What is the most important satire: the patients who look for particular answers or for authority to hand down diagnoses, the officials responsible for law and governing, or the psychiatrist himself?

"The Psychiatrist" could be interpreted as a satire on positivism. This is a philosophy that predominated in the West in the late 19th and early 20th centuries which held that all human problems would one day be solved by science. At the time Machado wrote the story, positivism had spread to his native Brazil, becoming almost an article of faith among the educated middle classes. Then, as now, psychiatrists believed themselves to be practicing science and saw their work with patients as involving the application of insights gleaned from scientific theory.
The learned psychiatrist Bacamarte—which in Portuguese means "good for nothing"—acts as if his scientific training has given him a status akin to a priest in pre-Enlightenment times. Bacamarte's high-handed behavior and insistence on his absolute authority as a professional reveals a surprising kinship between the men of science and their clerical predecessors. Positivism is supposed to be based on a fidelity to scientific rationality, yet in the figure of Bacamarte, it displays the kind of rigid dogmatism one normally associates with a certain kind of religion.
The psychiatrist of the title arrogates to himself the right to determine—in the broadest possible interpretation—who is and who isn't insane. The enormous power that this gives him makes him almost infallible in his own professional field. Again, the parallel with clerical power isn't difficult to detect. It's as if, in positivism, humankind has simply replaced one dogmatic religion with another.

Argue for or against the idea that Macbeth is a classic example of a Shakespearean tragic hero. Provide the four-square method and thesis statement only.

This prompt is asking for you to make a personal, subjective argument. You have to decide whether or not you think that Macbeth is a good example of a tragic hero. Once you have made that decision, then you have to craft a working thesis statement that is going to guide the rest of the paper. Personally, I think the safer option is to argue in favor of Macbeth being a tragic hero. Finding evidence for or against is going to be a similar process, but arguing against his being a tragic hero does make me consider that a portion of your essay should be about a particular character that does fit the tragic hero mold. This would allow you to contrast Macbeth with that character. You are welcome to go that route, but I think it would be more work. The thesis statement in favor of his tragic hero status could be quite simple.
"Macbeth is a classic example of a tragic hero because of his nobility, his flaws, and his final fate."
The four-square method of essay preparation is often used as a graphic organizer that allows students to organize essay "chunks." The four squares in the four-square method are not standardized squares, and the method could be applied to an individual paragraph or the entire paper as a whole. For an essay of this magnitude, I recommend using the four-square method for multiple paragraphs. If the paper is going to focus on the three specifics mentioned in my example thesis, then a four-square organizer could be used for each specific item.
Take a piece of paper, and divide it into four sections. Label the top left box "evidence." Label the top right box "character." The bottom left box should be labeled "quote." The bottom right box should be labeled "summary" or "connection." Above the four boxes, write a simplified version of the thesis. In this case, "Macbeth is a tragic hero." Next, write a sentence or two in the appropriate boxes. The evidence box should contain something about tragic heroes having noble backgrounds. Apply that information to Macbeth in the next box. Then give a supporting quote from the play in the bottom left box. Finally, write a sentence or two that wraps up the entire box. Repeat the process for the other parts of the thesis. These graphic organizers then serve to give you a working framework from which to write the entire essay.

Is Della pregnant?

There is nothing in "The Gift of the Magi" that makes explicit that Della is pregnant. In fact, the narrator describes her as "quite thin." Granted, it is not impossible that Della is expecting a baby, because she could simply be in the early weeks of pregnancy. But given the economic circumstances of the young couple, it is reasonable to assume that they are not actively planning to have a child at this time.
Though some readers may read the narrator's observation of Jim's situation (e.g., "Poor fellow, he was only twenty-two—and with a family to take care of!") as an oblique reference to Della being pregnant, that is not necessarily the case. When Jim and Della married, they became a family. The narrator's exclamation could also mean that Jim had financial obligations to members of his own family.
Another reason that a pregnancy seems unlikely is the nature of the gifts that Jim and Della exchange. If Della were pregnant, buying Jim a gold watch chain would be highly impractical. Likewise, Jim buying his wife a pair of fancy hair ornaments would be impractical with another mouth to feed on its way. Though they are young, the couple seem too thrift-minded to throw money away on luxurious gifts if they know their budget will soon be stretched even further when the child arrives.

And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh. Matthew 2
“The Gift of the Magi” is perhaps O. Henry’s most popular story, and as such, it has been the subject of much critical analysis. One line of thinking examines the story's title and the links to the three Magi in the story of the birth of Jesus. The Magi are not only rich but they are kings. Della and Jim are barely getting by on twenty dollars a week. The three kings give valuable presents, including gold. Jim has to sacrifice his watch and Della her hair to buy simple Christmas presents. The Magi in the New Testament do not give presents to each other. Most significantly, the Magi bring gifts to a newborn baby. But there is no baby in O. Henry’s story.
Or is there?
The general interpretation of the story suggests that the gift of the Magi that O. Henry's title alludes to is simply Jim and Della's spiritual enlightenment in realizing that their love was more important than material possessions. But O. Henry gives an interesting hint that the common denominator between the two stories might be a baby. Here is the one significant passage:
The door opened and Jim stepped in and closed it. He looked thin and very serious. Poor fellow, he was only twenty-two—and to be burdened with a family!
Della does not think Jim is burdened with a wife but is to be burdened with a family. Might Della be expecting a baby?

Who was Gabelle?

Théophile Gabelle, to give him his full name, is the man charged with taking care of the Evrémonde estate after the Marquis's death. Gabelle has been acting as Charles Darnay's steward, which immediately makes him suspicious in the eyes of the revolutionary authorities. At this tumultuous period in French history, simply associating with an aristocratic family, let alone working for one, is enough to mark you down as a traitor to the nation. That being the case, it comes as no surprise when Gabelle's slung in jail by the revolutionaries.
From his stinking prison cell, he sends an SOS to Darnay, informing him of his plight. Darnay, safely ensconced in England, could choose to ignore Gabelle's letter. But Darnay wouldn't be Darnay if he did that, for this is a man with a profound sense of duty, a unswerving devotion to doing the right thing. Feeling more than a little guilty over Gabelle's imprisonment—Gabelle was, after all, slung in jail for serving Darnay—Charles determines to go back to Revolutionary France and settle all unfinished business.
It's a brave move and a very dangerous one, because if Darnay's identity is discovered by the revolutionaries, he could well find himself sharing the same prison cell as Gabelle. Even worse, he could end up losing his head to the guillotine.

Who said, "I wouldn’t have come home to kill my father," in Oedipus Rex?

This quotation can be attributed to the character Oedipus in Sophocles's play, Oedipus Rex. In the play, first performed in approximately 429 BC, Oedipus is the king of Thebes. He became the king by unwittingly killing the previous king, who also happened to be his father. Oedipus also decides to marry a woman named Jocasta, who also happens to be Oedipus's mother. Importantly, just as Oedipus does not initially realize that he has killed his father, he also doesn't realize when he marries Jocasta that this woman is his mother.
The given quotation can be found in the later part of the play, after Oedipus has discovered that it was in fact he who killed his father and that he has in fact married his own mother. Appalled with the patricide and incest which he has unwittingly committed, Oedipus gouges out his own eyes. At this point in the play, blind and alone, Oedipus wishes that he had died soon after he was born. That way, he says, he "would not have come to kill [his] father."

Why do Kino's knuckles burn when the doctor visits them?

In Chapter Three, the news of Kino's magnificent discovery quickly spreads throughout the community and nearby town, where the pearl dealers greedily begin to collude against Kino. In addition to the pearl dealers, the town's priest and doctor also hope to gain some fortune from Kino's expensive pearl. After the priest travels to Kino's hut on the beach, the doctor and his servant visit Kino's humble abode to check up on Coyotito, who seems to be recovering from the scorpion sting. When Kino sees the doctor and his servant, Steinbeck writes,

"The split knuckles on Kino's right hand burned when he saw who they were" (15).

Steinbeck utilizes a metaphor by writing that Kino's split knuckles burn in order to emphasize Kino's hatred and anger towards the doctor and his servant. Kino had originally split his knuckles after punching the doctor's gate when he refused to treat Coyotito. Kino understands that the only reason the doctor is now willing to treat Coyotito is because the doctor knows that he has the Pearl of the World. Kino has deep-seated hatred towards the doctor and wants to protect his son, which is why his knuckles metaphorically burn. Unfortunately, Kino has no other choice but to trust the doctor, who has selfish intentions.

It's a metaphorical expression. Kino's knuckles aren't literally burning; he's just ready to fight to protect his family from the doctor and his men. He already has good reason not to trust the doctor. Earlier on, he ignored Kino's pleas for help in treating little Coyotito. It was then that Kino split the knuckles in his right hand by angrily punching the doctor's gate.
Now, the doctor, having already deliberately made Coyotito sick to maintain the pretense that the scorpion sting still needs to be cured, has shown up with some other men, determined to find out where Kino's hidden the pearl. Kino's anger and rage soon turn to fear. He's placed in an impossible situation. Coyotito's health is the most important thing in the world to him; only the doctor can save him, or so he claims. Yet Kino also doesn't trust the doctor and with good reason, too. At that moment, he feels the weight of his people's history on his shoulders, a history of exploitation at the hands of those of a supposedly higher race, class, and education.

How did Bud feel when Miss Thomas tells him that he will be staying with them?

Miss Thomas tells Bud that she wants him to stay in chapter 16. Bud's immediate reaction is a "gigantic smile" which he says "split [his] face in half." This implies that he is very happy. The metaphor, in which the smile is described as splitting his face "in half," emphasizes how broadly he is smiling and thus how extremely happy he is.
He also reassures Mis Thomas that he will be strong enough, in body and in spirit, to help and endure Mr. Calloway. Bud is then given a new suitcase, of which he is proud, and he joins in the laughter when Miss Thomas makes a joke about the car. This suggests that he is pleased and also that he feels comfortable with his new family.
Bud's delighted reaction to being told that he can stay with his new family is understandable. He has, up to this point, led a rather nomadic, chaotic, and unfortunate life. Indeed, the story begins with Bud as a ten-year-old boy, about to be placed with his third foster family. His mother has died and he has never known his father. Miss Thomas offers him the opportunity for a more permanent, secure, and happy life.

