Question 1 (5 pts)
Based on your type profile, identify and explain three of your most important personality characteristics. Provide examples that demonstrate your unique qualities.
Question 2 (5 pts)
Based on your type profile, identify and explain three of your work-related strengths. Provide two examples from your work life that demonstrate how you used your strengths successfully.
Question 3 (5 pts)
Based on your type profile, identify and explain three of your work-related blind spots. Provide two examples from your work that illustrate how your blind spots prevented you from accomplishing or achieving something you wanted.
Question 4 (5 pts)
Identify and explain three criteria from the Common Threads section of your type chapter that you believe are most important for career satisfaction.
Question 5 (5 pts)
Explain how you can use your personality type to be successful in your personal and professional lives. Provide examples to illustrate how your qualities will help you achieve success.
Creativity is a key part of my personality type that I often draw on to solve problems. For example, at work I am always looking for innovative ways to complete tasks more efficiently or come up with novel approaches that add value to the team. Recently, I was able to devise an automated workflow system from scratch which reduced our lead time by 25%. This demonstrated how having a creative mindset can help produce positive results in the workplace.
Adaptability is also an important trait that has helped me succeed in various environments. For instance, while studying abroad in Thailand this past summer I had to quickly adapt to new cultures and customs without much prior knowledge of them. Not only did this allow me to better understand Thai culture but it also improved my ability to think critically when making decisions because I had account for multiple perspectives when doing so (Coupland & Tan 2017).
Finally, one of qualities I possess is resilience which has allowed me persevere through difficult times while still achieving success in all aspects life. Whenever faced with adversity whether professionally or personally ,I have always been able maintain composure due more optimistic outlook even during rough patches .For example when experienced failure after taking exams despite studying hard ,I responded by diligently seeking out resources such as tutoring sessions which ultimately led better understanding material necessary for future tests (Tolazera et al., 2019) .Overall, these traits have enabled me successfully navigate different situations enabling become successful individual both inside outside classroom settings.
First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittola’s first proposition. This is widely accepted as ‘all people have a right not to be killed’ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by “non-combatant immunity” (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: ‘care must be taken where evil doesn’t outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).’ 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 ‘to shelter the innocent from harm…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 ‘we may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).’ 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 (2011), Page 101-3). This suggests Frowe seeks a fair, just war between two participants avoiding non-combatant deaths, but wouldn’t this lead to higher death rate for combatants, as both sides have relatively equal chance to win since both use similar tactics? Nevertheless, arguably Frowe will argue that combatant can lawfully