In the first half of Part I of the Communist Manifesto (roughly through the top of page 72), Marx describes all the ways that the bourgeoisie have altered the course of history. Can you explain some of these ways in further detail? It would be useful to me if you used quotes as well

In The Communist Manifesto, Marx describes all of history as a cycle of class antagonisms, which he characterizes as "freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman." These classes of people were defined by their relationship to the means of production. The rise of industry, Marx writes, has led to the rise of a new class, the bourgeoisie. According to Marx, this class has changed history in a number of ways. Basically, the bourgeoisie (or, more accurately, the forces that created it) has "simplified class antagonisms." It has done this in a variety of ways, which Marx lists in the section referenced by this question. According to Marx, the bourgeoisie has

destroyed all human relations other than "cash payment."
converted the practitioners of once-prestigious crafts and occupations into "wage-labourers."
usurped the family as a nexus of human relations.
through its unmatched ability to mobilize labor, constructed technological marvels unsurpassed through the ages.
created a global market that has destroyed cultural and political autonomy of many peoples.
brought the countryside under the rule of towns.
concentrated property ownership in just a few hands.

Through all of this, Marx writes, the bourgeoisie has also created its antithesis, the proletariat, or working class. Eventually, through creating an increasingly alienated working class, the bourgeoisie is inadvertently sowing the seeds of its own downfall.

In The Boy Who Drew Cats, why didn't the boy go home after he left the temple?

In this Japanese folk tale, a boy who is the youngest of many siblings is deemed by his parents to be too small and frail for farming and is sent to a temple to study with Buddhist priests. This child happens to have a particular passion: drawing cats.
The boy does not apply himself to his studies at the temple but instead continues to focus on his passion for drawing cats. When the priests of the temple see that the boy is not cut out for their way of life but has a special skill and purpose as an artist, they tell him to go back home so that he can pursue his calling. One of them gives him a bit of parting advice: to avoid large places at night and to keep, instead, to small places.
The boy, however, is ashamed that he has been sent away and does not head home. He wanders away instead. Needing a place to shelter for the night, he finds an abandoned temple and draws cats on its walls. He has no idea that a monster, a goblin-rat, is the reason why there are no longer any priests in this place.
Heeding the advice he had received to keep to small places at night, the boy goes to sleep inside a cabinet he finds in the temple. He hears frightening noises during the night. In the morning, the boy leaves the cabinet to discover a dead goblin-rat on the floor and blood on the mouths of the cats he had drawn on the temple walls. He is recognized as a hero by the vilagers.
In an older, traditional version of the tale, the boy stays on to care for the temple. In an 1898 retelling of the story by Lafcadio Hearn, he eventually becomes a famous artist.

Why do the kids spit on the gate when they sneak into Boo Radley's yard?

In chapter 6, the children raid the Radley yard at night in an attempt to peek through the windows and get a good look at Boo Radley. When the children approach the Radley yard from the rear, they must first crawl underneath the wire fence surrounding a large garden and outhouse. After crawling underneath the wire fence, the children quietly walk through the garden and Scout is cautious not to step on any of the loud collards. When they come to the gate that separates the garden from the back yard, Jem goes to open it and discovers that it squeaks. Dill then suggests that everyone begin spitting on the hinge of the gate to make sure that it will open without making a loud noise. After spitting themselves dry, Jem is able to quietly open the gate and the children furtively approach the Radley house.

Write an essay response focusing on relating aspects of Cinder to either a futuristic society or contemporary society. You may look at how the story reflects the attitudes, morals, values, or views of society.

Cinder is a futuristic science fiction novel by Marissa Meyer, based on the fairy tale of Cinderella. The plot reflects the social and moral attitudes that define our society, especially the prejudice against those who are disabled.
Cinder herself is a person with disabilities—she lost her leg, arm, and memory in an accident prior to the beginning of the book—and a cyborg, a person in the future who has robotic additions to their human body. Cyborgs are discriminated against in New Beijing in a few ways (and assumed to be discriminated against by everyone who is not a cyborg). The Lunars, although they seem to be an evolved or different race of humans themselves, also look down on the existence of cyborgs.
Cinder does not have any legal or financial autonomy because of her social status as a cyborg. Her stepmother has the authority to make significant decisions on her behalf, such as taking Cinder's wages that she earns as a mechanic, or signing her up to be a test experiment against her will. This lack of autonomy is something that can happen in the modern world, and financial limitations can be significant obstacles for people with disabilities.
Cinder frequently covers up and hides her robotic prosthetics with gloves and shoes, and despite the many chances available to tell Prince Kai that she is a cyborg, does not do so. When he asks her to the ball, she turns him down, in part to spare him the public embarrassment of associating with a cyborg. Cinder's self-consciousness and shame could be compared to the stigma that still surrounds many visible and invisible disabilities in our contemporary society.

What are some themes in "The Grasshopper and the Bell Cricket"?

In "The Grasshopper and the Bell Cricket," the narrator watches a group of children collecting insects, which culminates in a scene where a boy finds a grasshopper. He seems to think this is quite a prize, and he offers it aloud to the group several times. Ignoring the claims of several other children, he turns his attention to a young girl who comes to claim it. However, when she sees it, she finds that it is something much more rare than a common grasshopper: the boy has found a bell cricket. As this point, the narrator notes that the lanterns which the boy and girl are carrying "write" the names of each onto the other's chest and waist. Through reflection on this scene, the theme is clear: pure love is transformative.
The narrator wishes several things for the future of these children. He wishes that, when love seems to offer "grasshoppers"—or something common and ordinary—they never forget to cherish the "bell crickets" that they find instead. And conversely, when they think they have found an elusive "bell cricket" but instead are met with a much more common "grasshopper," love helps them laugh.
The narrator notes that there are not many "bell crickets" in the world, but he hopes that when the children find love they see "bell crickets," even if in actuality they have found common "grasshoppers." Pure love helps transform the most ordinary people, events, and experiences into something extraordinary and valuable.

What are the methods Holmes used to solve the case?

While Holmes does not fully explain how he solved the case in A Study in Scarlet, knowing more about his deduction style can help explain how he knew. As a "consulting detective," Holmes primarily uses the powers of deductive and inductive reasoning to solve crimes. Through deductive reasoning, Holmes uses minute details from a crime scene to create a logical, evidence-based hypothesis. He then uses inductive reasoning by using criminal, scientific, or medical knowledge he already has to flesh out his deduction and solve the crime.
In A Study in Scarlet, the crime scene itself is primarily where Holmes gathers evidence to form his deduction. The bloodstains left in the room without any weapons or signs of a struggle indicates that the blood is from the murderer, not the deceased man. This could indicate that he knew it was Jefferson Hope because a red, flushed face is a symptom of those who get frequent nosebleeds. Hope's flushed face indicated to Sherlock that Hope had suffered a nosebleed on a crime scene, which explains the lack of a struggle or weapon. Hope's arrest and subsequent confession (and death) both solve the crime and justify Holmes's adherence to deductive and inductive reasoning.

What are some morals of To All The Boys I've Loved Before?

While To All the Boys I've Loved Before does not have a distinct, explicit "moral" (morals are typically associated with fables, parables, or folktales), readers can absolutely draw lessons from its major themes.
One major theme in the novel is honesty. Rather than being honest about her feelings, Lara Jean keeps them literally "boxed up" in her hat box full of letters. Rather than being honest about her feelings, Kitty secretly sends Lara Jean's letters. Lies flood the school about Lara Jean and Peter's relationship (and what did or did not happen on the ski trip), and Peter does nothing to dispel the rumors. All of these examples of dishonesty lead to problems, frustrations, and heartbreak for the novel's characters. This can easily lead the reader to learn the importance of honesty, which could certainly be considered a "moral" of the story.
Similarly, the novel teaches readers to bravely pursue love. So much drama and heartache could have been avoided if Lara Jean had actually acted on her feelings rather than hiding behind her unsent love letters. If she had acted, she could have likely discovered "true" love much sooner instead of living through her somewhat immature personal fantasies. If any of the characters had just gone after what (and who) they wanted in a relationship openly and honestly, there could have avoided a lot of conflict.

Arguably, the main moral of the story is that honesty is always the best policy. Over the course of the book it becomes clear that most of the many misunderstandings that arise do so through people not being straightforward with each other. Lara Jean doesn't divulge her true feelings for Peter, for example. Not only that, but she tells him that she's dating someone else, which is untrue.
As for Peter, he's not exactly blameless: rumors have been going round that he and Lara Jean had sex during the recent school ski trip. These rumors are completely false, but Peter does nothing to dispel them.
Eventually, the two lovebirds are reconciled and all their silly little misunderstandings cleared up, but this was by no means an inevitable outcome. Because of all the dishonesty, the lies, and the dissimulation, a promising relationship could just as easily have been wrecked for good.

Throughout To All The Boys I've Loved Before by Jenny Han, main character Lara-Jean prefers to keep her romantic life in the fantasy world. Fascinated by romance novels, she's no stranger to love stories, but when it comes to her real-life crushes, she has a debilitating fear of what will happen if she tells them how she really feels. She is afraid of their reaction and of the possibility that they won't reciprocate. Her feelings end up being exposed anyway, though not by choice.
Of course, throughout the novel, she does not have to tell her fake boyfriend Peter how she really feels to have her feelings reciprocated. Through their fake relationship, she slowly learns how it feels to be loved, without even realizing it at the time. Only when she rereads all the little notes that Peter left her does she realize that she had, in fact, been written love letters.
Lara-Jean's story provides the reader with the main moral that everyone is deserving of love. It also shows us that you will never know until you try. After all, Lara-Jean and Peter would never have fallen in love if her sister hadn't sent out her secret love letters, and in hindsight, Lara-Jean realizes this.

How do I write my thesis properly?

No matter what argument you are trying to make about this text, you can approach writing a thesis statement this way:
First of all, select a subject that is interesting to you. For example, in David Sedaris's Me Talk Pretty One Day, you could select the subject of his childhood or his habit of using exaggeration as a storytelling technique.
Next, select a literary focus that concerns a topic or term you have learned about in class. Sedaris employs hyperbole and irony in this particular collection, and either one would make a great literary focus for your thesis and for an analysis proving your argument.
Finally, choose a verb or a verb phrase that brings your subject and your literary focus together. For example, you might be able to create something like this thesis:

Sedaris's descriptions of his childhood reveal his ironic sense of humor in surprising ways.

