Factors Affecting Human Intelligence Psychology Essay

Factors Affecting Human Intelligence Psychology Essay The objective of this context is to discuss human intelligence. To achieve the following sub titles constituted as guidelines for the discussion; anatomy of human of intelligence, theories of human intelligence and factors affecting human intelligence Anatomy of Human Intelligence Human nature has intelligence that governs the human mental ability and to as cognitive ability. Despite being a widely studied and debated topic there is still lack of a universal definition for intelligence because of its compound and many-faceted nature i.e it engages multiple areas of the brain, instead of just having one intelligence center. Intelligence facilitates the gaining of knowledge and consequent wide applications in solving problems. The roots of intelligence are biological and it is believed to have evolved over time and is connected to structure of the brain and its development in that the intelligence quotients are related to the brain volume (Frohlich, 2004). According to Sternberg (1981), psychologists and laymen agree that intelligent people are characterized by their capacity for solving problems, their expertise with language and their open-minded nature to innovation. According to Flinn et al (2004), the evolution of human intelligence has been so rapid compared to other species such that the human brain increased by about 250% in less than 3 million years. This is evidenced by remarkable behavioral changes of the past few generations. They further argue that the high evolution rates leading to greatest complexity in human are due to the demand of their environment citing ecological demands, such as hunting or climatic variability and selective pressures favoring other species compared to them. Research on human intelligence has become intense in trying to answer the several questions raised on basic structure and mechanisms of intelligence following the discoveries made in relation to genetics of intelligence and its functioning in the most recent stages of human development. In trying to classify intelligence, the following three classes were arrived at; social intelligence, natural or potential intelligence and academic intelligence. The social intelligence is a practical mode of intelligence used in making day to day life decisions in all fields. Natural or potential intelligence helps in acquisition of knowledge and cognitive abilities essential for easy interaction with the surrounding environment. The third form of intelligence is more of as measure of the cumulative levels of the former two types of intelligence describing the complexity of intelligence and is characterized by the IQ tests. Modern psychology classifies intelligence in two categories namely fluid int elligence and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence is mainly the use of self acquired knowledge through life experiences to solve challenges and crystallized intelligence is more like academic knowledge as it largely depends on long-term memory. However all these different forms of intelligence are dependent and do not operate in isolation (Colom Pueyo 2000). Theories of Human Intelligence In an endeavor to understand human intelligence, there are various theories advanced to explain it. They can be divided into the unilateral construct based on unitary entity of general intelligence and those based on multiple dissimilar activities. Some of the theories discussed below include Psychometric approach theories, Piagets stages of cognitive development, Sternbergs Triarchic theory of intelligence and Gardners multiple intelligences theory. Psychometric approach to understanding intelligence is the most used and is based on psychometric tests. Some of the theories advanced based on this include; Charles Spearman in 1904 came up with Two-factor Theory of intelligence as a way of measuring general intelligence using Tetrad Differences. His basic inputs were common sense (native capacity) and sensory discriminations. It stated that every test can be divided into a g factor and an s factor. Where the g-factor measures the general factor or common function among ability tests and the s-factor measures the specific factor unique to a particular ability test. This however had its limitations because the g factor showed that any cognitive ability regardless of how different they were had a positive correlation (Spearman, 1904). Following the shortcomings of Spearman, L.L. Thurstone came up with the Centroid method for modern factor analysis. Modern factor analysis took in seven orthogonal factors referred to as Primary Mental Abilities; verbal comprehension, word fluency, numerical capability, spatial visualization, associative memory, speed of understanding and reasoning to yield multi factors, unlike Spearmans single factor yield (Thurstone, 1934). Raymond B. Cattel spotted a weakness in the former theories as a result of the use of single generation in trying to measure intelligence. He developed The Gf-Gc Theory measuring intelligence using fluid intelligence (Gf) and crystallized intelligence (Gc) to account for differences between children/adolescents and adults. The Gf represented the ability to discriminate and perceive relations while Gc represented the ability to differentiate earlier established relations using Gf. He supposed that crystallized intelligence increases gradually to old age where it slowly declines whereas fluid intelligence reaches a peak in adolescents and remains almost constant through adulthood (Carroll,1993). J. P. Guilford ventured more into the adulthood intelligence developing a Structure-of-Intellect model (SI model). The model had a 3-D cube shaped model