It can be argued that short-term exposure to stress is adaptive and can increase positive performance. Long-term exposure to stress, on the other hand, is considered maladaptive, yet common, in our society. Consider and research the physiological functioning of stress.
Describe how stress responses can be adaptive and how this type of stress affects the brain.
Describe how stress responses can be maladaptive and how this type of stress affects the brain.
Compare the ways in which adaptive stress responses and maladaptive stress responses affect the brain.
Sample Solution
First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittolaâs first proposition. This is widely accepted as âall people have a right not to be killedâ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by ânon-combatant immunityâ (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: âcare must be taken where evil doesnât outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).â This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would come at a cost. However, this does not hide the fact the unintended still killed innocent people, showing immorality in their actions. Thus, it depends again on proportionality as Thomson argues (Frowe (2011), Page 141). This leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill âto shelter the innocent from harmâ¦punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as âwe may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).â In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (>
GET ANSWER
First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittolaâs first proposition. This is widely accepted as âall people have a right not to be killedâ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by ânon-combatant immunityâ (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: âcare must be taken where evil doesnât outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).â This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would come at a cost. However, this does not hide the fact the unintended still killed innocent people, showing immorality in their actions. Thus, it depends again on proportionality as Thomson argues (Frowe (2011), Page 141). This leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill âto shelter the innocent from harmâ¦punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as âwe may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).â In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (>
Is this question part of your Assignment?
We can help
Our aim is to help you get A+ grades on your Coursework.
We handle assignments in a multiplicity of subject areas including Admission Essays, General Essays, Case Studies, Coursework, Dissertations, Editing, Research Papers, and Research proposals
Header Button Label: Get Started NowGet Started Header Button Label: View writing samplesView writing samples