What is the rhyme scheme of the poem "pity this busy monter,manunkind"?

The poem's rhyme scheme is irregular, to say the least. Cummings was renowned for his experiments in rhyme and so it's not too surprising to see them on display here. Such examples include

We doctors know
a hopeless case if --- listen: there's a hellof a good universe next door; let's go (emphasis added)

The rhymes are only occasional, and when they appear they provide a counterpoint to the poem's loose-limbed structure—which perfectly conveys Cummings's contempt for the idea of human progress and the arrogance on which it is based.
Had Cummings resorted to a more conventional poetic structure, complete with neat rhymes and rhythms, then he would've undermined his own message. It would've been strange indeed to read a poem damning human beings for acting as if they're god-like and omnipotent that was written in a polished, formal style.
On the contrary, Cummings wants to show "manunkind" at his very worst: in all his arrogance and hubris. And what better way to do that than to use a zig-zagging structure with only the occasional rhyme peeping through the chaos?
https://web.cs.dal.ca/~johnston/poetry/pitmonster.html

Who is Madame Sofronie?

Despite scrimping and saving for many long months, Della has only been able to save a dollar and eighty-seven cents to purchase a Christmas gift for her beloved husband, Jim. She cries because she so longs to buy him something worthy of him, but she does not have any other way to come up with the money or even anything of value that she can sell—nothing except her "beautiful hair," her most prized possession. When she lets it down, it falls "about her, rippling and shining like a cascade of brown waters."
It occurs to her that she might sell her hair in order to acquire the money she needs to buy Jim a beautiful gift. Madame Sofronie is the owner of the shop that deals in "Hair Goods of All Kinds." She is described as "hardly looking the 'Sofronie,'" perhaps because it is such a beautiful-sounding name and Madame herself is "large, too white, [and] chilly." She is standoffish and disinterested, quite a contrast to the warm and cozy feeling Jim and Della have created in their little home. Madame Sofronie could be interpreted as a symbol of the cold, uncaring world outside the Dillinghams' relationship, drawing even more attention to their priorities and values as the "wisest."
Madame Sofronie is driven by money; Della and Jim are motivated by love.

Madame Sofronie is characterized as a cold, tough, unsympathetic woman who is only pretending to be a foreign-born artiste for business purposes; she actually appears to be from Brooklyn. She puts on airs with her customers but not with a girl like Della, who is a seller and not a buyer. Madame Sofronie gives herself away when she says, “Take yer hat off and let's have a sight at the looks of it.” This woman must realize that Della is feeling distressed and even frightened, but she deals with many such desperate young girls who need money and have nothing else to sell.
O. Henry uses the episode with Mme. Sofronie to emphasize the ordeal Della has to go through in selling her beautiful long hair. It is a sufficiently painful experience to part with her hair without having to deal with a woman like the hard-boiled businesswoman who calls herself Madame Sofronie. O. Henry is not interested in characterizing hair buyers in general; he only invents this unpleasant character in order to highlight the sacrifice that Della is making. Della is like a shorn lamb.

How did England discover America?

The primary purpose for the discovery of America was trade. England had sent merchant ships to North America before and found a vast land of resources, primarily fish. They then believed they could expand their trading routes with India by sailing further. This northwest passage would prove vital for the English in the worldwide competition with Spain.
Several attempts at colonization transpired in the late 1500s. Martin Frobisher, John Davis, and Humphrey Gilbert all made contact with North America, although none of these attempts grew into full colonization. Walter Raleigh was chartered to settle on the infamous Roanoke Island in 1585. As religious fervor increased, so did the need for chartered voyages. What ultimately transpired was several voyages sailing to the New World and the creation of colonies in America.
https://www.history.com/topics/exploration/exploration-of-north-america

https://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1130.html

In "On Social Class and Happiness," does Margaret Cavendish support or criticize her society's status quo? How can I write about the rhetorical strategies she used, and what would be the thesis if I were writing essay on it?

You were pleased in your last Letter to tell me, that you had been in the Country, and that you did almost Envy the Peasants for living so Merrily

From this line, it can be inferred that the prevailing attitude in Cavendish's society is that the wealthy live happier lives than the lower classes. Note that her friend, to whom she pens these reflections, is not actually envious of the poor. She's "almost" envious, hanging on to the idea that she's better off with her wealth and isn't going to trade that in any time soon. Cavendish wishes to further investigate this idea.
She thinks that the lower classes really do live happier lives than the wealthy. They don't have as many possessions to cause them anxiety. They get to be outdoors and enjoy nature, not worrying about how the sun will damage their complexions. They attend dances and other social gatherings with friendship and fun, not with an envious attitude borne in comparisons. She contrasts this sharply with images of opulent balls:

But great Ladies at Publick Meetings take not such true Pleasures, for their Envy at each others Beauty and Bravery Disturbs their Pastimes, and Obstructs their Mirth, they rather grow Peevish and Froward through Envy, than Loving and Kind through Society . . .

Cavendish does seem to have a slightly romanticized view of the life of the poor in her society. After all, are the poor excited to fall into bed in utter exhaustion each night so that they don't have to worry about sleeping well? Are they that happy to have to earn their food by the sweat of their brow? Probably not.
Cavendish uses both pathos and logos in her reasoning. Pathos (an appeal to the emotions) is seen in all the images where the poor seem to be living a joyous, carefree, exuberant life that the wealthy can't experience. They milk cows instead of curling their hair and dance without restraint instead of worrying what people think. They are free to live life for themselves, on their own terms, instead of living simply to impress other people. Logos (an appeal to logic) is seen in the section where Cavendish comments that for every happy noble, there are 100 happy peasants. She also closes in logic, noting that it is impossible to know the thoughts of anyone and that outward appearances can be deceiving.
If you are looking for a thesis that brings all of these elements together, you may want to consider something like the following: Through pathos and logos, Margaret Cavendish challenges the common belief in her society that the wealthiest people are the happiest people.
The body paragraphs could examine the overall assertion of how she sees the lower classes as living happier lives and then where, specifically, pathos and logos are used in that argument.

Compare how the poets present power in “My Last Duchess” and “La Belle Dame sans Merci.”

Each of the poems presents a man who is obsessed with a woman. In John Keats’s poem, the primary character, a forlorn knight, describes himself as helpless in the face of the woman’s charms: she has the power. In Robert Browning’s poem, the speaker is the Duke, who brags about his control over the now-deceased duchess in a portrait he is describing: he has the power, or so he believes. In both cases, the woman’s departure has left the man alone.
In the knight’s situation, the warrior in armor has been accustomed to doing battle with other similarly armed men. He was apparently unprepared for a battle of the heart, which he has lost. Seduced by her looks and sounds, the knight is convinced of the woman’s love, yet he finds himself disappointed in his inability to possess her. His interpretation is that his beloved did not fight fair. His only way to understand her power over him is to attribute it to supernatural forces. The woman must have been an enchantress, or perhaps was not even human; she cast spells on him that made him love her but then abandoned him. She was without mercy. The knight presents her power as illegitimate because it had magical properties.
As regards the Duke, he tells the listener numerous details about the portrait and the famous artist, Fra Pandolf, who painted it. He intends to convey that he admired his duchess for her virtues, but he ends up revealing more about his jealousies and suspicions. The Duke implies that he had his wife killed—which seems an odd suggestion, given that the listener is the agent with whom he is negotiating the terms of his second marriage. He may believe he is being so subtle that the listener will not understand that implication, or he may be deliberately warning the listener what might befall the new bride if she were unfaithful. Although he goes out of his way to emphasize his powerful position, the Duke also reveals that he is a man at the mercy of his passions, a person who understands power as rule by force rather than intellect.

What role should science play in environmental decision-making?

Science is among many epistemological approaches that could be used to influence decision making with modern environmental issues. It is however, one of the more valid and often used methodologies in many environmental problems. Science should have a significant role in environmental decision-making based on it's ability to produce verifiable and repeatable results through a rigorous, peer-reviewed process. This process arms decision makers with data that can contribute positive outcome. It should be coupled with socio-economic, cultural and political influences to make a sound decision.
For example, decisions about the type, frequency and intensity of earthquakes, say in the greater San Francisco Bay Area, can be made with the added certainty that Earth has tectonic plates. That they are always moving and that with the specific type of slip-slide plate action of the Andreas Fault it is likely that they will happen again, that they will be proximal to the greatest point of pressure that builds up between two or more plates. Using this type of science to influence decision makers with planning for adequate earthquake protection and zoning in and around the metro area of San Francisco could save lives and help people prepare for future occurrences.

Scientists are the experts on environmental issues. Often times, environmental problems are brought into the political arena from the science community. However, the information provided by the scientists is not always easily understood by the general public. These complex issues can often become convoluted once they are discussed by politicians. The media also has a strong influence as it interprets information and decides what and what not to share with the public. Although the scientists are the experts as to the environmental problem and can advise and make predictions regarding future outcomes, they are not experts on policy making and foreign affairs. Therefore, science should meld with good policy practices to guide environmental decision-making. Scientists and policy makers must work together to solve our current environmental issues.

How closely does stanza 2 adhere to the rhyme and rhythm of the Spenserian stanza?

A Spenserian stanza consists of nine lines arranged in an ababbcbcc rhyme scheme. The first eight lines are iambic pentameters, ten-syllable lines with five instances of an unstressed syllable followed by a stressed one. The ninth line is an iambic hexameter (or alexandrine), a twelve-syllable line with six iambs, or feet, in which an unstressed syllable precedes a stressed one.
To figure out how closely stanza 2 adheres to the rhyme and rhythm of a Spenserian stanza, you can start by examining its rhyme scheme. Then you can compare it to the rhyme scheme of the Spenserian stanza. You'll notice that youth in line 10 rhymes with uncouth in line 12. You'll also notice that Night in line 13 rhymes with both delight in line 11 and wight in line 14. How does the rhyme pattern in the rest of stanza 2 compare with the rhyme scheme of the Spenserian stanza?
Next you can compare the rhythm of each line in stanza 2 to the rhythm of its corresponding line in a Spenserian stanza. How many syllables does each line contain? Which of its syllables are stressed, and which ones are unstressed?
You will probably see that most of the lines are perfect iambic pentameters. But you may find one or more exceptions. For example, you should pay close attention to line 15. And observe the word Albion's in line 10. How does it affect the number of syllables in the line? How does it affect the stress pattern?
http://www.english.emory.edu/classes/Handbook/Spenserian.html

Why does Gulliver allow the Lilliputians to control him in Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels?

