What are the advantages and disadvantages of punishment in schools and colleges?

Punishment is an event that takes place after a behavior. Punishments are designed to reduce that behavior in the future. If you are pulled over for a speeding ticket, that ticket is a punishment designed to reduce your behavior of speeding—or at least speeding when a police officer is nearby. Prison is designed to be a punishment for crimes, as is getting sent to the principal's office for breaking school rules. 

While punishment can work in the short term, it does tend to have a negative effect on relationships between the punisher and the punished, especially if the person doing the punishment has made some kind of mistake. Children who are punished over and over again lose interest in school and tend to drop out. 

When punishment is frequent, a person may believe nothing he or she does will be successful and may quit trying. This is known as learned helplessness and makes learning almost impossible. 

Finally, some people become used to punishment, which means the consequence do not work as a deterrent to behavior. The child who knows the teacher will reliably yell under certain circumstances may actually deliberately commit undesirable behaviors with the purpose of making their teacher angry. The punishment, in this case, actually increases the problematic behavior. 

There are always going to be cases where punishment is merited, such as when a behavior is dangerous or seriously egregious. A better way of dealing with relatively minor infractions, though, is to figure out why the person is doing these things and to help that person both understand why the behavior is problematic and voluntarily commit to doing something better. 

What are the similarities between solar and coal energy?

Solar energy originates with the Sun. It can be captured by plants and other producers for the process of photosynthesis. As a result of this process, solar energy is converted to chemical energy in the form of glucose molecules. Glucose can be in turn eaten by herbivores and these organisms can be eaten by other organisms in a food chain. When an organism dies, bacteria and fungi known as decomposers, consume dead organisms and obtain energy.  All of this energy is indirectly from the Sun. 

Coal is formed from the remains of ancient trees that lived in the Carboniferous era. It was hot and they lived in a swampy environment. Through burial and compression over time, the remains of these ancient trees became coal. Coal contains stored chemical energy and this energy originally came from solar energy that kept these ancient trees alive.

What is really occurring here is the process of energy transformation. Energy cannot be created or destroyed but it can be transformed from one form to another. Solar energy is transformed to chemical energy in plants and this energy can be eaten as seen in a food chain, or it can be used to heat a home as seen in power plants which use coal's stored chemical energy to generate electricity. This shows the relationship between solar and coal energy.

I have included a link which has a virtual lab showing energy transformations and another that has a diagram illustrating the same concept.

What is art? What makes art?

The answer to this question has changed a lot over history, so it depends on when it is being asked. To the ancient Greeks art was what captured anything that was considered "beautiful" about the human form or organic world. That is no longer the case today. Today art is anything that turns something abstract, like an emotion, which has no shape or color or form but is something felt, into a physical thing, like a painting, or anything that questions what art is. 

I had a professor in college who said that "it is the job of the philosopher to define what art is and it is the job of the artist to break that definition," meaning, art's job is to redefine what art is, so you could say that art is anything that redefines what art is in its historical moment. That could be as simple as painting something that has never been painted before, or as complex as something like Duchamp's Readymades, which forces us to ask, if a urinal is put in an art gallery, does that make it art? It's not this specific question but the fact that the object is forcing us to ask questions about art that makes the object art, because it is attempting to redefine what art is. 

The goal of postmodern art has always been to produce art that questions what art is, but art in previous periods had different goals, mainly to put into form abstract things like emotions. So today art can be anything that does either of those things. 

What view about human nature does "Oration on the Dignity of Man" portray?

Pico della Mirandola's "Oration on the Dignity of Man" presents a very positive view of human nature. While Church doctrine emphasized the sinful aspects of human nature, Pico preferred to dwell on man's capacity for intellectual achievement. Unlike later Calvinist authors, Pico believed that God had given humanity free will. He believed that, unlike other creatures, humanity did not have a fixed place in the creation order. Rather, he had the free will to select his own place in the chain of being. He could lower himself to the level of the beasts by living a carnal and materialistic life, or he could elevate his soul to the heavens by focusing on spiritual pursuits, such as philosophy. Pico's view of human nature was very influential, causing many historians to view it as a sort of Renaissance manifesto.

What are five citizenship roles and responsibilities that an entrepreneur can perform?

We have a Business tutor online right now to help you!

To chat with a tutor, please set up a tutoring profile by creating an account and setting up a payment method. If you initiate a chat, please note you will be charged $0.50 a minute for tutoring time.

What descriptions about Zaroff's physical features serve to warn Rainsford (and the reader) about the man's brutal nature?

Zaroff is described through the eyes of Rainsford, the narrator of the story, and also through his own dialogue and description. 

Though Rainsford's first impression of Zaroff is that he is "singularly handsome," he remarks in the same phrase that there is an "original, almost bizarre quality about the general's face," which is a more negative description. Later, Zaroff declares himself "a bit of a savage" because he is a Cossack, (a person from southern Russia/Ukraine). Zaroff is later revealed to have "pointed teeth," which are ominous characteristics. Though the general starts off as a polite and gracious host, Rainsford is unnerved by the general's constant appraising stares. The general's "red-lipped smile" is also unnerving. It's clear that he is a brilliant and dangerous man from his conversations about hunting. 

Even the general's actions highlight his brutal nature. When discussing the hunting of men, the general chuckles and laughs repeatedly. He drops a walnut on the floor and crushes it with his heel to emphasize a point. Ultimately, he challenges Rainsford to the hunting game, which demonstrates his cruelty and brutality in his willingness to hunt a fellow man. 

What does Arthur Miller want to leave the audience with at the end of The Crucible? How does he accomplish this? Please provide quotations to...

By the end of the play, Arthur Miller has shown that redemption is always possible.  John Proctor, the protagonist, is a flawed man, to be sure.  He has committed a pretty egregious sin, the sin of adultery, and he has "come to regard himself as a kind of fraud" as a result.  John no longer thinks of himself as a good man, and this makes him very defensive when he feels that his wife still doesn't trust him.  However, Elizabeth, his wife, says, "I do not judge you.  The magistrate sits in your heart that judges you."  It's true. 

John thinks of himself as damaged goods until the end of the play when he must make a decision between lying and saving his life or refusing to lie and dying for it.  He says, "My honesty is broke [...]; I am no good man.  Nothing's spoiled by giving them this lie that were not rotten long before."  And for a few moments, John is ready to confess a lie in order to keep his life and return to his family.  But when it comes time to sign his confession so that it can be publicly posted, he tears it up.  The magistrates, without meaning to, have given John an opportunity to prove his goodness, and he takes it.  He tells them, "You have made your magic now, for now I do think I see some shred of goodness in John Proctor."  In making the choice to be honest, in sacrificing his life for his integrity, he has redeemed himself in his own eyes.

How would you compare and contrast the relationship of Oliver and Orlando with that of Rosalind and Celia?

The most obvious contrast is Oliver's hatred of Orlando compared to Celia's loyalty to Rosalind at the beginning of the play.  Despite being brothers, Oliver hates Orlando, in part because Orlando is better loved than he is.  In explaining his hatred in 1.1, Oliver says Orlando is "so much in the heart of the world and especially of my own people, who best know him, that I am altogether misprized."  Celia and Rosalind, on the other hand, are as close as sisters, even though they are only cousins.  Duke Frederick even says that Celia is made to seem less important as long as Rosalind is in the court (1.3 "She robs thee of thy name, / And thou wilt show more bright and seem more virtuous / When she is gone."), but that does not move Celia, who is so devoted to Rosalind that when Rosalind is banished, Celia considers herself banished as well.  While Rosalind, Celia, and Orlando take refuge in the forest of Arden, Oliver remains at the court and is coerced by Duke Frederick to pursue Orlando.  When Orlando saves his life, Oliver has a change of heart.  While he is no longer actively working against Orlando, Oliver never expresses the sort of affection for his brother that Celia holds for Rosalind.  In the only onstage moment where the brothers talk together after their reconciliation (5.2), the topic of conversation is Oliver's relationship with "Aliena," not their feelings for each other.  Much of Celia's character, on the other hand, revolves around her love for and loyalty to Rosalind.  While Oliver has other priorities and concerns--his estate, his status, even his love for Aliena--Celia is always centered on Rosalind.

What happens when you let the air out of an inflated balloon? Why?

An inflated balloon has a higher air pressure inside of the balloon than it does outside of the balloon. When a balloon is opened the air is released. The reason the air leaves the balloon is because the air pressures inside and outside the balloon are trying to reach equilibrium. This is where the pressures inside and outside of the balloon are the same. As air particles leave the balloon, they exert a force in the opposite direction. This causes the balloon to go in the direction of that force. The air that is flowing out of the balloon in one direction provides a force in the opposite direction. The direction of that force is the direction the balloon is going to move.

What does the carousel represent in The Catcher in the Rye?

Holden Caulfield struggles to come to terms with the knowledge that the loss of innocence is an inexorable aspect of our lives. He would like to make it his mission to protect the innocence of children and in some way postpone his own fall into the adult world. He is drawn to the carousel because it represents a place of blissful, childish pleasure with music, lights, movement, and safety in the familiar.  

The nature of carousels is circular. Symbolically, that means that one can only go on repeating the same path until one steps—or falls—off the carousel. Forward momentum is necessary to lead a successful life, and in the novel's moving final carousel scene, Holden experiences an epiphany. He declines Phoebe's invitation to ride with her and understands his place in the world and his own maturation. The scene ends with an uplifting tone as Holden recalls, "I felt so damn happy all of sudden, the way old Phoebe kept going around and around." Phoebe still has years to live in the suspension of childhood and is safe on the carousel—for now.

Who is Ralph De Bricassart in The Thorn Birds by Colleen McCullough most like in The Kite Runner and A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini?

Father Ralph De Bricassart is quite the anti-hero. While he has positive qualities, he isn't a completely sympathetic character. In essence, because he finds himself steadfastly conflicted between the Church and his lust for Meggie, we get the feeling that he doesn't deserve Meggie's adoration.