The subject, which is the descriptions of his childhood, does something interesting for the literary focus, which is his use of irony. Basically speaking, your thesis sums up interesting idea for your reader. The rest of your essay will need quotes and careful analysis to prove your thesis, but you will be well on your way with a simple and clear thesis written according to this easy formula. Good luck!

In National Security Council 68 (1950), what are the primary arguments? And how does it suggest the United States respond to the perceived threat of the Soviet Union and communism?

The National Security Council of 1950 and its associated policy paper is considered one of the most important policy statements during the Cold War. The document was compiled relatively early in this non-fighting conflict, four years after US foreign policy began containment of Soviet expansionism and decades before the 1991 collapse of the USSR.
The end of the Second World War and the US defeat of Japan had left the US and the Soviet Union as the two dominant world powers. Authors of the paper argued that a significant threat to the US was the “hostile design” of communism in the Soviet Union; if communist influence spread, no coalition of nations would be able to defeat it. The policy statement essentially concluded that the Soviets would manufacture more weapons, including nuclear, and that the best course of action was to respond with a similar amassing of weaponry.
NSC-68 included multiple potential courses of action, the objectives of which were later considered to be poorly implemented. The paper outlined significant military spending in peacetime, increased defense of the Western Hemisphere and allied areas to develop war capacities, a return to isolation tactics, and increased diplomatic efforts with the Soviets. Although it outlined isolationism, the report rejected this tactic out of fear that the US would be cut off from its allies in Europe. Moreover, preventative strikes against the Soviet Union were also ruled out over concern that retaliation would leave Western Europe even more desolate, shortly after WWII.
The National Security Council ultimately concluded that the best course of action was to amass weaponry and utilize scientific advancements in technology that would maintain lines of communication and protect against Soviet land and air attacks. Shortly after NSC-68, the Soviet invasion of South Korea in 1950 resulted in the council’s recommendations becoming policy.

How did the Great Rebellion break out among the British-led Indian army?

It is important to note that India, prior to the Great Rebellion, was governed and controlled by the British East India Company rather than Great Britain itself. To consolidate Company control over India, the Company used Indian troops to defend their interests. These soldiers formed the backbone of the East India Company's own military forces, and they were the troops who mutinied, starting the Rebellion.
As has already been addressed, there were already tensions within Company-ruled India, and these tensions were inflamed by rumors of rifle cartridges greased with animal parts. These rumors led to a number of confrontations between sepoys and their officers, which culminated with the mutiny at Meerut. Knowledge of these events inspired similar acts of rebellion, and thus the unrest spread.
The Great Rebellion began with the sepoys and spread toward other disaffected portions of the Indian population, such as peasants and local political elites. Thus, the rebellion's scope grew larger than the soldier class which launched it. In the end, the British government itself intervened to quash the revolt.

A series of actions led to the Great Rebellion. First, the British disrespected Indian rituals and traditions. They encouraged the spread of Christianity and tried to do away with the Hindu and Muslim religions. The British also introduced western education, which focused on European ideas and disregarded the Indian education system.
Another factor was the new Enfield rifle. After the weapon was introduced between 1856 and 1857, rumors spread that the cartridges used to lubricate this gun were made of cow and pig parts. This angered the Indian troops even more.
Following the rumors about the Enfield rifle, some Indian troops in Meerut refused to use those guns and were sentenced to jail as a result. This was the last straw, and the Indians felt it was time to do something about it. On May 10, 1857, the Great Rebellion commenced after Indian troops shot their British counterparts and went on to seize Delhi.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/indian_rebellion_01.shtml

What forces did the Enlightenment release that brought about major changes in the Europe and the English colonies of North America?

The Enlightenment was an intellectual movement of the 18th century that had profound consequences for both Europe and America. It emphasized science over superstition and religion. It ushered in the belief that knowledge could be categorized and that reality could be discovered through science and reason. The church and the secular rulers did not have a monopoly on truth. These were the tenets of the Enlightenment.
The movement spread throughout Europe in French salons, English coffeehouses, and German universities. At these places, men met to to discuss and argue a wide variety of subjects(women were barred from participation). This widespread exchange of ideas was unprecedented.
Traditional Christian religion was called into question. Other ideas such as the pantheism of Baruch Spinoza (1632–77) and the empiricism of John Locke (1632–1704) challenged traditional religious thoughts and beliefs. In 1687, Sir Isaac Newton published Principia (Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, or Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), which revolutionized science.
Denis Diderot (1713–1784) was the influential editor of the first modern encyclopedia. The idea of gathering and storing all knowledge in one publication was novel at the time.
In Europe, the Enlightenment ultimately contributed to the French Revolution of the late 18th century. French revolutionaries were extremely hostile to both the king and the church.
In America, the Enlightenment led to the weakening of the bonds with England. Enlightenment thought diminished the institution of monarchy, and it inspired and informed the Founding Fathers as they wrote the United States Constitution in the late 18th century.

What was Martin Van Buren's response to the Panic of 1837?

Martin Van Buren inherited a fair old economic mess from his predecessor, Andrew Jackson. Jackson had been notoriously hostile to the very idea of the Federal Bank, seeing it as a way for the East Coast financial elite to hurt the little guy, the "little guy" whose interests he claimed to represent. As such, he refused to renew the charter of the Second Bank of the United States, choosing instead to move federal funds to smaller state banks, which Jackson believed would be more responsive to the needs of farmers and small businessmen, the people who'd helped get him elected.
Unfortunately, Jackson's banking policy turned out to be an unmitigated disaster. Reckless lending by the state banks for the purchase of Western land led to a collapse of large parts of the banking system, not to mention the loss of many businesses, as well as the foreclosure of thousands of acres of land out West. The situation was pretty desperate; what the situation demanded, many thought, was a creative response to this unprecedented financial panic.
Yet it didn't get one, for President Van Buren stuck rigidly to the philosophy of Jackson, and before him of Thomas Jefferson, that the federal government should involve itself as little as possible in the running of the economy. Instead of rising to the occasion and reestablishing the Federal Bank, Van Buren simply moved government funds from the failing state banks to an independent treasury. This measure did little or nothing to alleviate the growing crisis, and economic recovery was slow in coming. It's no surprise, then, that Van Buren wasn't re-elected in 1840.

Critically analyze the religious and didactic elements in Henry Vaughan's "The World."

The religious and didactic (instructing) elements are one in "The World," for in this poem, the speaker is teaching us to avoid the snares of the earthly in order to attain what is far superior, the heavenly and eternal realm of God's salvation.
Vaughn contrasts the two worlds by using imagery that exalts the heavenly while denigrating the worldly. For example, the eternal is pictured as "pure," "calm," "bright," and filled with an everlasting light. These simple words describe a place of perfect harmony and evoke a sense of peace.
The imagery, however, that describes earthly pursuits—such as lust, politics, power, and hoarding wealth—is uneasy, ugly, and unharmonious. Vaughn uses words such as "hurled" and "complain" about the earth and images such as "sour delights," "prey," "gnats and flies," and "blood and tears" to describe what seem to many to be earthly prizes. He teaches us to despise ambition and the material goods of the world as sordid.
In the final stanza, the speaker refers to the scramble for the worldly as a form of "madness" but explains that the bridegroom (Christ) shares his peace and light with those who come and join him as his bride. Salvation is available, but only to those who turn from the world and accept God's gifts.

How did the New Deal permanently change the federal government's relationship with US citizens?

The New Deal was one of the largest government interventions in the history of the United States. As the Great Depression sank its teeth into the country, the New Deal originally aimed to restore full faith and confidence in the US economy. However, it changed the way US citizens perceived the government—a perception that lasts to this day. The size and scope of these programs touched nearly all aspects of society and changed the government's relationship with the citizens economically, politically, and culturally.
Economically, the United States was generally fiscally conservative before and during the New Deal. One specific change that the program instigated was increased taxes. While the New Deal might appear as a leftist program by modern standards, the Democrats of the time were considered conservatives in terms of spending. Being fiscally conservative meant offsetting debt-spending with tax increases. Americans who once opposed major tax increases now saw the benefit of it. In fact, FDR's programs formed a significant part of the foundation for modern liberalism.
Another major change was making the United States paternalistic in its approach to citizens. The US government was now responsible for certain aspects of the medical and financial well-being of the citizenry. For instance, Social Security created pensions for millions of Americans and guaranteed assistance for the disabled. Today, nearly 90% of all Americans work in a job covered by Social Security. As a result of the New Deal, citizens could now depend on the government to provide security in times of need.
One specific area to research for this topic is the relationship between the Democratic Party and African American citizens that resulted from the New Deal. During the Depression, African American unemployment was two or three times higher than white unemployment. However, the New Deal strengthened the relationship between the Democrats and African American citizens by providing assistance during this difficult period. Programs such as low-cost housing provided government homes to minorities. The Civilian Conservation Corps helped improve and continue education for African American children while they worked. In some ways, the government began to take a more active role in the civil and economic rights of minorities in America. This was one of the first major steps in paving the way for the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. However, because FDR needed the support of Southern politicians for the success of his New Deal, the programs that were offered remained racially segregated and were often unequal.
Politically, the New Deal sparked the a debate between conservatives and liberals with regards to government spending—a debate that persists to this day. While the tax increases were met with great anger by conservatives in Congress, their constituents continued to vote for it. To this day, a staple of conservative ideology is to acknowledge the overreach of the New Deal. Members of the Republican Party believe that the government went too far with the New Deal, whereas Democrats defend social spending.
Additionally, there were moves made by the Democratic Party to ease the passage of the New Deal through Congress. FDR was adamant on adding more liberal justices to the Supreme Court in order to override the conservative opposition to his programs. This was the subject of significant skepticism because it was seen as an abuse of power. However, this practice continues to this day, with standing Presidents appointing Supreme Court justices according to their ideologies in preparation for political fights.
Overall, the New Deal changed the relationship between the US government and its citizens in nearly all aspects. One of the largest changes was the establishment of short- and long-term government benefit programs that support US citizens. Before the programs started, welfare programs were almost non-existent in the United States. To this day, many New Deal programs still exist, and millions of Americans are dependent on the help they provide.
https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297c/poverty_prejudice/soc_sec/hgreat.htm

https://www.history.com/topics/great-depression/new-deal

In the beginning of the story "The Tell-Tale Heart," what is the attitude of the narrator?