with five categories of how the information is presented on a test, six operation categories of what is done on a test and six product categories of the form in which information is processed on a test. Upon conducting a test and filling all the categories, the point of intersection provides foundation for generating hypothesis of intelligence (Carroll, 1993). Using re-analysis of several data sets John B. Carrol proposed the Three Stratum Theory. This consists of three different levels of intelligence. The first layer represents narrow abilities that are highly specialized, the second level represents moderate abilities but in several areas and Spearmans concept was a sufficient representation for the third level (Carroll, J. B. 1993). The latest work using psychometric approach is the Cattel-Horn-Carrol (CHC) Theory. This is an amalgamation of The Gf-Gc theory, Horn theory and The Three-Stratum Theory. According to Horward Gardner (1999) psychometric tests had ignored other forms of intelligence of equal importance; that our minds handle different tasks using several cognitive mechanisms and not through a single centralized system. He therefore developed Theory of Multiple Intelligences basing his studies on both the normal and abnormal personnel coming up with eight different components of intelligence with the eighth one just added in 1999. Robert Sternberg came up with Triarchic Theory of intelligence based on three aspects of intelligence. These were creative intelligence (experiential), analytic (componential) intelligence and practical (contextual) intelligence; where analytical intelligence deals with academic brilliance, creative intelligence deals with insights, fusion and reaction to events while practical intelligence deals with acquiring knowledge, understanding and dealing with life challenges. He was of the opinion that general intelligence is only but part of analytic intelligence and therefore cannot give a full insight of intelligence. Following its use in evaluation of individual success in the modern times this has later been named as Theory of Successful Intelligence by Sternberg (Sternberg, 1984, p.271). Jean Piaget advanced one of the used theories in the development of school curriculums. He used the development approach in the study of intelligence. His view was that growing up is a process that has stages and every stage bracket has its maximum capabilities. The group stages of development he came up with are Sensimotor stage (0-2 years), preoperational stage (2-7 years), Concrete stage (7-11 years)Â  and formal operational stage (11 years and above). At Sensimotor stage (0-2) intelligence is based on perception and how other objects work, the thoughts occur mentally and cannot be expressed. In the preoperational stage (2-7 years) one learns to speak, image representation of objects with the thoughts being external. Concrete stage (7-11 years)Â  involves logic reasoning and thinking. The formal operational stage (11 years and up) is the final stage of development of human intelligence. His theory suggests that growth of intelligence is continuous process of assimilation and acc ommodation of new ideas and which lead to expansion of field of applications. Factors affecting Human Intelligence Human intelligence is affected by biological factors, environmental factors and ethical factors. Biologically genes pass cognitive abilities from parents to the children through the DNA. This is evidenced by a number of factors that include the correlation of IQs between an individual and the parent, hereditary brain diseases, similar IQs in identical twins, similarity in brain language areas among family members and cognitive skill such as verbal and spatial abilities, reaction times, and even some personality qualities, including emotional reactions to stress. Intelligence is connected to structure of the brain and its development in that the intelligence quotients are related to the brain volume. Since intelligence is affected by the brains some factors like ratio of brain weight to body weight, the ratio in for instance of brain weight to body weight in a fish is 1:5000 whereas in humans it is 1:50. Occasionally brains metabolic activity may lower intelligence for big brains. The size of the frontal lobe critically affects fluid intelligence tests Other factors affecting intelligence related to the brain include location of the grey matter tissue and its volume and the overall thickness of the cortex (Colom Pueyo, 2000). Environmental effects are affect intelligence of human population both at individual and group levels. Some environmental factors are either enhanced or suppressed by the genes of the individual. The social set up has impacts on the level of intelligence attained by an individual as it dictates things like what he does, what he values and how he lives. This is attested by the different level of intelligence of different communities living in different locations say urban-rural places. Their different tend to improve one aspect of intelligence compared to the other set up. Occupation of individuals also tends to affect their intelligence depending with the scope pr demand of their job jurisdiction. Education is also a major factor influencing level of intelligence; this will depend on the level of education where highly educated individual is likely to have a high level of intelligence compared to one with low levels of education in general skills and problem-solving and abstract thin king. Another environmental factor affecting intelligence is nutrition, it has been largely converged that prolonged malnutrition during childhood has long-term effects on level of intelligence. Intelligence is also affected by the manipulation of existing