Give examples (other than slavery) of how it is wrong to accept something just because that is how things have always been done. (See below)A...

When a society has been doing things in one way for a long
period of time, people come to believe, without having to think about it, that that way
of doing things is morally right.  They will tend to defend it simply because it is
traditional, because that is how things have always been
done.

You mention that we should not use slavery to answer
this, but I would point out that the closely related issue of racial discrimination is
another example of this.  White people in America, as late as the 1960s, still simply
assumed that non-white people were inferior and should be segregated.  This was clearly
a case of something that was wrong being accepted because it was
traditional.

If we look at the present day, this is a more
controversial idea because many people will still believe that the tradition they are
upholding is right.  One possible example of this would be ideas about gay people.  At
present, gays are denied some legal protections and rights, such as the right to marry. 
This is largely because we have traditionally believed that homosexuality is wrong. 
Future generations may well look back at our times and conclude that we were stubbornly
holding on to a wrong belief simply because it was traditional.

What was the role of Gibraltar in World War II, specifically as far as the war in the Mediterranean went.

Gibraltar's strategic location at the entrance to the
Mediterranean Sea made it essential for British naval operations during World War II. At
one point it was about the only British-held area in the region, since the Germans had a
foothold in southern Europe and North Africa. Most of the inhabitants of Gibraltar were
relocated during the war, and the famous Rock of Gibraltar was heavily fortified.
Tunnels were dug throughout the mountain, and heavy artillery was put in place for the
defense of the territory. The British were able to control virtually all naval traffic
between the Atlantic and Mediterranean during the war, and the invasion of North Africa
(Operation Torch) was conducted from the defenses of Gibraltar. Gibraltar served as both
a forward operations base during the campaigns in North Africa and a rear-area base of
supplies following Italy's surrender in 1943. The British Royal Air Force built a
landing strip and maintained a base on Gibraltar, which was attacked by Vichy French
planes based in Morocco in 1940.

Hitler desperately wanted
to capture Gibraltar, but he met with resistance from the neutral Spanish government.
Hitler's plan to invade Gibraltar via Spain (with or without Spanish dictator Francisco
Franco's approval) with troops pulled from the Russian front was eventually canceled.
Gibraltar was attacked sporadically by Italian bombers and even a group of naval
frogmen; Spanish saboteurs were also active intermittently. German U-boats tried to
isolate Gibraltar from British supply ships, but they suffered heavy damage themselves
while trying to negotiate the treacherous Strait of Gibraltar. 

What are some of important contributions of the Sumerians to later societies?

The Sumerians were the first group to settle in what we
call Mesopotamia, which means "between two rivers", located between the Tigris and
Euphrates Rivers in modern-day Iraq.  As one of the earliest agricultural settlements,
and earliest "civilizations", the Sumerians contributed much to the
world.

1. Cuneiform.
 Cuneiform is the earliest form of writing.  Cuneiform is made up of a series of wedges
and lines carved into wet clay with a stylus.  The cuneiform script was copied by the
Assyrians, Persians, and Babylonians.  Cuneiform recorded commercial transactions as
well as history.  In essence, we have the Sumerians to thank for writing!
 

2. Irrigation.  The
Sumerians used irrigation for agricultural growth.  Situated between two rivers, the
Tigris and Euphrates, they were able to harness enough water during the hot drought
seasons to survive year round.  One of the unfortunate environmental consequences was
seasonal flooding, so the Sumerians also developed water transport systems to bypass the
northern flood waters.

3.
City-states.  The Sumerians didn't exist in one settlement; they formed
dozens of city-states that served as urban centers.  The city-states often went to war
against one another.

4. Monumental
architecture.  The Sumerians used mud-dried bricks to create architecture
that was used for religious and political purposes.  The ziggurat was a Sumerian pyramid
used for religious purposes; unlike the Egyptian pyramids, ziggurats look more like
stacked boxes (similar to the Mayan and Aztec pyramids).
 

5. Number system based on 10, 60, and
360.  We still use this system today- 60 minutes in an hour, a circle has
360 degrees, etc.

What is the moral of the play Dutchman?

I don't know if I'd call it a moral lesson.  Certainly,
Amiri Baraka had a point of view that he communicated clearly through his play.  The
play is a terrific example of protest drama, a style popular in the
1960s.

Baraka establishes two iconic characters - Lula,
representing white culture, and Clay, representing the non-violent/assimilationist black
culture.  He then puts them in conflict with each other; Lula challenges Clay time after
time on his assimilation into white society.  When Clay is ready to fight back, she
kills him.

The message Baraka sends is that assimilation is
not the answer, and that the non-violent approach to the civil rights movement is not
going to work.  Bluntly put: blacks should strike first before whites kill
them.

What is the difference between liberalism & fascism ?Im doing an ideology essay on liberalism & fascism. We have to create 2 different schools on...

There is a huge difference between liberalism and
fascism.  Liberalism is based on the idea that all people should be seen as individuals
who have rights that must be protected.  Liberalism believes that people should tolerate
one another's differences.  By contrast, fascism is based on the idea that all people
should be the same.  They should all identify themselves with each other and their
ultimate goal should be to serve their country.

If you set
up schools that were based on these ideas, they would be very different.  A liberal
school would encourage students to think and to express themselves.  There would likely
be no dress code and the educational process would emphasize creativity and independent
thought.  By contrast, a fascist school would emphasize thinking the "right" things and
all pulling together for the good of the school and the larger community.  Students
might be required to wear uniforms.  The curriculum would be geared towards teaching
students the "right" things and teaching them the idea that they should obey authority
and sacrifice for the common good.

Two tugs are towing a ship. The smaller tug is 15 degree off the port bow, and the larger tug is 20 degree off the starboard bow. The larger tug...

To understand the answer to this question on must
understand how to add force vectors in a coordinate plane.  Although this can be done
graphically by making a scale drawing and representing the size and direction of the
vectors as arrows, it is probably easier and quicker to add the vectors together using
basic trigonometry.

To do this one needs to remember how to
break a vector into its horizontal and vertical components.  Once that is done for each
vector, the next step is to add the vertical components for each vector together and
then to add the horizontal components together.  The resulting two answers will be the
two legs of a right triangle.  The direction and size of the total force will be
determined by the hypotenuse of that triangle.

To begin we
will first define "port" as negative and "starboard" as positive thus creating the two
vectors

F1 = F at -15 deg

F2 =
2F at 20 deg

The horizontal components
are

F1x + F2x = Fcos(-15)+2Fcos(20) = F[cos(-15) +
2cos(20)] = 2.85F

The vertical components
are

F1y + F2y = Fsin(-15) + Fsin(20) = F[sin(-15) +
2sin(20)] = 0.425F

By Pythagorus'
Theorem

`"net" F =sqrt((2.85F)^2
+(0.425F^2))`

`"net"F = sqrt(8.30F^2) =
2.88F`

To get the angle we
use

`theta ="tan"^(-1)((0.425F)/(2.85F)) = 8.48
deg`

The result of the two tugs pulling against the ship
will be that the ship will be pulled with a force
2.88F

in a direction of 8.48 degrees to the
starboard bow.