In the first paragraph of the story, the narrator is concerned to convince readers that he is not insane. He insists, for example, that his senses are sharp and acute. He says he was and is "dreadfully" nervous but also states that he can tell his story calmly. He questions why anybody would call him "mad."
While trying to communicate his sanity, the first-person narrator immediately raises in our minds the idea he is not sane. Why, we wonder, has he been accused of insanity? If he is very nervous, how can he tell his story calmly? How do acute senses, especially hearing, correlate with sanity? Can't you have acute senses and still be insane?
If the first paragraph raised doubts, the second paragraph even more strongly contradicts the narrator's assertion that he is sane. The narrator proceeds to tell us that he decided to murder the elderly man he lived with for no other reason than that he "had the eye of a vulture."
In the third paragraph, the narrator is still insisting he is not mad and pointing to his "caution" as a proof of his sanity. We, however, are looking at the fact he murdered a man for no logical reason.

What is the first horrible thing the Cyclops does in book 9 of Homer's The Odyssey?

When Odysseus and his man arrive in the Cyclopes after escaping from the lotus eaters, they immediately happen upon a cave filled with invaluable food such as goats, milk, and cheese. Odysseus, against the wishes of his men, chooses to linger in the cave for some time until the dweller of the cave, Polyphemus, son of Poseidon, returns. Though he is initially courteous, he eventually commits his first horrible act by devouring two of Odysseus' men and imprisoning the rest for later consumption. Completely outmatched in terms of strength, Odysseus must devise a way to outwit the colossal cyclops. He gets him drunk and tells him that his name is "Nobody," so that when he and his men attempt to kill to cyclops in his sleep, the latter calls out to his friends that "Nobody is killing me."

The first obviously horrible thing that the Cyclops does in book 9 of The Odyssey is eat two of Odysseus's men. Before he eats the men, however, Polyphemus pretends to show the men hospitality, which is an act of deception intended to disarm the men and encourage them to let down their guard. Though this act of deception could be considered the first horrible thing the Cyclops does, it evades that description because the Cyclops fools the men only after he finds them trespassing in his cave. Odysseus and his men should not have been exploring the cave after observing details that indicated someone lived there; additionally, Polyphemus's consumption of the men could be interpreted as punishment for Odysseus, who ignored his men's advice to leave the cave.

What is ironic about the scene with the Sergeant and the Ragged Man?

Isabella Augusta Persse introduces irony in two main ways during this scene. In different ways, both the Sergeant and the Ragged Man are disguised and then reveal their true selves. In addition, the two characters reverse their functions: the Sergeant begins as the pursuer and investigator but ends being investigated and found out by the Ragged Man.
The Sergeant is metaphorically disguised because he is hiding his true feelings about the Irish nationalist cause. As the two men converse, these feelings emerge at first when he admits knowledge of the song lyrics. The Ragged Man is literally disguised as the singer and ballad seller and finally reveals his identity as the wanted man. The Sergeant’s sympathies get the better of him when he lets the man escape.
The main reason the Sergeant was on the wharf was to keep watch for the wanted man. He allows the man first to distract him and then to pry out his true sentiments. The Ragged Man was on the run, trying to escape from the policemen. He patiently waits in a dangerous situation while ferreting out information that could be—and indeed proves to be—useful to him.

One realizes the irony of the situation of the Sergeant and the Ragged Man in The Rising of the Moon as they sit talking on the barrel overlooking the river. The Sergeant is a poor family man who ekes out a living, the Ragged Man is an Irish diplomatic patriot who disguises himself as a poor man. The Ragged Man begins to sing an Irish ballad which brings back memories to the policeman. In their discussion, the Sergeant reveals that as a youth he had patriotic feelings and divulges this information to the patriot when he misses a line in the ballad he is singing. The sergeant acknowledges that if his life circumstances were different that he might have become a patriot for the Irish cause himself.
It is ironic that the Ragged Man has actually disguised himself to be a poor man eking out a living singing his patriotic ballads for the sailors, while the sergeant who had been a patriotic at heart as a youth, tries to capture the escapee.

Are there in persuasive techniques and discourse markers in the poem "They told me you had been to her"?

The White Rabbit, presenting evidence in court before the King, recites this poem. Even during the lead-in dialogue to the poem, it’s clear that Lewis Carroll is about to embark on a head-spinning festival of randomness. Several things about this moment are funnily contradictory. One would think that statements in court, normally spoken for purposes of persuasion, would make more (or any) sense. Carroll, in life, as a mathematician and logician, was clearly aware of this. However, taken in context with the rest of Alice in Wonderland—virtually all of which takes place in a Victorian, bizarre planet—its texts and verse refuse to adhere to any agenda beyond its own.
Discourse markers are the ‘connective tissue’ of language; Firstly, Secondly, And So, etc., are examples. The closest thing I can find in terms of these is the word “But,” as in “But said I could not swim.” This would seem to be the equivalent of On the one hand / On the other hand, which are formally official markers. However, again in context, this only adds to the (intentional) confusion, rather than providing transitional clarity.
As for persuasion, it’s absent—as one might expect from a parody of dramatic court proceedings, as opposed to the setting of a nonsense poem, which in itself is a statement of the absurdity of the justice system.
Carroll biographer Derek Hudson writes that the author would consider that we were prone to “making too much of him,” and his word games and puzzles. It’s an accident of sorts that the output that he used to escape the adult world of education are often used to instructional purpose.
As an “accomplished versifier,” Lewis Carroll:

returns to the world of musical nonsense (in 19th Century English Literature). It was Lewis Carroll, with his logician’s equipment and his rare understanding of the mind of childhood, that won us our freedom of the world of nonsense.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/discourse-markers-so-right-okay

https://lessonbucket.com/english/year-9-english/persuasive-language/analysing-persuasive-language/

Why did Christopher Columbus think he landed in the East Indies?

There is the myth that everyone up until the time of Christopher Columbus’s voyage believed that the earth was flat. However, astronomers, other scientists, and mariners were well aware that the earth was spherical. This could be seen by the movement of the heavenly bodies, the outline of the earth’s shadow during eclipses, and the descent and approach of the masts of ships as they traversed the horizon.
Europe, for centuries, had been involved in overland trade with India and the Far East. This was a long and arduous journey, and so it was hoped that ships could sail to the west and wind up in Asia and its outlying islands. However, no one knew how large the circumference of the world is or that there are two continents and a myriad of islands between Europe and Asia. Therefore, when Columbus set sail for the west and reached land, he assumed that he had arrived in the East Indies.

What was Mr. Justice Wargrave accused of?

Justice Wargrave is one of the eight people invited to an island near Devon, England. Wargrave is a retired judge.
The voice on the recording played for the guests accuses each of them of murder. It names Wargrave in a crime during a specific trial, when he sentenced Edward Seton, who was probably innocent of murder, to death.
All of the accused guests insist on their innocence. Wargrave says he has a clear conscience and that Seton's sentence was correct because he had been convicted. Another of the accused guests, Dr. Armstrong, challenges this. He says that there was talk of the judge's prejudice against Seton, which might have led him to influence the jury toward finding the man guilty.
As the guests die off one by one, in manners resembling the ways their alleged victims died, Wargrave continues to insist on his proper conduct.
More complications ensue as the deaths mount up, but Christie finally provides the mystery's solution.

identify at least two ways that globalization contributed to the outbreak of World War I.

Two important political-economic developments of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were the conflicting alliances formed among European powers and the related colonization of Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. By the 1890s, Britain and France had extended their imperial control of key areas of Africa and Asia, while Germany and Italy had been less successful. With increasing industrialization, both a steady supply of cheap natural resources and unrestricted access to land and water routes were crucial to building up national economies, including militarization. With its victory in the Spanish American war, the United States also gained a firm foothold in Asia by controlling the Philippines.
By the 1910s, the European powers had split into two groups: England, France, and Russia formed the Triple Alliance, while Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary created the Triple Entente. Both groups challenged the former Ottoman control of Eastern Europe and key Middle Eastern and central Asian areas, including modern Turkey and nations along the Eastern Mediterranean Coast. The division of the African continent among these powers, nicknamed the Scramble for Africa, was established in the 1884 Berlin Conference; by 1914 less than ten percent of African countries remained independent.
In Asia, Britain had consolidated its political control over India while extending its economic spheres of influence into China. The German strategy was to keep a port settlement in China and control islands throughout the Pacific, thus accentuating its naval might. Britain’s alliance with Russia seemed crucial to maintain that control and stemming the expansionist tendencies of Japan. These relationships flared into armed conflicts during the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905).
https://books.google.com/books/about/Europe_in_the_Age_of_Imperialism_1880_19.html?id=vlEMGwAACAAJ&source=kp_book_description

With whom does Junpei have his last significant relationship in "The Kidney-Shaped Stone That Moves Every Day"?

Junpei's second and last significant relationship narrated in "The Kidney-Shaped Stone That Moves Every Day" is with a mysterious woman named Kirie, who is eventually revealed to be a tightrope walker and a window washer. While Kirie holds back and only shares a brief time with Junpei, she clearly makes an impression.
Junpei's father told him that every man meets exactly three women who will be significant in his life. Junpei was haunted by this theory, and after his first significant relationship ended poorly, he was withdrawn in relationships, not wanting to waste another of his significant women.
Junpei tells Kirie of a short story he is writing about a doctor who is haunted by a kidney-shaped stone that moves every day. While this is the central symbol of the story, Junpei is unsure of what it means. Kirie vanishes from Junpei's life suddenly, and now, both the kidney-shaped stone and his father's theory of three "significant" women haunt Junpei.
While we might expect the story to close with Junpei's third significant relationship, it instead ends after it is clear Kirie has moved on and before another significant woman appears, with Junpei deciding that he is done with his father's theory and done holding back. Thus Kirie is the last significant relationship of the short story but not necessarily of Junpei's life.

In Wages Against Women, Silvia Federici sees the continuing slavery of the women in general through housework, exploitation, low level work, and mind-numbing activities. Write a paragraph explaining it.

In Wages Against Women, Silvia Federici explores a number of different ways that women's work has not been remunerated. She argues that all unwaged work is an extreme form of exploitation, when considered within capitalism, a system based on the owners' exploitation of workers.

One of the most harmful effects of imposing housework on women is that

it has been transformed into a natural attribute of our female physique and personality . . . supposedly coming from the depth of our female character.



This concept of domestic as "natural" to women is harmful because it makes it far more difficult to sever the association, which according to Federici must be done.


Part of the "housework" burden is the emotional support women are expected to provide as wives and mothers. The variety of services in women's expected roles



create the specific character of that servant which is the housewife, that makes her work so burdensome and at the same time invisible.