normal conditions; eugenics is currently being practiced to improve the human species by improving human genes. This is mainly to correct congenital disorders and cognitive skills. There are also studies being conducted to try coming up with artificial intelligence through increasing IQs and also using machines. There major cognitive skills of interest are reasoning, knowledge, perception and reaction (Flinn, 2005) Ethical issues also affect human intelligence. In this work the ethical issues discussed are privacy, accuracy and accessibility. Human intelligence is likely to be compromised by wrong information availed to it leading to wrong conclusions or decisions. Lack of information or refrained access to vital information required later translates to lack of knowledge which limits the level of operation of the human intelligence. Human intelligence is surely a not so well understood phenomenon that still requires more research to give a clear insight and understanding of its complex nature. Simulation and improvement of the advanced theories will be key to any further development in these field

Absolute and Relative Surplus Value – Seminar

In contemporary social science, the concept of â€Å"value† has attained currency in such disciplines like Economics, Sociology, Political science etc. in these disciplines, value is considered as those essentials needed by members of a society. It is further seen as scarce resources pursued by competing groups. Value in political economy, basically refers to that portion that creates wealth or the so called reward for the â€Å"risk taker†, the entrepreneur.In other words, value refers to that unpaid labour of the worker which the capitalist pockets or recapitalizes. It should be noted that, the concept of value is an integral part of the labour process in general, capitalist commodity production, wear and tear of the working class and of course class antagonism. In essence, the concept of value (Absolute and Relative) cannot be understood without recourse to the mode of production that brings it about as well as the nature of social relations of production.Under capit alism, labour power becomes a commodity and like any commodity, it has its value and use value. The value of any commodity like labour power is determined by the expenditure of social labour on its production and reproduction. Therefore, surplus value is derived from surplus labour of a worker. The worker creates a value which the owner of the means of production appropriates without compensation. Marx’s Das Capital not only revealed the exploitation surrounding the extraction of surplus value, he as well revealed the degree and ratio of exploitation involving the labour power of the workers.In this direction, he maintained that that surplus value can be categorized into â€Å"Absolute and Relative†. With this, Marx gives an analogy of how the value of labour power is used in extending capital. A school master is a productive labour or his labour power becomes of value when he finds himself in a school factory, that he must ensure that teaching and non-teaching staffs become productive as to ensure not only the preservation of capital assets of the owner of the means of production but that they produce surplus value that exceeds the rate of hiring them.Beyond this, Marx situated the social relations of production in historical context which has continued to associate the worker and surplus value creation. From the foregoing, capitalist exploitation of the labour power of workers can be looked at from two angles: the first being the production of Absolute surplus value which becomes possible in the prolongation of the working day. In other words, to Marx, Absolute surplus value is obtained by increasing the amount of time worked per worker in a given time.From one stand point, any distinction between Absolute and Relative surplus value appears illusory. Relative surplus value is Absolute since it compels the absolute prolongation of the working day beyond the labour time necessary to the existence of the labourer himself; While Absolute surplus va lue is relative since it makes necessary such a development of the productiveness of labour, as will allow of the necessary labour time being confined to a portion of the working day.The second way of increasing the degree of the exploitation of labour power through the relative surplus value which is derived by a reduction of the necessary labour time without any changes in the working day. For Marx, it is possible to reduce the labour time primarily by increasing social labour productivity in branches producing means of subsistence for the workers. Consequently, both the Absolute and Relative surplus value are defined within the logic of the establishment of capitalism which perpetually subjects labour to capital.Again, Marx tries to highlight the differences between the Absolute and Relative surplus value, which he says is defined with the establishment of the capitalist mode of production; that is it is the prolongation of the working day beyond the point at which the labourer w ould have produced just an equivalent for the value of his labour power, and the appropriation of that surplus labour by capital. Although, as a special method of reducing relative surplus value, he continues capitalist industries get operated by by the army of workers themselves with the ultimate aim of ensuring the revolution of the entire capitalist production.It is with regard to the forgoing, that the author presupposes that when the above two conditions that creates surplus value for the capitalists are absent or when the labour spends all his labour time for the reproduction of himself, then the cycle of capital reproduction is obstructed and