When Lemuel Gulliver is shipwrecked, he washes ashore on an island and then falls asleep. When he wakes up, he has been tied down with ropes on numerous parts of body. He learns that this is the land Lilliput, where the people are only six inches tall. Nevertheless, the men are armed with bows and arrows, which they prove willing to use against him.
Although Gulliver is much larger, he is a guest and a prisoner of the Emperor of Lilliput and dependent on them for food and water. Relying on diplomacy rather than brute force, he uses his wits to learn their language and figure out ways to encourage the emperor to grant him his freedom. His liberation finally comes with conditions about his proper behavior and a commitment to become the Lilliputians’s ally against their rival, Blefuscu.

What is a brood sow, and how does its loss affect the Baxter Family?

A brood-sow is a female pig kept for the purposes of breeding. In The Yearling, the Baxter family own a black brood-sow by the name of Betsy. One morning, Penny and Jody are shocked to discover Betsy's mangled corpse. The poor pig has been attacked and killed by Slewfoot, a big old bear who lives in the forest. As a brood-sow, Betsy would not have been slaughtered for meat, so she became almost like a family pet. As one can imagine, Penny and his son are pretty upset at the death of one of their most beloved animals. But they're also determined to track down the vicious swine-killing bear to his lair and finish him off.
Unfortunately, the big showdown between man and bear turns out to be a bit of a fiasco. Penny's gun backfires, and one of this hunting dogs—Old Julia—ends up being injured by the ferocious bear. Much to Jody's disgust, it's only after the bear has successfully escaped into the forest that their "feist," or small hunting dog, returns to the party. So much for the dog's hunting skills.

In A Raisin in the Sun, George suggest that Beneatha should be a certain type of girl and tells her to drop the "atmosphere". Elaborate what he implies by this.

In Lorraine Hansberry's A Raisin in the Sun, Beneatha dates the wealthy, well-educated man George Murchison; he is set up as a foil for Joseph Asagai, who also attracts her attention. In his pursuit of success, George has chosen to assimilate to white American culture, whereas Joseph is proud of his African heritage and teaches Beneatha about their shared culture and history. Joseph appreciates Beneatha's intellect and desire to learn, but George is not interested in Beneatha's mind, which he reveals when they come home from a date at the start of act 2, scene 2.
He tries to kiss her, and when Beneatha pulls away, they have the following exchange:

George: Look, we've had a nice evening; let's not spoil it, huh? . . .
He again turns her head and tries to nuzzle in and she turns away from him, not with distaste but with momentary lack of interest; in a mood to pursue what they were talking about.
Beneatha: I'm trying to talk to you.
George: We always talk.
Beneatha: Yes—and I love to talk.
George: Exasperated; rising I know it and I don't mind it sometimes . . . I want you to cut it out, see—The moody stuff, I mean. I don't like it. You're a nice-looking girl . . . all over. That's all you need, honey, forget the atmosphere. Guys aren't going to go for the atmosphere—they're going to go for what they see. Be glad for that. Drop the Garbo routine. It doesn't go with you. As for myself, I want a nice—Groping—simple Thoughtfully— sophisticated girl . . . not a poet—O.K.?

George shows a physical interest in Beneatha and her beauty, but he has little respect for who she is inside.
In scene 1 of act 2, Beneatha had remarked to her family that George was "shallow," and he only confirms her judgment here. The "atmosphere" he refers to consists essentially of her personality and intellect. She longs to have deep, serious discussions about the world, but George dismisses this as "moody" and unattractive. Beneatha finds this puzzling, since George is himself an educated man, but he reveals that the two of them have different ideas about the role of education:

George: I don't go out with you to discuss the nature of "quiet desperation" or to hear all about your thoughts—because the world will go on thinking what it thinks regardless—
Beneatha: Then why read books? Why go to school?
George: With artificial patience, counting on his fingers It's simple. You read books—to learn facts—to get grades—to pass the course—to get a degree. That's all —it has nothing to do with thoughts.

Upon realizing that George is—as she later tells Mama—"a fool," she ends their date.
This moment in the play underscores Beneatha's intelligence, determination, and authenticity. A man like George wants Beneatha to look good on his arm, treating her as an accessory to his wealth and image, but Beneatha values herself and her mind more than that.

A population sample of 300 individuals is studied for the electrophoretic mobility of an enzyme that varies according to the genotype determined by 2 alleles, E and T of a single gene. The results are 7 individuals with genotype EE, 106 with genotype ET, and 187 with genotype TT. What are the allele frequencies of E and T, and what are the expected numbers of the 3 genotypes if random mating is assumed?

The allele frequencies are the proportions of each allele among all alleles at a given locus. In this problem, the population is 300 individuals: 7 + 106 + 187 = 300. Since each individual is expected to have two alleles, the total number of alleles is 600. To find the allele frequencies, we need to find the number of each allele.
We are told 7 individuals have two copies of allele E (genotype EE) and 106 have a single copy (genotype ET). The total number of copies of E is thus 2*7 + 106 = 120. The allele frequency for E is this number divided by the total number of alleles—that is, 120/600, or 0.20 (20%). Similarly, 187 individuals have two copies of T, while 106 (the heterozygotes) have only one. The total number of T alleles is 2*187 + 106 = 480. The allele frequency for T is the fraction of the total number of alleles that are T, or 480/600 = 0.80 (80%).
So the allele frequencies are 0.20 and 0.80 for E and T, respectively. Let’s call these p and q. The expected numbers of each genotype are based on probabilities of each individual's receiving each combination of alleles. In a system of random mating, the probability of getting EE is the product of the independent probabilities of getting one copy of E from each parent. In random mating, the probability of each allele’s getting passed to an offspring is equal to its frequency in the population, which, for E, is 0.20. The probability of inheriting E from both parents is thus p^2 = 0.20*0.20 = 0.040. Similarly, the probability of inheriting T from both parents is q^2 = 0.80 * 0.80 = 0.64. This is also the proportion of individuals having the TT genotype. There are two different ways an individual can inherit ET: E from the male parent and T from the female, or the other way around. The probability of each is pq, so the overall frequency of heterozygotes in the population is 2pq = 2*0.20*0.80 = 0.32. These frequencies should add up to 1. We have 0.04 + 0.64 + 0.32 = 1.00.
If the population remains constant at 300 individuals and random mating is assumed, the population is expected to stabilize at 0.04*300 = 12 having genotype EE, 0.64*300 = 192 with genotype TT, and 0.32*300 = 96 with genotype ET. Notice that the initial sample did not contain this random distribution of alleles.

Discuss how Beowulf and Sir Gawain might be considered Christ figures. On the other hand, how might both characters represent the journey of the Christian from lost to redeemed? What might the authors of these works be saying about Christian ideals and human nature?

Beowulf might be interpreted as a Christ figure because of his selfless bravery. When he defeats the greedy dragon as his final quest, Beowulf is fatally wounded. The dragon, as a clear representation of evil, infects Beowulf with its poison, but Beowulf does not let evil triumph. Knowing he will die anyway, Beowulf takes a risk, cutting the dragon in two. Beowulf sacrifices himself to restore peace and order to the people, just as Christ did.
Because Sir Gawain’s legends are diverse, I will focus on the most widely read of his stories, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. One could argue that Sir Gawain is a Christ figure because he is the only one among Arthur’s court brave enough to accept the Green Knight’s challenge. In the beginning of the poem, the Green Knight is fearsome and threatening, and he seems to represent some kind of mysterious evil force. Sir Gawain then learns that he is destined to be sacrificed the following year in the same Christmas game. This is similar to Christ, who knew he was destined to be crucified. Gawain willingly travels to the Green Knight’s castle when his time comes. However, Gawain experiences a moment of weakness when he takes the sash under the pretense that it will make him impervious. The Green Knight exposes Gawain’s fear when he reveals that he is really the lord of the castle and explains all was just a test. Gawain, admitting his weakness, vows to don the green sash forevermore in penance for his sin. Gawain was tempted, resisted, and then faltered in his quest, but his willingness to face the Green Knight is evidence of his selfless bravery.
Gawain certainly could represent the journey from lost to redeemed based on his weakness. Gawain’s fear of mortality shows that he might be uncertain about the afterlife, which is supposed to be a joyous transformation in Christian theology. When he promises to wear the sash forever after admitting this fear, Gawain shows that he has learned his lesson.
Beowulf, on the other hand, begins the epic as a heroic figure willing to face evil head-on. He requests permission from the King to leave the land of the Geats to rush to Hrothgar’s aid. I don’t know if his journey indicates he was lost and then redeemed.
The authors of both texts present their heroes as exceptions among most. While the majority of people in these texts prefer to sit on the sidelines when confronted with evil, Beowulf and Gawain volunteer to face it alone. All but one of Beowulf’s men abandons him on the battlefield with the dragon, showing both Beowulf’s heroic nature and the majority’s cowardice. Despite being one of the youngest knights, Sir Gawain volunteers himself to save the king. Each hero is representative of what it takes to be an exemplary Christian: courage, dedication, and humility. Both stories suggest that embodying Christian values is a tall order for mankind, but that it is possible.

At the end of Flowers for Algernon, Charlie feels good that he did something important for science, although he cannot remember what. Do you think that his experience did improve the lives of others? Do you think Nemur and Strauss will continue to experiment on other people? Should they?

I don't think that Charlie's experience improved the lives of others. Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss—especially Dr. Nemur, who was getting older—rushed into the experiment too quickly. They took advantage of Charlie's lack of intelligence and sophistication to get him to agree to brain surgery when he was unable to fully understand the risks of what he was getting into. One of the main points of the story is that the scientists were more concerned about themselves and their careers than they were about the fates of Charlie and Algernon. Charlie identifies with Algernon because he realizes that he too has simply been used by the two scientists as an experimental animal.
One can only hope that Nemur and Strauss will learn from their mistake and refrain for experimenting on humans, at least until they are much more certain of the physical and psychological repercussions of their experiments. They should, for ethical reasons, refuse to do any more experiments that could cause pain and suffering.

Who was Mr. Lorry? Why was he angry with Defarge?