It is Father Ralph who chooses to deny Meggie her rightful inheritance of thirteen million pounds in order to pursue his ambitions within the Catholic Church. At the same time, he consummates his love for Meggie and satisfies his lust without making a commitment to her. His excuse is that he was born to be a priest and that he owes the Church his complete allegiance. To salve his conscience, he makes sure that the entire Cleary family receives generous yearly incomes. When Meggie's son dies, it is Father Ralph who uses his influence to bring Dane's body home for burial. Father Ralph is a multifaceted, complicated character. He is neither a gentleman nor a complete cad.

In The Kite Runner, the character who best corresponds to Father Ralph De Bricassart would be Amir. In the story, Amir betrays his cowardice when he chooses to leave Hassan to his fate at Assef's hands. After Hassan's rape, Amir further torments his servant companion by accusing him of theft. Because of his despicable actions, Hassan and his father, Ali, have no choice but to leave Baba's home and employ. This is an egregious betrayal, and Amir knows it. To redeem himself, he agrees to retrieve Sohrab, Hassan's son, from the clutches of the Taliban. However, it is only after Rahim Khan's fantastic admission about Hassan's paternal heritage that Amir sees his true responsibility.

At this point, we are interested in whether Amir will manage to redeem himself in his eyes and in ours. Unfortunately, it is Sohrab who has to save Amir from being beaten to death by Assef. Considering that it was Amir who had originally set out to save the poor boy, this doesn't speak well of our hero. Luckily for Amir, Sohrab's skill with a slingshot allows them both to escape Assef's murderous fury. Even in his quest for redemption, Amir doesn't quite succeed. He's mentally weak and easily intimidated by bullies.

In A Thousand Splendid Suns, the character who best corresponds to Father Ralph would be Laila. She is a complicated character who both inspires our sympathy and our judgment. When Laila discovers that she is pregnant with Tariq's baby, she consents to marry Rasheed in order to pass off the older man as Aziza's father. In this, Laila exemplifies a Machiavellian cunning which rivals that of Father Ralph's. Later, Laila has to leave Mariam behind to take the fall for Rasheed's death. Although she had no choice, Laila knows that she left an innocent woman behind to face death without comfort and without hope.

Certainly, your thoughts may vary regarding the characters that best correspond to Father Ralph, but I hope that the suggestions above are helpful.

What is Franklin Delano Roosevelt's famous contribution to America?

Franklin Delano Roosevelt transformed America from a country on its knees into a superpower.

During the Great Depression, President Roosevelt greatly expanded the role of the federal government with his New Deal. Some historians separate the New Deal into two parts, with the second part as more liberal. In the first part there were attempts to deal with the banking crises through the Emergency Banking Act and the 1933 Banking Act, measures meant to keep banks from closing as they did after the stock market crash. To do this, President Roosevelt permitted the Federal Reserve Banks to issue more currency so that emergency calls by banks could be met.
After these banking acts, faith was restored and Americans returned to their banks with the money they had hidden at home. Later, Roosevelt expanded the Banking Act to include the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. This FDIC insures individuals' deposits up to US$250,000 in any of its membership banks.

In the second part of the New Deal, expansive social programs such as the WPA (Works Progress Administration) employed thousands of men in huge projects such as the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Hoover Dam, and the many other projects like the Public Works of Art Project which employed artists to enhance public buildings. Earlier there was a project to employ men in building bridges and buildings that was named the Civil Works Administration. However, this program met with much criticism because of its cost and effectiveness, so it was ended and replaced with the WPA. 
Among additional programs in this Second New Deal are the following:

• Farm Security Administration


• National Labor Relations


• Rural Electrification Act


• Social Security


• U.S. Housing Authority

Above all else, President Roosevelt inspired confidence and faith in the American people. After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, he unified Americans with his strength of purpose. He worked with the military, and sometimes around them, to develop strategies for the defeat of Japan and Germany through a series of invasion, beginning with North Africa in 1942 and ending with the D-Day invasion which General Eisenhower executed successfully in 1944. Throughout this time, FDR's fireside chats comforted and encouraged many Americans.

Along with the social programs and the military-industrial complex of the war, FDR brought America out of a depression and, after the victory of the Allied Powers, the U.S. became a superpower that was able to make its influence felt around the world. 

List three positive attributes of the Articles of Confederation.

Although the Articles of Confederation were often considered to be a weak attempt at a central government, they did have a number of positive attributes.

Under the Articles of Confederation, the government negotiated a treaty with France in 1778. The allegiance formed through this treaty ensured the support of the French which contributed to the Patriots success in the Revolutionary War. In 1783, the government, under the Articles of Confederation, negotiated the Treaty of Paris officially ending the war. 

In addition, this attempt at a unified government resulted in the formation of the departments of Foreign Affairs, War, Marine, and Treasury on a national basis.

Perhaps one of the most important, but often overlooked, attributes of the Articles of Confederation was its ban on slavery in the Northwest Territories based on the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.

The Articles of Confederation served as a precursor to the United States Constitution as the document's weaknesses became apparent. 

How does Ulysses regard his son's approach to life? Which character would you consider the most effective ruler: Ulysses or Telemachus?

In Tennyson's "Ulysses," the second stanza is devoted to Ulysses' description of his son, Telemachus. To get an idea of what the king thinks of his son, it helps to look at the second stanza in full:

This is my son, mine own Telemachus, 

To whom I leave the sceptre and the isle,— 

Well-loved of me, discerning to fulfil 

This labour, by slow prudence to make mild 

A rugged people, and thro' soft degrees 

Subdue them to the useful and the good. 

Most blameless is he, centred in the sphere 

Of common duties, decent not to fail 

In offices of tenderness, and pay 

Meet adoration to my household gods, 

When I am gone. He works his work, I mine. (33-43)

By reading this stanza, it's possible to ascertain that Ulysses regards his son's approach to life with a great deal of respect. Ulysses obviously loves his son, and he assumes that Telemachus will be able to effectively rule (and potentially improve) the subjects and citizens of Ithaca with wisdom. As such, Ulysses sees Telemachus' approach to life as wise and just, as he has faith that his son will be able to rule well in his place.

Since Telemachus appears to be such an ideal leader, it would also appear that he is a more effective ruler than Ulysses. While Ulysses is undoubtedly a great hero and an adventurous soul, he also shows himself to be an irresponsible ruler. He regards his kingly duties as a burden and seems eager to run away from them. Telemachus, on the other hand, appears to be a wise ruler, one who is determined to faithfully serve his subjects. Based on this comparison, it seems fair to say that Telemachus is a more effective leader than his father. 

Do you trust Zinn? Why or why not?

Howard Zinn (August 24, 1922 – January 27, 2010) was an historian and political scientist with a PhD in history from Columbia University who had a long and distinguished career as a professor. As well as his popular works, he published scholarship in peer-reviewed journals. These qualifications suggest that his work will generally be factually accurate in the sense that he will get dates correct, spell names correctly, and be a generally reliable recounter of empirical information; he won't make the sort of errors that a high school student would make. That doesn't mean his interpretations of the events he discusses should be taken as anything more than one thinker's understanding of those events. 

Interpretation is not a matter of trustworthiness but of persuasiveness. Zinn has a particular political stance and interprets events through that lens. As he is an influential and original thinker, his ideas are worth serious consideration. One should never, though, "trust" interpretations wholesale, but one should think for oneself, reading a wide range of different interpretations and primary materials, and then basing one's thinking about history on careful and judicious examination and reflection of multiple viewpoints rather than blind trust of some one individual.

A People's History of the United States is a popular textbook rather than a work of scholarship, and thus it tends to generalize more than works written for an audience of specialists. Thus although it makes for an interesting introductory text, that is not the same as meticulous scholarship that attempts authoritative treatment of a specific, narrow issue. 

How does the novel To Kill a Mockingbird reveal that prejudice is a destructive force in society?

Throughout the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, there are numerous tragic events that are caused by the community's prejudiced beliefs and attitudes. Harper Lee reveals that prejudice is a destructive force by examining how it negatively affects the lives of innocent individuals and divides a community. Maycomb's prejudiced jury wrongly convicts Tom Robinson simply because he is black. Tom eventually loses his life in prison after he attempts to escape, leaving his wife and children behind. The Robinson family is essentially destroyed because of Maycomb's prejudice. Boo Radley is another individual whose life is negatively affected by prejudice. Mr. Radley, a religious fanatic who is prejudiced against society in general, keeps Boo inside the house for the majority of his life. Boo is unable to form relationships with his community members and becomes the victim of nasty rumors and gossip. Boo's social life is essentially destroyed because of his father and the community's prejudice.

Maycomb's entire community is divided because of prejudice. White and black citizens remain segregated, and the black community suffers from injustice and inequality because of the predominant prejudiced ideology found in Maycomb. The Finch family also becomes divided. Atticus' sister disagrees with his decision to defend Tom Robinson and makes hateful, judgmental comments about her brother. Scout and Jem also feel the destructive power of prejudice throughout the novel. They are subjected to derogatory comments directed at their father and are continually insulted by their fellow community members. Jem and Scout are also physically threatened several times throughout the novel by prejudiced community members. They narrowly escape a lynch mob and a vicious attack from Bob Ewell. These negative experiences result from the ugly prejudice that is prevalent throughout Maycomb. Lee depicts how individuals, families, and communities are negatively affected by the destructive force of prejudice.

Which sentence is correct? Question 31 options: 1) Susan held onto her son's hand very protect as they entered the waterpark. 2) ...

The correct answer is the third choice, and I will explain why:

Susan held onto her son's hand very protectively as they entered the waterpark.

The word "protect" comes in many forms.  In its form in the first sentence, it is a verb, to be used like this:

He needs to protect the children.

In the second sentence, it is in a verb form with a helping verb, which is being used like an adjective, to describe a noun:

The protected town had a great many soldiers.

The town was protected by a great many soldiers.

In the fourth sentence, we have another adjective version of the word:

There was no protective coating on the wires.

In the correct version, the form needed is an adverb, which is the form we use to describe a verb. The word is describing how Susan held her son's hand. Most adverbs are formed by adding "ly" to an adjective:

The man hovered protectively over the baby.