In James Thurber's My Life and Hard Times, what seems to be implied about education when Thurber is summoned by General Littlefield?

In his humorous autobiographical work My Life
and Hard Times, James Thurber describes several peculiar encounters with a
military figure ironically named General Littlefield. Littlefield’s name is even more
comic since he is the “commandant of the cadet corps” at Ohio State University and since
one of his main responsibilities involves teaching the student cadets how to march
properly. Thurber’s description of his encounters with General Littlefield implies a
number of things about education, including the
following:

• Because Thurber cannot perform his
  military duties well, General Littlefield considers him – or people like him – “the main
  trouble with this university.” Thurber seems to imply that the general’s priorities are
  misplaced: a university should not, ideally, be a place obsessed with military training
  (especially mere marching) but a place in which real intellectual learning takes place.
  Failure in genuine learning might be considered a genuine source of trouble at a
  university; failure in performing military drills seems minor in
  comparison.


• When Thurber eventually becomes the best
  performer at military drill (simply because he continually fails it, year after year,
  and thus has eventually much more experience at it than younger students), the general
  suddenly admires him, thus completely reversing his earlier opinion. Thurber is even
  promoted to corporal. He is therefore rewarded for an achievement which, in the context
  of a university supposedly dedicated to higher education, is not much of an achievement
  at all.


• When Thurber is summoned to the general’s office,
  presumably to be congratulated for his achievement, the general can’t seem to remember
  who Thurber is or why he was summoned.  Thurber thus seems to imply that the general is
  not especially bright (or at least that his memory is not good). Perhaps Thurber is
  suggesting that the general is not especially well qualified to have an important
  position at an American university, although Thurber also seems to suggest that the
  general’s position is not really very important to begin
  with.


• When the general instructs Thurber to button up his
  coat, Thurber may be suggesting that the general is concerned only with superficial and
  trivial matters.  Presumably, a university is not a place in which superficial or
  trivial matters should be of much concern to anyone.


• The
  general’s obsessive focus on swatting flies during Thurber’s visit may also imply that
  his concerns are essentially trivial.


• At the conclusion
  of this encounter, Thurber seems as confused as his readers about the reason the general
  summoned him:

readability="8">

He either didn’t know which cadet I was or else
he forgot what he wanted to see me about. It may have been that he wished to apologize
for having called me the main trouble of the university; or maybe he had decided to
compliment me on my brilliant drilling of the day before and then at the last minute
decided not to. I don’t know. I don’t think about it much
anymore.

Thurber’s last
sentence here implies, as his description of his whole encounter implies, that the whole
idea of being drilled in marching at an institution of higher learning is a bit
ridiculous and not really worth remembering.

The sum of a surface area of a sphere and a cube is given. Show that when the sum of their volumes is least, the diameter of the sphere is equal to...

The sum of a surface area of a sphere and a cube is
given. Show that when the sum of their volumes is least, the diameter of the sphere is
equal to the edge of a cube.

The surface area of a sphere
is given by `SA=4pir^2`
The surface area of a cube is given by    `SA=6s^2`

where r is the radius of the sphere and s
is the side length of the cube.

Let the sum of
surface areas be k, so `k=4pir^2+6s^2` . Then we can solve for
s getting `s=sqrt((k-4pir^2)/6)` .

Now
the sum of volumes is `4/3pir^3+s^3` . Substituting for s
yields
`4/3pir^3+((k-4pir^2)/6)^(3/2)` . To minimize this, we can take the
derivative with respect to r, setting the derivative equal to zero
to find the critical points,and evaluating to find the
minimum.

`d/(dr)``[4/3pir^3+((k-4pir^2)/6)^(3/2)]=4pir^2+3/2((k-4pir^2)/(6))^(1/2)(-4/3pir)``
`
Setting this equal to zero we find:

` ` `
``4pir^2+3/2((k-4pir^2)/(6))^(1/2)(-4/3pir)=0`` `

`4pir^2=2pir((k-4pir^2)/(6))^(1/2)`
`2r=((k-4pir^2)/(6))^(1/2)`

`4r^2=(k-4pir^2)/6`
`24r^2=(4pir^2+6s^2)-4pir^2` by substituting
back for k
`24r^2=6s^2`
`4r^2=s^2`

`2r=s` Since we are dealing with lengths, we only need the positive
root.

Since 2r is the diameter of the
sphere, we have shown that the sum of the volumes is minimized when the diameter of the
sphere equals the side length of the cube.

Does the story "A Snake in the Grass" by R. K. Narayan end on a conclusive note?

Does R. K. Narayan’s story “A Snake In the Grass” end on a
conclusive note?  The simple (and probably accurate) answer to this question is “no,”
for some of the following reasons:

• The story can
  be read as a simple “slice of life” tale, which offers no grand lessons and which
  teaches no lofty morals.  Since life itself is often inconclusive, it is appropriate to
  the tale that its own ending seems fairly
  inconclusive.


• The story ends by emphasizing what might
  have been rather than what really
  happened:

readability="6">

The college boy murmured: “I wish I had taken the
risk and knocked the water-pot from Dasa’s hand; we might have known what it
contained.”

• This
  final sentence is inconclusive in a number of senses besides the one just mentioned. Had
  the college boy really, truly suspected earlier that Dasa was tricking them, or did this
  idea occur to him only after the appearance of the second snake? The narrator doesn’t
  make an answer to this question clear, and so the story ends on an inconclusive
  note.


• Why didn’t the college boy at least move the stone
  slab above the pot open just slightly enough to see if the pot really contained a
  snake?  The narrator provides no clear answer to such a question, and thus the story
  ends inconclusively in yet another way.


• What would the
  family have done if they had indeed checked the pot? The narrator provides no clear
  answer to this question, and thus the story seems inconclusive in one more
  way.


• What will the family do when Dasa returns?  The
  narrator doesn’t say.


• Will the family check with the
  snake charmer to test Dasa’s veracity?  The narrator doesn’t
  say.


• Does the fact that Dasa claimed he would take the
  supposedly captured snake to the snake charmer imply that he really does have a snake in
  the pot? The narrator leaves this potential question
  open.


• Is the snake spotted by the family the snake they
  had been looking for, or is this indeed possibly a real second snake? The narrator
  leaves the question open.


• How are we meant to assess the
  meaning of this story and the nature of the characters? The narrator, by merely
  reporting rather than openly commenting and assessing, leaves the conclusion of the
  story open-ended in yet one more way.

How is Florence associated with civic humanism?

Civic humanism is a term (first coined in the 20th
century) used to refer to the ideas of republicanism.  It is the idea that people should
all participate in governing themselves.  This is not just a personal right to freedom,
it is also a responsibility that people have to their community.  It also holds that
this is how people truly fulfill their humanity.  In other words, it says that people
need to be part of governing themselves and helping improve their community if they are
to fully realize their potential as human beings.