class division disappears. However, Marx goes on to say that the increasing complexity of the needs of society has correspondingly increased the absolute and relative surplus value extracted in the process of production.Regarding the origin of surplus value and labour power from its engagement, Marx is of the opinion that it was influenc ed under two conditions: The first being the subsistence of workers when man gathered natural wealth for subsistence. The second is market conditions when market production got underway, instruments of labour such as navigable rivers, wood, coal, metal etc became important in the capitalist production of goods and services. Inhering from the consequence of commercial production is the issue of climatic change which is caused the excessive demand for consumer goods.So, the lesser the natural wants of man; the greater the fertility of the soil and the suitable climatic conditions and ultimately, the less impoverished the labourer. From the foregoing, the capitalist mode of production, according to Marx, thrives on man’s assertiveness on the wealth of nature. The differentiation of the fertility of the soil and its components such as the changes of the seasons informs social division of labour in societies and by extension multiplied human wants, his capabilities, means of produ ction and surplus value. t therefore follows that human labour is the only source of new economic value since it is indispensable for the conservation and transfer economic value (maintenance and redistribution of capital assets). In other words, the ability of the capitalist to manipulate the surplus labour time in order to produce surplus product is the starting point for the extraction of surplus value. Bourgeois economists such as David Ricardo did not see surplus value as the driving force behind the productiveness of labour rather as an essential part of labour production that determines surplus value.Again, this view of the Bourgeois scholars contrasts from that of the merchantilists which believe that surplus value originates from the aspect of exchange of the labour product above its original value. Another, bourgeois scholar with yet another perspective is John Stuart Mill who sees surplus value as inhering from the duration of the product of labour. In other words, Mill b elieved surplus value can still be made without the exchange value of commodities. But, in reality, surplus value can be derived from subtracting the total expenditure made in the process of production and exchange from the final price of the commodity.Surplus value is in fact the main goal and the driving force of capitalist production. It is also important to note that it is on the basis of the engagement of labour power that surplus value is extracted. Since capital needs a steady flow of labour power to preserve the capital assets and provide surplus value, it is where the mystery of capitalist exploitation lies, it becomes pertinent to examine the views of Karl Marx on the following Sub themes: CHANGES OF MAGNITUDE INTHE PRICE OF LABOUR POWER AND IN SURPLUS VALUE: Labour power is determined by the expenditure of social labour on its production and reproduction. In other words, in order to live and work, a worker has to have food, clothes, housing, etc , in order to meet his nee ds and fulfill his role as a member of society. Essentially, for Marx, there are three important factors that determine the value of labour power: i.The value of the necessaries required by the worker ii. The expenses involved in skills acquisition of the labourer iii. The value of the means of subsistence required to maintain the worker’s family. In addition, labour power has a specific use value which no other commodity possesses. For example, the use value of commodities such as bread, clothes, footwear, writing materials, etc is fully used up in the process of consumption while the use value of labour power has the capacity to produce more value than it has itself.This also constitutes the cradle of capitalist exploitation and appropriation of surplus value. It is based o the above premise that Marx underscores that the Relative magnitudes of surplus value and of price of labour power are determined by three circumstances: a. The length of the working day b. The normal in tensity of labour c. The productiveness of labour The above factors or circumstances could variously be combined. One of the three factors could be constant and the others variable or two constant and one variable or lastly all three simultaneously variable.The following analogy further explains the various combinations that determine the relative magnitudes of surplus value and the value of labour power: LENGTH OF THE WORKING DAY AND INTENSITY OF LABOUR CONSTANT. PRODUCTIVENESS OF LABOUR VARIABLE : The above assumptions are determined by three laws: First, a working day of a given length always creates the same amount of value, irrespective of the productiveness of labour and with it the mass of the product and the price of each of the product may vary.What the capitalist would do in this circumstance in order to extract surplus value is to divide the working day into two parts: The first is the necessary labour time and the other is surplus labour time. The capitalist maximizes th e utility of the surplus labour time in which time the worker expends surplus labour and creates surplus value. Again, Marx added that the outcome of labour process varies with the productiveness of labour. Second, surplus value and the value of labour power vary in opposite directions.A variation in the productiveness of labour, its increase or decrease influence the variation in the opposite direction of the value of labour power and in the same direction in