You can see that there are many different forms, and the key to figuring out which to use is to understand what the word is supposed to do in the sentence.

What is Cassie's middle name in Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry by Mildred Taylor?

Cassie’s Middle name is Deborah.

Cassie does not use her middle name often. Her mother uses it when she gives her a copy of The Three Musketeers.  When she receives the book for Christmas, it is important enough that her full name is written inside it. Her mother is impressing upon Cassie how special the book is, and using her full name makes it official and grown-up.

On the inside cover of each book in Mama’s fine hand was written the name of the owner. Mine read: “This book is the property of Miss Cassie Deborah Logan. Christmas, 1933” (Chapter 7).

Papa tells Cassie that her book and Stacey’s book, The Count of Monte Cristo, were written by a black man.  Alexandre Dumas was French, but his father was a Mulatto (half-black). Casey’s father is very proud of that fact, and wants his children to understand its importance. He tells them that the books might be hard for them to read at first, but they should read them.

Having a book is a very special thing. The Logan children's parents are trying to impress upon them the importance of education. The books they use at school are all hand-me-downs from the white school. The family does not have much money, but they make sure each child gets a brand new book of his or her own. 

Cassie Logan is living in an interesting time. Her parents own their own land, which is rare. They are proud of their heritage but wary of racism. It is still not possible for them to have equal rights. They are segregated and mistreated by white people constantly, especially those who feel they should not own land.

In Philbrick's Freak the Mighty, why does Max go under his bed?

Maxwell Kane lives with his mother's parents. His grandpa made his a bedroom in the basement, which isn't much to look at, but he actually calls it the "down under." When life gets really difficult for Max, though, he hides under his bed. In Chapter Five, he explains that he goes to a special place in his head where his mind drifts like clouds and he forgets everything. Later, Kevin's mom, Gwen, panics when she sees her little boy with a big boy who looks like Killer Kane. Max doesn't know that Gwen panics because he looks like his killer father, so it hurts deeply. Max hides under his bed in his deep, dark basement room. Max explains that it is easier to get to that happy place in his head when he is under his bed. He just stares at the bed springs and the darkness helps to take him away from his problems. Max explains being under his bed as follows:

". . . and before long I'm somewhere else, sort of floating, and it's so cool and empty in there, you don't have to think about anything. You're nothing, you're nobody, nothing matters, you're not even there. Time out" (21).

In conclusion, Max specifically goes under his bed this time because he feels rejected by Kevin's mother. She completely flipped out when she saw Max with her son and it made him feel like trash. She does call to apologize, though, so Max doesn't stay under his bed for long.

Which right is an example of an Enlightenment idea?

One right that people in Western societies take for granted (and one that is protected in the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution) is religious freedom. While many rights, like trial by jury and various property rights, have their origins in English common law, the right to religious freedom was really first asserted during the Enlightenment. John Locke, in his "Letter on Religious Toleration," asserted that "care of souls is not committed to the civil magistrate," suggesting that religion was essentially a private matter, and that belief could not in any case be compelled. Voltaire, the celebrated philosopher, admired English society in no small part because religious minorities were permitted to exist there. He saw religious freedom as indispensable for civil order. The Preamble to the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, written by Thomas Jefferson, stated the Enlightened case for religious freedom more explicitly than had any previous work. Arguing that "Almighty God hath created the mind free," Jefferson asserted that religious freedom was a "natural right," inviolable by civil law. 

What are Hilary Clinton's dishonesty issues?

Hillary Clinton is facing some issues that cause some people to feel that she is dishonest. One of those issues deals with the time when she was Secretary of State and used a private server to send and receive emails. When word leaked that many of these emails were deleted, people became suspicious. When she said that she never used this server for sending or receiving classified information, the FBI investigation found that she did use this private server to do this at times. As a result, some people believe she is trying to hide something and hasn’t been fully honest when dealing with this and other issues.

Another issue where her credibility has taken a hit has been with the huge amounts of money she has made on speeches that were given to companies on Wall Street. When she says she is going to go after these companies, people are suspicious because she has made a lot of money on these speeches. People wonder if she really will go after these companies.

Recently, there have been concerns raised about donations to the Clinton Foundation. Some people believe that those who gave a lot of money to this foundation were given the opportunities to meet with her. While she denies this was the case, because of previous concerns that have existed about her, there are people who have a difficult time believing her.

While each person will have to draw their own conclusions, there are people who believe she is not honest.

According to Thomas Kuhn and Paul Feyerabend, is science characterized by incommensurability?

The term incommensurable comes from the Greek for having no common measure and originated in the field of mathematics. As applied in science, theories are commensurable if they can be directly compared to determine which is more valid or useful. The theories must share a common conceptual framework and nomenclature in order to be compared. This concept basically means you must compare apples to apples, oranges to oranges. Theories are incommensurable if they cannot be directly compared because they have drastically different conceptual frameworks or nomenclature—comparing apples to oranges.

Paul Feyerabend first presented his explanation of commensurability in 1952. He identified three principle reasons scientific theories may be incommensurable. First, observations are essentially influenced by the theoretical assumptions of the observer, so theory can never be teased out from observation. Second, paradigms have different underlying assumptions about scientific methods and building scientific knowledge. Third, new theories give rise to new language, meaning competing theories cannot be directly compared because they are, in effect, different languages.

Thomas Kuhn applied the philosophical concept of commensurability to the field of science in his 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. He posited that, historically, competing paradigms organize concepts differently, leading to communication problems in comparing these differing views. Like Feyerabend, Kuhn pointed to language as a fundamental issue creating incommensurability.

`y = 2arccos(x) - 2sqrt(1-x^2)` Find the derivative of the function

`y = 2arccos(x) - 2sqrt(1-x^2)`

First, express the radical in exponent form.

`y = 2arccos(x)-2(1-x^2)^(1/2)`

To take the derivative of this, use the following formulas:

`d/dx(arccos(u)) = -1/sqrt(1- u^2) (du)/dx`

`d/dx(u^n)= n*u^(n-1) *(du)/dx`

Applying these formulas, the derivative of the function will be:

`(dy)/dx = d/dx[2arccos(x) - 2(1-x^2)^(1/2)]`

`(dy)/dx = d/dx[2arccos(x)] - d/dx[2(1-x^2)^(1/2)]`

`(dy)/dx = 2d/dx[arccos(x)] - 2d/dx[(1-x^2)^(1/2)]`

`(dy)/dx = 2 * (-1/sqrt(1-x^2))*d/dx(x) - 2 * 1/2(1-x^2)^(-1/2) * d/dx(1-x^2)`

`(dy)/dx =2 * (-1/sqrt(1-x^2))*1-2*1/2(1-x^2)^(-1/2)* (-2x)`

`(dy)/dx =2 * (-1/sqrt(1-x^2))*1-2*1/2*1/((1-x^2)^(1/2))* (-2x)`

`(dy)/dx =2 * (-1/sqrt(1-x^2))*1-2*1/2*1/sqrt(1-x^2)* (-2x)`

`(dy)/dx = -2/sqrt(1-x^2) +(2x)/sqrt(1 -x^2)`

`(dy)/dx = (2x-2)/sqrt(1-x^2)`

Therefore, the derivative of the function is `(dy)/dx = (2x-2)/sqrt(1-x^2)` .

What do you think was the difference between the "release" and the "loss", based on the way the community used these words?

In the worldview of the people of the community described by Lois Lowry in The Giver, there is no concept of death. The only way to leave this community is either by "loss" or by "release."

The "loss" refers to accidental death, something that was not planned and should have been prevented from happening. This occurs very rarely, as the citizens abide by the rules which ensure their safety. The only example given of someone being "lost" is that of a little boy who accidentally fell into the river. Again, this was a highly unlikely event, which was attributed to the parents' irresponsibility. The parents were "chastised" and they probably would not be ever allowed to have another child.

The "release", however, is a planned death. The elderly people in the community are "released", or put to death, before they die of old age on their own. Same thing is done to the babies who fail to thrive, and the citizens who fail to follow the rules.

By eliminating the very concept of death, or real loss, the authorities of the community "save" the citizens from the discomfort of the negative feelings. However, doing so limits the range of positive emotions as well, depriving people of experiencing life as we, the readers, know it.

What roles do Steve's parents play in his life before, during, and after the trial? What characterizes his relationship with his parents? What...

Steve's parents are both supportive throughout the novel. Myers does not go into great detail about Steve's relationship with his parents before the trial, but their support during the trial suggests that they are close and care about their son. They regularly visit Steve while he is in jail, and Steve's mother attempts to comfort him. Steve's father supports him but cannot come to terms with his son's situation. Steve's father mentions that he imagined his son attending Morehouse and playing football. After the trial, Steve's father moves away and distances himself from Steve and his family. Steve's mother is simply happy that he is not guilty. Steve shares a close relationship with his parents, and it is apparent that they both care deeply about their son. They even suggest getting an African American lawyer to defend him because they think it will help. Although Steve made the decision to participate in the crime, his parents clearly haven't instilled a sense of right and wrong in their child. Steve's flashback to when he threw a stone that hit a man demonstrates that he has been making bad decisions since a child. Despite their parenting flaws, they visit Steve in jail and attend the trial which illustrates that they support their son.

Why do you think the Tucks had to carry Winnie off?

I do not necessarily think that the Tucks had to carry Winnie off. They could have left her in the woods by the spring and simply run away. They chose to grab Winnie and haul her away with them.

First she was kneeling on the ground, insisting on a drink from the spring, and the next thing she knew, she was seized and swung through the air, open-mouthed, and found herself straddling the bouncing back of the fat old horse, with Miles and Jesse trotting along on either side, while Mae ran puffing ahead, dragging on the bridle.

I believe that the Tucks chose that line of action because they panicked.

"This is awful!" said Jesse. "Can't you do something, Ma? The poor little tad."

"We ought to've had some better plan than this," said Miles.

"That's the truth," said Mae helplessly. . . "But I never expected it'd be a child!"

