Originally Posted by amna rafiq

CSS 2011
The Psychological causes of unhappiness, it is clear, are many and various. But all have something in common. The typical unhappy man is one who having been deprived in youth of some normal satisfaction, has come to value this one kind of satisfaction more than any other, and has, therefore, given to his life a one-sided direction, together with a quite undue emphasis upon the achievement as opposed to the activities connected with it. There is, however, a further development which is very common in the present day. A man may feel so completely thwarted (dissatisfied) that he seeks no form of satisfaction, but only distraction and oblivion (forgetfulness). He then becomes a devotee (follower) of “Pleasure”. That is to say, he seeks to make life bearable by becoming less alive. Drunkenness, for example, is temporary suicide; the happiness that it brings is merely negative, a momentary cessation (termination) of unhappiness. The narcissist and the megalomaniac (power-hungry) believe that happiness is possible, though they may adopt mistaken means of achieving it; but the man who seeks intoxication, in whatever form, has given up hope except in oblivion. In his case the first thing to be done is to persuade him that happiness is desirable. Men, who are unhappy, like men who sleep badly, are always proud of the fact. Perhaps their pride is like that of the fox who had lost his tail; if so, the way to cure it is to point out to them how they can grow a new tail. Very few men, I believe, will deliberately choose unhappiness if they see a way of being happy. I do not deny that such men exist, but they are not sufficiently numerous to be important. It is common in our day, as it has been in many other periods of the world’s history, to suppose that those among us who are wise have seen through all the enthusiasms of earlier times and have become aware that there is nothing left to live for. The man who hold this view are genuinely unhappy, but they are proud of their unhappiness, which they attribute to the nature of the universe and consider to be the only rational attitude for an enlightened man. Their pride in their unhappiness makes less sophisticated people suspicious of its genuineness; they think that the man who enjoys being miserable is not miserable.

precis:
There are numerous psychological reasons of being un happy.The most common is the deprivation of early age contentment resulting more stress upon achieving rather than the activities associated with them.Man adopts various temporary negative means to overcome this state.Persuasion for good might be prove helpful to reshape their life in a better way.At present people who are of the view that life is of no use are displeased in a real sense.
Title:”Momentary cessation of unhappiness"

Originally Posted by amna rafiq

2008
Objectives pursued by, organizations should be directed to the satisfaction of demands resulting from the wants of mankind. Therefore, the determination of appropriate objectives for organized activity must be preceded by an effort to determine precisely what their wants are. Industrial organizations conduct market studies to learn what consumer goods should be produced. City Commissions make surveys to ascertain what civic projects would be of most benefit. Highway Commissions conduct traffic counts to learn what constructive programmes should be undertaken. Organizations come into being as a means for creating and exchanging utility. Their success is dependent upon the appropriateness of the series of acts contributed to the system. The majority of these acts is purposeful, that is, they are directed to the accomplishment of some objectives. These acts are physical in nature and find purposeful employment in the alteration of the physical environment. As a result utility is created, which, through the process of distribution, makes it possible for the cooperative system to endure.

Before the Industrial Revolution most cooperative activity was accomplished in small owner managed enterprises, usually with a single decision maker and simple organizational objectives. Increased technology and the growth of industrial organization made necessary the establishment of a hierarchy of objectives. This is turn, required a division of the management function until today a hierarchy of decision makers exists in most organizations.

The effective pursuit of appropriate objectives contributes directly to organizational efficiency. As used here, efficiency is a measure of the want satisfying power of the cooperative system as a whole. Thus efficiency is the summation of utilities received from the organization divided by the utilities given to the organization, as subjectively evaluated by each contributor.

The functions of the management process is the delineation of organizational objectives and the coordination of activity towards the accomplishment of these objectives. The system of coordinated activities must be maintained so that each contributor, including the manager, gains more than he contributes.

Precis: The foremost duty of organizations must be the fullest satisfaction of mankind.They should set such goals as are desired by men by conducting survey & market research.They are here to barter utilities & their success depends only upon properly arranged acts thus they bring practical change in environment & make the system continue to exist.Industrial revolution has developed graded organizational acts with multiple management functions.pursuing for suitable objectives directly affects it's efficiency.The basic function of the management is to portray the targets & to coordinate the acts to achieve them in order to extract maximum profit.
Title: "Organizations,the server of mankind"
"Appropriate objectives & organization's efficiency"