Mr. Lorry is a banker who divides his time between London and Paris. When Dr. Manette is imprisoned in the Bastille, Lorry takes pity on his daughter Lucie and brings her to London to keep her safe. Over the course of the novel, Lorry develops a close bond of friendship with the Manettes and goes out of his way to help them and the people they care about. It is Lorry who hires Sydney Carton and Mr. Stryver to defend Charles Darnay in his trial for sedition.
After Dr. Manette is released from the hellhole of the Bastille, Mr. Lorry takes Lucie back to Paris to see him. Upon his release, Dr. Manette is staying in the upper room of a wine shop run by the Defarges. This is our first encounter with these characters who will play such an important role later on. Monsieur Defarge takes Lucie and Mr. Lorry up to see Dr. Manette. But as he does so, Lorry is enraged to discover that other men are already there, peeping through holes in the wall. Defarge assures Lorry that he only allows a select group of men to do this, but Lorry is not be placated. He clearly thinks it unacceptable that a man who's just spent eighteen long years inside the Bastille should be subjected to this kind of undignified scrutiny, stared at as if he were an animal in a zoo.

What is the moral of the poem?

Although death permeates every stanza of the poem like a shadow hovering over the poet and his father, “Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night” concerns life and how it should be lived. Dylan Thomas as the poem’s voice argues that those who have reached old age should not willingly consent to dying; he does not, however, denigrate death itself. Death is a “good night,” he writes, and extending the metaphor, he observes that “wise men” understand that “dark is right.” In the context of the poem, death at the conclusion of a long life is “good” and “right” because it is natural; death is not an aberration in the natural cycle of life but is instead the culmination of it. Why then should those who are old “burn and rave at close of day”? Why do the old men in the poem, those who are “wise,” “good,” “wild,” and “grave,” resist dying—and should resist, as he contends? The answer lies in how they have lived and in the regret they experience as their lives draw to a close.
Throughout the poem, being alive is associated with passion—with feeling deep emotion. It is also associated with using one’s gifts fully in the pursuit of something fine and truly remarkable. Thomas’s “wise men” and “good men” resist dying because they have not achieved what they could have achieved during their lives. His “wild men” had lived passionately as they “caught and sang the sun,” but they had failed to savor being alive, realizing “too late” their own mortality. The “grave men” resist dying because they understand with “blinding” insight that in their seriousness, they have not experienced the joy of being alive. Through the examples of these four types of men, Thomas affirms the brief and precious nature of being alive and defines how life should be lived—with passion, with joy, and with an elevating purpose not to be betrayed through inaction. Death is a “good night,” he believes, but dying should be resisted if a life, even a long life, has not been truly lived.

Explain the relationship between elements and atoms.

The relationship between elements and atoms is really quite simple: elements are made up of atoms.
More specifically, elements are made up of only one type of atom.
The element hydrogen, for example, is made up of only hydrogen atoms. Oxygen is made up of only oxygen atoms. Einsteinium (yes, there is such an element), is made up of only einsteinium atoms. And so on.
Currently, there are 118 elements on the periodic table of elements, which is that big chart with rows of colored squares with different letters and numbers that you see hanging on the wall in the science room.
The first 94 elements on the periodic table occur in nature, although some of the elements are found only in very, very small amounts. Elements like gold, silver, copper, sulfur, and carbon have been known for centuries. Other elements in the periodic table, such as einsteinium (which you already know about), seaborgium, and ununquadium (who makes up these names?), have only been synthesized (artificially created) in laboratories by mad scientists or in nuclear reactors, and some of those elements were added to the periodic table as recently as 2016.
"Great," you say. "So what's an atom?" An atom is the smallest unit of ordinary matter. In other words, an atom is the smallest thing that we put a finger on, if we had fingers small enough to touch an atom.
There are things smaller than atoms called "elementary particles," like quarks, leptons, and bosons, but good luck finding one or putting a finger on it.
Back to atoms: atoms are composed of protons, electrons, and neutrons. Protons carry a positive electrical charge and live in the nucleus (more or less the middle) of the atom. Neutrons carry no electrical charge and live with the protons in the nucleus of the atom. Electrons carry a negative electrical charge and orbit (fly around) the nucleus.
All atoms have protons and electrons. All atoms except hydrogen have neutrons. Hydrogen apparently didn't feel the need for any neutrons.
The type of atom is determined by the number of protons, neutrons, and electrons it has. As you already know, all hydrogen atoms have 1 proton, 1 electron, and zero neutrons. All oxygen atoms have 8 protons, 8 neutrons, and 8 electrons. All einsteinium atoms have 99 protons, 153 neutrons, and 99 electrons. By the way, einsteinium has no known uses, or at least none that we've discovered so far.
In summary, elements are made up of one type of atom. Atoms, the smallest unit of ordinary matter, are made up of protons, neutrons (except hydrogen), and electrons.

What is the significance of the forest?

The use of the forest as a dangerous setting for man's moral welfare is common in the writings of the early Church Fathers, such as Augustine of Hippo (354-430 CE), who notes in In Ioannem "this forest [is] so immense and full of snares and dangers." For Christian writers, the forest often becomes a metaphor for Hell or, more correctly, the absence of God. Just as a forest, dense with trees, obscures what lies before the wanderer, Dante's own moral compass spins wildly, leading the him deeper into a confused state. As many commentators on Dante's journey into the forest have noted, the forest mirrors the state of Dante's soul--lacking the light of truth and seeking the light in the wrong place.
https://www.owleyes.org/text/dantes-inferno/read/canto-1

Why did Joey act the way he did at Tangerine Middle School?

This is an interesting question about Edward Bloor's novel Tangerine, and it does not have a direct answer from the text. Readers must make inferences to determine the answers to why Joey acts the way he does at Tangerine Middle School.
The circumstances surrounding Paul's transfer to Tangerine Middle School were quite different than Joey's. Both boys had the option to transfer after the sinkhole at Lake Windsor Middle School. Paul jumped at the chance to transfer. He had no hope of being on the soccer team at Lake Windsor because of his IEP. He felt his mother ruined his life with his IEP, and transferring to Tangerine Middle was a fresh start for him. Paul was new to Florida anyway, he would have been new in any school, but that was not the case with Joey.
Joey was dealing with the tragic loss of his older brother, and that caused him to change in ways that could never be predicted. His only reason for transferring to Tangerine was because Paul asked him to, and they had become fast friends. Joey was on the soccer team at Lake Windsor, though he was not getting much playing time. His father got special permission for him to play at Tangerine after tryouts, and the other players are probably aware of this and resent him for it. Tino begins making fun of Joey for sticking so close to Paul all the time. He calls him "Charlie the Tuna" and insinuates that he has a crush on Paul. Paul is able to ignore these insults, but Joey, in his raw emotional state, is not.
Paul also reveals something on the entry dated October 3rd that insinuates that Joey could be racist or that he at least looks down on students at Tangerine Middle School for their lower socioeconomic status. Here is the exchange between Joey and Paul:

I said, "Where's Theresa?"
"Who?"
"Theresa Cruz. I told you to ask for her as a guide."
"Oh yeah. She's back at the office. I saw her there."
"What? Is she guiding someone else today?"
"Nah. I just didn't need it. What do I need a guide dog for?"
"A guide dog? You're calling Theresa a guide dog?"
Joey laughed. "C'mon man, lighten up. What? Do you think she's good looking?"
I thought about that. "Yeah. I guess I do."
Joey still had that cocky smile plastered on his face. "Then you've been here too long."
I couldn't believe what I was hearing. I just shook my head. I finally said, "I gotta tell you, you're coming in here with the wrong attitude."

What cause factions and why are they dangerous?

The danger of factions was discussed by James Madison in Federalist Paper #10. He defined a faction as a group of citizens who banded together with common goals, which if implemented would hurt the rights of other citizens or the community as a whole.
Madison writes that the cause of factionalism are inherent in human nature, because we can easily start to dislike others with different views, solely for those views. Furthermore, he writes that property ownership often creates these differing views as it divides society into groups along class lines. One example of this type of division is owners and renters. Owners want high property values and high rents and renters would prefer the opposite. This inherently sets these groups in opposition and this opposition can be inflamed into mutual dislike.
The grouping nature of factionalism is dangerous because it sets individuals in a country against each other. When this occurs, the interests of the majority will often infringe upon the rights of the minority. This leads to a situation the country is not ruled by law and is instead ruled by the whim of the people. This has historically lead to situations where the liberty, life or property is taken away from the minority. This stands in contrast to one of the generally recognized purposes of government: maintaining the rights of all for the public good.
Madison believed that the most pratical remedy for factionalism was to design the government as a republic, where citizens where represented by legislators. He also believed that this republic should have a large number of citizens with widely varied views. His hope was that the legislators could take the beliefs of the large number of citizens they represented and distill out of these beliefs the best path for the common good. In addition, he hoped that having a large number of citizens voting for each representative would reduce the likelihood that the representative had extreme views. However, this is only a bulwark against factionalism and does not stop it fully due to its strong roots in human nature.
FURTHER READING:
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa10.htm

By faction, I am assuming you mean a division within a political movement or organization that splinters from a larger group to form its own independent one.
Based on this definition, there are several reasons why factions are formed. Within a movement, there are certain individuals who might disagree with one or more of the major values or policies, inspiring them to form their own group. They could also feel like they are not being listened to, which causes frustration and the desire to form a faction. They could also disagree not with the values of the primary group but with the methods by which it tries to achieve its goals.
To answer the second part of your question, I will discuss one of two ways in which factions can be dangerous. One reason why factions could be bad is that they can tarnish the unified message of the primary group, thereby creating obstacles to achieving the group’s goals. This means that movements could fail when multiple factions exist.
Another way factions can be dangerous is in the radicalization that often accompanies factions’ ideologies. Because a faction is comprised of more like-minded individuals than a larger group, it is more likely that radical opinions or methods will become platforms of the faction. This happens because insular groups lack the diverse perspectives that tend to moderate extreme opinions. As a result, factions within the government, for example, could cause civil unrest or use violence as a means to an end.

How did the Cold War bring about reforms in the U.S. military and intelligence establishments in the 1940s and 1950s?