The reason that the Tuck family panicked was because they were unprepared for their discoverer to be a child. They knew that sooner or later the spring would be found, but it never occurred to them that the person who found it would be anything other than an adult.

Carrying Winnie off was, first, possible. They could physically do it. They could not have done that to an adult male. Second, Winnie (as a child) wasn't likely capable of putting up much of a fight. Lastly, Winnie wasn't likely to go with the Tucks by her own choice. I'm sure that her overprotective family drilled "stranger danger" into her head. Carrying Winnie off was likely the fastest and easiest solution at that particular moment, though perhaps not a smart decision.

Where does Ichabod Crane live?

Ichabod Crane lives in a "sequestered glen... known by the name of Sleepy Hollow."  Sleepy Hollow is located just north of Tarrytown in New York.  It is located in the Hudson River Valley, along the banks of the Hudson River.  Some consider the place to be bewitched.  Legend says that the area is haunted by a Headless Horseman.

It is customary for a schoolmaster in the 1700s to "[board] and [lodge] at the houses of the farmers whose children he instruct[s]."  Typically, a schoolmaster spends a short period of time staying at the house of one student before moving on to board with another.  This is often part of the contribution that parents make toward their children's education in this time period.  As an unmarried schoolmaster, Ichabod does not have a real home.  He does always have a place to sleep at night, even though the location of the bed changes based on which family he is staying with that week.  He stays in various parts of the village with the different families.  He spends a lot of time visiting with the locals in his spare time.

What important ideas does Harper Lee explore, and how are these ideas developed through the narrative of To Kill a Mockingbird?

Written as a bildungsroman, To Kill a Mockingbird examines the maturation of Jem and Scout as their perceptions of various ideas and people are altered by their developing objectivity. This objectivity comes as a result of their interactions with others and personal experiences.

Here are some of the important lessons developed in the narrative:

Understanding people

• Miss Caroline, the new teacher who is assigned the first grade, is misjudged by Scout, who perceives her as an outsider from the hated Winston County. Scout does try to help Miss Caroline by advising her of the history of other students, but Miss Caroline punishes her, believing Scout to be impudent. Another student who misjudges Miss Caroline is the insolent Burris Ewell, who calls her "a snot-nosed slut of a schoolteacher." Scout is appalled by him, but later learns of his dysfunctional family and cruel father.
  When she returns home, Scout talks with her father in the evening, asking if she may just stay home where he could teach her. Atticus explains that he cannot do this. Furthermore, he explains that Miss Caroline cannot know how to treat everyone as she is new in the area. He tells Scout that the best thing to do in order to understand people is to figuratively "climb into [a person's] skin and walk around in it"; then she will come to know people better.


• Further in the narrative, Jem becomes angry at Mrs. Dubose, whose house is on the way to town. One day, in retaliation for her cruel and insulting remarks about his father, Jem tears off the blossoms of her camellia bushes. After having learned of his son's behavior, Atticus makes Jem read for an hour a day for a month to Mrs. Dubose. At the end of the month, Jem and Scout both are relieved that his assignment is complete; however, Atticus informs his children shortly thereafter that Mrs. Dubose has died. He adds that she was conscious of life until her end because she withdrew from her morphine addiction. Atticus calls her a brave woman for having faced death without drugs. While neither Jem nor Scout have known that her spiteful words and actions were due to her morphine addiction, she has left Jem a box with beautiful camellia blossoms inside as a sort of peace offering.


• The children certainly misjudge Boo Radley, who makes tender offerings of friendship in secret: the mended pants, the gum and trinkets, and the carved soap figures of themselves. More than anything, Boo saves their lives when the disreputable Bob Ewell tries to kill them. When Scout walks him home and stands on his porch, the earlier words of Atticus about seeing things from another's perspective really become meaningful to her.


• At the trial of Tom Robinson, Scout, who at first thought that Tom was "just a Negro," learns that Tom is a humble and kind man who is sacrificed by "the secret courts" of hatred and bias in men's hearts. This experience of witnessing an innocent man being condemned profoundly affects Jem and Scout, especially after they learn that Tom is shot as, in despair, he tries to escape.


• Mr. Dolphus Raymond is condemned as a drunkard by the upright citizens of Maycomb because he lives on "the other side of the tracks" with the African-Americans. Scout learns that he affords these citizens a reason for his actions by pretending to be an alcoholic. In truth, he is more decent than those who condemn him.


• Scout and Jem even misjudge their father, who is actually an excellent shot. When they witness his expertise, Jem takes a new look at Atticus. Of course, the children learn many things from Atticus, especially how to find the decency in everyone. For instance, at the end of the novel, Scout tells her father that she has learned that Boo "was real nice." Atticus replies, "Most people are, Scout, when you finally see them."

The importance of family

• When Aunt Alexandra arrives in Maycomb, she conducts herself as the landed gentry of the South did years and years ago. She has Calpurnia waiting upon her immediately and talks of the social system in Maycomb county. Further, she has Atticus inform the children that they are not

"...from run-of-the-mill people, that you are the product of several generations' gentle breeding--"

Scout finds this attitude of Alexandra's pretentious, and she feels she is in a "pink penitentiary" when she must wear dresses. However, at the Missionary Tea and later on, Scout witnesses the family loyalty of her aunt and is impressed. In fact, she is so moved that she takes a tray and passes it around, even to Mrs. Merriweather. She narrates, "...After all, if Aunty could be a lady at a time like this, so could I."

• Of course, there is never a moment in which family is more meaningful than after Boo Radley saves the lives of Scout and Jem. Atticus shows his gratitude--"Thank you for my children, Arthur"--and is quite shaken by what Bob Ewell has attempted to do.

In Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron," what is the Handicapper General, and what does her job entail?

In Kurt Vonnegut’s short story “Harrison Bergeron,” the Handicapper General is akin to the real-life Surgeon General or Postmaster General, two high level government positions that began out of a military tradition. As the Surgeon General and Postmaster General are heads of government agencies, one can infer that the Handicapper General leads the agency that deals with handicapping Americans whose abilities or beauty are greater than average.

The reader learns little about the Handicapper General’s exact job description, but what is revealed is that Diana Moon Glampers, the current Handicapper General, takes an active role in suppressing anyone who attempts to subvert the government. Acting as judge, jury, and executioner, she kills Harrison and his ‘Empress’ with a shotgun. Her job likely gives her this authority, a clear sign that the America Vonnegut depicts has cast aside rule of law and due process in order to enforce equality among its citizens.

What are the responsibilities of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government?

The primary purposes of a government are to create laws, enforce laws, apply laws to the citizens, and protect the citizens. In some forms of government, all of these functions are subsumed under a single branch of government. Other forms of government have multiple branches of government that divide up these functions. Many current governments divide these functions into three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial. 

The legislative branch's role is to create the laws. In some systems the legislature can self-enact laws whereas in others the executive branch must approve and enact the laws. The legislative branch is often charged with providing for the sustainability of the political entity through creating laws to raise revenue and budgeting that revenue. 

The executive branch is responsible for enforcing the laws and for protecting the citizens of the political entity from external and internal threats. Typically, the executive branch does not create laws, although it may be able to create regulations for how laws will be enforced as well as set priorities for the enforcement of the laws. The executive branch also collects and administers the revenue of the political entity. 

The judicial branch is tasked with applying the law to the citizens of the political entity. The judicial branch may also determines the penalty for violations of the law if those penalties are not specifically manifest in the laws themselves. In some systems the judicial branch may interpret the meaning and application of the laws whereas in others the judicial branch may be limited to applying the law to individual situations. Finally, the judicial branch may have the power to review, and even overturn, the laws passed by the legislative branch and the regulations and actions of the executive branch. 

How did life begin?

The short answer is that nobody really knows.

While we have a fiarly detailed and precise account of how life evolved from its initial state as some sort of single-celled prokaryote to the vast diversity of living organisms today, we know very little about how that first prokaryote got started in the first place.

Creationists often try to use this as an argument against evolution, but this makes very little sense; it would be like saying the theory of gravity is wrong because we don't have a solid theory of star formation.

One theory is that life on Earth came from outer space, panspermia, but that really just pushes the question back: Okay, but where did that come from?

Current theories include:

1. Ice sheets during one of the coldest ice ages could have shielded organic compounds from solar radiation, keeping them stable for long periods of time and allowing them to form more complex structures simply by natural chemical reactions.

2. We know that lightning can produce organic compounds in the atmosphere, so maybe lightning in volcanic clouds provided the right conditions for a simple organism to emerge.

3. DNA is very hard to create, but RNA is less so; so perhaps RNA emerged first, populating the world with RNA-based organisms, which then later evolved into DNA-based organisms.

4. Primordial organic chemicals could simply have gradually combined and randomly mixed enough to eventually create a living organism.

5. Hydrothermal vents deep in the ocean contain a lot of energy and organic compounds. They were well-shielded from radiation, and could have provided the catalyst for living organisms to emerge.

None of these are really convincing theories, but a lot of scientists are working on it. It's also important to keep in mind that the universe is very big, and so even a very small probability of creating life on any given planet could nonetheless be enough to ensure that it happened somewhere---and since we're alive, one would expect us to find ourselves on a planet where it had, rather than a planet where it hadn't. (This is an application of the Weak Anthropic Principle.)

Large biological molecules such as carbohydrates and proteins contain ________ bonds.

There are two types of bonds: ionic bonds and covalent bonds. In the ionic bond, one species donates the electrons, while the other gains them. In the case of covalent bonds, the electrons are shared among bonding species. Covalent bonds are the bonds that are present in many large biomolecules such as carbohydrates and proteins.

There are four main biomolecules: carbohydrates, proteins, nucleic acids and lipids. Carbohydrates are made up of monomer units called as monosaccharides. The specific type of covalent bond that connects two sugar molecules together is known as glycosidic linkage. For example, sucrose (common sugar) is made up of two sugar molecules - glucose and fructose, connected together by a glycosidic linkage. Similarly, in the case of proteins, amino acids are connected together by specific types of covalent bonds, known as peptide bonds.