Originally Posted by amna rafiq

2007
The author of a work of imagination is trying to effect us wholly, as human beings, whether he knows it or not; and we are affected by it, as human beings, whether we intend to be or not. I suppose that everything we eat has some effect upon us than merely the pleasure of taste and mastication; it affects us during the process of assimilation and digestion; and I believe that exactly the same is true of any thing we read.
The fact that what we read does not concern merely something called our literary taste, but that it affects directly, though only amongst many other influences , the whole of what we are, is best elicited , I think, by a conscientious examination of the history of our individual literary education. Consider the adolescent reading of any person with some literary sensibility. Everyone, I believe, who is at all sensible to the seductions of poetry, can remember some moment in youth when he or she was completely carried away by the work of one poet. Very likely he was carried away by several poets, one after the other. The reason for this passing infatuation is not merely that our sensibility to poetry is keener in adolescence than in maturity. What happens is a kind of inundation, or invasion of the undeveloped personality, the empty (swept and garnished) room, by the stronger personality of the poet. The same thing may happen at a later age to persons who have not done much reading. One author takes complete possession of us for a time; then another, and finally they begin to affect each other in our mind. We weigh one against another; we see that each has qualities absent from others, and qualities incompatible with the qualities of others: we begin to be, in fact, critical: and it is our growing critical power which protects us from excessive possession by anyone literary personality. The good critic- and we should all try to critics, and not leave criticism to the fellows who write reviews in the papers- is the man who, to a keen and abiding sensibility, joins wide and increasingly discriminating. Wide reading is not valuable as a kind of hoarding, and the accumulation of knowledge or what sometimes is meant by the term ‘a well-stocked mind.’ It is valuable because in the process of being affected by one powerful personality after another, we cease to be dominated by anyone, or by any small number. The very different views of life, cohabiting in our minds, affect each other, and our own personality asserts itself and gives each a place in some arrangement peculiar to our self.

Precis: Any literary work that we read must influenced (influence) us knowingly or unknowingly & it doesn't only reflect our taste but also draws out (brings out) our true personality.By honest & thorough examination of our life we get to know that we were occupied by different literary personalities in successive periods of time & we started comparing them that gave birth to our critical views that really requires (require...subject is plural so verb agree to it) wide knowledge.Wide knowledge doesn't refer to the confinement of knowledge within mind rather it assists us to resist the domination of only a few & to arrange various ideas in a particular way.

Title: "Reading elicits our self/our personality"

Originally Posted by seher bano

Seniors Check out this precis, Please.
Precis (2005)
Basically, psychoses and neuroses represent man’s inability to maintain a balanced or equated polarity in conducting his life. The ego becomes exclusively or decidedly one sided. In psychoses there is a complete collapse of the ego back into the inner recesses of the personal and collective unconsciousness. When he is repressed toward fulfilling some life goal and where he is further unable to sublimate himself toward another goal, man regresses into goal structures not actually acceptable to himself or to the society. Strong emotional sickness of the psychotic type is like having the shadow run wild. The entire psyche regresses to archaic, animal forms of behaviors. In less severe forms of emotional sickness there may be an accentuated and overpowering use of one of the four mental functions at the expense of the other three. Either thinking, feeling, intuiting or seeing may assume such a superior role as to render the other three inoperative. The persona may become so dominant as to create a totally one-sided ego, as in some forms of neurotic behavior. All in all, whatever the type of severity of the emotional disorder, it can be taken as a failure of the psyche to maintain a proper balance between the polarities of life. Essentially, psychoses and neuroses are an alienation of the self from its true goal of self actualization. In this sense the culture is of no consequence. Emotional disorder is not a question of being out of tune with one’s culture so much as it is of being out of tune with one’s self. Consequently, neurosis is more than bizarre behavior, especially as it may be interpreted by contemporaries in the culture. This interpretation avoids the sociological question of what is a mental disorder, since form of behavior which is acceptable in one culture may be considered neurotic in other culture. To Jung, the deviation from cultural norms is not the point. The inability to balance out personal polarities is. (Word Count: 325)


Title:
Comparison of psychoses and neuroses
Man in psychoses and neuroses
Psychoses, neuroses and Man’s character


Man’s failure to strike a balance between his favour and disfavour is the manifestation of psychoses and neuroses. The former ruins the egoistic part of mans character; and render him unable to get his goals of life achieved. In addition, a severe case of psychoses, at times, makes him uncontrollable. On the other hand, in less severe cases patient’s one of the different mental abilities takes the precedence over others. Moreover, self-recognition, in psychoses, of the patient is more important than recognition of his culture. However, from the cultural perspective, a neurosis is more strange condition. In a nutshell, incapability of balancing one’s self is more important than that of culture. (WC:111)