It is in discussing the impact of waged housework on men, Federici makes the claim about women being slaves. She also says men will benefit from having the true nature of unpaid work exposed, which will show



the way capital has kept us divided and . . . against each other, we—their crutches, their slaves, their chains—open the process of their liberation.
https://caringlabor.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/silvia-federici-wages-against-housework/

What are some of the features of Caribbean literature?

Caribbean literature often incorporates aspects of the cultures, practices, and spiritualities of the African Diaspora. Within Caribbean literature, one can often find searches for or celebration of black and/or Indigenous identities and how that relates to French, Spanish, or British colonialism in different islands throughout the Caribbean.
Particularly, most African people who were originally kidnapped from Africa during the slave trade and forced into slavery in the Caribbean Islands were from West Africa. As a result, West African traditions and spiritual practices are evident in much of Caribbean literature. The effects of slavery and forced migration and their ongoing impact are explored as well. The struggle for decolonization—particularly spiritual and cultural decolonization—and post-colonial life are also themes common in Caribbean literature.

In The Giver, what does the community gain by not having memory?

Because the Receiver holds all of the collected memories for the community, the members of this society have no sense of history. This means that they have no memories of conflict that could drive further conflict. They are not burdened with the sadness or grief of past events. They also don't know the benefits of living any other way and can't recognize the benefits of living in a society which doesn't, for example, release the elderly or newchildren who aren't thriving. They peacefully exist in the society created for them because they have no memory of other societies.
In short, by not having access to memories, people peacefully accept their present society as the only way to live.
Of course, the point of Jonas's experience is that everyone needs the pain of the past in order to make the best possible decisions. Without knowing pain, they also can't really know other emotions, like happiness or love. The human experience is dependent on fully living through all past experiences, including the painful ones.

What message is Beatty trying to convey to Montag when he says "Fire is bright and fire is clean" ?

In part 1 of the novel, Montag witnesses a woman commit suicide with her books, and he begins to second-guess his occupation as a fireman. Montag decides to call in sick for work, and Captain Beatty visits his home in an attempt to persuade him that firemen play a valuable role in their society by maintaining the peace and making sure citizens are content at all times. Captain Beatty supports censoring literature because he believes that authors and critics are a threat to society. Beatty's answer to dealing with any uncomfortable subject or obstacle in society is to burn it. As Montag is lying in his bed, Beatty explains the positives associated with burning literature and tells Montag, "Burn them all, burn everything. Fire is bright and fire is clean" (Bradbury, 29). The adjectives "bright" and "clean" have positive connotations and are associated with cleansing and purification. In Beatty's opinion, fire purges society of conflict, and he believes that destroying obstacles benefits society, as opposed to solving issues through compromise, self-awareness, and discovery.

Firstly, to understand what Beatty means in this quote, think carefully about the words he uses. When he says that fire is "bright" and "clean," for example, he is saying that fire is a positive force. For Beatty, fire can purify things that are unclean.
Secondly, you need to relate this to the role of fire in this society. As we know, fire is used to burn books, and books are regarded as having a negative influence on people. They are viewed as dangerous and harmful because of their ability to make people think critically about their lives, as well as feel a range of emotions—both positive and negative.
Beatty, therefore, is defending the practice of book-burning. By setting fire to books, Beatty believes that society is being purified and kept safe from the dangerous messages contained in books.

What are some examples of hateful intolerance within the book?

The Sarajevo Haggadah is an illuminated manuscript and Jewish book of rites that has survived through centuries of war despite multiple attempts to destroy it. These efforts were acts of intolerance for the Jewish religion and part of hateful crusades fueled by religious and political fanatics who strove to subjugate the Jewish people and destroy their culture and practices. Because the Sarajevo Haggadah contains the sacred text of the Jewish religion, it was the target of authorities during Spanish inquisition, and it was the target of the Nazis during the Jewish Holocaust.
People of the Book tells about the efforts to save the manuscript from these people and their hateful campaigns, people whose acts of religious intolerance threatened to obliterate Jewish history. There are many instances in the book where the manuscript is caught in the middle of religious and political battles. Most notably, the story tells of a Muslim librarian who risked his life to hide the book from the Nazis when they entered Sarajevo in 1941 and demanded the Haggadah, which was housed there in a museum. The story also tells of a Catholic priest who saved the manuscript from burning in the Spanish Inquisition. A particularly chilling scene from the book shows how authorities during the Inquisition tortured people accused of heresy.

Are Mrs. Maloney’s reactions and actions after the murder believeable?

Yes, I would say Mary Maloney's actions and reactions after the murder are believable.
We learn that, after she whacks her husband on the back of the head with the frozen leg of lamb (an act done in an almost trancelike state), she suddenly can think very clearly and begins to think "very fast." As the wife of a detective, she knows the penalty for murder, and we surmise she also knows something about crime detection. At first, she believes she is willing to pay the price for killing her husband, but then she remembers her baby and wants to protect it.
It seems very plausible to me that a pregnant woman would be so devoted to her unborn child that she would want to protect it by getting away with the crime. She doesn't want to risk being separated from her child.
It also seems plausible that she would feed the detectives the leg of lamb. She is a domestic creature through and through and is doing what comes naturally to her. She has also been thinking very quickly and is intelligent enough to understand that this is a good way to get rid of the murder weapon.

What does Lina not tell her mother about Kostas in Between Shades of Gray?

The answer to your question can be found in Chapters 12 and 13 in the book.
In Chapter 12, the Vilkas children (Lina and Jonas) and Andrius Arvydas (their friend and another Lithuanian deportee) finally catch up with Kostas Vilkas.
Kostas is the father of Lina and Jonas. In Chapter 12, new cattle wagons begin lining up behind the trains carrying Lina, Jonas, Andrius and other Lithuanian deportees. The children go from train to train to try and see if they can find Kostas Vilkas and Andrius's father, Petras Arvydas.
They finally come across Kostas in one of the trains. When they see him, they notice that his face is ashen and one of his eyes is badly bruised. From all appearances, Kostas has been beaten. This is what Lina neglects to tell her mother, Elena.
During their interactions with their father, Lina and Jonas learn that they are all going to Siberia. Accordingly, Kostas's train is to be attached to the ones carrying Lina, Jonas, Elena, Andrius, and the other Lithuanian deportees.
Before they part ways, Kostas hands his children two jackets, some shirts, and socks. He also gives them a piece of ham and tells them to divide it among themselves. Finally, Kostas gives Lina his gold wedding band: it is for Elena, in case she needs to sell it for necessities.
As for Lina and Jonas, both are grieved that they must leave their father. Kostas, however, tells them to have courage and to tell their mother to remember the oak tree. He also maintains that they can help him find them in due time.
In Chapter 13, when Elena questions Lina about how Kostas looked, she lies that he didn't look "too bad." Lina neglects to tell her mother that her father had been beaten.

Which literary devices does the poet use to emphasize the theme of the supernatural?

The poet uses many metaphors and personification to emphasize the theme of the supernatural. In Part I stanza 11, the speaker describes a ferocious storm that jostled his ship.

And now the STORM-BLAST came, and he
Was tyrannous and strong:
He struck with his o'ertaking wings,
And chased us south along.


The storm is given the pronoun "he" instead of it, as if it is a living being. The storm is being compared to some kind of intimidating bird that chases the ship with his "o'ertaking wings." This comparison creates a supernatural feel because the storm seems as though it is a sentient being that can think and strategize.

Personification is also used when speaking about the moon.


The moving Moon went up the sky,
And no where did abide:
Softly she was going up,
And a star or two beside—

Her beams bemocked the sultry main,
Like April hoar-frost spread;




The moon is also given a living pronoun, "she," and the moon moves and does not "abide" and her moon beams harassed the main mast of the ship, spreading down the mast, like a frost in April. The speaker describes the moon as if it is a sinister entity creeping down the mast of the ship.

In what way is "The Hemingway World" present in Hemingway's To Have and Have Not?

If the "Hemingway World" is defined as the interests, values and experiences of the author, then To Have and Have Not reflects many aspects of Hemingway's perspective of his world in the mid-to-late 1930s.
Ernest Hemingway moved to Key West in 1928 after passing through it as he returned from a trip to Havana. He and his wife Pauline lived there for a number of years while he wrote the novel, and many of the people Hemingway knew in Key West appear in it. Hemingway and his friends spent a great deal of time deep sea fishing around the Keys, Bimini and Cuba; thus, he acquired a great deal of firsthand knowledge of the activities of human traffickers and smugglers.
Because the Great Depression gripped the country during Hemingway's time in Key West, he personally witnessed the divide between the "haves" and the "have nots." He observed the desperate lengths that the "have nots" endured to survive. His political ideologies were varied, but To Have and Have Not suggests a Marxist bent likely developed in conjunction with Hemingway's Republican or Loyalist leanings during the Spanish Civil War when he lived in Spain as a journalist.
The protagonist of To Have and Have Not, Harry Morgan, is presented sympathetically as a moral man, the captain of a sports fishing boat, whose unfortunate financial circumstances propel him into increasingly serious criminal behavior. After initially refusing to illegally transport Cubans to America through the Keys, Morgan becomes entangled in a scheme to traffic Chinese immigrants that leads him to commit murder. Afterward, he becomes a bootlegger and smuggles alcohol from Cuba into America, where Prohibition is federal law.
Morgan makes a series of devastatingly bad choices for himself and his family, yet Hemingway somehow makes the wealthy and socially-connected elites he encounters come off as perhaps more villainous than the protagonist.

What was the Americans' primary way of protesting the Townshend Acts?

The Townshend Acts were placed on the American colonies in 1767. The act placed taxes on common imported goods like paint, glass, lead, and paper. The Townshend Acts were passed in an attempt to less directly tax the colonists in comparison to the Stamp Act, which was extremely unpopular.
In order to protest the Townshend Acts, the colonists took up a strategy known as an agreement of nonimportation. This strategy was eventually undertaken by merchants across the colonies. Through nonimportation agreements, merchants refused to import certain goods from Britain in order to avoid having to pay the tax. This had a significant impact on British trade with the American colonies, which is typically an effective way of bringing about change.
Women were also involved in this form of protest, as they produced clothing and other goods at home. Producing goods at home meant fewer being purchased from the British. With fewer goods being purchased from the British, the British were receiving less tax income, thus making the Townshend Acts less effective.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=137

In "To His Coy Mistress," what does the speaker mean by describing his mistress as "coy"?

