking down the US governments struggle of proper utilization of policy driven use of technology, . This is a recommended read for those with established cyber roles in the government to those who are wanting to understand how the failure of governmental cyber policy allowed for the overreaching of boundaries. What it comes down to is whether you want to At its core, Kaplan depicts a history of the United States (US) Government failing to create policy (i.e. the boundaries) for the use of emerging technological advances in the cyber domain. Works Cited Kaplan, Fred M., Dark Territory: The Secret History of Cyber War. Simon Schuster Paperbacks, 2017. Underwood, Kimberly, The U.S. Government Urgently Needs to Address Cyber security Challenges, Signal, September 24, 2018, https://www.afcea.org/content/us-government-urgently-needs-address-cybersecurity-challenges. PDD-63 Critical Infrastructure Protection, 5/20/1998https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/12762