Hope this helps. 

What did a typical bedroom belonging to a Qing Dynasty princess look like?

A good example of the room of a princess during the Qing Dynasty is the Palace of Gathering Elegance, one of the six western palaces and the place where the Empress Dowager Cixi lived in the 1800s and early 1900s in the Forbidden City in Beijing. A pair of bronze deer and a pair of bronze dragons flank the entrance to the palace as signs of harmony and wealth. These dragons were only supposed to be located where emperors lived. Within the palace, Cixi had a main hall for welcoming guests, a room to the east for worshipping Buddha (as she was a devout Buddhist), and a room to the west that was her bedroom. Her bedroom (still in existence) has a large brick bed (kang), built into an alcove, and a dressing table filled with cosmetics. Around her bed are shelves that held ornaments such as jade figurines. In addition, she had several hanging lanterns that were decorated with tassels and wall hangings, likely made of silk and depicting traditional Chinese scenes. The doors to her room were draped with curtains. For more information, see the book Empress Dowager Cixi by Jung Chang.

What are examples of direct and indirect characterizations of Crooks in Of Mice and Men?

Direct characterization occurs when an author explicitly states what a character is like: happy, humble, impetuous, angry, and so on. Indirect characterization occurs when a character is revealed through descriptions of their looks, by listening to what the character says as well as his private thoughts, how other characters react to that character and the character's actions. In Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, much of the characterization is done indirectly. For example, Steinbeck never comes right out and states that Lennie is mentally disabled. Rather, he reveals Lennie's character through what he does, how he talks and what others say about him.

In the case of Crooks, Steinbeck chose to use both direct and indirect characterization. He is indirectly characterized in Chapter Two when Candy talks about him. He describes him physically as a black man who has a crooked back because he was kicked by a horse. He further relates that Crooks is a good horseshoe player, reads books, and is something of a fighter (because he wins a fight against "Smitty"). Candy seems to like Crooks although he does refer to him with a derogatory name for a black person, which would have been a common label at that time. In Chapter Three, Crooks is also characterized as having a face "lined with pain." 

In Chapter Four, Steinbeck uses direct characterization to inform the reader that Crooks was "proud and aloof." The reader later understands that Crooks is aloof because he is often ostracized from the white workers on the ranch and that he spends a great deal of time by himself. In the same chapter, Steinbeck again uses indirect characterization to reveal that Crooks is terribly lonely and frustrated by his position on the ranch. He temporarily takes out this frustration on Lennie by suggesting that George might leave Lennie alone. Finally, the reader also understands that Crooks has the same dreams as the other men when he suggests that he could go with George, Lennie and Candy to the dream farm and work and live with them. Unfortunately, Curley's wife spoils this dream by reminding Crooks that, as a black man, he is virtually a second class citizen without the same rights as the white men.

A man has $100 and decides to invest it in a bank for 6 years. The bank gives him two choices, annual rate of interest 2%, compounded annually,...

Interest is paid on the principal amount deposited at the interest rate fixed by the bank. If interest is being compounded annually, after every one year, the interest earned is added to the initial deposit and interest is now paid on the entire amount. If interest is compounded quarterly, after every quarter, the interest earned is added to the initial deposit and further interest is earned on the entire amount.

If the annual rate of interest is R, the quarterly rate of interest is R/4. The formula that is used to determine interest earned on an amount P, deposited for N years when the rate of interest is R and compounding is done t times in a year is I = P*((1+R/t)^(N*t) - 1)

In the problem the person is given two choices. Determine the interest earned in both the cases.

When he is given interest at 2% per year and compounding is done annually, the interest earned in 6 years is 100*((1+0.02)^6 - 1) = 12.62

When he is given interest at 1.8% per year and compounding is done quarterly, the interest earned is 100*((1+0.018/4)^(6*4) - 1) = 11.38

As the person gets more in terms of interest in the first option, he should  deposit the $100 at a rate of 2% compounded annually.

What does a vacuole do?

A vacuole is a membrane-bound organelle that can store any variety of materials for a cell including food and nutrients that the cell will use, or even wastes that the cell will get rid of. 

Both plant and animal cells have vacuoles. In plant cells the vacuole is very large and helps to provide the turgor pressure necessary to keep plant cells rigid and the plant upright. In animal cells there are multiple small vacuoles. 

Vacuoles can be formed by smaller membrane-bound organelles, vesicles, fusing together. Vesicles are used for transporting molecules to and from the cell membrane to either take in molecules or release molecules through endocytosis and exocytosis. 

Vacuoles are perfect for separating anything the cell doesn't want exposed to the rest of the cell. In the case of wastes, some substances can be harmful for the cell, and the vacuole can store these wastes until they are either released or broken down by lysosomes. Vacuoles are extremely versatile storage organelles that can provide a variety of functions for the cell.

Find the distance traveled by a baseball in 1.7 s if the baseballs average speed is 22.4 m/s

Take note that average speed can be computed using the formula

`s_(avg) = (t otal .distance . covered)/ (t otal . time . taken)` 

  Plugging in the given values, the formula becomes

`22.4m/s =(distance)/(1.7s)`

Isolating the distance, the equation turns into

`22.4 m/s * 1.7s = dista n c e`

`33.08 m= dista n c e`

Therefore, the baseball has a traveled a total distance of 33.08 meters.

Who is more evil, Macbeth or Lady Macbeth?

Shakespeare gives numerous clues throughout the text as to which character truly is the leader in the conspiracy to kill King Duncan. Even though the witches plant the seed of ambition in Macbeth's head in Scene 1, he would never have the guts to do something as black as murder the reigning king without pressure from Lady Macbeth. She, as his wife, knows him best, and says of him:

"Glamis thou art, and Cawdor; and shalt be What thou art promised: yet do I fear thy nature; It is too full o' the milk of human kindness To catch the nearest way: thou wouldst be great; Art not without ambition, but without The illness should attend it: what thou wouldst highly, That wouldst thou holily; wouldst not play false..." (Act 1 Scene 5).

She states that though Macbeth may have ambition and potential for greatness, he is too good to act in any false way to attain his goals. This is where she decides to become the influence he needs to make quick work to fulfill the prophecy. She calls upon evil spirits to fill her with evil power. Read the whole scene to get the full effect.

"Come, you spirits That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here, And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full Of direst cruelty!" (Act 1, Scene 5).

Later in the play, her dominant role is reinforced when Macbeth has second thoughts about the murder (Act 1, Scene 7). She tells him he cannot call himself a man unless he does the deed. Throughout the whole ordeal, Macbeth is clearly struggling with fear and guilt, while his wife is undaunted. After the murder is complete, Macbeth is the first to hear voices and suffer fear of being discovered--Lady Macbeth again becomes the voice of rationality,

"MACBETH:

I'll go no more: I am afraid to think what I have done; Look on't again I dare not.

LADY MACBETH:

Infirm of purpose! Give me the daggers: the sleeping and the dead Are but as pictures: 'tis the eye of childhood That fears a painted devil. If he do bleed, I'll gild the faces of the grooms withal; For it must seem their guilt" (Act 2 Scene 2).

In all of these scenes, Lady Macbeth seems to be the voice of darkness and temptation for Macbeth. Yes, he does commit the murders of Duncan and his servants, but after Lady Macbeth goads him to go through with it. After all of this, the spirits of darkness that she called upon at first seem to have abandoned her to her guilt and fear, and she dies having lost her mind.

Why is Lord Capulet so angry with Juliet?

Lord Capulet is incredibly angry with Juliet because Juliet becomes disobedient to him.  After the death of Tybalt, Capulet determines that Juliet will marry the Count Paris right away (presumably in order to stem the tide of the emotion he interprets as her grief over Tybalt, though it is actually her grieving for Romeo in his exile).  However, when Lady Capulet acquaints Juliet with her betrothal to Paris, Juliet refuses to marry him.  Lord Capulet proceeds to describe her as an ungrateful disappointment, even a "curse," and seems most upset by her lack of obedience to him; he refers to her as a "disobedient wretch" (3.5.166).  Further, he insists that if she is his daughter, then she is his to do with what he wishes: "An you be mine, I'll give you to my friend. / An you be not, hang, beg, starve, die in the streets, / For, by my soul, I'll ne'er acknowledge thee [...]" (3.5.203-205).  If she is his daughter, he can do with her whatever he wants, including giving her away to whomever he chooses; if she is not his, then she is on her own and should never expect assistance of any sort from him ever again.  Juliet's unwillingness to marry Paris and -- bigger picture -- to do as Lord Capulet tells her ultimately cause his terrible anger.

How does the monkey's paw influence the characters of Mr. and Mrs. White?

The characters of Mr. and Mrs. White seem to change in opposite ways in W.W. Jacobs's short story "The Monkey's Paw." In the beginning of the story, Mr. White appears to be something of a risk taker. First, the narrator claims Mr. White was involved in "radical changes" when it came to playing chess with his son Herbert. He tended to risk his king by putting the piece "into such sharp and unnecessary perils." Second, Mr. White takes a chance that the monkey's paw is indeed some magical charm and buys it from Sergeant Major Morris. Unknowingly, the procurement of the talisman puts his family into peril. On the other hand, Mrs. White appears cautious and conservative. She is initially repulsed by the monkey's paw, but later seems to regard it as insignificant. She even joins Herbert in making jokes about it: "Sounds like the Arabian Nights. . . Don't you think you might wish for four pairs of hands for me?"

After the evil of the monkey's paw is revealed when Herbert turns up dead and the couple is awarded two hundred pounds, the old man and woman change in different ways. In her grief over the loss of her son, Mrs. White becomes the gambler, insisting that Mr. White make another wish for Herbert to come back to life. In contrast, Mr. White becomes cautious and realizes the thing he wished for will not ease his wife's grief. Finally, he acts conservatively by wishing away the walking corpse that bangs on their door before his wife can let it in. Because of the evil which has pervaded their lives, Mr. and Mrs. White undergo "radical" changes in their willingness to take risks.

In Zindel's The Pigman, what is the first thing Lorraine notices about John?