As tensions mounted between America and the USSR in the 1940s and 1950s, the Cold War brought about tremendous reforms in US military and intelligence establishments, as each nation raced to secure its position as the superpower of the world. While World War II was raging during the 1940s, America poured time and energy into securing its defense at home and abroad. At the forefront of military advancements was the Manhattan Project, in which scientists worked relentlessly to create an atomic bomb as a deterrent to enemy threats. Also, the US sought to form military strength in Europe with its allies by forming the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949.
The military also made great strides in improvements for airplane engines, wings, radar systems, sonar systems, ship design, submarines, tanks, and automatic weapons during the Cold War. As many military personnel and politicians viewed air power as one of the predominant advantages in modern warfare, the Air Force Academy was established in 1954. Additionally, the impetus to secure strong intelligence on America's enemies pushed American politicians to create the Central Intelligence Agency in 1947 and the National Security Agency in 1952. Clandestine activity increased tremendously, as America placed personnel around the globe in positions to spy upon its enemies. The race to space began in this same decade as both America and the USS.R. competed to place satellites and reconnaissance abilities in space.
In regards to policy and theory, America also gained a more aggressive, offensive position regarding global defense and protection during the Cold War, as the US maintained the position that Communism must be defeated and contained around the world. America's military involvement in the Korean War from 1951–1953 illustrated this political and military stance clearly. The Cold War clearly influenced American institutions, which led to tremendous advancements in military and intelligence fields.

What modern examples can you cite that show similar destruction as a result of unguided and unbridled passion? Examples should be on a national or international scale.

The downfall of Troy as depicted in The Iliad has a variety of complex causes. According to the text, hatred from the gods and intervention of priests on both sides on behalf of their nations spurred the war. But from a human standpoint, it seems that the majority of the warmongering was a result of the kidnapping and return of Helen of Troy and the ensuing events—namely, the resulting passionate hatred that the Trojans had for the Greeks.
There is a similar modern portrayal of this sort of idea: the unbridled passion and loathing of another race ultimately leading to the downfall of a nation. Nazi Germany rose from the ashes of World War I, galvanized by Hitler's manifesto and ideals, chief among which was the scapegoating of the Jews for the damages incurred after the war.
Obviously, there were other causes of Nazi Germany's destruction, and the sum total effect of the World War II was a result of much more than Germany's anti-Semitism. However, in some respects, this hatred was intertwined with many activities which led to Germany's destruction. For one, their invasion and conquest of much of Europe was fueled by a desire to rule the world and a desire to rid the world of "undesirable people." It was a very aggressive form of racism, as well as nationalist pride, that led them to believe that the ideals of Nazi Germany were the best and would lead to a utopian society. However, to reach this "utopia," they would have to rid the world of Jews, LGBTQ+ people, gypsies, and other groups they despised.
Interestingly, the Nazis operated largely undisturbed prior to their efforts at conquest. The vast majority of Europe was content to allow them to build up their own nation and even to persecute people from those aforementioned groups within their borders. It wasn't until their expansionist attack on Poland that the rest of the world became concerned. So, their unbridled passion and desire to both rule the world and rid it of certain people led to a massive war that would be their eventual destruction, much like the city of Troy in The Iliad.

Who was Jim Stuckey? How did he and Chris get along?

Jon Krakauer’s Into the Wild tells the story of Chris McCandless’s unsuccessful efforts to survive in the Alaskan wilderness, where he was discovered dead several months after he passed away. In chapter 16, Krakauer tells of McCandless’s experiences in his early days in Alaska, where he hitchhikes along the Alaska Highway and is picked up sequentially by two different men: Gaylen Stuckey and Jim Gallien.
Chris meets Gaylen Stuckey at a hot springs. Although initially apprehensive about picking up a hitchhiker, Stuckey decides to give Chris a lift in his RV. Stuckey likes Chris and, hearing about his issues with his father, urges him to let his parents know his whereabouts. Chris travels with him for several days, until they reach Stuckey’s destination of Fairbanks.
Jim Gallien is discussed in several earlier chapters of the book as well, because he was most likely the last person to see Chris alive. After picking up the hitchhiker—who called himself “Alex”—outside Fairbanks, Gallien took him to Denali National Park. He tried to convince him to get more of the gear he would need and that the timing was wrong for a wilderness trek, as there was still more than a foot of snow on the ground. Realizing that Chris was adamant, he gave him a sandwich and some old boots and dropped him off at a trailhead. No further sightings of Chris alive were reported.

What is process vs content in therapy?

Process and content are two pieces to an overall idea of therapy and are also their own versions of therapy altogether. Process therapy deals with the actions and process, both of how something came to be (such as a negative reaction or experience) and how to resolve it (what steps need to be taken). Content therapy, focuses instead on the event or object—the content. Essentially it is a focus on the actual problem, and the therapy is revolved around confronting the issue and accepting it in order to move on.
For example, process therapy would deal with how someone came to have anxiety by addressing the stresses in the individual's life from a young age and then make a path forward to address those stresses and fix the problem. Content therapy, however, decides to address the fact that you are anxious and come to terms with that situation. By accepting it, the content therapist will be able to help them find rational ways of confronting it or working around it but in a different way than process therapists would.

Process refers to the nature of the relationship between interacting individuals. This can be seen in the subtext of the conversation between two individuals, or in groups. To fully understand the subtext, or the ‘process’, of a client or a group, therapists need to also have a sense of the each person in the interaction. This can be seen through the client’s inflection, tone, and behavior. Essentially, process is “what does the content delivery say about the interpersonal relationship of the participants?”

Content is the explicit words being spoken by the person. This includes the issues the clients bring in. The diagnostic aspects of the therapeutic relationship can be considered content. This also includes information about the client, such as their occupation, their education, etc. Therapists tend to specialize in various types of content, for example depression or trauma.

Essentially, content refers to “what” the client is saying, and process refers to “why” or “how” they are saying it. Therapists need to use both content and process in each session to get a full understanding of the client. For example, if a client says “Why do you need to know that?” The content is a question. But the process could be avoidance to the question the therapist is asking, it could be resistance to therapy or the therapist, or it could be genuine curiosity on the client’s part.

Process therapy is related to actions (versus what is going on in a clinical patient's mind, or what the expectations and goals motivating his or her behavior are). Content therapy examines how the patient's situation is delivered as a narrative (i.e., what is the ostensible problem and motivating force—physical hunger, pain, social needs, etc.). What a patient tells the therapist is the relevant content. What is motivating to engage in or subject themselves to such behaviors is the process. Ideally, therapists address both the content and processes of a patient's circumstances, and neither to the exclusion of the other. Therapists aim to give patients tools to address the expectations and motivators that result in certain behaviors with process-based therapy, while also identifying the specific problems (content) which the patient is combating.
Content is "what" of a discussion, argument, relationship, etc. Process is the "why" or "how," these dynamics manifest themselves. Generally, process-based therapy is helpful when patients themselves may themselves not be able to identify the reasons for certain behaviors.

Does John Locke (Second Treatise of Government) regard women as equally free by nature or as naturally subordinate to men?

Be aware that Enlightenment thinkers tended to view women as collectively inferior to men in terms of temperament and capability (as did Europeans during the Enlightenment in general). The inequality between the sexes is a common theme within the Enlightenment, and it was defended and reified in the Enlightenment's appeal to reason, through which writers and philosophers could construct arguments and schemas of classification, further supporting the sexism which underlined Early Modern society. With this in mind, we should not be surprised to find Locke mirroring those same underlying sexist assumptions which the vast majority of Enlightenment thinkers tended to support.
Part of what's tricky about your question is that Locke himself doesn't talk all that much about women in the Second Treatise (though that silence in itself is very telling). That being said, you should consider that this entire treatise was centered upon the question of how "civil society" has come into being, and in the Early Modern Context, civil society was dominated by men. If Locke were to have supported the natural equality of the sexes, it would have raised critical questions and criticisms about the inequalities present in his own society, but he is notably silent on that account. Furthermore, consider that Locke's writing is itself dominated by gendered language.
Finally, I want to note that, while he does not speak much about women in particular, there are several places were he does make comments that adhere closely with Enlightenment assumptions as to the natural inequalities of the two sexes. In his First Treatise, for example, he states the following:

God, in this text, gives not . . . any authority to Adam over Eve, or to men over their wives, but only foretells what should be the woman's lot, how by his providence he would order it so, that she should be subject to her husband, as we see that generally the laws of mankind and customs of nations have ordered it so; and there is, I grant, a foundation in nature for it. (chapter 5)

Later, he reiterates this same theme in the Second Treatise, in its seventh chapter. Here he discusses what he considers the "first society"—that being between husband and wife. However, this should be understood as something separate from and ultimately transcending large-scale civil society because this particular relationship had the effect of ensuring the continued survival of the human species. This is, for Locke, the first and most fundamental of relationships, and he views it as unequal:

But the husband and wife, though they have but one common concern, yet having different understandings, will unavoidably sometimes have different wills too; it therefore being necessary that the last determination, i. e. the rule, should be placed somewhere; it naturally falls to the man's share, as the abler and the stronger." (chapter 7)

To conclude, it does seem that Locke holds many of the same assumptions which were common in the Early Modern Era as to the inherent inequalities between men and women.

Why do you think Shakespeare chose to include Lady Macduff's murder in the play Macbeth?

In Macbeth, Shakespeare tells the story of a madman’s descent into evil in the pursuit of power. Macbeth, the title character, learns of a prophecy that says he will become the King of Scotland. To secure his ascension to the throne, Macbeth, at the urging of his wife, murders the current ruler, King Duncan. Duncan’s son Malcolm flees to England to raise an army, and Macbeth goes to Scone to be crowned King of Scotland. Macduff, the Thane of Fife, flees Scotland when Macbeth becomes king because he fears for his life. In escaping, Macduff leaves his family and castle unguarded, and Macbeth has both his wife and son murdered.
Macbeth’s slow descent into madness and murder shows the audience a cautionary tale about the dangers of power. Lady Macduff stands as one of the principal characters of high moral fiber in the play. When her husband flees to England, Lady Macduff asks hard questions about why he would run from danger and leave his family—she calls out failure and argues for what is right. In having her create that argument, Shakspeare is making her a foil to Lady Macbeth, who urges her husband to do evil.
The death of Lady Macduff shows the depravity of Macbeth in high relief. She is a good person, and she does what is right—she is ultimately innocent of any crime—but Macbeth has her murdered anyway because she and her husband might stand in the way of his claim to the throne. Shakespeare includes Lady Macduff to show the moral dangers of power grabs and the lengths of Macbeth’s tyranny.
As a result of her murder, Macduff eventually faces down Macbeth in battle and kills him. Macduff, though he is the one to oppose Macbeth in the end, feels immense guilt for leaving his wife and son to die—and Lady Macduff calls out his failings very vocally in act 4, scene 2 of the play. Macduff’s penance, revenge on Macbeth, makes evident the role of Lady Macduff as a moral compass in the play.