The speaker in "To His Coy Mistress" is trying to persuade the woman he's addressing to stop being coy—meaning specifically that she should stop being shy about sex. Even more specifically, he wants her to stop being shy about having sex with him.
In the opening lines of the poem, the speaker says that the woman's coyness wouldn't be a problem if they had all the time in the world. He says that, if they did have all the time in the world, he would gladly spend as much of that time as she wanted in wooing her. He says he would spend a "hundred years . . . to praise / (her) eyes" and "Two hundred to adore each breast." The implication is that the woman has perhaps told him that she is not ready to have sex with him, possibly because he has not proven to her yet that he really loves her. In the first stanza, the speaker tries to reassure the woman that this is not the case.
In the second stanza, the speaker says that—although he would gladly woo her and convince her of his love for years if he could—he can't because his time is finite. Indeed, he says that he can always hear "Time's wingèd chariot hurrying near." He says that if she is always so shy (or coy) about having sex with him, then eventually they will both be too old to enjoy sex anyway: her "beauty shall no more be found" and her "long-preserved virginity" will be wasted on the worms in the grave.
In the third stanza, the speaker tries to convince the woman that they should take advantage of their youth before time—their common enemy—takes it away from them. He frames her coyness as an "affront" to (or a waste of) their youth, as well as a surrender to "the slow-chapped power" of time.
This poem was written in the seventeenth century when a woman was expected to preserve her virginity until she was married. A woman who had sex before or outside of marriage was considered a "fallen woman"—or an outcast who was no longer fit for marriage. In this context, the coyness of the woman addressed in this poem therefore seems perfectly reasonable.

"Coy" is a word that entered English as a descendant of Old French "coi," which means quiet or retiring. In English, however, it quickly took on another nuance. Almost invariably applied to women, the word "coy" connotes a sort of affected modesty which is really concealing a desire which the woman is pretending isn't there. For such a small word, "coy" implies a lot. In describing his mistress as coy, the speaker is here suggesting that her supposed shyness or modesty is simply a front. In reality, a woman who is coy is simply leading on her lover, making herself as alluring as possible through this pretense of modesty and being uninterested.
In the poem, the speaker is trying to persuade his mistress that such coyness is a waste of time, and that she should give in to her desires and sleep with him. However, the modern reader can detect a lot that is problematic in the speaker's assumptions. What if his mistress isn't being coy at all? What if she doesn't reciprocate his desires as he believes she does?

Discuss Robinson Crusoe as a religious allegory.

Robinson Crusoe is intended to be an allegory for what happens when we turn away from God. Crusoe has been washed up on a desert island where he's been provided with everything he needs to survive. Yet far from offering thanks to God for such bounties, he takes everything for granted. Unlike most Christians at the time, he doesn't see the benevolent hand of God at work: he doesn't see Providence.
It was such arrogance that originally led Crusoe to ignore his father's wishes and take to the high seas. In defying his father, Crusoe was also defying the Almighty, challenging the God-given social order in which fathers rule over their children as divine surrogates. It's not too hard to see this as an allegory on humankind's sinful tendency to turn its back on God the Father and try to make its own way in the world, without divine grace. This would've been an especially important theme for Puritans like Daniel Defoe, who believed that a sinful humanity's salvation was totally reliant on the freely given gift of God's grace.
It's only when Crusoe undergoes a profound religious conversion that he returns to the path of righteousness. But even then there are many bumps along the way, emphasizing once more the inherently sinful nature of man.

During his time on the island, Robinson Crusoe goes through a religious conversion. He was raised Puritan, but he commits sins such as rebelling against his father and failing to appreciate his class status. These decisions and feelings go against God. He suffers trials and misfortunes, ultimately winding up on an abandoned island, but his conversion is not complete until after he falls sick and nearly dies as a result of fever. He calls on God to deliver him and vows to serve Him afterward.
This story contains some parallels with the prodigal son parable in the Bible, in which the son leaves his father and squanders his fortune. When he returns, the father welcomes him with open arms.
Robinson Crusoe goes on to record reflections about his relationship to God, as well as his place in creation (which he had been dissatisfied with before). It is important to note that he also teaches Friday religion.

Are there cultural overlaps between the British and the Yoruba people? What are they?

I would argue that the concept of duty is one that is common to both British colonial and Yoruba culture alike. According to Yoruba folklore, Elesin is supposed to commit suicide so that his soul will accompany the king's into the next life. However, in trying to postpone his death, he's effectively failing in that duty. A duty that to the Yoruba is sacred.
It's perfectly understandable that Elesin doesn't want to die, but he's a relatively small part of a much bigger picture. Individualism as it exists in the West has no purchase among the Yoruba. For them, everyone and everything is linked together as part of a giant cosmos which encompasses the dead, the living, and those yet to be born. All must must do their duty and must fulfill their divinely-appointed roles within this interlocking system, even if it means sacrificing one's life.
The British colonial officer, Pilkings, is no less committed than the Yoruba to doing one's duty, except that his duty is shorn of all metaphysical or spiritual trappings. His duty is that of a colonial official: to carry out the orders of one's superiors without question. The most important order for any such official to follow is to maintain good order among the indigenous population. This is what Pilkings thinks he's doing by having Elesin arrested to prevent him from committing ritual suicide.

As we all know, what characterizes philosophy is its (complicated/ambiguous) language. Thus, simplicity and clarity is highly needed in answering this question please. According to Sartre's existential philosophy, to be free is to be responsible. That is, Absolute Freedom results in Absolute Responsibility. So, man must take full responsibility for the consequences of his own actions made freely. By contrast, not to take full responsibility for the consequences of his own actions, man may be deprived of his absolute freedom and humanity. It makes sense to assume that man alone should shoulder the consequences of his own choice in order to be held responsible. My question is: What if other people shoulder the consequences of a man's choice rather than him: is he still held responsible? Could consequences be the main criterion on which responsibility/irresponsibility is determined?

The distinction between a choice in which the consequences fall on one's own shoulders and a choice in which the consequences fall on the shoulders of others is a meaningless distinction in the context of Sartre's thought. In deciding to do anything at all, one is in effect legislating for all of humanity. Ethical judgment and responsibility, then, is always implicitly both self and other-directed. Sartre says:

When a man commits himself to anything, fully realizing that he is not only choosing what he will be, but is thereby at the same time a legislator deciding for the whole of mankind—in such a moment a man cannot escape from the sense of complete and profound responsibility.

Note the absence of consequentialist or deontological thinking in this formulation. There are no a priori rules nor any means of weighing relative moral costs and/or benefits either to the self or to others. The aim is consciously to carry this burden and to know that consciousness of being is thus emburdened, as it were, and is the only freedom. The impossibility of escape to which Sartre refers is the impossibility of an escape from responsibility for "the whole of mankind," not for oneself understood in contradistinction to another.

Identify and describe the basic tenets of Islam.

The Five Pillars of Islam include Shahada (Faith), Salat (Prayer), Zakat (Charity), Sawm (Fasting), and Hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca). These five tenants are considered essential for those who follow Islam.
Shahada (Faith) is sometimes translated as "bearing witness" in English. To proclaim one's faith, a Muslim is expected to state God's divinity and Muhammad's status as his messenger: "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah." The Shahada statement is typically learned by all Muslims when they are children, and all converts to Islam must proclaim it at the point of their conversion.
Salat (Prayer) is to be carried out five times per day, and each prayer typically takes no more than a few minutes to complete. These prayers, performed at dawn, noon, mid-afternoon, sunset, and night can be conducted just about anywhere. The only stipulation is that all Muslims must face their prayer mat toward Mecca and women must have their heads covered.
Zakat (Charity) is the giving of money to those less fortunate. This money is typically given to a person's local mosque, which then takes responsibility for using it to support those in the community who are in need.
Sawm (Fasting) is a semi-regular practice for Muslims. Each year during the month of Ramadan, Muslims fast from sunrise to sunset, meaning they abstain from all food and drinks, including water. Muslims may also fast on other holy days throughout the year apart from Ramadan, such as the Day of Arafah. The practice of fasting is considered spiritually purifying.
Hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca) is the practice of traveling to Islam's most holy site, Mecca, in Saudi Arabia. This pillar, unlike the others, is not obligatory, but instead is only required for those who have both achieved maturity and have the financial resources to make the pilgrimage. During Hajj, Muslims spend five days performing various rituals.

The five tenets or pillars of Islam are: Shahadah, Salat, Zakat, Sawm, and Hajj.
Shahadah is the first of the five pillars and requires one to state that, 'There is no God but Allah, and Muhammed is his messenger'. A person that professes this statement three times with complete sincerity in front of witnesses is considered to be a Muslim.
The second pillar is Salat which requires Muslims to pray five times a day: upon sunrise, midday, late afternoon, after sunset and between sunset and midnight.
The third pillar, Zakat, means giving a portion of one's assets to charity.
Sawm is the fourth pillar and it means fasting during the month of Ramadan. Ramadan occurs during the ninth month of the Islamic calendar and from sunrise to sunset, Muslims must not eat, smoke or perform any sexual activity.
Hajj, the fifth pillar is the pilgrimage to Mecca. This pilgrimage is expected to be done at least once in a lifetime for those Muslims that are physically and financially capable.

Islam is a monotheistic religion where its followers, known as Muslims, believe in one God who is referred to as Allah. It is one of the three Abrahamic faiths along with Christianity and Judaism.
Islam's basic tenants are based on five pillars:
1. Shahadah: This is the first tenant, which is the belief that "There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah."
2. Salah: Salah is the Arabic word for prayer. Muslims pray five times a day: Fajr (dawn), Zuhr (noon), Asr (afternoon), Maghrib (sunset), Isha (night)
3. Zakat: Zakat is an obligatory payment that Muslims give annually (2.5 % of savings) that is used for charity towards the poor and needy
4. Sawm: Sawm is the Arabic word for fasting. Muslims are required to fast during the month of Ramadan from sunrise to sunset. This is the month of internal purification and reflection upon oneself.
5. Hajj: Hajj is the Arabic word for pilgrimage. Muslims are required to perform the pilgrimage to Makkah (Saudi Arabia) at least once in their lifetime if they have the means to do so (finance, health, etc).

The basic tenets of Islam are called the five pillars of Islam. They are as follows:
The first is professing that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammed is his messenger.
The second is repeating five set prayers at specific times during the day while facing Mecca.
The third is charity. A person is required to give a portion of his or her income each year to help the needy. If an individual does not have much money, he or she can perform charitable acts to help someone more needy.
The fourth is fasting from sunrise to sunset during the month of Ramadan, while being conscious of one's sins.
The fifth is making the hajj or pilgrimage to Mecca at least once during one's lifetime.
In short, the basic tenets of Islam are exclusive faith in Allah and Muhammed; prayer; charitable giving; fasting; and pilgrimage to Mecca.