John and Lorraine are buddies in high school. They sit down to write The Pigman, after their sweet friend, Mr. Pignati, dies from a heart attack. Each chapter is either written solely by John or Lorraine. John writes the first chapter and Lorraine writes the second. The pattern continues throughout the book. Lorraine begins Chapter Two by talking about John, but it isn't until the middle of this chapter that she says how she first notices him. Lorraine first says that she moved into John's neighborhood at the beginning of their ninth grade year. She first notices the trees on the block, but she says the following about the first time she notices John:

"I noticed him the very first day mainly because of his eyes. As I told you, he has these fantastic eyes that take in everything that's going on, and whenever they came my way, I looked in the other direction. His eyes reminded me of a description of a gigantic Egyptian eye that was found in one of the pyramids I read about in a book on black magic . . . That's what John's eyes remind me of. I knew even from the first moment I saw him he had to be something special" (14).

Lorraine and John meet first at the bus stop on the first day of school. They become friends a little bit later, though, when there is one day that there aren't enough seats for him to sit by his friends, so he sits by Lorraine. The two end up laughing for some unknown reason and they are friends from that point on. 

What are some similarities and differences between Romeo and Mercutio?

Romeo and Mercutio seem to be more different than they are similar, but they do have a few similarities. Both men enjoy wordplay and witty repartee, can be rather immature when they are together, and show bad judgment at some point in the play.

The discussion between Romeo and Mercutio in Act I, Scene 4, is so clever; they discuss the nature of love using puns. Mercutio also tries to convince Romeo that he should attend the Capulets' party that night, even though Romeo is depressed about Rosaline. Mercutio has a tendency to wax philosophic more than Romeo does, however, and he becomes quite poetic when the mood strikes him.

The behavior of Romeo and Mercutio when Juliet's nurse approaches them in Act II, Scene 4, is likewise somewhat immature. Romeo remarks on the Nurse's attractiveness, prompting Mercutio to insult her and make lewd jokes. Mercutio is a great deal more immature and insulting than Romeo is; he really says some terribly inappropriate things to a woman, and an older woman at that. Romeo is certainly immature here as well, but Mercutio is far worse.

Mercutio shows his poor judgment when he insists on fighting Tybalt because Romeo will not. It is not Mercutio's fight, and the only reason Mercutio involves himself is because he feels Romeo is acting submissively. Romeo then shows poor judgment when he immediately turns around and slays Tybalt. Initially, Romeo tried to exercise good judgment while Tybalt insulted him. Romeo manages to respond calmly and patiently until Tybalt slays Mercutio. All of Romeo's patience and forethought disappears when he becomes emotional.

In the 1996 film version of Romeo and Juliet, what is one character and one setting that are enhanced by the symbols Luhrmann chose? How does this...

What an interesting question! Let me suggest that you consider the swimming pool just below Juliet's balcony, a potentially meaningful symbol that adds to the drama, tension, and intensity of the film scene corresponding with Act 2, Scene 2 of the original play. This pool makes the setting of the scene more dynamic and exciting, allowing the characters to move in and out of the water instead of just standing around talking to each other, and it helps reveal more about both Romeo and Juliet as individuals as well as their budding relationship.

Of course, there's no mention of a swimming pool or other body of water in Shakespeare's original text for this scene! But the director of the 1996 film, Baz Luhrmann, used the image of the pool as a symbol for risk, haste, and the potential for metaphorical drowning, by having his characters leap into the pool together, hide there, and, yes, kiss there also.

We know that Romeo was admonished not to rush into things, and that Juliet herself claims that it's way too early for their relationship to move toward marriage. As you view that scene in the film, notice how Juliet tries to climb out of the pool, but Romeo wants to pull her back in--this is a fairly straightforward representation of a relationship as a dangerous yet thrilling situation. Seeing these characters leap into the water together though they're improperly dressed for swimming, viewers realize that the characters really are jumping into the deep end of a dangerous new situation. The message is clear: like a swimming pool, young love can be thrilling and fun--and extremely dangerous.

While we're on the topic of danger, notice how tense we (the viewers) become while Romeo has to stay hidden under the water to hide from the staff members of Juliet's home. How long can he hold his breath? We don't know, but the tension foreshadows the young couple's willingness to take risks as well as their eventual deaths.

Finally, the pool adds sex appeal to the scene. (Clothes are clinging to the actors' bodies; there's water dripping off their faces; there are embraces and kisses both below and above the surface of the water.) The young couple's physical attraction and eagerness to express it may be something perhaps missing from the original text; it has to be conveyed by the actors themselves, and Luhrmann takes that attraction and desire one step further by including the pool. To put this more directly, if we were simply reading Act 2, Scene 2, we might not get the sense that Romeo and Juliet are attracted to each other. But the film director's choice to place them in a swimming pool together makes that attraction extremely clear, which enhances the viewer's understanding of the teens' intense relationship. The pool also makes the experience of watching the film more engaging.

How did the Enigma (a rotor machine used during World War II) help the Allied forces? What was the impact and significance?

The Enigma machine was a type of rotor ciphering machine used by the Nazis during World War II.  Nazi military leaders communicated secret messages using Enigma code.  The Nazi use of the Enigma machine was discovered by the Allies and they were able to use it to their benefit.  The British government established a large secret compound for decoding Enigma codes at Bletchley Park.  The code changed daily, which proved to be a challenge for those who were seeking to decode it.  At times, the code was broken by the codebreakers.  The Germans then made changes to the codes they used, which the Allies had to learn how to decode.  For example, Alan Turing developed an early computation machine called the bombe to help decode messages sent using the Enigma machine.  After that, the German Navy altered their method of code communication.

Enigma codes used by the Nazis were not perfect, and therefore could be cracked.  When the decoders at Bletchley Park were able to decipher the Enigma code, military leaders discovered the plans and movements of the Nazis.  The Italian Navy also communicated via Engima code.  When these codes were broken, the Allies were able to make military decisions that protected troops.  

The British Royal Navy was able to sink many German ships because of the intelligence they received via Enigma code.  The war would most likely have lasted longer if not for the decoding practices at Bletchley Park and among other departments of Allied intelligence.  The use of computing machines, such as Turing's bombe, paved the way for the development of future computers.

How does George influence/affect three other characters in Of Mice and Men?

Though he is a small man, Georg Milton, who possesses the name of kings and a metaphysical poet, is intelligent and very discerning about people; therefore, he is able to influence others.

Here are three people upon whom George has an affect or some influence:

Lennie is virtually George's ward because he is mentally-challenged and is very childish in his thinking. George plays the role of a big-brother/parent who must constantly watch out for Lennie. Furthermore, he dominates Lennie as much as possible so that Lennie will not endanger others or threaten his and Lennie's own welfare.
In Chapter 1 as George and Lennie camp out, George scolds Lennie as though he is the bigger man's parent when Lennie has a mouse in his pocket; George then orders him to throw it away. When Lennie whines about not having ketchup for his beans, George scolds him, again. But, later, like a loving parent, George acquiesces to Lennie's request to recite their dream. This recitation soothes Lennie; afterwards, George then instructs Lennie to remember the place where they are in case he gets into trouble. If this happens, Lennie can just follow the river from the ranch where they are going to be working to the clearing and wait for George.

Once they are at the ranch, George gives Lennie strict instructions to let him do the talking, and to stay away from Curley, who is very pugnacious. Since Lennie was almost charged with rape in Weed where they worked previously, George tries to keep Lennie under control. Certainly, George tries very hard to keep Lennie away from females. So, frequently Lennie tells others, "George don't want me to ------" as he tries to follow George's orders.

When Lennie and George arrive at the ranch and they are in the bunkhouse, Candy is respectful to George as he answers the newcomer's questions. George also inspires enough ease in old Candy that the swamper feels comfortable enough to tell him in confidence about Curley. He adds,

"Don't tell Curley I said none of this. He'd slough me. He just don't give a damn. Won't ever get canned 'cause his old man's the boss."(Ch. 2)

Also, after Candy loses his dog and he hears George recite the dream to Lennie, he is revived from his depression by a hope that he can be a part of the farm that they are going to have; in fact, he offers his savings to the men. After George accepts and says that now owning a farm is a real possibility, Candy becomes much happier, and proudly boasts to Crooks that he and George and Lennie are going to own a ranch and have a future.

The mule skinner is a tall man with "God-like eyes" who is highly respected by both bosses and the ranch hands alike. Yet, he engages George in conversation and is interested in his history. When he first talks with George, Slim moves back out of the light in order to give George a "calm invitation to confidence." As they talk, Slim is "quiet and receptive" (Ch. 3), displaying a respect for George. Further, he asks George about "going around" with Lennie because most men are loners.
Of course, he later befriends George after Lennie's death, consoling him by saying, "You hadda, George. I swear you hadda. Come on with me" (Ch. 5).

How can I diagram the main argument and the sub-arguments of a piece like this? Look around today and you can see for yourself that most of the...

Often, you can get a good idea of an author's argument by picking out where they begin and end. As in an essay, a paragraph argument will have an introduction, supporting points, and conclusion. In an essay, the "main argument" is called a thesis. In this example, we're looking for the thesis of the paragraph first and the supporting points (sub-arguments) second.

Main argument

To diagram the main argument of this paragraph, take a look at the first and last sentences.

• Look around today and you can see for yourself that most of the organisms you come across are not making it into the fossil record.


• Thus, it is not at all surprising that there are “missing links” in the fossil record, and this is not good evidence against evolutionary transmutation. 

The author is saying that the fossil record is not a complete picture of the evolutionary history of organisms. (We'll call the author and people who agree with the author group 1.) Based on this paragraph, the author is arguing against another group of people (group 2) who say the opposite: that the fossil record should show a complete history of evolution if transmutation is real. A critical part of this paragraph is that the author wants to explain why the people in this second group are misguided--they are making a poor assumption about the nature of the fossil record.

Group 2 made the first argument. IF transmutation is real, THEN we should see it in the fossil record.