Who was the old friend Holden made at Elkton Hills?

Elkton Hills is one of many schools that Holden attends before winding up at Pencey Prep. Like all the schools he attends, it's a place that Holden cordially loathes, not least because—surprise, surprise—it's full of "phonies." According to Holden, the biggest phony of all at Elkton Hills was Headmaster Mr. Haas, whom he describes as ten times worse than Dr. Thurmer, head of Pencey Prep.
While at Elkton Hills, Holden didn't make any friends, but he did have a lot of time for a classmate of his called James Castle. James was a nice guy who Holden set apart from all the "phonies." Holden only talked to him once, and that was when he lent him his turtleneck sweater. James was wearing that sweater when he threw himself out of a window to his death to escape a gang of bullies.
Seeing James's bloody, broken corpse lying on the ground outside affected Holden deeply, dramatically changing his whole outlook on life. Ever since that terrible, traumatic day, when he saw what can happen to someone who dares to stand up to the "phonies" by whom he's constantly surrounded, Holden has often contemplated following James's example by committing suicide.

What do you consider to be the aims of science? Justify your decision as fully as you can.

The main aim of science is to gain a better understanding about the natural world and how it works. The base goal of science is to gain knowledge about why things are the way they are and how they got to be that way. An example of this might be scientists looking to understand how the Earth formed.
Science has also evolved with goals in which we work to apply the knowledge that we gain from science. For example, technology is developed and science is used to prevent certain things from happening or to predict what might happen in the future. We can use science to gain an understanding about how diseases develop and then use what is learned about these diseases to work towards methods to treat or prevent them.
An important component of science is that it is always evolving. Scientists are continually testing theories and looking to gain a better understanding of how things work. This goes back to the scientific method of creating a hypothesis and testing it, then replicating the experiment to continue to prove or disprove the hypothesis or determine which other factors might be involved.
https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/whatisscience_04

Explain why Papa started the fire in Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry by Mildred D. Taylor.

In chapter 12 of Mildred D. Taylor’s Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry, the Logan family faces many obstacles and challenges due to the racism of their white neighbors. The Logan childrens’ friend, T. J., is no exception to this unfairness, though he does at times attempt to use it to his advantage and to the detriment of the Logan children. At one point, he even tries to get their mother, a teacher in their school, in trouble. This backfires, causing him to lose his friends at school—in particular, his best friend, Stacey Logan.
T. J. begins hanging out with two white boys, unaware they are using him. He finds himself an unwitting accomplice to murder during a robbery, which he is fully blamed for. A lynch mob comes after him, and he turns to Stacey for help. In order to save T. J. and Stacey, Papa sets his own fields on fire. This causes the white men to have to stop searching for T. J. while they put out the fire. Unfortunately, it doesn’t mean that T. J. is completely safe. He goes to jail, where we are left unsure of his fate. It is believed he will end up on a chain gang or executed for the crime.

When was Of Mice and Men published?

Of Mice and Men was published in 1937.

How is Romeo affected by Balthasar’s news?

In act 5, scene 1 of Romeo and Juliet, Balthasar brings his master, Romeo, the terrible news of Juliet's death. Juliet isn't actually dead, but after taking Friar Lawrence's potion that's put her into a deep sleep, it appears to everyone that she is indeed dead. In any case, Romeo is utterly devastated at the news, as we might expect—but he's also defiant. He rails against the bad fortune that has brought about what he thinks is the death of his beloved:

Then I defy you, stars!

Defiance soon turns to resolve as Romeo determines that he will head back to Verona that very night, kill himself, and lie next to Juliet. He says he knows of a shabby old pharmacist in Mantua who'll be able to make him a batch of deadly poison. Wasting no time, Romeo heads off to see the pharmacist and demands that he sell him the most lethal poison he has. The pharmacist is reluctant to do so, as he'll be breaking the law. But he's also incredibly poor, and Romeo's money is too tempting to turn down.

In the novel The Outsiders, what was learned and what was the effect that was important to Johnny and Ponyboy?

The Outsiders is a coming of age story in which Ponyboy develops perspective on life and significantly matures by the end of the novel. At the beginning of the story, Ponyboy is a relatively naive, immature adolescent, who believes that Darry does not love him and is unable to accurately judge and perceive Dally Winston. Pony also struggles to overcome the negative reputation attached to being a Greaser and laments the fact that society considers him lousy without understanding him. After Johnny kills Bob Sheldon in self-defense, the two boys are forced to hide out in an abandoned church in Windrixville, where they become even closer friends and rely on each other for support.
One morning, Ponyboy watches the sunrise with Johnny and recites the well-known Robert Frost poem "Nothing Gold Can Stay" but is unable to interpret its meaning. Later on, the boys return to their hideout after eating with Dally, only to discover that the church is on fire and children are trapped inside. Ponyboy and Johnny proceed to run into the burning building and save each child. Tragically, Johnny is mortally wounded during the event and is placed in critical condition. At the hospital, Ponyboy sees Darry crying and finally understands that he truly loves him. Following the big rumble, Johnny dies and Dally loses his mind. Ponyboy ends up witnessing Johnny and Dally's deaths and is severely traumatized by the experience.
Eventually, Ponyboy discovers a letter Johnny wrote to him before he passed away, which elaborates on the Robert Frost poem and encourages him to remain innocent and hopeful ("Stay gold"). After reading Johnny's letter, Ponyboy experiences a dramatic transformation and realizes that it is important to share his story with other adolescents who are considered outsiders. He repairs his relationship with Darry and understands the importance of never losing hope or his childhood innocence. Both Johnny and Ponyboy learn the importance of remaining "gold" and holding onto the pure elements of life despite their surrounding environment.

What theme is in The Great Gatsby, Hamlet, Death of a Salesman, and Slaughterhouse-Five?

The main theme of The Great Gatsby is the death of the American Dream, with that dream's focus on exploration, individuality, and the pursuit of happiness. In Gatsby's world (and, arguably, the author's mind), these things have long been forgotten, and the reality is all about relaxed social morals, social class wars, and the pursuit of easy money.
Hamlet is, on the face of it, a revenge play, but there's more lurking beneath the surface, as indicated by Hamlet's famous soliloquy "To be or not to be. . . ." The overall theme is the uncertainty of life and death—and how each individual must try to navigate these uncertainties on his or her own.
Death of a Salesman is also largely about uncertainty and an individual's identity crisis. It's the story of what happens when a man is unable to accept the changes that are occurring within and around him.
The main theme of Slaughterhouse-Five is the nonsensical nature of war and violence. It is the story of an individual who has been so affected by his horrific experiences in World War II that he has come "unstuck in time."
Indeed, all four of these works deal with changes that are occurring around and within the main characters and how the main characters navigate—or fail to navigate—through them.

How do the past events in Scrooge's life influence his personality in Stave 1?

The Scrooge is Stave I is a bitter, reclusive person who is disillusioned with humanity and has turned all his attention to making and hoarding money. We learn, as we travel with Scrooge and the Ghost of Christmas Past into Scrooge's former life, that the choices Scrooge once made formed the person he has become.
We realize as we watch Scrooge's response to Fezziwig's long ago Christmas dance that Scrooge was not born a miserable person. At one time, he enjoyed a good party. To this day, he looks fondly on the sociable, generous Fezziwig. We also learn that Scrooge was once in love and about to marry.
Scrooge threw all that away by becoming obsessed with making money. We realize, as we witness his long-ago breakup with his fiancee, that he has taken a basic truth—that all people have material needs and are respected for being wealthy—to an extreme. He has started to use people and love things, not vice versa. He has put getting rich ahead of simple virtues like love, generosity, and kindness. As he gradually isolates himself, he becomes more and more bitter and withdrawn until, by the time the story opens, he has forgotten what it is like to live a normal life with other people.
Now, however, seeing the past, Scrooge's long-frozen emotions begin to soften and thaw, and he begins to have regrets over the decisions he made as he is reminded of how much happier he once was. He realizes he might like to be more like the generous Fezziwg and to have some of the love he threw away back in his life.

In the poem, how does the speaker's wrath affect his friend and his enemy individually?

The speaker's wrath hardly affects his friend because he "told [his] wrath," and so "[his] wrath did end." Evidently, he talked to his friend about his anger, and, as a result, his anger subsided. However, with his foe, he "told it not," and so "[his] wrath did grow." He continued to harbor his wrath, holding a grudge against his enemy rather than discussing it as he did with his friend. He tended that wrath as one might a prized plant: he watered it with his fears and tears, and he sunned it by being deceitful. It seems, then, that he not only did not speak about his wrath, but he actually hid it and lied to his enemy's face. As a result of all the attention and care he gave his wrath, it grew into something truly harmful and, ultimately, took the life of his enemy. We can see, then, how short-lived anger can be when we simply talk about our feelings and give the other person a chance to make it right, like the speaker does with his friend; conversely, we see how dangerous wrath can be when we hold it in, keeping grudges, and nursing our anger against another, as the speaker does with his enemy.

In Blake's "The Poison Tree," the narrator expresses his wrath to his friend. Because the narrator (the "persona") has verbalized his anger and unburdened himself, the anger goes away.
With his enemy, however, it is a different story. This time, the narrator doesn't express his anger. Instead, he lets it fester, and, as result, it grows. As the poem says, the narrator "waters" his anger with his fears. By pretending that everything is alright and by smiling at his enemy when he really feels furious, the narrator grows his wrath.
The wrath the narrator feels and nurtures produces a poisonous, deceptive fruit that kills his enemy.
The moral of the poem is that it is better for us to let our anger out before it can grow out of proportion and become poisonous.

Despite Wilson's rhetoric of freedom and democracy, there were restrictions placed on freedom during World War I. Explain how and why.