Assess the significance of the American Revolution to the following groups: colonists, slaves, native populations, and women.

In order to assess the significance of the Revolutionary War on different social groups, you need to look at the lives of the people in these groups before and after. Specifically, you are looking to see if any real changes took place, therefore showing how significant the wars were.
When it comes to women, we know that the Revolutionary War was significant. Firstly, it was significant because many women participated in the war as nurses or even as spies—but more importantly, when men went off to fight, women had to assume their roles and responsibilities both inside and outside of the home. For some women, the Revolutionary War brought freedom and their first participation in business. Of course, some women followed their husbands and fathers to war and lived in military camps, which dramatically changed their lives. For more of an insight into this, take a look at Reference 1.
Similarly, slaves were also impacted by the Revolutionary War. For example, we know that thousands of slaves participated in the fighting, and this enabled many to win their freedom. However, the desire for American independence from Britain did not dramatically alter America attitudes to slave-keeping. For more information, take a look at Reference 2.
https://www.ncpedia.org/history/usrevolution/african-americans

https://www.socialstudies.org/sites/default/files/publications/se/5802/580204.html

Who is John Byro? Why did he not accuse the boys of stealing his white horse?

John Byro, in this story, is the original owner of the beautiful white horse which is mentioned in the title and which is stolen by the cousin of the narrator. We are told that John Byro is an Assyrian by birth, but he has learned Armenian in order to be able to speak to his neighbors.
Byro knows that the horse the boys have is his horse. He looks into its mouth and tries to make it obvious that he knows what has happened—he says he would swear this were his horse were it not for the renowned honesty and integrity of the boys' family. He seems to want the boys to confess to what they have done and return the horse of their own accord so he doesn't have to get them in trouble with their family. It could also be that Byro, who is a foreigner, does not want to create trouble for himself by throwing around accusations within this community, to which he does not belong.
The boys do indeed feel guilty, and they return the horse to John Byro overnight.

Keeping in mind the title Big Fish, what is the significance of the many references to water throughout the novel? Consider the opening chapter “The Day He Was Born,” as well as “The Girl in the River” and “In Which He Goes Fishing.” What elements of symbolism or foreshadowing do you see at work?

The stories presented in the book Big Fish are all progressively taller tales told by a notorious stretcher of the truth, Edward Bloom. His life is full of exciting adventures and crazy stories, from visiting a town that never ages or changes to catching his wife like a fish, and even to enjoying the company of a giant.
Bloom's life seems centered around water. The title echoes two specific themes—the "big fish" tale of fishing, where a fisherman will progressively increase the size of the fish they caught when telling stories (which is exactly how Bloom operates) and the quote "a big fish in a little pond," exemplifying the extent to which Bloom feels he is out of place and destined for bigger things.
Both of these ideas relate to water—as do many of the stories in the book. He feels that he is trapped at times, stuck in a restrictive place that keeps him from growing (at one point he examines the science that says a goldfish will only grow as large as its container will let it). To combat this, he begins to flow like a river—living as a traveling salesman and finding it difficult to settle down and lead a domestic life. Water is a perfect analogy for Edward's lifestyle and his views.

The water is extremely important for Edward, the main character in the novel. The title of the novel references the common phrase "big fish in a little pond," which represents the idea that one is larger or more important than their surroundings. For Edward, he feels this sentiment throughout the entire novel. He is always restless and feeling like he was meant for grander things.
His life is fluid and constantly shifting. For instance, he works as a traveling salesman for a great deal of his life, selling all kinds of knick knacks and trinkets, and he is always itinerant. This traveling lifestyle is contrasted against the town that never ages and supported by the rivers that he visits and fishes in. He is always on the move and never settled.
He even relates the story of "catching" his wife to catching a fish. He connects the two and recognizes that his wife is just as restless and itinerant as he, even though he was the only one with the freedom to drift throughout the world. Edward is, as the saying goes, "a fish out of water." He is constantly reminded of how different he is from those around him and feels uncomfortable in a normal life. He is always destined for greatness in his own eyes.

Edward, the main character in the novel Big Fish, makes constant references to water through the story. Several times, he even implies that he, himself, may be aquatic, and that he caught his wife like a fish—both of which are extreme exaggerations of the events that happened in his life.
Edward is the ultimate teller of tall tales. He likes to aggrandize the events of his life and other details to make himself feel important and to improve his reputation. One of the many things that he repeats throughout the book is that he was a "big fish in a little pond." This colloquialism refers to being more important or skilled than those around you, and needing to be freed from them in order to achieve what you were meant to accomplish.
It seems Edward's relationship with water is related to this idea. He feels like he is dissimilar to those around him—that he has greater things to achieve and is more important than the other people in his life. Much in the way someone says that an individual is "a fish out of water," Edward Bloom is not where he belongs, because he constantly feels he could be accomplishing more in a different setting or situation. This leads him to a vagrant and ironically fluid lifestyle—traveling as a salesman, finding it difficult to settle down, and pursuing many different spirited passions on a whim.

Water is an important motif that threads throughout the narrative of Big Fish by Daniel Wallace. For Edward Bloom, his preoccupation with water seems to stem from several of his beliefs about water and, more importantly, what water symbolizes to him. Edward makes reference to the old idiom “big fish in a small pond” numerous times throughout the novel. He sees himself as something bigger than the circumstances and small town he was born into. For Edward, water serves as a symbol for the immensity and the fluidity of the world he lives. Water is ultimately a symbol of grand adventure and freedom for Edward.
In the end of the novel, as Edward is dying, he returns to the water in his bathtub, trying to recapture that feeling of being a fish⁠—free and unafraid. The bathtub is a symbol for how he has returned to the small pond and how age and disease has withered him. This is important because the major theme of the novel is Edward’s relationship with his son, Will. In the end, Will tells his father that when he dies, he will be a fish returning to the vast sea from the river. Water is our life in Big Fish.

In Breathing Underwater, Nick titles his January 10th entry "In my worst nightmares." Why does he do this?

Nick Andreas has been sentenced by the court to attend Family Violence Class. He's there because he physically assaulted his girlfriend, Caitlyn, replicating the violent behavior of his father towards him. To Nick, the whole experience of attending this group is a nightmare; he feels like he doesn't belong there. He's a good-looking, popular student from a well-to-do, respectable family. What on earth would someone like him be doing in such a class?
We can see from Nick's self-pity that he's still in denial over his violent behavior. At this early stage in the program, he tries to minimize what happened when he hit Caitlyn. He maintains that their relationship was "damn near perfect" and that he simply lost it that one time. Other members of the group are not convinced, however, and confront Nick about his behavior. This merely adds to Nick's discomfort, making him feel like he's breathing underwater.

How does Steinbeck's detached point of view in "The Harvest Gypsies" help you understand the plight of migrant farm workers living in California during the Great Depression?

In John Steinbeck's series of articles for The San Francisco News, "The Harvest Gypsies," there is a tone of detachment that is also evident in his fiction. This tone of detachment shows that Steinbeck was a writer who believed in realism. Steinbeck's background in journalism shaped his writing style in fiction. One can interpret The Grapes of Wrath, one of Steinbeck's most well-known and critically-acclaimed novels, as a form of documentary about the lives of farmers in Depression-era Oklahoma and California.
However, "The Harvest Gypsies," is an actual journalist work and captured the socioeconomic issues of the time in great detail. In particular, the series documented the lives and issues of migrant workers in the Central Valley and Lower Colorado River Valley regions of California.
As a reporter, Steinbeck's tone and style in writing the series allows the readers to sympathize with the migrants' plight while also gaining then-new information about the effects of the Great Depression. Steinbeck did not write the series in a dramatic style—as it was a work of journalism—and did not portray the migrants as victims of economic crises.
Instead, he portrayed the migrants realistically, without embellishment, and allowed his subjects to tell the stories themselves. In this sense, Steinbeck is similar to an ethnographer or interpreter. He simply recorded their personal narratives, and it was up to the newspaper readers to come up with their own conclusions.

What made Mrs. Hall think that there were spirits in the room? What did she guess about the stranger?

When Mrs. Hall pops her head round Griffin's door, she gets the fright of her life. In the strange guest's room there are blankets, pillows, and items of furniture frantically swirling around in the air; it's as if the place is haunted. Indeed, Mrs. Hall thinks it is. She's already clocked her new guest as more than a bit weird; he always keeps himself to himself, never talks to anyone, never goes to church, which in this neck of the woods is tantamount to Satanism. But now she's convinced herself that this funny man's actually been playing around with the forces of darkness, summoning up malevolent spirits to move the furniture around. Mrs. Hall also thinks that her strange guest has been at another kind of spirit, the kind you find in bottles of whiskey, gin, and vodka.

This incident happens at the beginning of Chapter VI. When Mrs Hall enters the room in which the stranger has been staying, the bedclothes pulled themselves together, leaped off the bed in "a sort of peak," and then jumped over the end of the bed. Mrs Hall thinks it looks as if they have been grabbed by a hand and then thrown aside. After this, several other things begin to throw themselves at Mrs Hall: the stranger's hat, a sponge, and finally a chair. The chair "charged at" Mrs Hall, and she hears a dry laugh. This sends her running from the room, and she declares that "tas sperits." She says that she had "half guessed" that the stranger, who does not go to church on Sundays, has "put the sperits into the furniture." Essentially, she seems to think he is a sort of witch, or otherwise involved in the occult, and has somehow haunted her room.

Discuss any poem or set of poems from William Blake's Songs of Innocence and of Experience. Focus on the various literary and/or pictorial elements that Blake employs to convey his ideas or themes: elements such as speakers, verbal and visual imagery, versification, points-of-view, allusions to the Bible, irony, and the like. In general, explore what Blake means by the "contrary states" of innocence and experience, drawing on your own as well as Blake's understanding—but, in particular, seek to show how Blake conveys his thinking about any theme or combination of themes: childhood, protection, suffering, creation, divine humanity, sexuality, spirituality, encroachment, slavery, social inequality, solidarity, authority, Christianity. No matter which theme you discuss, be sure focus on how literary and/or pictorial elements support your claims.