The
connection between civic humanism and Florence is that the term was coined to describe
attitudes in Florence in the Renaissance.  During this time, some Florentines were
coming to embrace this attitude as a solution to the dangers that their city faced. 
There were constant worries about being invaded by enemies.  There were also worries
about falling under the power of a tyrant.  The idea of civic humanism arose in part as
a way to justify the idea of having a republic and as a way to motivate people to stand
up for Florence and republianism against those dangers.

Briefly can someone explain what Deuteronomy 6:7 means from The Bible?Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when...

As always it is vitally important to analyse such a verse
in the context of its original pasage and the book as a whole rather than just trying to
guess at a meaning from the verse itself. If we have a look at the Book of Deuteronomy,
we can see that one of its principal themes is the way in which the people of Israel
have received God's laws and how they are supposed to live as a result. The verse you
have quoted actually comes from the Shema, which is Hebrew for
"hear" and has become the Jewish confession of faith, recited daily by fervent Jews. Let
us remember what verse 6 says:

readability="5">

These commandments that I give you today are to
be upon your hearts.

What
comes after this verse is a development of the process of ensuring that God's commands
are "upon the hearts" of his people. The verse you have cited is part of this process,
and involves making sure that the children of the Jews are brought up realising the
importance of these commandments and how they should follow them as well. These
commandments should be the topic of conversation in one's household with your family but
also as you travel to ensure that they are fully understood and their importance is
remembered.

What Is The Purpose Of Ivan Is This Story?

Ivan, General Zaroff’s butler and attendant in “The Most
Dangerous Game,” is extremely large and vicious. He is deaf and dumb, so he is unable to
communicate verbally with Rainsford or any of the men who approach the chateau. He, like
Zaroff, has experience in the Russian military. Their service under the Czar appears to
have been particularly brutal. Therefore, when those who served the Czar begin to lose
their position in Russian society, Zaroff (and Ivan along with him) leave the country
and relocate to this island. Both Zaroff and Ivan are blood-thirsty brutes who thrive on
bloodshed and carnage. Consequently, although Zaroff hunts the victims who have the
misfortune of landing on his shores, Ivan tortures them if they refuse the hunt. His
size and his strength give him a substantial advantage over the men who arrive on the
shore. He is ferocious and cruel in his torment of the men. In fact, the men decide to
be hunted as prey rather than suffer at Ivan’s hands. He is an enforcer who brutalizes
men so that they agree to become Zaroff’s prey.

what is the meaning of If poem by Rudyary Kipling i read it but i don't get what the aruthor trying to say!!! help important plz reply in fast is...

The poem is a father defining for his son the qualities of
a good man. He is setting the parameters or  boundaries for his son and giving him a
goal to achieve.  The poem deals with life's challenges and how to deal with
them.

Stanza one deals with being confident about the
decisions you make and taking responsibility for those decisions.  If others, who cannot
take that responsibility for themselves, react negatively, you should be patient with
them and not reduce yourself to their level by telling lies or dealing in hate. 
However, don't ever believe you are above someone
else.

Stanza two states that it is good to dream, but don't
let your dreams control your life.  It is good to think, but don't just think and not
put those thoughts into action.  You will experience success and disaster in your life,
but don't take them too seriously because  they are not the substance of life; they are
the extremes.  If you hear things you said misquoted or misstated or see things you have
done destroyed, you need to be able to pick yourself up and rebuild them with everything
that you have left in you.

Stanza Three counsels not to be
afraid to take risks and possibly lose everything.  If you do lose everything, don't
talk about it, just start over at the beginning.  When you are tired and exhausted and
your body just feels like it can't continue on, use your mind and your will to command
yourself to "Hold on" and persevere.  Push through
it.

Stanza Four deals with a person's reaction to others. 
You need to be able to talk to big groups of people and yet not let them influence your
belief in what is right, wrong, moral, or immoral.  You need to be able to walk with men
of power and influence and yet not forget the common man and his needs.  You need to
know yourself and your beliefs so well that neither your friends nor your enemies can
hurt you because you know who you are and what you stand for.  People can depend on you,
but don't let them become too dependent on you.  You need to live every single minute of
your life to the fullest.  If you do these things, then the world is yours, and you will
be a good man.

Bruno's grandmother disagrees with the views of the Nazis. How does she stand up for her beliefs?

The grandmother's primary source of resistance is
questioning her son's beliefs and her son's value system.  Outside of this, there is
little to show that her standing up for her beliefs exists outside of the realm of the
personal.  She questions her son as to why he embraces the Nazi philosophy.  She does
this by openly questioning him, and also insisting that the values with which she and
her husband taught to Bruno are antithetical to what the Nazis believe.  While others
around her are impressed with her son, she is not and she speaks her mind about it. She
questions him about why he wants to "dress up" while "not caring .... what it stands
for."  Bruno's grandmother represents the few who had the courage to speak out against
the Nazis when it would come at great cost to them.  While others attempt to silence
her, such as her husband, she does not stop speaking what she considers to to be the
truth.  She does not recant or back down from her statements.  In this, she stands up
for her beliefs, even if it means openly questioning her son's
status.

In The Old Man and the Sea, how does the marlin's behavior change on the third day?

Santiago has spent two days holding the line while the
marlin swims in a straight line, tiring itself out. The marlin is so big that Santiago
must be pulled behind it, and cannot pull it in until it is dead. On the third day, the
marlin begins to circle, showing that it can't keep swimming against the
current:

He could not see by the slant of the line
that the fish was circling. It was too early for that. He just felt a faint slackening
of the pressure of the line and he commenced to pull on it gently with his right
hand.
(Hemingway, The Old Man and the Sea, Google
Books)

This behavior proves to Santiago that the
marlin is on its last reserves of strength, and that it will soon come to the surface
where he can harpoon it. The marlin is strong enough to pull the boat, but it can't pull
forever without resting; the circling behavior shows that it is losing strength because
Santiago never lets the tension of the line go.

What shoudl I write about in a paragraph on a theme in "The Most Dangerous Game"?

A number of themes are presented in "The Most Dangerous
Game".

You might choose to write about how
irony becomes a theme. The title is the first example of
irony in the story, working on two levels. The title is ironic because it has two
meanings. (Rainsford is the game being hunted and Zaroff, in a way, thinks of the hunt
as a serious game, to be played and won.)

Additional
example of irony as a theme can be found in the repeated motif of "the hunter becoming
the hunted". This happens to Rainsford and it happens to
Zaroff. 

Furthermore, Rainsfored's attitude regarding
killing humans becomes ironic in the end. He had protested against the idea of hunting
people, calling it murder. When the "game" is finally over, Rainsford takes a human
life, killing Zaroff.

readability="9">

Zaroff's murder, therefore, is not self-defense,
as it would have been before Rainsford won the game. It is either an act of revenge or a
killing for sport.

