Can I take a human sperm and animal ovum to produce a new creature?

No.

People do not have any close enough species to successfully reproduce with. Even the closest species to humans (orangutans, chimps, and gorillas) are far too separate to breed with. 

Some other animals are capable of hybridization, or can breed with each other to produce offspring. Hybrids like mules, wholphin, hybrid iguana, and killer bees can exist in nature, and can even be capable of reproduction on their own. Most hybrids are sterile and cannot reproduce.

Hybridization is frequent in plants, and is capable of producing fertile offspring. Limequats, loganberries, wheat, and grapefruit are all hybrids of various plant species.

The biggest factor in hybridization is genetic compatibility. if two species are too far removed, they will be unable to hybridize. For example, if one species has more chromosomes than the other, hybridization is impossible. There are no human/animal hybrids.

Why did America enter WWII?

One can easily point to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as being the reason why the United States entered World War II. But while this is certainly true, the answer regarding why the country entered the war is more nuanced than simply thanks to the occurrences of a single event.

Even as late as 1940, U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt had told the American people that their "boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." However, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill was persistent in asking for U.S. assistance and participation in World War II. Some believe that Roosevelt was taking steps toward bringing the United States into the war even before the bombing at Pearl Harbor.

After the attack, only one congressman opposed the declaration of war. If the attack hadn't been enough to provoke the United States, then Germany's declaration of war against the United States just four days later certainly would have been. 

What was in the mind of the poet when he wrote the poem "The Road Not Taken"?

When asked if he would reveal the intended meanings in his poems, Robert Frost replied, "If I wanted you to know I'd had told you in the poem." So, no one really knows the hidden meaning of "The Road Not Taken." 

One thing that is known about this poem by Frost is that he composed it shortly after returning home in the United States from his trip to England, where he accompanied his fellow poet and friend, Edward Thomas on walks. This friend would often take Frost with him on woodland strolls where Thomas would be very indecisive about which path to take. He would worry that, perhaps, he had chosen the wrong path as another might have had more fauna and flora.

At any rate, Edward was rather indecisive. So, he certainly fits the character of the poem's speaker who suffers in the second stanza as he deliberates over his decision to take the "other" path that was "just as fair"--

And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same

Still, the power of poetry is that it speaks to the heart, and there are always various meanings that different people derive from poems. So, while Frost may have had some fun writing about this friend, he also may have intended for his readers to think of the metaphoric meaning of his poem as one about life's choices and their profound affect upon people. After all, in 1961 Frost did say that "The Road Not Taken" is “a tricky poem, very tricky.”

How would you describe the dualism in Winston Smith's personality in Orwell's 1984?

Dualism is a feature of Winston's personality and we see strong evidence of this in Part One, when Winston is battling between conformity and rebellion against the Party. The fact that Winston purchases the diary, for example, (and risks being imprisoned) suggests that he desperately wants to make a stand against the Party's oppressive regime. This is further reinforced by his writing of the phrase, "DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER," over and over.

By Chapter Two, however, Winston's internal need to conform takes over. He realises that writing in the diary is an intensely risky business:

And in front of him there lay not death but annihilation. The diary would be reduced to ashes and himself to vapour.

Winston's fatalistic attitude contrasts strongly with his desire to rebel and to build a future in which the Party no longer exists. It creates an internal sense of conflict within Winston and it is this conflict which drives the plot of Part One. 

How did Maniac create more trouble when he raced Mars Bar in the book Maniac Magee?

Maniac won his race with Mars Bar running backwards, which was insulting to his opponent.

Maniac just did not understand what he was getting into when he met Mars Bar.  He didn’t realize that the boy had a reputation for being tough and that Mars Bar was a threat to him.  His first mistake was not acknowledging Mars Bar's greatness, and his second was taking a bite out of his candy bar.

Maniac was really confused by Mars Bar.  Just as race was not a concept he understood, toughness was lost on him.  He made an enemy of Mars Bar though, and he realized that.  After Grayson's death, Maniac returned and ran into Mars Bar again.