The poems in Songs of Innocence and of Experience present William Blake's views of "the two contrary states of the human soul." Blake emphasizes the importance of innocence as a quality that must be shielded from the taint of experience. Among the themes he uses in this regard are childhood, including children's need for protection from suffering; the latter is one of the inevitable, although often negative consequences, of experience. Christian themes and images are frequently deployed in relationship to those themes. Blake frequently reminds the reader that experience brings considerable burdens which can be managed, though not always lifted, through faith in God.
Numerous poems would be very appropriate for analysis in relationship to childhood, protection, suffering, and Christianity. Most but not all appear in the "Innocence" portion. "The Shepherd" and "The Lamb" refer directly to established images associated with Jesus Christ and appeal to a personal apprehension of God. That relationship is established in the "Introduction" at the beginning of "Innocence." The paired poems "The Little Boy Lost" and "The Little Boy Found" address the idea of protection and guidance, equating God with the father.
The child and the lamb are established as related ideas in "Introduction." The speaker identifies a child as the one who demanded "a song" about a lamb, a request that this book of poems aims to fill in a joyful manner. The poem uses an extended metaphor in equating piping songs with writing poems:

'Pipe a song about a Lamb!'So I piped with merry cheer. . . .And I wrote my happy songsEvery child may joy to hear.

"The Shepherd" lays out the idea of Christ as a pastoral caretaker who protects the innocent. This poem also equates Christians with lambs and Christ with the shepherd:

For he hears the lambs' innocent call,And he hears the ewes' tender reply;He is watchful while they are in peace….

In "The Lamb," the poet uses a related metaphor, calling the subject a lamb, and the speaker identifies with innocence by saying he is a child: "I a child and thou a lamb." Blake uses apostrophe, direct address, as the speaker directs his remarks to the Lamb: "Little Lamb, who made thee?" The connections with Christ are clearly established in the answer: "He is called by thy name, / For He calls himself a Lamb."
"The Little Boy Lost" uses a first-person speaker who is a child and seeks his elusive father, then switches to third-person to indicate the father's absence: "The night was dark, no father was there." The darkness is metaphorical for a lack of spiritual enlightenment. In the next poem, "The Little Boy Found," instead of darkness, there is "the wandering light" that guides the lost boy. Here the equation of God to father is made using a simile—"God, ever nigh, / Appeared like his father"—and protection is expressed as guidance: "He kissed the child, and by the hand led"

Which type of conflict does Della face in O. Henry’s “The Gift of the Magi”?

I would say that Della's major conflict is actually of the character vs. character variety. She worries a great deal about what her husband, Jim, will think of her once all her beautiful hair is gone, but she only "faltered for a minute" and lets a few tears fall when she fights with herself about whether or not to actually sell her hair. It does not take her long to make a decision, and, once she does, she acts immediately. However, Della says to herself regarding her husband:

If Jim doesn't kill me [...] before he takes a second look at me, he'll say I look like a Coney Island chorus girl. But what could I do?--oh! what could I do with a dollar and eighty-seven cents?

When Jim does walk in, he has an expression on his face "that she could not read, and it terrified her." She fears that he will not think she is pretty anymore now that her hair is gone. His response, looking around the room with a rather vacant expression and "an air of almost idiocy," makes her really nervous that he is angry with her. This conflict is more imagined than it is real, of course. Jim is only shocked—especially because of his gift to Della—and not angry. However, we do not know that right away, and neither does she.

Della desperately wants to buy Jim a nice gift for Christmas; she wants to buy him a nice chain to go with his pocket-watch. But, unfortunately, she doesn't have anywhere near enough money to pay for it. Della and Jim are dirt-poor and neither can afford to buy the gifts that they really want. Della deals with this problem by selling some of her beautiful locks of hair to a fancy wig-maker. This raises enough money to pay for Jim's watch-chain. Unbeknownst to her, however, Jim has decided to deal with his own conflict in a similar fashion. He's sold his pocket-watch to buy Della a gift of some fancy combs. So both Jim and Della, in dealing with their conflicts, have ended up buying each other what turn out to be useless gifts.

What does the narrator do every night that he believes is proof of his sanity?

Like a number of Poe's unreliable narrators, the narrator of "The Tell-Tale Heart" is at great pains to convince us that he's completely sane, despite the fact that his behavior would suggest otherwise. Right off the bat, the narrator admits to some kind of nervous disorder, but he quickly goes on to reassure us that this doesn't mean that he's mad. He sets out to prove his sanity by telling the story as calmly as possible. Surely a madman wouldn't be able to do that?
The narrator relates the meticulous preparations he made leading up to the old man's murder. Each night, around midnight, he'd slowly open the door to the old man's bedroom. Then he'd gently open the shutter on a lantern to cast a small beam of light on the old man's evil eye, the one that really creeps out the narrator. But because the evil eye remained closed for seven whole nights, the narrator was initially unable to carry out his dark and deadly deed. The narrator is once again trying to convince us of his sanity. He's effectively saying that if he really were a madman, then he would've killed the old man at the first opportunity, instead of showing such incredible patience over the course of a whole week.

What type of colony was New York?

At first a Dutch trading post that was established in 1614, New Amsterdam was founded by the Dutch West India Company in 1626. In 1664, the British took over New York. It was ruled as a proprietary colony, meaning that the colony was granted to the Duke of York with the right to self-government. The Duke of York could rule it as he wanted, as long as his rule was consistent with the laws of England. The Dutch were given freedom of worship, and many stayed in the colony after the British took it over. During the reign of James II of England in 1685, New York became a royal colony with a legislature and colonial governors. People of different religions were welcomed in New York, including Jews, Quakers, Catholics, and others. New York also became an important center of colonial trade.

What was King Midas's secret?

In a section of Geoffrey Chaucer’s lengthy poem, The Canterbury Tales, the Wife of Bath digresses from her primary tale for a small anecdote. She claims that she obtained her story from the Roman poet Ovid and, in lines 958-988 of the poem, claims that:

. . . Midas had beneath his long curled hair,Two ass's ears that grew in secret there.

Yes, King Midas had a secret pair of donkey ears! According to the Wife of Bath, Midas’s wife was the only person privy to his secret and had sworn herself to secrecy. Nevertheless, the more she tried to hide her husband’s disfigurement, the more she itched to reveal it. Eventually, unable to cope with the urge to gossip, Midas’s wife made a strange decision. She sprinted to a brook and exposed Midas’s secret to the running water. After this, Midas’s wife felt better and continued to keep Midas’s donkey ears a secret.
The Wife of Bath claims that her story isn’t simply an entertaining tale; it has an important moral:

Here may you see, though for a while we bide,Yet out it must; no secret can we hide.

There you have it. According to the Wife of Bath in Chaucer’s poem The Canterbury Tales, women can never keep a secret! Interestingly though, in Ovid’s version of the story, the wife was not privy to Midas’s secret. In Ovid’s tale, it was his trusted barber who fled to the river to spill the secret. Perhaps women aren’t the only gossips after all! I hope this helps.

What is a summary for A Rulebook for Arguments by Anthony Weston?

Weston’s book is a short breakdown of the concept of the “argument,” what it is and what it is not. The author argues that, contrary to popular opinion, arguments are not merely statements of facts based on nothing other than one’s opinion. Instead, arguments are constructed by supporting certain points of views with reasons, and in this way they tend to be much less antagonistic than disputes, in which people come to conclusions and try to defend them without much, or any, supporting proof. Weston maintains that proper arguments are really a form of inquiry, or the process of coming to conclusions about speculations by considering as much information as possible, and then using that information to defend said conclusions once they have been reached.
Weston then breaks down his book into sections that further explain the different types of arguments that exist. Short arguments contain premises which are relatively straightforward and easy to defend. Such premises can be defended via a variety of methods. The use of examples (from literature, science, etc.) is critical when formulating a short argument. It is typically useful to use more than one example in this kind of defense, unless you are making an argument by analogy, in which one defends a position by examining its likeness to another case. Arguments made by using informed and authoritative sources, such as by consulting medical professionals on questions of health or historians on questions of history, is another solid way to defend an argument using sound reasoning. Finally, Weston argues that some combination of all of these (and other) methods makes for the most convincing case possible.
Extended arguments tend to be more complex, which requires the arguer to break down their larger narrative into simpler premises and then defend these premises one by one. Extended argumentation often requires substantial amounts of research and the ability to simplify this research, and its conclusions, into manageable points for discussion. Finally, longer debates based on extended arguments are likely to be more open to criticism, as they contain a great deal more material that must be considered. Weston urges his readers to deal with objections gracefully, to consider the counterarguments that could be used against one’s point of view, and always remain open to the idea of change. The ability to revise one’s thinking at a fundamental level will better prepare that person to engage in more sophisticated argumentation in the future.

What is "law as rhetoric?" How does it apply to a state's management of monopoly?

Law as rhetoric is a popular idea that focuses on law's persuasive character. Both legal scholars and rhetorical studies scholars have addressed these issues in books, academic articles, and the blogosphere. Scholars think about law as rhetoric, that is as a persuasive activity that does not conform to the more strict standards of formal logic. Scholars have also written extensively about the way that rhetoric informs law. Remember, the beginnings of rhetoric are in Greek land disputes. Disputants needed someone well-versed in persuasion to help argue their case, and it is at this point that classical rhetoric gets started with Aristotle and others. Scholars of law and rhetoric also think about law as persuasion and as constitutive of identities, which is one way to think about what is called "constitutive rhetoric."
Scholars also think about the construction of judicial opinions, the writing of laws, and the policy statements made by law makers as rhetorical because they are attempts at persuasion and generative of action.
There are a couple ways to think about state management of monopolies and law as rhetoric. Keep in mind that law as rhetoric is used as a lens to understand law across legal disciplines (tort, criminal law, family law, civil procedure, and more). One might think about what a state's management of monopolies means about a state's ability to control the economy. Put another way, one might also think about the way controls on monopolies expand state power and create the image of the state or its officials as anti-free market or as a necessary protection against certain economic practices. That is, laws send messages and those messages are crafted to give officials and states certain personas (tough on crime, supportive of diversity, welcoming, etc.). This is law as rhetoric in practice. We use law to persuade and construct identities. Scholars have written much about this as well.