Other
themes you might write on relate to violence, the value of human life, and
the ethics of hunting.

readability="8">

If hunting humans for kicks is murder, Connell
asks, then how does this differ from hunting
animals?

Why does Cinderella's shoe always fall off, if it was created to fit to her foot?

This is an interesting question and could have several
different answers:

1. The Fairy Godmother who
   created the shoe incorrectly sized it.  It's possible.  She was old.
   


2. The glass slipper, though referred to as "glass," may
   have actually been another see-through material that expanded (or stretched) over the
   course of the night when the heat from Cinderella's foot was applied to it.  This makes
   sense because a true "glass slipper" more than likely would have cracked at some point
   in the evening, mauling her foot.


3. As she danced,
   Cinderella's foot got sweaty, providing lubrication, and while running her fit simply
   came out.  She was likely barefoot in the slipper, so this makes
   sense.


4. The Fairy Godmother designed the shoe to come off
   at the critical moment.  In her wisdom it was planned all along so that the prince would
   have something to track her by.


5. Cinderella may have
   wanted to lose the shoe herself as a way for the prince to find her.
   

These are my guesses.

What are the major and minor propositions behind Swift's modest proposal?

The problem Swift is addressing is the treatment of the
poor in Ireland by the wealthy.  He proposes a ridiculous and disgusting solution to the
population growth of the poor in the hopes that it will force people to see the truth. 
The poor were being treated with cruelty and indifference.  Swift forces the wealthy to
see them as people by suggesting they eat the children. 

Swift is
also expressing his frustration with solutions to current problems that he considered
just as ludicrous.  In way, he was pointing out how ridiculous some of the actual
proposals of the time were by showcasing a ludicrous solution of his own in the same
manner.

How would you describe the style of the prologue to Act 3 of William Shakespeare's play Henry V?

The style of the prologue to Act 3 of Shakespeare’s play
Henry V might be described in a number of ways, including the
following:

• Unifying,
  as in the opening word “Thus,” which links Act 3 with the immediately preceding
  act.


• Alliterative, as in the
  words “with imagin’d wing our
  swift
  scene
  flies” (1) or the words
  “Than that of
  thought”
  (3).


• Employing assonance, as
  in the words “motion of no”
  (2).


• Dialogical, as when the
  Chorus directly addresses the audience by referring to them as “you”
  (3).


• Smoothly flowing
  (notice how relatively few of the lines in this speech end with any kind of punctuation;
  this is known as enjambment).


• Richly
  adjectival, as in the following lines, asking us to notice the
  king’s

readability="5">

. . . brave
fleet

With silken streamers
the young Phoebus [fanning].”
(5-6)

• Emphatic
  in its use of verbs, as in “Suppose” (3), “Play” (7), “behold” (7),
  “Hear” (9), etc.  Such phrasing gives enormous energy to the
  speech.


• Often abrupt, as in
  such short phrases as “Play with your fancies” (7) and “Follow, follow!” (17). Yet these
  short phrases are typically used to punctuate and interrupt much longer sentences, thus
  giving the speech a great deal of rhythmic variety, so that it never seems
  monotonous.


• Innovating and
  inventive in some of its phrasing, as when the Chorus refers to ships
  “Breasting the lofty surge” (13).


• Vivid in
  its use of imagery, as when the Chorus describes
  how

readability="7">

. . . th’ invisible and creeping wind
[can]

Draw the huge bottoms through the furrowed sea” . . .
 (12)

• Imaginative
  in some of its imagery and
  metaphors, as when the Chorus compares ships at sea to “A
  city on th’inconstant billows dancing”
  (15).


• Unconventional
  in some of its phrasing, as when the Chorus mentions a “fleet majestical” rather than
  the more predictable phrase “majestical fleet” (16).
  


• Skillful in using emphatic
  lists, as in the reference to “grandsires, babies, and old women”
  (20)


• Humorous and playful,
  as when he refers to a

readability="7">

. . . chin . . .
enrich’d

With one appearing hair
(22-23)

and also when he
plays with very heavy and exaggerated alliteration in line
24.

• Courteous, as
  when the Chorus ends his speech by once more begging the audience’s
  indulgence.

All in all, this speech is lofty,
soaring, eloquent, witty, and highly imaginative.  It displays the very kind of
heightened imagination it hopes to stir in the audience. It advances the plot of the
play (as in lines 28-31), but it also contributes mightily to the epic, heroic tone of
the work.  It is patriotic, rousing, celebratory, and clever.

How can you determine if this equation: x-6=y2 is a function or not?

Determine if class="AM">`x-6=y^2` is a
function.

(1) If a relation is a function, each
input corresponds to exactly one output. If x is the independent variable, and y the
dependent variable, then this relation is not a function. The following ordered pairs
are in the relation: (6,0),(7,1),(7,-1),(10,2),(10,-2). Notice that the input 7 has two
outputs; i.e. 1 and -1. Likewise the input 10 has two outputs. If any input has more
than one output then the relation is not a function.

(2)
Draw the graph. If you pass a vertical line across the graph, then the relation is a
function if the line crosses the graph at no  more than 1 point. If the vertical line
cuts the graph twice or more times, the relation is not a
function.

src="/jax/includes/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/asciisvg/js/d.svg"
sscr="-1,12,-5,5,1,1,1,1,1,300,200,func,sqrt(x-6),null,0,0,,,black,1,none,func,-sqrt(x-6),null,0,0,,,black,1,none"/>

Notice
that the vertical line x=7 crosses the graph at two points, so the relation is not a
function.

(3) Try to write the relation in "function" form;
i.e. y=f(x). Here solving for y yields class="AM">`y=+-sqrt(x-6)` . Notice that there are really two functions
here, the positive root and the negative root. But if this relation was a function, you
would just get one function when solving for y.

What are the Civil War Amendments?

The amendments to the Constitution that are commonly known
as the Civil War Amendments are the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.  These amendments
were passed in 1865, 1868 and 1870 respectively in reaction to the Civil War, its
causes, and its aftermath.  These amendments together give African Americans the same
legal status and rights as whites enjoy.

Briefly, the 13th
Amendment prohibits slavery.  The 14th Amendment mandates that all citizens of the US
must enjoy the "equal protection of the laws."  The 15th Amendment states that blacks
cannot be prohibited from voting due to their race or to the fact that they were once
slaves.

How does Tan explore the idea of change in The Joy Luck Club?

I think the central way in which this masterful story of
Chinese immigrants starting new lives in the US explores the theme of change is through
the differences between the two generations of immigrants and how the daughters of the
Chinese women who left their country are forced to construct their own identity as they
grow up as second-generation immigrants who are born in the US but nonetheless grow up
in a Chinese subculture. This of course creates conflict in all of these relationships,
as the mothers expect their daughters to grow up and show similar respect and obedience
as they had to when they grew up in China. However, at the same time, the Chinese
mothers want their daughters to learn something from American strength and independence,
and integrate these qualities into their identity. The novel is really the exploration
of the daughters and their attempts to find a compromise between the two extremes of a
Chinese identity and an American identity that prove acceptable to both themselves and
to their mothers. An excellent example would be the way in which Rose Hsu Jordan manages
to assert herself in the face of her husband's cruelty after hearing the story of her
grandmother.

