Rogers Assertion

Discuss if you agree or disagree with Rogers's assertion that humans are basically good and if left alone to live in accordance with their organismic valuing process, would live in peace and harmony with their fellow humans. Discuss how you think Rogers would explain some humans who engage in criminal activities. Based on what you have learned in this chapter discuss what Rogers recommend as the most effective way of dealing with criminals? What would likely reduce the probability of them committing a criminal act?

Sample Answer

There are numerous personality theories that have contributed immensely in the understanding of human behavior. Such proponent is Carl Rodgers. According to Rodgers, people are essentially good and that human nature is a product of environmental and social factors as well as heredity (Corey, 1986). He focuses on person-centered therapy in dealing with ‘clients’ which implies that the focus should be placed on what is right with the person and not what is wrong with him or her


Norway, an European nation arranged close to the Arctic Ocean, spreads over around 304,282 square kilometers of land and 19,520 square kilometers of water. When evaluated at a national level, Norway appears to be especially strong with the impacts of environmental change. On account of this the Norwegian culture was not inconceivably stressed over what might befall their nation. Be that as it may, with a more critical look on the territorial and neighborhood levels Norway turns out to be increasingly defenseless, making more stress inside society (O'Brien, Synga and Haugen, 2004).

In a New York Times article, Elisabeth Rosenthal clarifies that Norway is the third biggest exporter on the planet, demonstrating that Norway isn't earth amicable (Rosenthal, 2008). Since Norway is such a major exporter, it leaves the nation particularly defenseless against the impacts of environmental change. Contrasted with different nations, Norway has been influenced by environmental change more than the others. Norway is influenced most in light of the expansion in nursery gasses being discharged into the climate (Øseth, 2011). Since the 1990's the outflow of nursery gasses from vehicles has gone up by 33% though the emanations from oil and gas organizations has developed by 83% ("Norway's Climate", 2017).

Being close to the Arctic makes Norway's temperature plentifully rely upon heat moved by the North Atlantic Ocean Current (O'Brien, Synga and Haugen, 2004). In a report done by Ellen Øseth, the North Atlantic Ocean Current is clarified as an augmentation of the Gulf Stream that permits sea territories around Norway to have higher temperatures (Øseth, 2011). The warmth is moved by North Atlantic Deep Water which has been diminishing in the previous barely any decades. This causes insecurity in the temperature in Norway. Despite the fact that the decline in shipped warmth would make Norway cool, the mean temperature has been expanding which has made a hotter and wetter atmosphere all through the nation (O'Brien, Synga and Haugen, 2004). During the only remaining century, the temperature in the high northern scopes has been expanding by 0.1°C every year (Øseth, 2011).

Because of ascends in temperatures all through the nation, ice sheets and ice sheets off the shore of Norway have been diminishing in volume since the 1960's. In spite of the fact that Norwegians don't consider their to be as powerless to environmental change and ascends in ocean level (O'Brien, Sygna and Haugen, 2004), the proof has just indicated generally. Environmental Change is influencing the shoreline of Norway in light of the fact that with the ice sheets dissolving, the volume of water in the ocean increments and the ocean level ascents too ("Norway's Climate", 2017). Since such a significant number of animal categories are reliant on ocean ice, its liquefying can prompt less biodiversity in the seas. With the loss of ocean ice the temperature of the seawater is rising which too has caused changes in the biological systems. The ascent in temperature permits species that lean toward hotter water to relocate into Norway's oceans, rivaling the species that as of now populate that territory (Øseth, 2011).

The ascent in ocean level represents a contention for the streets and structures all through Norway. With higher temperatures and dissolving of ocean ice, flooding is bound to happen and in light of the fact that Norway doesn't have a satisfactory waste framework streets and structures will be influenced (Øseth, 2011). With flooding, all things considered, the frameworks will fall flat (O'Brien, Sygna and Haugen, 2004). Bombing foundations will likewise expect Norway to put more cash into making an approach to stay away from harm to their frameworks (Øseth, 2011). Norway as of now contributes around 4 billion Norwegian Krones, roughly 510,500,000 US dollars, into fixing harms done to structures as a result of environmental change, and with the expansion in flooding that value is relied upon to rise (O'Brien, Sygna and Haugen, 2004).

Another issue Norway faces with respect to environmental change is the normal effect it will have on plants and creatures. Since the volume of the ocean ice is diminishing, polar bears and seals are in risk of losing their environment just as getting wiped out. With the expanding mean temperature, it is anticipated that what is presently the tundra, will turn into a backwoods. The expansion in ranger service in Norway alongside the increment in temperature will make the woodlands progressively vulnerable to backwoods fires. Another impact environmental change has on the earth is the solicitation to outside species to attack current biological systems ("Norway's Climate", 2017). Higher temperatures will likewise make flow species move northwards looking for cooler temperatures, diminishing the accessibility of nourishment and reasonable territories (Øseth, 2011).

Norway has proposed an alleviation methodology that would leave them carbon unbiased, producing no nursery gasses, continuously 2030 (Rosenthal, 2008). In spite of the fact that this technique sounds clear, it will expect society to make a great deal of changes to their ordinary ways of life. Since the ozone depleting substance emanations are so high in Norway, it is critical to make changes to decrease the sum transmitted. For this to be done, the Norwegian government needs to make stricter natural laws for industrial facilities to submit to. While those advances will have any kind of effect, society should do a great deal themselves. There are numerous progressions individuals can make in helping Norway arrive at its objective. For instance, planting more plants can help increment the nature of the air just as driving and flying less much of the time (O'Brien, Sygna and Haugen, 2004).

Before finding out about Norway's powerlessness toward environmental change, Norwegians didn't pay attention to the issue. As studies were done Norwegians turned out to be increasingly mindful of the problems that are begging to be addressed the nation was confronting (O'Brien, Sygna and Haugen, 2004). From that point forward the nation has started making an alleviation system to lessen the impacts and make Norway a more secure spot for its condition and its general public.