surplus value. In other words, the capitalists through the intensity of labour can reduce the value of labour power, while at the same time increase their extraction of surplus value. Further, the value of labour power cannot fall and consequently surplus value cannot rise without a rise in the productiveness of labour.For instance, a working day of seven hours created a value of #10,000 as a constant. The constant quantity is the sum of the surplus value plus the value of labour power; therefore, neither of them can increase without the other diminishing. It then follows that the value of the labour power cannot decrease from #10,000 to #8,000 unless an increase in the productiveness of labour makes it possible to produce in five hours the same quantity of necessaries as previously required in 7 hours to produce.On the other hand, the value of the labour power cannot rise from #10,000 to #12,000 without a decrease in the productiveness of labour, whereby 9 hours become sufficient to produce the same quantity of necessaries for the production of which 7 hours previously sufficed. Third, increase or diminution in surplus value depends on the corresponding diminution or increase in the value of labour power. Every change of magnitude in surplus value arises from an inverse change of magnitude in the value of labour power.According to this third law, a change in the magnitude of surplus value presupposes a movement in the value of labour power, which movement is brought about by a variation in the productiv eness of labour. WORKING DAY CONSTANT. PRODUCTIVENESS OF LABOUR CONSTANT. INTENSITY OF LABOUR VARIABLE : In this case, increased intensity of labour in a constant working day of 7 hours will amount to more products than one of less intense labour. Productiveness of labour will also result in more products in a given day of 7 hours.Evidently, the mass of surplus value can be increased both by increasing the rate of the exploitation of labour power and by increasing the number of wage workers. In addition, the reduction of the value of the workers means of subsistence and consequently the value of labour power or a reduction of the necessary labour time and increase in the surplus labour time can generate surplus value in the process of capitalist production. Again, technology increases surplus value at the expense of labour power.In fact, capitalism as a social system puts all the achievements of the technical progress at the service of non-working, parasitic classes and dooms the wo rking class to poverty and rightlessness. Machines serve to intensify the exploitation of labour and wear out the human organism at a faster pace. When the value created by a day’s labour increases from #8,000 to #10,000, then the two parts into which this value is divided, ie price of labour power and surplus value may both increase simultaneously, equally or unequally.Here, the rise in the price of labour power does not necessarily imply that the price has risen above the value of labour power. On the contrary, the rise in price may be accompanied by a fall in value. This occurs whenever the rise in the price of labour power does not compensate for its increased wear and tear. PRODUCTIVENESS AND INTENSITY OF LABOUR CONSTANT. LENGTH OF THE WORKING DAY VARIABLE: The length of the working day creates a greater or less amount of value. In addition, every change between the magnitudes of surplus value and the value of labour power arises from a change in the absolute magnitudes of the surplus labour.Furthermore, the absolute value of labour can change only in consequence of the reaction exercised by the prolongation of surplus labour upon the wear and tear of labour power. From the foregoing, one can conclude that: A shortening of the working day under the conditions leaving the value of labour power and its necessary labour time unaltered; it then reduces the surplus labour and surplus value. A change in the productiveness and intensity of labour either precedes or immediately follows a shortening of the working day.Second, if the working day be lengthened say 2 hours and the price of labour power remain altered; the surplus value increases both absolutely and relatively. In other words, the change of relative magnitude in the value of labour power is the result of the change of absolute magnitude in surplus value. The point to be emphasized here is that the wear and tear of workers is not adequately compensated in Nigeria. SIMULTANEUOS VARIATIONS IN THE DURATION, PRODUCTIVENESS AND INTENSITY OF LABOUR The ifferent variations are capable of counteracting one another, either wholly or in part. In speaking of diminishing productiveness of labour, it is in relation with those industries whose products takes care of the subsistence of the worker such as the fertility of the soil and the consequent dearness of its products like food, shelter, clothes, etc. In the latter case, should there be no change in the working day, the capitalists will experience a fall in surplus value because the price of the labour power required for production would have increased.Therefore, with diminishing productiveness of labour and a simultaneous lengthening of the working day, the absolute magnitude of surplus value may continue unaltered, at the same time that its relative magnitude diminishes; its relative magnitude may continue unchanged at the same time that its absolute magnitude increases; both the absolute magnitude and relative magnitude may incre ase in so far as the duration of the working day is sufficient. On the other hand, the increasing productiveness of labour with a simultaneous shortening of the necessary labour time results in the relative surplus value.When the productiveness of labour is as a result