Identity is something that is presented as
being malleable and in a process of flux or change. The daughters range between adopting
a Chinese approach to life and rejecting their Chinese heritage to embrace American
norms and values. All of them show the theme of change by incorporating elements of both
identities to create a new hybrid identity that allows them to pick and choose, showing
the way in which identity is something that is in a constant process of change for many
immigrants or second-generation immigrants.

Why do you think Beowulf offers to help a tribe other than his own, in spite of the danger?

Since you're asking for an opinion, and not a factual
answer, this question really should be on the discussion
board.

Having said that, I'll give you my opinion. Beowulf
goes to help Hrothgar for one reason: fame. He wants to make a name for himself. That's
why he fights Grendel on his own; he'd have to share the spotlight with someone else if
he let his men help him. In Norse mythology, in order to get into Valhalla, "the Hall of
Heroes" (the Viking heaven), not only did you have to die in combat, but you also had to
be the bravest warrior. Certainly facing a monster alone would qualify Beowulf to be the
bravest warrior. If he defeats Grendel, he will be famous among all men. If he is killed
by Grendel, he will be assured of going to Valhalla. It is a no-lose
situation!

What is an easy way to find the x and y intercepts of a line?

The equation of a line can be written in many ways. Each
of them is suited to determine some characteristic of the line. For example to determine
the slope and the y-intercept of a line it is written in the form y = mx + c, where m is
the slope and c is the y-intercept.

To determine the x and
y intercepts of a line in the general form ax + by + c = 0, the following can be
done.

ax + by + c =
0

=> ax + by =
-c

divide all the terms by
-c

=> (-a/c)x + (-b/c)y =
1

=> x/(-c/a) + y/(-c/b) =
1

The x-intercept here is -c/a and the y-intercept is
-c/b

To find the x and y intercept of any
line write the equation of the line in the form x/a + y/b = 1 which gives the
x-intercept as a and the y-intercept as b

What is shocking about Mrs. Dubose's language when she expresses her attitude about Atticus defending a black man in To Kill a Mockingbird?Key...

Although the children of Maycomb fear the acid-tongued
Mrs. Henry Lafayette Dubose, Atticus treats her with neighborly respect when he passes
her house.

readability="11">

     ... Atticus would sweep off his hat, wave
gallantly to her, and say, "Good evening, Mrs. Dubose! You look like a picture this
evening."
     I never heard Atticus say like a picture of
what.

Mrs. Dubose obviously
respects Atticus as well, since we find out later in the chapter that she has entrusted
him with making out her will. You would never know it, however, from the way she speaks
of him when she screams at Jem and Scout from her front porch.Referring to Scout as "you
ugly girl," Mrs. Dubose then "terrified" her, warning that she will end up waiting on
tables at the O. K. Cafe. But Mrs. Dubose had saved her biggest insult for
Atticus.

readability="5">

"You're father's no better than the niggers and
trash he works for!"

Her
racist language is not really surprising, since she had grown up during the Civil War
and probably remembered the days of slavery in ante-bellum Alabama. She was from an
older generation not ready to accept the changing ways of the times. But the insulting
manner in which she spoke to Atticus is surprising, considering his own mannerly
disposition toward her, and her own decision to hire his legal services. Of course, as
Atticus explains to Jem later, it was only the morphine talking--the terrible addiction
which she had not yet kicked when she angered Jem and Scout.

Is the US Constitution a form of government which has a bicameral legislature, strong central government, yet leaving powers to the states, and 3...

The question is a bit confusing.  I think the answer is
"yes," but here's why.

The legislature is divided into two
sections, the House of Representatives and the Senate, thus a bicameral legislature. 
Bills that become law need to pass votes in both sections.  The representatives of the
House are elected by district and are allocated according to the number of citizens in
the state.  Thus a more populous state, New York for example, will have more reps than a
less populous state like Nebraska.  In contrast, there are two senators for every state
regardless of population or size.

The three branch system
refers to the division of government into the legislature, presidency, and supreme
court.  The three parts provide a system of "checks and balances" that doesn't allow any
one part to become too powerful.

The U.S. does have a
strong central government, but many important legislative decisions are made on the
level of the state.  For example, the federal government says that a state must provide
for the education of its young citizens, but the individual state may make decisions
about the curriculum or how that education will be funded.  Therefore these things
differ from state to state.

In Brave New World, what did the author predict in the book that actually came to pass?Basically, what happened in the novel that actually happened...

In response to your question, I particularly like one of
the writing prompts from College Board (See the citation below).  Clearly, Aldous
Huxley’s vision of the modern world was reasonable if not prophetic. He suggested
several possible consequences of human progress. He suggests that humans will be so
consumed with pleasure and distractions that they will become apathetic and passive. His
visions of our world have proven to be generally
true.

 Computers, the Internet, newspapers, magazines,
e-book readers, and smart phones have provided us with many means of communication.
However, many believe that these technological advances have produced a culture in which
instant communication is preferred to thoughtful and deliberate exchanges between
people. These innovative and creative forms of communication have stifled (and in some
cases eliminated) the need for individuals to communicate clearly with one
another.

 Pleasure-seeking is rampant in today’s world.
Drug abuse, greed, and materialism indicate that people are concerned with selfish
endeavor and that compassion is waning. Enormous debt, big-screen televisions, and smart
phones contribute to the declining sense of personal responsibility within our
population. Rather than spend our lives engaged in practical and altruistic services to
others, we selfishly seek fulfillment of our every
desire.

 The number of distractions in our culture today is
endless. People worldwide spend more time watching sports programs, playing video games,
texting on the phone, exchanging with others on social networks, and participating in
recreational activities than they do in academic activities such as reading. Huxley
understood that these pleasures and distractions would shift our focus from important
issues.

When a pendulum swings 40 degrees from the vertical, the bob moves 20 cm horizontally and 7.3 cm vertically. What is the length of the pendulum?

When a pendulum swings 40 degrees from the vertical, the
bob moves 20 cm horizontally and 7.3 cm vertically. What is the length of the
pendulum?

Lets name the point where the pendulum hangs
from A, the point where the bob rests directly beneath A we will call B, and the point
after displacement of the bob C.

Drop a perpendicular from
C with length 7.3cm and call the terminal point D. Connect D to B with a segment -- then
triangle BCD is a right triangle. Using the pythagorean theorem, we find the hypotenuse
BC to be approximately 21.29cm.

But BC is the base of an
isosceles triangle whose legs are the length of the pendulum. Drop an altitude from A to
BC and name the point of intersection M. The altitude of an isosceles triangle is also a
median, and an angle bisector.