The idea of law as rhetoric was described by J.B. White in an article published in the University of Chicago Law Review in 1985. Instead of viewing law is a set of rules, as it is most commonly viewed by philosophers and academic scholars, White proposes that we view law as a branch of rhetoric. According to Plato, the ancient rhetorician Gorgias defined rhetoric “the art of persuading people about matters of justice and injustice in the public places of the state.”
White believed that law cannot be objectified or abstracted, because the acceptance of any law is subjective, based on the views of the audience, or the persons deciding a legal case. Arguments are interpreted differently by different audiences, as interpretations depend on the socio-cultural context in which information is presented. In a court of law, an argument is resolved when whoever hears the argument decides that one claim sounds more reasonable than the other. Thus, because rhetoric affects the way an argument sounds, rhetoric determines the outcome of legal arguments. The key idea here, however, is that the persuasiveness of an argument depends on what the audience considers persuasive.
As far as your question about how law as rhetoric relates to a state’s management of monopoly, I believe “law as rhetoric” is an independent concept that is not related directly to a state’s management of monopoly but rather to legal matters in general. So, unless I’m misunderstanding something, in applying the concept of law as rhetoric, the effectiveness of legal arguments advanced in any state and on any issue will depend largely on how well the attorney is able use the language of persuasion to address socio-cultural influences on the views of the audience (whoever is hearing the case or being persuaded).
The article at the link below is J.B. White’s article, "Law as Rhetoric, Rhetoric as Law, The Arts of Cultural and Communal Life."
https://www.lwionline.org/sites/default/files/2016-09/v5%20White.pdf

What does the quote “To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation” from Life of Pi mean?

The quote in question appears at the very end of chapter seven, and it is one of my favorite quotes from the entire text.

I'll be honest about it. It is not atheists who get stuck in my craw, but agnostics. Doubt is useful for a while. We must all pass through the garden of Gethsemane. If Christ played with doubt, so must we. If Christ spent an anguished night in prayer, if He burst out from the Cross, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" then surely we are also permitted doubt. But we must move on. To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation.

Pi is a wonderfully intelligent character, and he has one of the most unique perspectives on religion I have ever seen. He has found a way to incorporate Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism into his own personal belief system. For Pi, belief in something is important, and that opinion is further highlighted through his interactions with Mr. Kumar. Mr. Kumar is a strong atheist. Science, experimentation, logic, reason, and experience contribute to his faith.

There are no grounds for going beyond a scientific explanation of reality and no sound reason for believing anything but our sense experience. A clear intellect, close attention to detail and a little scientific knowledge will expose religion as superstitious bosh. God does not exist.

Pi definitely doesn't agree with Mr. Kumar, but Pi respects Mr. Kumar's stance. Kumar has chosen to believe in something. On the other hand, agnostics don't put their faith in anything, and that really bothers Pi. Agnosticism allows for the possibility of anything while at the same time doubting everything, and that really angers Pi. Agnostics have chosen not to believe in anything, which simply doesn't make any sense to Pi.

Who prevents the evacuation of the last 20,000 prisoners at Buchenwald?

This question refers to the events of chapter 9. In the text, Elie and the other prisoners learn that Buchenwald is to be evacuated and the camp liquidated in stages in April. Elie is among the twenty thousand remaining prisoners in the camp, including several hundred children.
The last twenty thousand were to be evacuated into the evening on April 10, but as Elie is waiting in the assembly square before the gates, the sirens in the camp suddenly go off.
The prisoners are then instructed to return to their barracks to await further instructions. By the time the sirens have stopped, it is too late in the evening to begin evacuations. The next day, Buchenwald's prisoners' resistance group makes a move against the remaining SS in charge of the camp, who abandon the camp rather than continue fighting to maintain control. Elie explains that at six o'clock that evening, the first American tanks arrived at the camp, thereby signifying its liberation.
Although the text does not explicitly state who is responsible for these sirens, the reader can infer that it is the approaching American forces that caused the Germans in control of the sirens to sound the alarms to prevent evacuation.

Summarize these sections from Euthyphro by Plato. 1)Introduction to Plato's Euthyphro 2)Plato's Euthyphro 3)About the author: Plato

Plato (ca. 428–348 BC) was an Athenian philosopher. He was born to a wealthy and powerful family and demonstrated an early talent as a writer. Falling under the spell of Socrates, an older philosopher who left no writings but was much admired by many followers, Plato turned his attention from literary pursuits to philosophy and founded the Academy, a gathering place dedicated to the Muses where those interested in philosophy could gather, share ideas, and study.
Although its precise date is unknown, Euthyphro is usually categorized among Plato's "early" dialogues and presumed to have been written shortly after the death of Socrates in 399 BC. The main characters in the dialogue are:
Socrates: a philosopher whom Plato very much admired
Euthyphro: a self-proclaimed religious authority accusing his father of murder in a lawsuit
Meletus: a man who would later accuse Socrates of impiety in a trial resulting in Socrates' death
The main theme of Euthyphro is the nature of piety and whether things are considered pious because they are approved by the gods or whether the gods approve of things because those things (ideas, behaviors) are inherently good or pious in nature. An important issue in the dialogue is the question not just of what is a good definition of piety but the more general issue of what constitutes a good definition.

Note the ways in which the Mozart-Salieri relationship changes.

English playwright Peter Shaffer's 1979 play Amadeus is a tale of the life of composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Later remade into a feature film, it focuses on an embellished and fictionalized account of the relationship between Mozart and Italian composer Antonio Salieri.
Salieri, who is Mozart's senior, has heard of the younger composer since his early reputation as a musical prodigy spread throughout Europe. When Salieri is finally introduced to Mozart, however, he becomes disillusioned at what he perceives as Mozart's crass behavior.
Salieri spends much of the rest of the play as Mozart's passive aggressive rival, feigning support for Mozart while using his influence as imperial court composer to secretly sabotage his career behind the scenes. Mozart is oblivious to Salieri's machinations, expressing gratitude for his overt efforts.
Toward the end of the play, Salieri becomes conflicted about his own plans to destroy Mozart and his increasing affection for the composer's works. Nonetheless, he induces Mozart to transcribe the rituals of Freemasonry into an opera—The Magic Flute—which meets with the disapproval of prominent Masons in Vienna. Thus begins the end of Mozart and Salieri's relationship, with Salieri, it is strongly suggested, murdering Mozart.
Ultimately, the conflict between Salieri's two visions of Mozart drives the Italian mad.
http://dramatica.com/analysis/amadeus

Why did Tessie Hutchinson get singled out as the winner in "The Lottery"?

On the surface, the winner is chosen at random. Community members blindly select a piece of paper. The person who chooses the paper with a dot on it becomes the winner. Everyone else becomes a willing participant in planned violence toward a randomly selected person. Shirley Jackson makes it clear that anyone could've been singled out. However, Jackson makes various points, both blatant and nuanced. While we're given direct reasons, it is equally important to note implied reasons Tessie may have been chosen. For instance, she arrives late and claims she forgot about the annual event. In a community that seems to put tradition before everything, including humanity, it's possible that breaking the rules was enough to seal Tessie's fate.

During the annual lottery, the community gathers in the town square to draw slips of paper in order to determine what innocent, defenseless citizens will be stoned to death by the entire community. Tragically, Tessie Hutchinson becomes the community's scapegoat when she "wins" the lottery by selecting the strip of paper with the black spot on it. After Tessie's husband, Bill, selects the slip of paper with the black spot on it, the entire Hutchinson family is called to draw again from the black box. When the five members of the Hutchinson family draw again from the black box, Tessie selects the strip of paper with the black spot in it, which indicates that she will be the community's scapegoat.
Despite her pleas that the procedures were not fair, Tessie Hutchinson is brutally stoned to death by her friends, family, and neighbors. The origins of the lottery are briefly discussed and the barbaric ritual was originally founded on the superstitious belief that sacrificing a random community member would increase the crop yield. Since the community insists on blindly following tradition, they senselessly kill an innocent, defenseless citizen each year. Tragically, Tessie Hutchinson is singled out as the winner after selecting the slip of paper with the black spot on it.

How does the setting increase the conflict between the main characters in Roman Fever?

There could be more than one argument to this answer. I would argue that the place, Rome, is most significant because it is a place that the two mothers (Mrs. Slade and Mrs. Ansley) travelled to together when they were young women. At first, the women discuss how beautiful the place is. Mrs. Ansley seems to have a particular connection to the place; she doesn't explain her reasoning until the very end of the story. Mrs. Slade remarks,

"After all, it's still the most beautiful city in the world.

Mrs. Ansley responds,

"It always will be, to me," assented her friend Mrs. Ansley, with so slight a stress on the "me" that Mrs. Slade, though she noticed it, wondered if it were not merely accidental . . .

At first, they ponder the beauty of the city as they sit in a restaurant during the day. The waiter asks them if they will stay for dinner, and, since both are widows and their daughters are occupied, they decide to stay and observe the city together:

The headwaiter, bowing over her gratuity, assured her that the ladies were most welcome, and would be still more so if they would condescend to remain for dinner. A full moon night, they would remember.

This is an early mention of the moon, which becomes a significant idea later in the story. They continue to discuss the moonlight. Mrs. Slade remarks,

"Moonlight, moonlight! What a part it still plays."

Soon, readers hear that the women had been neighbors in New York City for many years:

Mrs. Slade and Mrs. Ansley had lived opposite each other actually as well as figuratively for years. When the drawing-room curtains in No. 20 East Seventy-third Street were renewed, No. 23, across the way, was always aware of it. . . . Little escaped Mrs. Slade. But she had grown bored with it . . .

Ironically, Mrs. Slade is tired of watching the ways of Mrs. Ansley; she thinks she knows almost everything about Mrs. Ansley's life. However, one of the greatest conflicts of the text comes from the one important secret that Mrs. Slade kept from Mrs. Ansley about her activities on a moonlit night (as a young woman) when they were previously in Rome together.
As the moon comes out while the women sit together at the restaurant, their conversation turns to their memories of that youthful trip. The setting sun is extremely significant in building this conflict:

The long golden light was beginning to pale, and Mrs. Ansley lifted her knitting a little closer to her eyes.

As Mrs. Ansley knits, Mrs. Slade thinks to herself,

"It's all very well to say that our girls have done away with sentiment and moonlight . . . "

Mrs. Slade then instigates deeper conversation about their memories of their youthful trip:

"The sun's set. You're not afraid, my dear?"
"Afraid?"
"Of Roman fever or pneumonia!"

They discuss how Mrs. Ansley got sick from being out at night (in the moonlight) long ago. This leads to a conversation about why she was out. When the reason for her nighttime adventure is revealed at the end of the story, the readers finally understand the depth of the conflict between these two women. Mrs. Slade did not know everything about Mrs. Ansley's life, as she thought she did.