Despite Woodrow Wilson’s rhetoric of freedom and democracy after the atrocities of World War I, he signed legislation into law that placed restrictions on freedoms and civil liberties before the end of the war. The Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918 effectively criminalized speaking out against the government, conveying false reports or false statements with an intent to sabotage an American military operation, and using disloyal and profane language about a form of government in the United States.
After World War I, leaders from Allied nations met at Versailles, France, to draft the Treaty of Versailles in an effort to bring stability to Europe. When the “Big Four” (David Lloyd of England, Georges Clemenceau of France, Vittorio Orlando of Italy, and Woodrow Wilson of the United States) met at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 to discuss the provisions of the treaty, Wilson was vocal about his desire be gentle and compassionate toward Germany. However, Clemenceau, aptly nicknamed “The Tiger,” wanted to punish Germany for their aggression during the war. Wilson argued that punishing Germany would be counterproductive in that the Germans might seek revenge later and spark conflict.
Wilson presented the committee with his plan for peace, known as the Fourteen Points. His vision was the creation of a worldwide alliance that would use diplomacy to solve problems in an effort to avoid future wars. In Wilson’s mind, World War I was so horrible that the world could not endure another war of its magnitude. As part of the Fourteen Points, Wilson called for an end to secret alliances, a reduction of armaments and militarism, a reduction of trade and economic barriers, a reduction of colonial holdings, and a respect for nationalist movements and self-determination around the world so as to reduce ethnic and religious conflict that could cause future wars. This idyllic alliance of countries would be known as the League of Nations.
Wilson’s advocacy for goodwill in constructing the treaty was drowned out by the other members of the conference, and Germany was forced to accept blame for the destruction of the war, limit the size of its army, pay reparations to Europe, and give back the territories of Alsace and Lorraine to France. Although the treaty was ultimately rather harsh to Germany, many leaders did like Wilson’s overall idea for the League of Nations, and they agreed to join. Wilson was pleased that some of his Fourteen Points had been accepted. When he returned to America, he presented the idea to Congress for a formal admittance of the US into the league. Congress said no. In the spirit of George Washington, they did not want to enter into foreign entanglements with Europe.
Interestingly, while Wilson advocated for peace, democracy, and diplomacy overseas, he had passed acts restricting the civil liberties of Americans at home during the war. The Espionage Act of 1917 effectively criminalized speaking out against the government or conveying false reports or false statements with an intent to sabotage an American military operation. The censorship clauses in the act were a direct response to resistance to the draft and were used to stop dissent or insubordination against the government. Those who were deemed as breaking the new law could be fined a maximum of $10,000 or imprisoned for twenty years, but not both. The act also gave the Postmaster General the authority to refuse mail to publications that violated the act’s terms. In fact, seventy-five publications lost their mailing privileges under the law.
This act was followed up by the Sedition Act of 1918, which punished those using disloyal and profane language about a form of government in the United States. The courts brought the Sedition Act under the name of the Espionage Act, forming the amendments called the Sedition Act. Ultimately, the Sedition Act amendments were repealed in 1920, but some provisions remain to this day.
Pieces of the provisions that still remain were upheld by the Supreme Court several times, supporting the idea that free speech can be limited during wartime if that speech presents a “clear and present danger” to the government action. For example, in Schenck v. United States (1919), the Supreme Court ruled that Schenck, an anti-war activist and socialist, had broken the law by disseminating anti-war pamphlets to men who were eligible for the draft. The court ruled that charging Shenck did not violate Schenck’s civil liberties, because his actions had harmed the American war effort and thus endangered the nation. Likewise, socialist presidential candidate Eugene Debs was arrested in 1918 for protesting the draft as well. Although he was sentenced to ten years in prison, his sentence was eventually commuted and he was able to continue his political career.
Overall, Wilson’s desperate desire for global peace, while also advocating for legislation that suspended habeas corpus during times of war, can be seen as hypocrisy, or it can be seen as two goals toward the same end. Wilson may have envisioned a world in which peace and democracy could only be preserved if everyone adhered to a common good that relinquished some freedoms in order to support a social contract that was expertly designed.
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1914-1920/league

https://immigrationtounitedstates.org/482-espionage-and-sedition-acts-of-1917-1918.html

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/u-s-congress-passes-sedition-act

How does Jiro act like a leader?

Among other things, The Master Puppeteer is a coming-of-age story. Over the course of the story, Jiro matures considerably, overcoming many obstacles and much adversity in his journey to manhood. Yet early on, Jiro already shows the skills and aptitudes one normally associates with leadership. His family are dirt poor and on the brink of starvation. Jiro seizes the initiative and runs away to the theater, where he hopes to be able to help out his family by becoming an apprentice. In doing so, he's effectively taking over the leadership of his family from his poor, incapable parents.
Jiro's leadership skills are much in evidence later on in the story when he stands guard at the theater to protect it from an angry, starving mob, the so-called "night rovers." Even more courageously, Jiro plunges headlong into a full-scale riot to rescue his mother and Kinshi and lead them back to the relative safety of the theater.

How do I link the themes of Revolutionary Road by Richard Yates and The Beautiful and Damned by F. Scott Fitzgerald?

Both novels are concerned with the empty values and self-absorption of two young American couples. While F. Scott Fitzgerald treats early 20th-century and post- World War I, Jazz Age New York, Richard Yates’ novel is set in the materialistic, post-World War II suburbs. Both novels, in different periods and concerned with different classes, showcase the empty side of the American dream.
Anthony and Gloria, the couple in The Beautiful and the Damned, are trying to live carelessly on Anthony’s ample family-provided income and, even more, the expectation of riches to be inherited from Anthony’s grandfather. In their minds they are freed from the worries of earning a living, so they live far too lavishly, and his grandfather disinherits him. Anthony cannot escape wartime military service, which furthers his destruction. Finding that her beauty is fading, Gloria wonders how they will make a living.
Frank and April, who live on Revolutionary Road in Connecticut, have two children. They consider their suburban existence somewhat beneath them, as Frank aspires to a better position in his company. April, an artistic soul who is dreadfully unhappy as a suburban matron, persuades Frank to take a last stab at a more carefree existence and move the whole family to France. Unwilling to give up the plan when she becomes pregnant, April dies from a botched abortion.

What is ownlife in 1984?

In 1984, "ownlife" is the word for solitude. It means wanting to do your own thing, separate from communal Party activities. As the novel explains, every moment a Party member is not working, sleeping, or eating, he or she is supposed to be involved in a communal activity. For a Party member, even taking a walk alone is suspect. The government considers it dangerous, odd, and individualistic to be by oneself.
In our world, "ownlife," which implies living your own life on your own terms, is a positive way of being, one many people aspire to. But in Oceania it is a borderline illegal activity, the kind of behavior that can get a person noticed and in trouble with the Thought Police. Therefore, when Winston decides to wander around London by himself on a warm April evening rather than go the "Centre" and drink gin with other Party members, it is no wonder he thinks about "ownlife" and the risky path he is taking.

In Oceania, Party members are required to attend community functions and volunteer their free time at the Community Centre, where attendance is carefully tracked. In principle, a Party member is expected to have no free time. Big Brother wishes for Party members to always be at work or taking part in some kind of communal recreation when they are not eating or sleeping. Winston Smith mentions that any indication of solitude is slightly dangerous. In Newspeak, the term for individualism and eccentricity is called OWNLIFE. If a Party member were to continually miss communal functions or even be caught roaming the streets by themselves, they could be arrested and charged with OWNLIFE. It is important to remember that in Oceania, individuality does not exist, and citizens' lives are solely dedicated to Big Brother. Winston Smith knows that his actions are dangerous and must be careful to avoid being accused of OWNLIFE.

What are some interesting interpretations for Mrs. Sparsit's staircase, something that will just blow the examiner away?

Dickens’s specific, satirical writing style is widely known for its uniqueness and ability to entertain the reader. Furthermore, it is also quite detailed, picturesque, and often poetic and, as such, doesn’t require an in-depth analysis of the plot in order to understand the point. When it comes to his characters and the narration, Dickens tends to keep it simple and avoids complex descriptions that carry a deeper meaning. However, in his sociological novel Hard Times, Dickens chose to incorporate a plethora of symbols and metaphors and thus create a captivating tale. One apt example of this is Mrs. Sparsit’s Staircase.
Mrs. Sparsit’s Staircase is the tenth chapter of Book II: Reaping. In it, Mrs. Sparsit—an unkind and jealous woman with a manipulative nature, creates an imaginary staircase that represents the interesting relationship between Gradgrind’s daughter Louisa and James Harthouse. Even though she is married to Mr. Bounderby, Louisa finds herself getting closer and closer to Mr. Harthouse. Mrs. Sparsit, being enamored with Mr. Bounderby herself, is a silent watcher from the sidelines and desperately hopes that Louisa will eventually act on her desires and cheat on her husband. The staircase she envisions in her mind is a symbol of the gradual fall and degeneration of Louisa’s morality and her path towards sin and adultery.

Now, Mrs. Sparsit was not a poetical woman; but she took an idea in the nature of an allegorical fancy, into her head. Much watching of Louisa, and much consequent observation of her impenetrable demeanor, which keenly whetted and sharpened Mrs. Sparsit’s edge, must have given her as it were a lift, in the way of inspiration. She erected in her mind a mighty Staircase, with a dark pit of shame and ruin at the bottom; and down those stairs, from day to day and hour to hour, she saw Louisa coming.

What is interesting about this allegory is the fact that Dickens gives Louisa a choice. When walking down Mrs. Sparsit’s metaphorical staircase, Louisa is always in control of her body and her emotions. She doesn’t hesitate, she doesn’t doubt her desires, nor does she question her ability to make rational decisions. She walks down the steps willingly and has every opportunity to stop and walk back up, or in other words, to put a stop to her near love affair with Mr. Harthouse. She may be wooed by a not so honorable man, but no one is compelling her to commit sin and adultery; she walks the path on her own free will, much to the pleasure of Mrs. Sparsit.
Although she comes close to cheating on her husband with Mr. Harthouse, Louisa never quite reaches the bottom of the stairs and never begins an actual relationship with him. Instead, she chooses to return to her father, which means that she neither walked down the stairs towards a sinful affair with Mr. Harthouse, nor walked up the stairs to an unhappy marriage to Mr. Bounderby. With her decision to go back home, separated from both her husband and her almost lover, Louisa destroys Mrs. Sparsit’s imaginary staircase and manages to save what is left from her honor and morality and redeem herself of sin.