Consider the triangle ABM.
It is a right triangle,with one leg opposite angle A having length 10.65cm (1/2 of
21.29cm). The angle MAB has measure 20 degrees. Thus `sin20=10.65/(BA)` , from the right
triangle definition of sine. Then `BA ~~ 31.14` cm, where
BA is the length of the pendulum.

What is ethical relativism?

The basic idea of ethical relativism is that there is
nothing that is absolutely ethical or unethical.  Instead, actions are ethical or
unethical only in a given context.  Usually, this context is a cultural one.  To someone
who believes in ethical relativism, an action is only ethical or unethical if the
ethical values of a given culture say it is.

In this way of
thinking, there is no such thing as an absolute moral truth that holds for all people in
all societies.  It is not correct, for example, to say that women have certain rights
that must be protected in all ethical societies.  Instead, we can say that actions that
would be considered abusive in the United States (denying women the right to drive or to
make most decisions without a male guardian's approval) can be perfectly ethical in
Saudi Arabia because that society has a different moral and ethical set of
standards.

What is a voting cue?

A voting cue is something that helps someone know how they
should vote on a particular issue.  It is often used with regard to members of
legislatures, but can also refer to the voting behavior of members of the general
public.

In legislatures, members often rely on cues to tell
them how to vote so they do not have to truly become informed on issues.  This saves
them the time and effort that would be needed to educate themselves on an issue that may
not be of great interest to them or even to their constituents.  Such legislators will
often rely on cues like how important colleagues are voting, what trusted interest
groups' attitudes are, or what their party leadership wants them to do.  These are the
voting cues that allow them to decide how to
vote.

Similarly, individual voters may have cues.  They may
rely on other individuals whose opinions they trust.  They may rely on the candidate's
party affiliation.  They may rely on the endorsements of interest groups that they
trust, such as the NRA or the AARP. 

In short, then, a
voting cue is some piece of information that helps a person decide how to vote on an
issue or in an election without having to become fully informed on the issues or the
candidates.

What can you compare about Jack and Piggy?I'm trying to use this quote: If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself....

I think Jack and Piggy are almost absolute opposites of
each other.

For example, Jack's ownership of the hunting
brigade demonstrates what might be apparent physical fitness and prowess in him. Piggy
is the absolute opposite. Whereas Jack has no problem removing his clothes to reveal the
inner man, Piggy is ashamed of his apparent fat and
asthma.

Also, Piggy's intellectual ability intimidates
Jack. When Jack fails to become the leader, there is something in him that really
struggles with that, but he does not have the intelligence to thwart the boys' purpose
for choosing Ralph. Piggy thinks through all circumstances and comes to Ralph's right
hand as a sort of advisor. Jack might like to be that person, but he doesn't know how to
communicate with reason and logic the thoughts that are inside of
him.

To apply the quote you cite in your explanation, you
might look at how each character uses their ability to try to seek leadership or at
least approval among the boys. Jack tries to portray how what he is interested in will
provide survival and sustainment for the boys in finding meat. Piggy, likewise, tries to
demonstrate that proper hygiene, developing shelter and seeking to be rescued are keys
to maintaining survival. Piggy and Jack hate the leader in each other because their
leadership styles and motive are different but seek similar
outcomes.

Another part of Jack's character that has nothing
to do with leadership may not only be not disturbing to Piggy but acutally appealing.
The converse may be true too. Consider if there might have been a scene wherein Jack led
the choir in song. Piggy might have thoroughly enjoyed it. He would have enjoyed it
because there was no room to compare himself to Jack. In the field of music, Piggy may
not be gifted.

What is the mood/atmosphere in this short story?

James Joyce's "Araby" depicts a solemn, stale atmosphere.
 The street where the narrator and his friends play is a blind, or a dead end.  The
houses are "brown," with "imperturbable faces," the gardens are "dripping," the bicycle
pump is rusty.  An empty house is located at the end of the blind where a former priest
had died. The air within is "musty." All these images present a stagnant, melancholy
atmosphere. The children, though, play until their "bodies glowed," apparently oblivious
to their somber environment.

However, with the description
of Mangan's sister, the tone suddenly changes.  She is described as standing in the
light, with her dress swinging, and her "rope of hair" tossing side to side.  The light
and motion that define Mangan's sister set her apart from the dark, stagnant imagery of
Dublin.

As long as the narrator is focused on Mangan's
sister, the mood is optimistic.  His friend's sister becomes his idol, his reason for
being, his escape from the drudgery of everyday existence.  However, when the narrator
reaches Araby and finds out that his quest to purchase Mangan's sister a suitbable gift
is futile, the mood becomes once again dark.  Just as the lights of the fair are turned
off, so too darkens the narrator's optimism as he feels himself utterly foolish and full
of "anguish and anger." With the disillusionment of his quest, the narrator's despair
enables him to see Dublin as it is presented to us:  a dead end.

Is allowing searches and seizures of the sort permitted by Terry v. Ohio a serious blow to the 4th Amendment?

This is, of course, a matter of opinion.  I would argue
that the 4th Amendment is not a serious blow to the 4th Amendment.  As you can see in
the New York Times links below, however, others would
disagree.

The 4th Amendment specifically protects us not
against all warrantless searches and seizures but from "unreasonable searches and
seizures."  So that leads us to ask whether the conduct allowed in
Terry is unreasonable.  I say it is
not.

Terry does not allow the police
to simply stop and frisk whoever they would like.  It requires that they see a person
acting in a way that makes the police officer suspect a crime is about to be committed. 
The frisk may only be used to detect concealed weapons.  It is not a general search,
just a frisk for the officer's safety.

The Fourth Amendment
does not and cannot take away all police discretion.  The Terry
rule does require us to trust the police.  That is not always the right thing, but it is
a reasonable thing to do under the Fourth Amendment.  Therefore, the type of searches
and seizures allowed by Terry do not constitute a "serious blow to
the Fourth Amendment."

In The Homecoming, how does Harold Pinter present family relationships in crisis?

The play The Homecomingby Harold
Pinter presents to us an all-male family unit living together under the same roof, but
living in as much isolation from each other as they possibly can. Harold Pinter
describes the relationship between the father, Max, and his three sons Lenny, Joey, and
Teddy as one in which the two main elements are anger and resentment. The family is
obviously dysfunctional: They break every boundary of etiquette and mutual respect, they
disrespectfully call each other by names, and there is not one member of that particular
unit that can be considered "normal".

We first have Max. At
his seventy years of age he is far from being a man who has learned from his past
mistakes and has redeemed himself from them. Contrarily,  he is bitter, sour, mean, and
abusive both physically and mentally. He takes pride on all his past mistakes and one
could almost think that he is willing to go back in time to make the same mistakes
again. He takes his anger out on his children and his brother, Sam. He seems still to
have a soft spot for the memory of his wife, and he obviously pushes down internal
demons closely related to his marriage, and his role within
it.

