Biography of Banastre Tarleton, British General

Biography of Banastre Tarleton, British General Banastre Tarleton (August 21, 1754–January 15, 1833) was a British Army officer during the American Revolution who became notorious for his actions in the southern theater of the war. He gained his reputation for brutality following the Battle of Waxhaws, where he reputedly had American prisoners killed. Tarleton later led part of Lieutenant General Lord Charles Cornwallis army and was crushed at the Battle of Cowpens in January 1781. Remaining active until the end of the war, he was captured following the British surrender at Yorktown that October. Fast Facts: Banastre Tarleton Known For: American RevolutionBorn: August 21, 1754 in Liverpool, EnglandParents: John TarletonDied: January 15, 1833 in Leintwardine, EnglandEducation: Middle Temple in London and University College at Oxford UniversityPublished Works:  A History of the Campaigns of 1780 and 1781, in the Southern Provinces of North AmericaSpouse(s): Mary Robinson (not married, long term relationship ca. 1782–1797) Susan Priscilla Bertie (m. December 17, 1798–his death in 1833)Children: Illegitimate daughter with Kolima, (1797–1801) Banina Georgiana Tarleton Early Life Banastre Tarleton was born August 21, 1754, in Liverpool, England, the third child of John Tarleton, a prominent merchant with extensive ties in the American colonies and the slave trade. John Tarleton served as the mayor of Liverpool in 1764 and 1765, and, holding a position of prominence in the city, Tarleton saw that his son received an upper-class education including studying the law at Middle Temple in London and University College at Oxford University. Upon his fathers death in 1773, Banastre Tarleton received 5,000 British pounds but promptly lost most of it gambling at Londons notorious Cocoa Tree club. In 1775, he sought a new life in the military and purchased a commission as a coronet (second lieutenant) in the 1st Kings Dragoon Guards. Taking to military life, Tarleton proved a skilled horseman and displayed strong leadership skills. Early Career In 1775, Tarleton obtained permission to leave the 1st Kings Dragoon Guards and proceeded to North America as a volunteer with Cornwallis. As part of a force arriving from Ireland, he took part in the failed attempt to capture Charleston, South Carolina in June 1776. Following the British defeat at the Battle of Sullivans Island, Tarleton sailed north where the expedition joined General William Howes army on Staten Island. During the New York Campaign that summer and fall he earned a reputation as a daring and effective officer. Serving under Colonel William Harcourt of the 16th Light Dragoons, Tarleton achieved fame on December 13, 1776. While on a scouting mission, Tarletons patrol located and surrounded a house in Basking Ridge, New Jersey, where American Major General Charles Lee was staying. Tarleton was able to compel Lees surrender by threatening to burn the building down. In recognition of his performance around New York, he earned a promotion to major. Charleston Waxhaws After continuing to provide able service, Tarleton was given command of a newly formed  mixed force of cavalry and light infantry known as the British Legion and Tarletons Raiders in 1778. Promoted to lieutenant colonel, his new command was largely comprised of Loyalists and at its largest numbered around 450 men. In 1780, Tarleton and his men sailed south to Charleston, South Carolina, as part of General Sir Henry Clintons army.   