Saturday, June 27, 2009

Who has the leading role in crackdown on crimes?!

Generally, the official crime statistics in third world countries like Iran is unreliable because lots of them are unrecorded which, I believe, is the most serious problem we are facing nowadays. Victims of sexual crimes and young victims are mostly afraid of reporting and suing the perpetrator of crime.

The are two major root causes of crimes, financial problems, and lack of culture. Certainly, they are closely related to each other but I personally think that, lack of culture occupies a crucial role in raising crime problem. You can understand it easily if you just take a look at the rate of crimes which are committed in rich and uneducated families everyday. On the other hand, there are lots of poor families with cultural background, whose members have never been reported as a criminal in their lives, which both show that culture is more effective deterrent against crimes.

Financial problems such as inflation and unemployment are the other major causes of crimes in third world countries. Unemployed young people are likely to be tempted into a life of crime. When someone can not provide themselves with the essential facilities of living they would do anything to survive, even committing vicious crimes in cold blood.

Cross-sections of society such as -in order of priority- families, schools and universities, have a vital role in decreasing the crime level. These are the places that we educate every individual member of our society and given the fact that culture is something that formed in society, we can see how important it is.
Crime prevention program of the government which can be implemented by police and legal system is one of the factors that helps to reduce crime rates -particularly youth crimes- in Iran.

The media also plays a leading role in consciousness raising of society by warning them about the potential crimes around them. Especially in countries like Iran, where media is completely monopolized by the government, they can affect people easily.

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Report on job satisfaction of bank employees

This report outlines the result of a survey, which has been recently conducted, of bank employees attitude towards their job satisfaction and working condition. We asked a sample of 300 employees, of different ages and both sexes who are all working in the cashier position of different branches of one bank, these three questions:

  1. Do you think that your salary is equal to your job responsibility?

  2. Do you think you deserve to get a higher position in your organization?

  3. Are you looking for another job or you prefer to continue doing your job until you get promoted?


The vast majority of employees are not satisfied with their salary. And that is why we can see a sheer weariness in employees. Most of them complain that their salary has not increased commensurately with the rate of inflation.


Unfortunately, 72 percent of the employees think that they deserve to get a higher position. It shows that they either are not satisfied with their job or don't have an objective evaluation of their job description, which both mean that they have a forlorn hope to get promoted and if not, they will be completely disappointed with their position.


65 percent of employees, who had expressed their dissatisfaction through the questionnaire, are looking for another job out side of this organization. And the other 35 percent are going to continue their job until they get promoted. This statistic means that the organization will lose some 47 percent of its employees in future and should hire new employees, which is not a good rate of recruiting.


Broadly speaking, the considerable proportion of employees, who work in cashier position, are not satisfied with their job in this bank, which means human resource department has failed in increasing their employees satisfaction. It seems making a revision in their salary system would be one of the best way of increasing their loyalty and satisfaction. In addition, educational programs in order to give them to understand that job promotion needs special skills and experiment and not everyone can get promotion easily, could be considered as another solution for increasing job satisfaction among the employees.

Monday, June 1, 2009

Why do not we clone Humans?

by: Amir Payman Kashefi (

Humans are eager to have immortal life. This is by far the most important dream of them. Scientists have been working hard to find out a way which makes them capable of managing this old-dream.

If we are enthusiastic about knowing whether the genetic engineering and cloning are coming to help us or not, we should study it from many different angles.

The scientists are intensely ambitious with the idea of accomplishing this mission in spite of limitations and very serious disagreements. These objections are often come from politicians and religious figures. Some of the religious figures are strongly against cloning because they believe that humans are not allowed to play the God roles. Also they are not qualified for unnatural interference in human life.

Dr Richard Fid, who is for the idea of cloning, was supposed to establish a cloning center. But he was denied.

Bill Clinton and Pope John Paul the second were the other figures who were against cloning and believed it should be banned.

Dolly was the first lamb that was cloned by scientists with its mammal cells. Megan and Murag were the other lambs that scientists cloned them by their mothers embryo cells.

Unfortunately, they could not live more than three years while a natural sheep can be alive for 6 years.

People think that proved genes can help the scientists to eradicate terrible diseases. However the Dolly's death showed that it is not true.

Dolly, Megan and Murag died sooner than the scientists prediction, not because of illnesses, they died because their cells were not young. It means that scientists can use the cells and prove them only when they become adult. So it is clear that the cloned lambs could not be alive as long as their mothers.

Dr Colien Tudje is one of the greatest scientists who was completely against the cloning. Also he had predicted Dolly's impending death in Science magazine 2001 before Dolly died.

He strongly recommended not to clone the humans.

In the end we can conclude that genetic engineering and top of that cloning is one of the most controversial subjects that humans have in this era.

I would like a Brad Pitt face!

Are we going to live in a century of choosing our look like or our body type or our intelligence? Can we (or at least our parents!) order our feature before we were born?

Generally, I believe that everything is perfect in the way god has made them, and this world has an equilibrium which we might not understand but it doesn't mean that does not exist. And if we make a little tiny change in one part of the world there will be definitely a reaction in the other part. So, every change in nature has consequences. For example, nowadays we are suffering from global warming problem which is the consequence of our mistakes treating the nature in the industrial revolution. Most of the time because we don't know the long-term effects of our actions we consider it as if it is harmless while on no account could we put the next generation's life in danger.

Genetic engineering is one of the science that instinctively talk about change. The aim of this science is understanding the process of inheritance and try to make changes in order to improve humans life. The very controversial issue is “are we going in the right way or we are fighting the god's rules?”

With no doubt, genetic engineering can help us eradicate diseases such as cancer. Although these changes have been made by our previous mistakes, it would be a cure for all of our sufferings. But, on the other hand, genetic engineering might make human able to change something we shouldn't and only god knows what will happen if we do that. For example, just imagine a world in which every one has a same appearance or a same intelligence. I think it would be boring living in a world in which every things is arranged already.

At the end, I believed that we don't have the knowledge and right to change every thing and to use genetic engineering we should have some red lines and avoid crossing them.