Max's children are emasculated and demeaned. This is
evident in that none of them lives normally. Teddy may be a professor with a PhD, but he
is still unable to control his wife, Ruth. He even lets his family persuade him to ask
Ruth whether she would work as a call girl for them in exchange of free rent in their
flat. He seems to have huge problems with asserting himself and, in the end, Ruth
chooses his family over him- even with that awkward
proposal.

Joey, the youngest, is immature, clueless, and
disrespectful. He, as well as the other brother, Lenny, tries to become intimate with
Ruth regardless of the fact that she is his brother's wife and the mother of his
children. He has stupid aspirations in life, works menial jobs, and in the end ends up
being more of a child to Ruth than a former lover.

Finally,
you have Lenny who works as a pimp, takes pride in beating up women, and is who tries to
get Ruth to become an escort. As he tells his stories, he seems more and more weak in
the eyes of Ruth, who represents the Alpha female- the woman who dominates. This, along
with Ruth's agreement of going with their silly plan, leads Lenny to realize how little
power he really has over Ruth and how Ruth seems to have the cards to win any game. He,
as well as Max, end up under the spell of Ruth.

In all, the
way in which Pinter presents a family in crisis is by showing us how the break in
boundaries, the abundance of disrespect, and the lack of solidarity can create a huge
black hole that can swallow a family hole. This family was already in a black hole that
Ruth seems to come to redeem.

are there more irrational numbers than rational numbers? or are they the same?

The answer here is that there are in fact far, far more
irrational numbers than there are rational numbers. One way to think about this is that
between any two rational numbers, there are an infinite number of irrational
numbers.

There is quite a bit of background knowledge
required to understand the answer to this question, and I will attempt to give an
overview. We must first define a few terms. We call the number of elements in a set
the cardinality of the set. For example, the set {1, 2, 3} has
cardinality 3. Two sets are said to have the same cardinality if a bijection can be
formed between the sets. We can extend the notion of cardinality to infinite sets, and
we say that the set of natural numbers `NN` has cardinality `aleph_0` (aleph
null).

Any set that has cardinality `aleph_0` is said to
be countably infinite. The set of all real numbers `RR` was
famously shown by Georg Cantor to have cardinality `aleph_1 = 2^(aleph_0)` . (See
reference link "Cantor's diagonal argument"). This number is called
the cardinality of the continuum, and a set with this cardinality
is said to be uncountably infinite.

It
has been shown that the irrational numbers are uncountably infinite
(they have cardinality `aleph_1` ).

However, the
rational numbers are countably infinite (have cardinality
`aleph_0`). To show that a set has cardinality `aleph_0`, you must construct a bijection
(one-to-one and onto function) between the set in question and the natural numbers.
An bijection between the rational numbers and the natural numbers is shown in reference
[3]. As such, we know that the rational numbers have cardinality
`aleph_0`.

It follows that there are more
irrational numbers than rational numbers, since there are `aleph_0` rational numbers and
`aleph_1` irrational numbers, and `aleph_0 < aleph_1 = 2^(aleph_0)`
.

Can anyone direct me to two web sites containing articles on the Mabo Case?

The Mabo Case was a test case in Queensland, Australia
concerning native tribal rights to land usage, specifically involving the Meriam people
(of which Eddie Mabo was a tribal member) and rights of tribal members to land on and
use the Murray Islands, located in the Torres Strait.

The
government attempted to derail the Mabo case by enacting the Queensland Coast Islands
Declaratory Act of 1985, claiming that Queensland had all rights, claims and interest in
the islands because of the annexation of the islands to Queensland in
1879.

In response to the Judgment on the Mabo Case issued
in June, 1992, the Australian Parliament enacted the Native Title Act of 1993 that
established a National Native Title Tribunal to adjudicate future similar disputes on
tribal land usage.

The Mabo Case decision gave a boost to
efforts for recognition of Aboriginal land rights.

The
first reference outlines the details of the decision and its implications.  A good
summary of the case and judgment is fund in the second
reference.

In the description of Aunt Alexandra in Chapter 13 of To Kill a Mockingbird, it says "she was born in the objective case". What would that mean? A...

Scout's description of her Aunt Alexandra being "born in
the objective case" is a clever play on words by To Kill a
Mockingbird author Harper Lee. The objective case is a grammar term referring
to objective pronouns (used in the oblique case). Two of the most commonly used
objective pronouns are "me" and "her." I believe that the author was trying to say that
Aunt Alexandra is mainly concerned with "herself," and that everything is "about her:"
She is a "me" person--all things that happen she relates to how they affect "her." I
believe that the author probably also used the term to suggest that she objected to many
things--Calpurnia's role in the house, Scout's unladylike ways, Atticus' parenting
skills, Atticus' defense of Tom Robinson, Walter Cunningham's presence in the Finch
home, her husband's lazy ways, etc.

In contrast to Freud, on what did Erikson place greater emphesis?

Sigmund Freud, an Austrian
neurologist, created psychoanalysis and founded clinical
psychiatry as we know it today. His theories have been challenged and changed
but remain the base of modern psychiatry.

Erik
Erikson, of Danish descent but raised in Germany, was a student of
psychoanalysis and an influential figure in post-Freudian
psychiatry.

While Freud focused on the unconscious mind and
psychosexual development, Erikson focused on
stages of life as a whole. Freud's basic theory is that all activity in life is based in
our unconscious desires as created in infancy by our latent sexual needs; the
Ego is subservient to the Id. In contrast,
Erikson theorized that the Ego, in its ability to consciously understand and accept the
Id, has the power to supercede it without falling prey to mental
damage.

In addition, Erikson claimed that personal development didn't
stop with Freud's Genital stage, extending to death; instead, each of Erikson's eight
stages of life is marked by a conflict -- for example, a teenager is rooted in Identity
vs. Role Confusion: the classic "Who Am I?" These stages cover the entirety of life and
postulates that humans have the ability to overcome each conflict in turn, understanding
and accepting the extremes of each, resulting in a rounded individual. He also concluded
that personality is a product of environment, instead of Freud's theory that everyone
has similar unconscious desires which manifest in different ways regardless of
environment.

Erikson's emphasis, therefore, is on the Ego conquering
the Id; man's ability to reason gives him the power to comprehend his innate desires and
control them, instead of letting them control him.

Was the Bush Doctrine preemptive or preventive?

Since there is no single statement of an official "Bush
Doctrine" it is hard to be precise in answering this question.  However, the overall
thrust of what has come to be known as the Bush Doctrine is much more preventive than it
is preemptive.

A preemptive war is one where war
is going to happen and the question is simply whether to
strike first or wait to be struck.  An example of preemptive war would if the US had
learned of the Pearl Harbor attack plan on December 1, 1941 and struck first to prevent
it.  Preemptive war is when you know that your enemy is going to attack and you beat
them to the punch.

A preventive war is one where the future
war might happen and you are trying to prevent that
eventuality from occurring.  The Iraq War that is synonymous with the Bush Doctrine was
preventive.  Even if Iraq had had WMD, there was no evidence that they were going to use
the WMD to attack the United States.  A war with Iraq was not inevitable.  Instead, it
was undertaken to prevent a possible conflict in the
future.