Group 1 argued that group 2's logic is flawed--since we should not expect to see a full evolutionary history in the fossil record at all, the premise "transmutation is real" can stand with or without the qualifying statement.

Sub-arguments

The sub-arguments mirror body paragraphs in an essay. The sentences that come after the intro but before the conclusion are all possible sub-arguments. We're looking for the sentences that best support the main argument. Let's look at each one:

• It takes a rather special combination of physical factors—usually those of swamps or estuaries where remains can be buried in sediment, be compacted and, if lucky, remain undisturbed for millions of years—for the bones or imprints of an organism to achieve a measure of immortality in stone (2).

This sentence is describing how unrealistic group 2's assumption is. The author is saying it's silly to assume that the fossil record is a complete picture of every organism's evolutionary history because preservation of any record is so rare! In fact, this author is saying that fossilization is so complicated that most of the time it doesn't occur. Does that mean an organism didn't exist? No, of course not. What it means is that it's not in the fossil record.

• To then become part of the scientific body of evidence, they have to erode in such a way as not to be destroyed and then found by someone who recognizes their importance (3).

This next argument points out that, even if an organism is preserved in the fossil record, we might not know it. In fact, there are sure to be fossilized organisms that we haven't discovered. Does this mean those organisms don't exist? No, of course not. What it means is that we haven't seen them yet.

• Furthermore, from what we know of evolutionary mechanisms, speciation events are likely to occur in isolated populations (4), and competition will quickly eliminate the less fit of closely similar forms (5).

This next argument points out that even if organisms are fossilized AND even if we find them in the fossil record, we might not understand how they relate to one another. The author points out that organism A might not lead in a straight path from A to B to C to D and so on... In fact, organism A might lead to organism B and C at the same time and organism B might lead to D, whereas C leads to E. In other words, the web of evolution is not a straight line.

• Both processes make it even more unlikely that there will be a smooth, continuous fossil record of intermediaries (6).

Finally, this sentence (not a sub-argument) re-caps the previous points to transition the reader into the conclusion. This sentence serves to say, "Now that you know these things, you can understand why I'm saying what I'm saying next."

What is the main point of the chapter "Gender equity: Perspectives on maternal and child heath" in Tolhurt, Raven, and Theobald's Maternal and...

This article explores how gender inequalities intersect with socio-cultural factors (class, race, education etc.) to impact the health and well-being of women and children. Because of socio-economic inequalities that favor men and disadvantage women, such as gender-based violence, lower social value of women in certain cultures, religious taboos about pregnancy and abortion etc., women typically have more limited access to adequate health care; this, in turn, negatively impacts the health and well-being of children whose mothers are unhealthy and not receiving sufficient care. The accepted solution to this problem is known as "gender mainstreaming". In essence, this is the practice of implementing gender awareness at every phase of health planning and policy so that gender-balanced access to health care can be achieved. 

As stated under the section titled "Research Priorities", it is surprising that there is such limited research to date examining the social impact of gender roles on maternal and child health. Given broad awareness that gender inequality negatively impacts women's health, and by association, children's well-being, there ought to be detailed research involving gender analysis so that more solutions to the problem can be implemented. Such research ought to be conducted at national and regional levels for different countries given the vast differences in the ways gender shapes health practices and policies across cultures.

Although gender mainstreaming sounds great on paper, it is a little confusing that this could be a truly effective way to address maternal health and healthcare. From the article, it seems that all socio-cultural factors impacting health are correlated. If this is the case, it is hard to imagine certain religious or cultural practices that limit women's agency ever changing if those practices are rooted in deep-seated traditions and beliefs; just as some people advocate creationism and reject scientific evolutionary theory, certain communities will undoubtedly always endow men with higher social value, and by association, grant them better access to health resources.

What are some character traits of Scout Finch from To Kill a Mockingbird?

Scout is intelligent, thoughtful, compassionate, adventurous, and cautious. Her intelligence does not only include book learning, though she does read well for her age. Her intelligence shows wisdom beyond her years. This also shows her thoughtfulness. For example, when Walter Cunningham refuses to borrow Miss Caroline's quarter, Scout knows why. She recalls that Mr. Cunningham paid her father in firewood, turnip greens, and other items because he does not like to owe anyone anything. Scout shows compassion toward Boo Radley at the end of the novel. She reaches out to him in friendship. Scout also shows compassion to Walter Cunningham by befriending him. 

Dill, Jem, and Scout often go on adventures together, such as the night when they sneak into the Radley yard to peer through the window. This shows Scout's adventurous spirit. Despite this, Scout does exercise caution. When Atticus tells the children that he hopes their game is not about the Radley family, Scout becomes hesitant to play. Jem taunts her about it. Scout is sometimes hesitant about Jem's ideas to communicate with or see Boo Radley. This causes her to stay "aloof from their more foolhardy schemes" for a time (Chapter 5).

What evidence from today demonstrates the effects of early modern globalization?

Globalization is a complicated concept. In its strictest sense, Globalization is the movement of products, ideas and cultures between nations due to well developed transport and telecommunication systems. It is not merely an economic process, it also entails exchange of ideas, people, culture and language.

Music, cars, trade, religion, wine and fashion are all examples of goods and services that have been impacted by globalization.

The first events that started this process can be seen in the colonization of many African and Asian nations by European powers since the 16th Century. For example, the British colonized the nations of India, Pakistan, Australia and New Zealand. In the case of India, resources were acquired and then transported back to Britain to fuel the growing Industrial Revolution. Since the British operated and controlled this trade, many British people lived in India, bringing aspects of British Culture to India such as British government, sports and architecture. That is, cultural and economic exchange took place between the nations as an example of Globalization.

This is one of the earliest explanations of Globalization. The same relationship between colonial countries and the colonies they exploited can be seen around the world (the Spanish in South America, the Portuguese and Germans in Africa to name a few).

Over time, this colonizer/colony relationship has changed. The patriarchal relationship of control that did once exist no longer does. Unfortunately, for many once colonized countries what remains is a cause for concern.

Firstly, the level of resources that can be utilized by these countries. The non-renewable resources that once did exist are no longer present and this causes problems for nations attempting to improve living standards for their populations.

Secondly, once the colonizing nation departed, they left an untrained and dependent population. The usual role of the indigenous population was as a cheap work force. The skills to continue existing industries in many of these nations were in low supply, again impinging the growth of these nations.

African nations seem particularly hard hit by these problems.

Globalization has existed for many centuries, but growth in globalization rocketed after World War 2 and the subsequent growth in technology. Despite this, the evidence of early globalization still clearly exists.

Why is the missionary circle's concern with the "squalid lives of the Mrunas" ironic in To Kill a Mockingbird?

Mrs. Grace Merriweather expresses her concern for the Mruna people at the missionary circle meeting. She then praises J. Grimes Everett for his work with the Mrunas. She tells the group: "Not a white person'll go near 'em but that saintly J. Grimes Everett" (Chapter 24).  

Mrs. Merriweather and the others show great concern for the Mrunas. They seem to care for their wellbeing. In the same conversation, however, the ladies complain about their African American servants. Ironically, they do not show the same level of compassion for the people in their own community as they do for the Mrunas.

Mrs. Merriweather is concerned by the poverty of the Mruna people. She fails to show any concern for the poverty of the African Americans living in Maycomb. She shows some concern for Tom Robinson's wife, but it is about her living a Christian life rather than that she has to be the sole breadwinner for her children and has trouble finding work.

Why does the Canterville ghost remain unseen for a long time?

I believe that this question is referring to events that occur in section four of the story. Up to this point, Sir Simon has been putting forth a valiant effort to scare the Otis family. Unfortunately for Sir Simon, all of his attempts have met with failure. Not only is the Otis family not scared of him, but they treat him like he's a joke. The twins are especially antagonistic to Sir Simon, and they play all kinds of pranks on him. By section four, Sir Simon is tired of dealing with the Otis family, and he is even a bit scared of them. He resolves to stay hidden for a bit.

The next day the ghost was very weak and tired. The terrible excitement of the last four weeks was beginning to have its effect. His nerves were completely shattered, and he started at the slightest noise. For five days he kept his room, and at last made up his mind to give up the point of the blood-stain on the library floor.

Sir Simon might have stayed hidden for longer than five days, but the narrator tells readers that he has ghostly duties that must be kept up on a regular schedule; however, Sir Simon resolves to be as stealthy as possible during his haunting.

For the next three Saturdays, accordingly, he traversed the corridor as usual between midnight and three o’clock, taking every possible precaution against being either heard or seen. He removed his boots, trod as lightly as possible on the old worm-eaten boards, wore a large black velvet cloak, and was careful to use the Rising Sun Lubricator for oiling his chains.

The Otis children catch on to Sir Simon's new tactics, and they continue to antagonize him. They are able to make a bucket of water fall on him and even manage to scare him by jumping around a corner and yelling "BOO!" Sir Simon is so frightened by this last encounter that he gives up his haunting completely.

After this he was not seen again on any nocturnal expedition.

The Otis family is so certain that Sir Simon is gone that Mr. Otis writes a letter to Lord Canterville that states the ghost is gone.

It was generally assumed that the ghost had gone away, and, in fact, Mr. Otis wrote a letter to that effect to Lord Canterville, who, in reply, expressed his great pleasure at the news, and sent his best congratulations to the Minister’s worthy wife.

In Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, what are some examples of and quotes relating to the theme illusion versus reality?

In Death of a Salesman, Willy Loman constantly indulges in illusions rather than face reality. For example, he imagines that his son, Biff, can become a successful salesman if Biff only applies himself. In Act One, Willy says of Biff, "I’ll see him in the morning; I’ll have a nice talk with him. I’ll get him a job selling. He could be big in no time." Willy ignores the reality about Biff, which is that he is happier and more successful as a farmer in the west; instead, Willy clings stubbornly to the idea that the proverbial tomorrow will bring a new and brighter future for Biff that involves his going into sales, the field in which Willy works. 