Landing, they aided in the siege of the city and patrolled the surrounding area in search of American troops. In the weeks before Charlestons fall on May 12, Tarleton won victories at Moncks Corner (April 14) and Lenuds Ferry (May 6). On May 29, 1780, his men fell upon 350 Virginia Continentals led by Colonel Abraham Buford. In the ensuing Battle of Waxhaws, Tarletons men butchered Bufords command, despite an American attempt to surrender, killing 113 and capturing 203. Of the captured men, 150 were too wounded to move and were left behind. Known as the Waxhaws Massacre to the Americans, it, along with his cruel treatment of the populace, cemented Tarletons image as a heartless commander. Through the remainder of 1780, Tarletons men pillaged the countryside instilling fear and earning him the nicknames Bloody Ban and Butcher. With Clintons departure after the capture of Charleston, the Legion remained in South Carolina as part of Cornwallis army. Serving with this command, Tarleton took part in the victory over Major General Horatio Gates at Camden on August 16. In the weeks that followed, he sought to suppress the guerrilla operations of Brigadier Generals Francis Marion and Thomas Sumter, but with no success. Marion and Sumters careful treatment of civilians earned them their trust and support, while Tarletons behavior alienated all those he encountered. Cowpens Instructed by Cornwallis in January 1781 to destroy an American command led by Brigadier General Daniel Morgan, Tarleton rode west seeking the enemy. Tarleton found Morgan at an area in western South Carolina known as the Cowpens. In the battle that followed on January 17, Morgan conducted a well-orchestrated double envelopment that effectively destroyed Tarletons command and routed him from the field. Fleeing back to Cornwallis, Tarleton fought in the Battle of Guilford Courthouse and later commanded raiding forces in Virginia. During a foray to Charlottesville, he unsuccessfully attempted to capture Thomas Jefferson and several members of the Virginia legislature. Later War Moving east with Cornwallis army in 1781, Tarleton was given command of the forces at Gloucester Point, across the York River from the British position at Yorktown. Following the American victory at Yorktown and Cornwallis capitulation in October 1781, Tarleton surrendered his position. In negotiating the surrender, special arrangements had to be made to protect Tarleton due to his unsavory reputation. After the surrender, the American officers invited all of their British counterparts to dine with them but specifically forbade Tarleton from attending. He later served in Portugal and Ireland. Politics Returning home in 1781, Tarleton entered politics and was defeated in his first election for Parliament. In 1782, after returning to England and supposedly on a bet with her current lover, Tarleton seduced Mary Robinson, ex-mistress of the Prince of Wales and a talented actress and poet: they would have a 15-year relationship, but never married and had no surviving children. In 1790, he won the election and went to London to serve as a member of Parliament for Liverpool. During his 21 years in the House of Commons, Tarleton largely voted with the opposition and was an ardent supporter of the slave trade. This support was largely due to his brothers and other Liverpudlian shippers involvement in the business. Mary Robinson wrote his speeches after he became a member of Parliament. Later Career and Death With Mary Robinsons assistance, in 1787 Tarleton wrote Campaigns of 1780–1781 in the Southern Provinces of North America, an apologia for his failings in the American Revolution, on which he blamed  Cornwallis. Despite Robinsons active role in his life by the late 18th century, Tarletons growing political career forced him to abruptly end his relationship with her. On December 17, 1798, Tarleton married Susan Priscilla Bertie, an illegitimate daughter of Robert Bertie, the 4th Duke of Lancaster. Tarleton had no surviving children in either relationship; although he did have an illegitimate daughter (Banina Georgiana Tarleston, 1797–1801) with a woman known as Kolima. Tarleton was made a general in 1812, and in 1815, he was created a Baronet and received a Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath in 1820. Tarleton died in London on January 25, 1833.