Since the Bush Doctrine allowed for war to prevent
possible dangers that might
lead to wars in the future, it was preventive.  If it had only said that the US would
strike first when war was inevitable it would have been
preemptive.

Why might one interpret Plato's theory of forms as a response to Heraclitus?Explain Heraclitus's position and platos theory of forms in detail

The evidence for this is found to a large degree in
Plato`s Cratylus and Theaetetus. The main problem Heraclitus poses for Platonic
epistemology is that the doctrine of flux makes the Protagorean equation of knowledge
with perception untenable. If things are constantly changing then it is impossible to
have true knowledge of them or derive knowledge from them. One can only perceive
constantly shifting phenomena -- Heraclitean physics makes it impossible, as it were, to
perceive the same river twice -- and thus knowledge of a type that is constant and
timeless (like the knowledge of mathematics, or the statement `cats are quadripeds`)
cannot be obtained by perception of phenomena. Given this, for us to make statements
about universals or abstractions, there need to be (1) timeless objects of knowledge
separated from the phenomena (the Forms) and (2) some other way of gaining knowledge
(i.e. the theory of recollection set forth in Phaedo).

Note
that this `middle theory of forms` and `theory of recollection`are both problematized by
Plato in later dialogues, especially Parmenides, Sophist, and
Philebus.

Good question!

What should the limit on self-determination be?

As can be seen in the link below, self-determination is
generally defined as the right of a national majority (usually defined in ethnic terms)
to choose whether it wishes to rule itself as an independent state, to be part of a
federal system within a larger state, to be fully assimilated into a larger state, or to
occupy some status in between those options.  This was one of the major ideas that
Woodrow Wilson pushed for in his 14 Points that were offered at the Paris Peace
Conference.  Wilson wanted all ethnic groups (or at least white ones) to be able to
choose their own political status.

The question of what the
limits of this should be is a very difficult one.  We see it crop up in places like
Sudan where a region that was formerly part of the country has broken away to form a new
state, South Sudan.  It is very complicated because national groups have in many places
been split up and have members in multiple countries.  An example of this is the Kurds
who live in significant numbers in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and
Syria.

My own take on this is that national groups that
have been part of a larger state for a long time should not break away and become
independent.  This would, in my mind, be too disruptive of the international order
because it would potentially lead to ethnic groups splitting off into smaller and
smaller states around the world.  However, I would also argue that ethnic groups who are
being abused by the countries in which they live should be given the chance to break
away.

This is a very complex issue with no easy answers. 
Overall, I am in favor of ethnic groups learning to live together within larger states,
but I realize that this is not always feasible.  My answer to the question would be that
there can be no hard and fast limits.  Self-determination should be allowed mostly in
cases where the ethnic minority has been historically abused.

In "Everyday Use," how do Maggie's scars affect her life?

You might want to examine the way that the narrator, Mama,
introduces Maggie to us, and in particular the way that she is presented as being a
profoundly shy and timid young woman who is unable to assert herself against anybody and
has a very low self-esteem. Consider the way that Mama introduces her
daughter:

readability="14">

Have you ever seen a lame animal, perhaps a dog
run over by some careless person rich enough to own a car, sidle up to someone who is
ignorant enough to be kind to him? That is the way my Maggie walks. She has been like
this, chin on chest, eyes on ground, feet in shuffle, ever since the fire that burned
the other house to the
ground.

We can therefore see
how the scars that Maggie bears are at least partly responsible for her withdrawn nature
and her shyness and lack of confidence. Even when she asks her mother how she looks, she
still hides behind the door, only showing enough so her mother knows that she is there.
The physical disfigurement seems to operate as a symbol of her psychological
disfigurement.

determine constant a and function f if f(1)=5 and f(x+y)-f(x)=axy-2y^2?

The notation, f(x), pronounced "f of x", represents the
output of a function, f, when the value of x is inputed.  For instance, f(x) = x^2-4 has
a value of 0 when x=2, or f(2) = 2^2-4 = 0.

The function in
this question has two facts known about it.  f(1)=5, which means the value of f(x) = 5
when x=1. The other fact is:

f(x+y) -f(x) =
axy-2y^2

Substituting a 1 for
x:

f(1+y) - f(1) =
a(1)y-2y^2

Substitute f(1) = 5: f(1+y) - 5 =
ay-2y^2

Add 5 to both sides: f(1+y) =
ay-2y^2+5

Rearrange the terms: f(y+1) =
-2y^2+ay+5

Factor out a -2 on the right:  f(y+1) =
-2(y^2-(a/2)y+____)+5

Knowing the blank above needs to be a
1 to get (y+1)^2:

f(y+1) = -2(y+1)^2+5+2 :Compensate for
the -2*1

f(y+1) = -2(y+1)^2 +
7

Therefore, f(x)=-2x^2+7 and
a=-4.

Since (y+1)^2 = y^2 + 2y +1, -a/2 = 2 and
a=-4.

Proof: f(1) = -2(1)^2 + 7 =5

How did the discovery of agriculture in the neolithic period change human political structures?

The Neolithic agriculture revolution made fundamental
changes in the organization of human societies. Compared to hunter-gatherer societies,
even fairly crude slash-and-burn agriculture is an extremely efficient method of
obtaining food. Agriculture intensifies food production for a given land area allowing
for substantial increases in population density. Agriculture also favours fixed
locations, as opposed to the necessary mobility of nomadic and hunter-gatherer means of
obtaining food. The combination of population density and fixed locales lead to
urbanisation and increasingly complex political structures. Irrigation, as developed in
Mesopotamia and Egypt, in particular, requires large scale and long term cooperation
among large groups of people.

Even more important, the
relative efficiency of agriculture food production results in an economic surplus, i.e.
no longer are all the people in the community engaged primarily in subsistence level
food gathering. This allows for some specialization of labour, and the development of
crafts -- e.g. potters who can trade pots for food -- leading to technological
innovation.

Why was the rule of Menes a pivotal event in Egyptain history?

The rule of Menes, whose actual existence cannot be
verified by the historical record, is pivotal as he is considered by Egyptian tradition
to be the first Pharaoh in human form; who inherited the throne of Egypt directly from
the sun god Horus. Tradition holds that he was the first Pharoah of the first Dynasty.
 All later Pharaohs were considered to be earthly manifestations of Horus. He is
credited with having joined upper and lower Egypt into a unified kingdom under his rule.
Herodotus credits him with founding the city of Memphis, which became the cultural
center and juncture of upper and lower Egypt. A number of apocryphal legends exist about
Menes, including that he was attacked by his own dogs and was saved by riding a
crocodile across the Nile, in gratitude for which he founded the city of Crocodilopolis.
Another legend is that he was killed by a hippopotamus. Although he cannot be proven by
historical record, his importance to Egyptian tradition cannot be
overestimated.