Who does Gary live with in Woodsong?

Gary lives with his wife in rural Minnesota. Though a reasonably successful writer, he has to take on extra jobs to make ends meet. One such job involves trapping beaver, as the state of Minnesota at that time had something of a beaver overpopulation problem.
As well as trapping the little critters, Gary's able to make a bit of money on the side selling beaver pelt. This is what starts him off on the intrepid sledding adventures that will form the main action of the book. For Gary needs to be able to run a team of dogs if he's to travel across the snow, trapping beaver out there in the snowy wilderness. At first, Gary inevitably makes a bit of a hash of things; driving a team of dogs is a lot harder than it looks. But eventually, Gary becomes more skillful and confident as he gains experience, and it's this growing confidence that encourages him to contemplate participating in the famous Iditarod ice race.

What do you think will be the potential ramification of Rashida Tlaib's election as the first Muslim woman to congress and the potential impact on the institution?

Michigan Democrat Rashida Tlaib has won a midterm election to become one of the first Muslim women elected to Congress. The Democratic Socialists of America, a burgeoning left-wing group, endorses her. Rashida was elected without opposition, to replace John Conyers, who stepped down following allegations of sexual misconduct.
The eldest daughter of Palestinian immigrants, Tlaib became the first Muslim woman in Michigan's Legislature a decade ago. She served from 2008 to 2014, before reaching term limits. During her tenure, she helped to secure millions of dollars for free health clinics, Meals on Wheels programs for seniors, and school education funds. She authored laws to protect homeowners and stop scrap metal thieves. Tlaib's victory symbolizes the systematic build-up of political power.
An attorney at the Sugar Law Center for Economic and Social Justice and a single mother of two boys, Tlaib prefers to view her faith as one of the many aspects of her identity. She supports a minimum-wage policy, medical insurance for all, and the abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement law. Her priorities are equal pay rules for women, immigration reforms, environment protection, and promoting higher education.
Rashida believes that walls do not work. She does not intend to pander to any community or faith. She believes in the policy of inclusion and attributes her victory to her ability to connect with the needs of a population who wish to be governed by progressive candidates.
Tlaib's achievement is symbolic of a rise of female representation in the Congress. It is likely to encourage more women to enter the US political space. Tlaib's victory comes at a time when anti-Muslim sentiments are rife in America. It indicates a departure from the anti-Muslim discourse. It becomes apparent that issues, not individuals, are key concerns to Americans. As a Congresswoman, Tlaib's responsibility is to be the voice of Muslim-Americans and counter the sentiment of Islamophobia.
Tlaib is the first member of the Arab-American activist cadre to break deep into the political mainstream. The Palestinian community expects her to give voice to Palestinian rights in the Congress. But the political reality is that Tlaib is supported by JStreetPAC, a pro-Israel organization. The endorsement comes if one does not challenge US military aid to Israel, and supports a two-state solution. Thus, Tlaib supports the U.S. policy of supplying military aid that Israel uses to kill thousands of Palestinians. The idea of opposing aid to Israel would not work for the Congress. It would not work for Tlaib's political career either.
Conditioning aid to Israel according to human rights may be a goal worth striving. It may not be possible for Tlaib and her colleagues to achieve this goal in two years. But she could initiate the groundwork for such a position in the long-term.

What happened to Alice when she drank from the bottle in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland?

After Alice finds a tiny key and fits it into the tiny lock of a 15-inch-high door, she peers inside and sees a beautiful garden. She wishes she could get through it, but even her head is too big. On the same table where she had found the key, she then notices a bottle which she is sure was not there before. Around its neck is a printed label that reads "Drink me." Alice is suspicious and takes time to ascertain that it is not also labeled "Poison." As it is not, she tastes the contents. The "very nice" flavor reminds her of:

cherry-tart, custard, pine-apple, roast turkey, toffee, and hot buttered toast.

Alice immediately starts to feel odd and realizes she is shrinking. She is getting her wish that she could "shut up like a telescope" to get through the door. She shrinks down to 10 inches high, which makes her happy because she will be able to reach the garden. She is soon reassured that she will not shrink any more, as she was a bit worried that she would keep shrinking down:

". . . it might end, you know," said Alice to herself, "in my going out altogether, like a candle."
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rgs/alice-I.html

What details in the physical description of Zaroff foreshadow the truth about his nature?

When Rainsford initially arrives at General Zaroff's impressive chateau, Zaroff descends the steps and immediately recognizes his guest as a renowned hunter. Rainsford's first impression of General Zaroff is that he is "singularly handsome." However, Rainsford also notices that there is some bizarre quality about the general's face. General Zaroff is then described as being a tall man with vivid white hair and a black pointy mustache. He is also described as having the face of an aristocrat, with very black and bright eyes. Rainsford also describes Zaroff's face as being dark and resembling a man used to giving orders. Judging from Rainsford's description, the bizarre, dark, and resolute appearance of General Zaroff's face foreshadows his twisted, maniacal nature. The words "bizarre," "dark," and "black as the night" are ominous and reflect General Zaroff's deranged personality. When Rainsford finally dines with the general, he discovers that Zaroff hunts humans on the island in order to satisfy his desire to hunt competitive prey.

During one full day, every time somebody asks, "How are you?" or "How's it going?" stop and actually give a complete, truthful answer. What happens when you respond to a polite question in an honest way? Listen to how people respond, and also watch their body language. What can you conclude? Be sure to include elements you learned in this chapter (idealization, Thomas Theorem) in your response.

This seems like an interesting experiment and I wish you luck with your responses.

The key is to recall the theories mentioned. In the Thomas theorem, the point is is to believe that "if men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences." You know that the person inquiring how you are doing is just offering a pleasant greeting, akin to saying hello. By providing a truthful answer on your health or general well-being, you are defining the surface question as a real question and acting accordingly.
Similarly, in sociology, idealization involves projecting or believing that our actions embody the values of an ideal culture, rather than serving selfish motives.
By assuming your asker really cares about you, you are suggesting that mutual concern, rather than lazy conversation, is occurring. You might want to craft an answer that you offer consistently to everyone so that you have a control for your experiment. Perhaps you could prepare a positive, but seemingly truthful, response to see how your respondents behave. Rather than merely saying you are "fine," elaborate as though you assumed the person really wanted details. Alternatively, if you think you will be able to experiment with a lot of people, have two answers—one positive and one negative—to see if you can assess changes in others' body language as they first receive an answer they didn't expect and then listen to either a positive or negative answer. Be sure both sound truthful, though.

What do we have to keep in mind when utilizing literary theory in order to evaluate "Meeting at Night"?

"Meeting at Night" seems to be a simple love poem of twelve adventure-filled lines, yet critics have found significant comment, within these twelve simple lines, about Victorian society and culture and about the poetic persona's personal struggles. How much information the poem gives up depends—as with all literature—upon the literary theory used to approach analysis of its twelve lines. Analysis of "Meeting at Night" is made more complex because, being the first half of a pair of poems—with "Parting at Morning" forming the second half—a theme made evident in the second poem can seep over and influence analysis of the first. Whether this is correct literary analysis or not depends, again, upon the critical literary theory used to approach it.
Essentials of Literature's Theoretical Approaches
There are essentially two kinds of critical literary theoretical approaches. The first kind of theoretical approach is concerned primarily with the text itself, while the second is concerned primarily with externals, such as history, society, culture, and biography. These two basic kinds of theoretical approaches can be combined in various ways or can be used exclusively. To illustrate, Formalism uses exclusively text and Marxism uses Marxist theory to produce literary analysis, while New Historicism uses a combination of text, social, cultural, historical and biographical issues to produce literary analysis. Application of different theoretical approaches to a literary work, like "Meeting at Night," can yield sometimes very different results.

What specific aspects show that this movie was set during the Great Depression?

One scene that shows that this story happens during the Great Depression occurs about fourteen minutes into the movie. In this scene Atticus is tucking Scout into bed. She asks to see his pocket watch, and he explains that one day the pocket watch will be given to Jem. Scout asks what she will get one day. He responds,

"I don't know that I have much else of value that belongs to me. But there's a pearl necklace, there's a ring that belonged to your mother. And I've put them away, and they're to be yours."

Atticus, though a lawyer, does not have much money; he has very few valuable possessions because this story takes place during the Great Depression.
Another scene occurs at approximately three minutes and twenty seconds. The narrator (an adult Scout) explains that in the town of Maycomb, Alabama, in 1932 there was

no hurry, for there was nowhere to go and nothing to buy and no money to buy it with.

The townspeople are very poor because the story happens during the Great Depression. People have to entertain themselves without spending money.
As she explains this, the focus turns away from the narrating voice and to a young actress who is playing six-year-old Scout Finch. Mr. Cunningham approaches her house trying to quietly leave some hickory nuts as repayment for Atticus Finch (her father). Again, this shows that farmers have very little money, since he has no way to offer Atticus payment other than produce from his crops. Mr. Cunningham greets Atticus politely and then leaves; Atticus realizes that Mr. Cunningham is embarrassed that he has to pay for his legal work with goods (rather than money), and he asks Scout not to fetch him next time Mr. Cunningham comes by. Scout asks if Mr. Cunningham is poor; Atticus says he is. She then asks if their own family is poor. This time, Atticus says that they are, but not as poor as the Cunningham family. He explains that the Cunninghams are farmers and that

"the crash hit them the hardest."

This reference to the Stock Market crash of 1929 (The Wall Street Crash) again shows that the movie is set during the Great Depression.

What did Milo tell Tock that he wanted to do if they ever got out of prison?

When the Spelling Bee and Humbug have an altercation in the marketplace, scrambled words are lying everywhere. The policeman holds Milo and Tock responsible for a large number of infractions, including mincing words; boy and dog are sentenced to 6 million years—supposedly a short sentence—and taken off to the dungeon. Milo has not been a fan of spelling or definitions, but this experience teaches him that words can be important. He frets to Tock that time will pass slowly as they don’t even have any crayons, but he still thinks about what he will do if they ever get out. This experience has taught him how much trouble can result from mixing up words and the importance of spelling. If he is released, he says to the Watchdog, he will be sure to learn all about words.
https://books.google.com/books?id=kxcXm_Q9csEC&source=gbs_navlinks_s