of increasing social labour productivity in branches producing means of subsistence for the workers and their families, it serves to reduce the value of labour power and subsequently produces absolute and relative surplus value when the necessary labour time is reduced at the expense of the surplus labour time. However, the more the productiveness of labour increases, the more can the working day be shortened; and the more the working day is shortened , the more can the productiveness of labour increase.VARIOUS FORMULAE FOR THE RATE OF SURPLUS VALUE: The rate of surplus value in production is defined by Marx as the volume of surplus value produced by the workforce divided by the variable capital expended to produce: a Surplus value S = Surplus value = Surplus labour Variable capital V Value of labour power Necessary labour b. Surplus labour =Surplus value =Surplus product Working day Value of the Product Total ProductHere, the intensity and productiveness of labour embodied in a working day depicts the degree of exploitation of labour. The formula for the mass of surplus value (S) is = S’x V, where S is the rate of surplus value and V is the variable capital advanced for the remuneration of all the workers. Evidently, the mass of surplus can be increased both by increasing the rate of the exploitation of labour power and by increasing the number of wage workers. Conclusion:

The Personal Attack: The Logical Fallacy of Argumentum

The term â€Å"ad hominem† is a Latin phrase that translates to â€Å"against the man† (â€Å"Ad hominem†).   It is one of several logical fallacies that may appear (intentionally or otherwise) in the rhetorical mode of writing or speaking known as Argument.   The use of the ad hominem indicates that an argument (or counter-argument) is focusing not on the issue or cause, but on the issue’s presenter, and it generally takes the form of a personal attack of the presenter’s character (â€Å"Introduction to Ad Hominem Fallacies†). The soundest ad hominem attacks are made up of two steps.   The first step is to discredit the speaker/presenter/sponsor, and the second step is to imply that because the speaker/presenter/sponsor is a â€Å"bad† person, the issue or cause must be bad as well (â€Å"Introduction to Ad Hominem Fallacies†). For example, prior to the last local election, I attended a debate between two city council candidates regarding a public school bond measure.   Having read about the issue, I was aware that the facts proved the bond’s cost would far outweigh the anticipated minimal benefits—benefits that had not been shown to occur in similar communities.   I had seen no evidence to support any logical argument to encourage citizen’s to support the bond issue, so I was not surprised when one candidate turned the factual debate into a personal attack of his opponent. The argument: that his opponent had no school-aged children and because of this, his opponent has no vested interest in the success or failure of the community’s public school system. Obviously the candidate who was attacking his opponent (via the ad hominem) hoped that people would equate his opponent’s lacking school-aged children with an inability to assess a public school bond issue properly. The logical counter to this fallacious argument would be to return the focus to the facts: if  passed, would the school bond result in improvements or would it not?   If passed, would the  costs of the school bond be worth the benefits or not?   I would quickly point out that whether or  not one has children has no bearing on one’s ability to assess the fiscal impact of a set of facts,  and I would add to that, that if this were a logical supposition, that only those who had children  should be allowed to vote on the bond issue as obviously only those with children have  the capacity to make a sound decision in this area. References Ad hominem.   (2000).   In The American heritage dictionary of the English language (4th ed.).   Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Introduction to ad hominem fallacies.   (n.d.).   Mission Critical.   Retrieved October 17, 2006, from http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/adhom/adhom.html

Analysis Of Julius Caesar s The Tale Without Felling A...

â€Å"VENI VIDI VICI,† or, â€Å"I CAME, I SAW, I CONQUERED.† These are probably some of the most ludicrous yet impressive words that can be articulated from the tongue. It is reassuring to note that undoubtedly these were the exact words uttered by Julius Caesar, for they seem to sum him up perfectly. Not only was he successful in conquering the ancient world, but his name resonated through the medieval and modern worlds also, and has not failed to fascinate the one present today. Very few people can read his tale without felling a sense of reverence for the man’s â€Å"brilliance, undeterred will, and extensive achievements concluded with one of the utmost dramatic tragedies of all time† (Grant 5). There are numerous reasons why Caesar’s life, along with the lives of other notable figures of world history, deserves continual study, but what sets him apart from the other great leaders is Caesar’s versatility for he was the most â€Å"outsta ndingly capable over the most extensive of range† (Grant 7). He was a man not just good at his activates, but exceptional at every single one of them including governing, commanding troops, and public specking. His bold solutions to problems of economic debt, the calendar, unemployment and mercy towards Roman rebels have all become legendary. No wonder why his myth and legacy has inspired, in some way or form, every sequential age from him marking the beginning of a new chapter in Roman history in his time, to influencing writing in Shakespeare’s time, and