Definition and Examples of Confirmation Bias

Definition and Examples of Confirmation Bias In argumentation, confirmation bias is the tendency to accept evidence that confirms our beliefs and to reject evidence that contradicts them. Also known as  confirmatory bias. When conducting research, people can make an effort to overcome confirmation bias by deliberately seeking evidence that contradicts their own viewpoints. The concepts of perceptual defense bias and the backfire effect are related to confirmation bias. The term confirmation bias  was coined by English cognitive psychologist Peter Cathcart Wason (1924-2003) in the context of an experiment he reported on in 1960. Examples and Observations The confirmation bias is a consequence of the way perception works. Beliefs shape expectations, which in turn shape perceptions, which then shape conclusions. Thus we see what we expect to see and conclude what we expect to conclude. As Henry David Thoreau put it, We hear and apprehend only what we already half know. The truism, Ill believe it when I see it might be better stated Ill see it when I believe it.The potent effect of expectations on perception was demonstrated in the following experiment. When subjects were given a drink that they thought contained alcohol, but in fact did not they experienced reduced social anxiety. However, other subjects who were told they were being given nonalcoholic beverages when they were, in fact, alcoholic did not experience reduced anxiety in social situations. (David R. Aronson, Evidence-Based Technical Analysis. Wiley, 2007) The Limits of Reason Women are bad drivers, Saddam plotted 9/11, Obama was not born in America, and Iraq had weapons of mass destruction: to believe any of these requires suspending some of our critical-thinking faculties and succumbing instead to the kind of irrationality that drives the logically minded crazy. It helps, for instance, to use confirmation bias (seeing and recalling only evidence that supports your beliefs, so you can recount examples of women driving 40 mph in the fast lane). It also helps not to test your beliefs against empirical data (where, exactly, are the WMD, after seven years of U.S. forces crawling all over Iraq?); not to subject beliefs to the plausibility test (faking Obama’s birth certificate would require how widespread a conspiracy?); and to be guided by emotion (the loss of thousands of American lives in Iraq feels more justified if we are avenging 9/11). (Sharon Begley, The Limits of Reason. Newsweek, August 16, 2010) Information Overload In principle, the availability of a great deal of information could protect us from the confirmation bias; we could use information sources to find alternative positions and objections raised against our own. If we did that and thought hard about the results, we would expose ourselves to a valuable dialectical process of objections and replies. The problem is, though, there is too much information to pay attention to all of it. We must select, and we have a strong tendency to select according to what we believe and like to believe. But if we attend only to confirming data, we deprive ourselves of the opportunity to have well-reasoned, fair, and accurate beliefs. (Trudy Govier, A Practical Study of Argument, 7th ed. Wadsworth, 2010) The  Backfire Effect and Affective Tipping Points The strongest bias in American politics is not a liberal bias or a conservative bias; it is a confirmation bias, or the urge to believe only things that confirm what you already believe to be true. Not only do we tend to seek out and remember information that reaffirms what we already believe, but there is also a backfire effect, which sees people doubling down on their beliefs after being presented with evidence that contradicts them.So, where do we go from here? Theres no simple answer, but the only way people will start rejecting falsehoods being fed to them is by confronting uncomfortable truths.  Fact-checking is like exposure therapy for partisans, and there is some reason to believe in what researchers call an effective tipping point, where motivated reasoners start to accept hard truths after seeing enough claims debunked over and over. (Emma Roller, Your Facts or Mine? The New York Times, October 25, 2016) Perceptual Defense Bias Like other biases, the confirmation bias also has an opposite which traditionally has been termed perceptual defense bias. This process refers to the automatic discounting of disconfirming stimuli that protect the individual against information, ideas or situations that are threatening to an existing perception or attitude. It is a process that encourages the perception of stimuli in terms of the known and familiar. (John Martin and Martin Fellenz, Organizational Behaviour and Management, 4th ed. South Western Educational Publishing, 2010) Confirmation Bias on Facebook [C]onfirmation bias- the psychological tendency for people to embrace new information as affirming their pre-existing beliefs and to ignore evidence that doesn’t- is seeing itself play out in new ways in the social ecosystem of Facebook. Unlike Twitter- or real life- where interaction with those who disagree with you on political matters is an inevitability, Facebook users can block, mute and unfriend any outlet or person that will not further bolster their current worldview.​Even Facebook itself sees the segmentation of users along political lines on its site- and synchronizes it not only with the posts users see but with the advertisements they’re shown. (Scott Bixby, The End of Trump: How Facebook Deepens Millennials, Confirmation Bias. The Guardian [UK], October 1, 2016) Thoreau on Chains of Observations A man receives only what he is ready to receive, whether physically, or intellectually, or morally, as animals conceive their kinds at certain seasons only. We hear and apprehend only what we already half know. If there is something which does not concern me, which is out of my line, which by experience or by genius my attention is not drawn to, however novel and remarkable it may be, if it is spoken, I hear it not, if it is written, I read it not, or if I read it, it does not detain me. Every man thus tracks himself through life, in all his hearing and reading and observation and traveling. His observations make a chain. The phenomenon or fact that cannot in any wise be linked with the rest which he has observed, he does not observe.(Henry David Thoreau, Journals, January 5, 1860)

(managing human capital) Traditional performance appraisal methods and Essay

(managing human capital) Traditional performance appraisal methods and why it leads dysfunctional behaviour - Essay Example Performance appraisals are undertaken to assess the individual, a team, or an organisational unit's progress as far as its function is concerned. They can be based on personal assessment of the ratee based on a prepared rating scale depending on the systems preferred by the management. In the general context, performance evaluation is a good tool to reward and recognise outstanding performances and correct or counsel employees with poor accomplishments (US Department of the Interior, n. d) Traditional methods of performance appraisal methods may differ in usability between private and public organisations. But they have similarities as far as the rating systems are concerned. Old systems use review processes in which the supervisor writes his ratings and opinions of the performance of a subordinate based on a form. In some organisations, the staff member is asked to fill out a self-review to share with the supervisor. In most cases, the appraisal reflects what the rater can remember and not a comprehensive evaluation. It is based on feelings and can be judgmental in nature (Dulewicz, 1989) Considering that humans have emotions, traditional assessment techniques and even some present methods are mostly ceremonial rather than a thorough assessment of the personnel's o