Comparing two records of a significant event in history Essay

Comparing two records of a significant event in history - Essay Example As such, Polybius is very aware of the time and place at which the events took place. Polybius journeyed to the site not long after the actual crossing of the Alps, and is more trustworthy than a modern day historian. The account is a prose form of chronology in that it just tells the story, like a story. It is not interspersed with facts- it is represented as all fact - which is typical of early histories. They did not have many other writers to reference, and the reader most likely wouldn't have been able to access the other books regardless. The only major discrepancy between Polybius' accounting and that of Livy is that Polybius mentioned they could see Italy from the pass and Livy stated they could not see Italy until they had started the descent. Titus Livy (59 BCE- 17 CE) is the author of the authorized version of the history of the Roman republic. His writings do betray that he knew little of military matters which would affect the believability of his account of the military operations of Hannibal.2 Again, there is no attempt to evaluate the sources of evidence and it is quite likely that he may have even used Polybius' writings as a possible reference. As he lived 100 years or so after Hannibal crossed the Alps, this accounting is more subject to inaccuracies due to the passage of time.

Reading log Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Reading log - Essay Example tural in the sense that they constitute human technological advancement, but that this advancement is operating in a paradigm that is oppositional to the structure of the human brain. There are a number of insights that can be gleamed from the discussion. One of the primary considerations is Morgan’s (2006) belief that mechanization is necessarily a negative for human progress; such a debate dates back as early as Rousseau’s ‘noble savage,’ with the reality remaining anywhere but clear. In either regards, it seems that at the least one can embrace the argument in that for many individuals there is oftentimes a longing for such ‘naturalness’ and that an organization only implementing mechanized inputs can only expect to produce mechanized outputs, effectively alienating this human longing. One of the prominent such considerations then is establishing objective means of avoiding such mechanization. It is clear that, to an extent, for Morgan (2006) this involves developing organizations that are more in accordance with natural human physiology. His main understanding of the brain as a form of organizational design seems contin gent on the central insight that traditional organizational mechanization is rooted in a cause and effect chain of events, whereas an organization linked to the human brain would be composed elements that act with slight independence while also containing a semblance of the whole. There are a variety of applications for such an approach. One considers Burnes’ (2009) examination of Oticon. For Burnes (2009) the critical success factor for Oticon’s turnaround was first the establishment of an overarching vision that contained strong values as a means of promoting a new organizational culture. The organization then established a learning organization wherein internal innovation and change became the fabric of the work process. One considers that these critical success factors relate directly to Morgan’s (2006) notions of the