Part of Willy's illusion is that he lives in the past. He is constantly caught up in remembering days gone by; for example, in Act One, he recalls telling Biff and Happy when they were younger that he wouldn't travel anymore. He says, "Tell you a secret, boys. Don’t breathe it to a soul. Someday I’ll have my own business, and I’ll never have to leave home any more." What he told his sons in this reverie never came true, but Willy keeps revisiting the past in an attempt to protect his illusions and dreams. 

Happy, Willy's younger son, is torn between indulging in illusions like Willy and being more realistic like Biff. Happy literally tries to present the appearance of being happy at all times. He tells his brother Biff in Act One:

"Sometimes I sit in my apartment — all alone. And I think of the rent I’m paying. And it’s crazy. But then, it’s what I always wanted. My own apartment, a car, and plenty of women. And still, goddammit, I’m lonely."

Happy is a relentless womanizer, and he has the illusion that if he only gets to climb one more rung and become a merchandising manager that he'll be happy, but he also senses that, despite climbing up the corporate ladder and dating a lot of women, he feels alienated and lonely. Happy vacillates between the illusion of happiness that will be created from success in business and the reality that he hates his life and might want to join Biff out west. 

Willy's biggest illusion is that he and his sons will reach success just by being liked by others. He tells his brother Ben in Act Two, "It’s who you know and the smile on your face! It’s contacts, Ben, contacts!" Although Willy spends years trying to get others to like him, no one attends his funeral save his family. It's clear that the principles by which he's conducted his life have also been an illusion—not reality.

Was Congress correct in approving the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution?

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed by Congress in 1964 to give President Lyndon Johnson the ability to conduct a war in Southeast Asia without making a formal declaration of war. After this resolution was passed, Johnson rapidly escalated American involvement in Vietnam. The resolution was in reaction to the Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which the U.S. destroyer the U.S.S. Maddox was attacked on August 2, 1964, by North Vietnamese torpedo boats while in the Gulf of Tonkin. The Maddox and another American destroyer also claimed to be have been attacked by the North Vietnamese on August 4. A later National Security report determined that while the Maddox had been involved in a skirmish on August 2 that there was no engagement between the Maddox and North Vietnamese boats on August 4. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara claimed that the Maddox had been on a routine mission, but a later Senate Foreign Relations Committee report found that the Maddox had been on a reconnaissance mission to collect information about the North Vietnamese. 

By the late 1960s, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was widely considered a mistake, as it had granted Johnson broad latitude to conduct a war that became deadly and disastrous, and there were calls for its repeal. It was eventually repealed under the Nixon administration in January of 1971. Later, the War Powers Resolution of 1973, passed over Nixon's veto, required the President to seek a formal declaration of war from Congress to send U.S. troops into a military conflict. 

Why did England look so wretched from a Leftist perspective in George Orwell's Coming Up For Air, Animal Farm, and Nineteen Eighty-Four, when...

The answer to your question is that George Orwell felt compelled to speak out against the dangers of English imperialism and fascism.

Orwell for our time.

If we go back and study the man himself, we can see that Orwell was an old-school English socialist; politically, he was unabashedly left. He prided himself on his support for the working poor, for freedom of speech and thought, and for democratic, classless societies. Yet, Orwell was staunchly anti-establishment; we can see this in his harsh criticism of the elitist Labour leaders of his beloved England:

“The truth is that to many people calling themselves Socialists, revolution does not mean a movement of the masses with which they hope to associate themselves; it means a set of reforms which ‘we’, the clever ones, are going to impose upon ‘them’, the Lower Orders”. (The Road to Wigan Pier)

While the elitist leaders of England claimed to support the defeat of an imperialist Germany, they essentially turned a blind eye to the excesses of communist Russia. The ruling Labour leaders were career politicians who favored exchanging one form of totalitarianism for another, as long as their power and privileges were preserved.

Essentially, this is what Animal Farm is about: Orwell's pigs (led by Napoleon and Snowball) were thinly veiled caricatures of Stalin and Trotsky. The pigs manipulated widespread anger and dissatisfaction among the animal populace to set themselves up as elite leaders in place of the farmers. The English Labour leaders were like Snowball and Napoleon, only interested in their own aggrandizement and success. For a time, they may have appeared to engage each other in a seeming struggle to secure proletariat rights, but in the end, their only goal was to set themselves up as bourgeoisie leaders over a scattered and divided populace.

In Animal Farm, the animals discovered that they had essentially exchanged one group of oppressors for another. There was to be no democracy, where they would have equal say in how the farm was run; there would only be the prospect of servile obedience to an indifferent and ruthless ruling class.

Everywhere the world movement seems to be in the direction of centralised economies which can be made to ‘work’ in an economic sense but which are not democratically organised and which tend to establish a caste system.'(George Orwell's letter to Noel Willmett)

Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which. (Animal Farm)

As with Orwell's Animal Farm, both Coming Up For Air and 1984 were equally controversial. England looked wretched in these novels because Orwell felt that England's leaders were in danger of appropriating totalitarianism for their own purposes. As a socialist in the purest sense, Orwell believed that no government (whether left or right on the political spectrum) should resort to coercion and violence to control the populace.

...there is the fact that the intellectuals are more totalitarian in outlook than the common people. On the whole the English intelligentsia have opposed Hitler, but only at the price of accepting Stalin. Most of them are perfectly ready for dictatorial methods, secret police, systematic falsification of history etc. so long as they feel that it is on ‘our’ side. (from George Orwell's letter to Noel Willmett)

In Coming Up For Air, Orwell's protagonist, George Bowling, also comes to this conclusion. At a talk during a Left Book Club meeting, Bowling has an epiphany: the elitist vision of revolution only serves to benefit a small group while the masses suffer.

I saw the vision that he was seeing. And it wasn’t at all the kind of vision that can be talked about. What he’s saying is merely that Hitler’s after us and we must all get together and have a good hate. Doesn’t go into details. Leaves it all respectable. But what he is seeing is something quite different. It’s a picture of himself smashing people’s faces in with a spanner. [CUA p. 148]

 Hitler’s after us! Let’s all grab a spanner and get together, and perhaps if we smash in enough faces they won’t smash ours. Gang up, choose your Leader. Hitler’s black and Stalin’s white. But it might as well be the other way about, because in the little chap’s mind both Hitler and Stalin are the same. Both mean spanners and smashed faces. [CUA p.149]

In 1984, England is essentially Oceania, one of three powerful states which are constantly in conflict with one another. Oceania controls its populace by controlling language and thought. The country is headed up by Big Brother (who no one has ever seen), and he is aided by The Inner Party and The Outer Party in his efforts to keep the Proles (the population) suitably cowed and docile. In the novel, violent means are used by the oligarchic elite to mercilessly subdue any perceived act of rebellion against it. So, the state is all-powerful; it has appropriated all means of production, all intellectual discourse, and all memories of the past for its own nefarious purposes.

Basically, through his three books, Orwell painted a grim picture of what his beloved England could look like if it continued on the path of rationalizing away the dangers of totalitarianism. It was his personal belief that both the Left and the Right were in equal danger of preserving an amorphous state at the expense of the suffering masses. His aim had always been to warn and to educate.

The Cold War refers to an unarmed conflict between the United States and what other country?

The Cold War was an unarmed conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union. It began after World War II ended and lasted until 1991. A cold war is a period of time when nations have a series of competitions and confrontations without actually engaging in armed conflict.

The Soviet Union wanted to spread communism. The United States tried to prevent the spread of communism. The Soviet Union tried to spread communism to Western Europe. The US provided aid to countries such as Greece and Turkey to prevent that from happening and organized the Berlin Airlift after the Soviet Union established the Berlin Blockade to try to force the Allies out of West Berlin to make West Berlin communist. The United States also asked the United Nations to help South Korea when North Korea, a communist country, invaded South Korea in 1950.

The United States and the Soviet Union also competed in the Space Race. The Soviet Union was the first nation to launch a satellite into space. They were also the first to get an astronaut into orbit around the earth. The United States was the first to land an astronaut on the moon.

What does history tell us about the motivations of God, gold, and glory?

The answer to this question is largely a matter of opinion.  It is very difficult to tell, 500 years later, why Europeans went out to explore.  This is partly because the evidence from history is very ambiguous.  Let us examine some possible answers to this question.

One possible answer is that history tells us that the Spanish were much more motivated by God than the English were.  When the Spanish conquered, they took priests with them.  It was priests who established the first Spanish outposts in places like Texas and California.  The Spanish converted all the natives with whom they came in contact.  By contrast, the English did not do this.  When the English came to North America, they did not make a strong effort to convert the natives.  They did not send religious people out to set up missions among the Indians.  They were much more likely to simply push the Indians off the land.  This, we can argue, is proof that “God” meant much more to the Spanish than it did to the English, who only cared abut “gold” and “glory.”

Another answer is that none of the European countries really cared about “God.”  They really wanted “gold” and “glory” and used “God” as a pretext.  As discussed above, we do not have to take the idea that the English cared about “God” seriously.  Let us look, then, at Spain.  We can argue that Spain really just used God as a means of social control.  In this view, Spain was not truly interested in the spiritual welfare of the Native Americans.  What Spain actually wanted was another way of making sure that the natives did what the Spanish wanted.  By converting them, the Spanish did this.  The natives could now be told that they should obey the Spanish not because the Spanish were powerful, but because that was what God wanted.  Converting the natives would also make sure that they were not loyal to priests or other religious leaders who might be anti-Spanish.  While it is certainly possible to make this argument, it is also impossible to actually prove whether the argument is accurate.

What is clearly true is that European countries were strongly motivated by gold and glory.  They worked hard to conquer new territories and they extracted all the wealth they could from those territories.  They tried to maintain large empires because those empires made it seem as if they were important and powerful countries.  There is nothing in the historical record to suggest that any country was interested only in “God” and not at all interested in “gold” or “glory.”

So, what history tells us is that European countries were clearly motivated by two parts of this triad.  However, it is more ambiguous as to whether they were actually motivated by “God.”  It seems clear that England was not motivated by God to any great extent, but it is difficult to determine whether other countries like Spain actually did care about spreading religion for its own sake.