Mars Bar told him he had new sneakers, he had been working out, and he was a faster runner.  He challenged him to a race.  Maniac was not sure what to do.

Even as the race began -- even after it began -- Maniac wasn't sure how to run it. Naturally he wanted to win, or at least to do his best. All his instincts told him that. But there were other considerations: whom he was racing against, and where, and what the consequences might be if he won. (Ch. 38) 

Maniac’s decision to run backwards was an unusual solution to a difficult problem.  He wasn’t really trying to humiliate Mars Bar by proving that he could run faster backwards than his opponent could run forwards.  He just didn’t know what to do and it was the best he could come up with. 

Why did I do it? was all Maniac could think. He hadn't even realized it till he crossed the line, and he regretted it instantly. Wasn't it enough just to win? Did he have to disgrace his opponent as well? Had he done it deliberately, to pay back Mars Bar for all his nastiness! (Ch. 38) 

In reality, Maniac just loved to run.  He enjoyed being on the East End among the people there.  He really missed it and the Beales. He wished he had a home.  Maniac had again added to his legend without meaning to.

Which type of rock is older and why?

Without looking at specific samples of rocks and comparing them, we can rely on a few general rules for dating rocks.

The Law of Superposition says rocks on the bottom of a sequence (a vertical cross-section of rock) will be the oldest, as new material usually accumulates on the top. There are definitely exceptions to this, such as plate tectonic activity that can go so far as to flip rock sequences completely upside-down, but this isn't very common and it's usually easy to recognize when it does happen.

Sometimes newer rock will protrude into older layers. Viewed from the side, this will appear like a spike or tube of rock that cuts through several layers, and those layers will be continuous on either side. If this is a volcanic layer, it's typically called a plutonic intrusion. In this case, the intrusion is younger than the layers it cuts through. 

In general, it's hard to say which rocks are older based on the type of rock themselves, but granites tend to be very old.

Can you summarize Little Red Riding Hood in 70 words?

The story of "Little Red Riding Hood" was first published by French author Charles Perrault, who was influenced by previous oral tellings of the tale. This version, of course, later proved to be of tremendous influence to Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm (or the Brothers Grimm) in their own rendition of the story. Since you are probably most familiar with the Grimm's version, let's summarize that one in seventy words, as you have requested:

Little Red Riding Hood is sent to deliver goodies to her sick grandmother. On the way, Little Red meet the Wolf, who convinces her to stray from the path to pick flowers. The Wolf hurries to the house and eats the grandmother. When Little Red arrives, the Wolf pretends to be her grandmother and eats the girl as well. A huntsman saves the pair by cutting open the Wolf's belly.

Are the animals free under Napoleon's rule? In which ways have they become slaves in Animal Farm by George Orwell?

The animals are certainly not free under Napoleon's rule.

As an allegory about Russian Communism, George Orwell's Animal Farm illustrates the ousting of the ideologue Leon Trotsky and the brutal dictatorship of the tyrant Josef Stalin. This ousting occurs with the tyrant Napoleon's calculated destruction of the windmill and his chasing off Snowball, the ideologue.

Named after Napoleon Bonaparte, who became as great a despot as the aristocrats whom he overthrew, Napoleon becomes power-hungry. He has trained dogs to protect him and to attack dissenters. His propagandist is Squealer, who speaks to them with circumlocution and sophistry. His loyalty to Napoleon, as well as his lack of any conscience, accompanied by his rhetorical skills, forms the ideal propagandist for any tyrant. 

Napoleon eventually has the Ten Commandments changed to a single one:

                    ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
        BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.

He also has the sheep chant, "Four legs good; two legs bad." This chant drowns out any type of intelligent debate. Later on, the chant is altered to "Four legs good, two legs better."

The manipulation of language and the commandments keeps the animals from any independent thought. Further, this removal of independent thought certainly takes away freedom. So, the animals stop protesting, especially when they are attacked by the dogs. Like Stalin, Napoleon becomes dictatorial rather than democratic, and the animals are made to work more, they are fed less, and the rules have changed. If someone protests, he or she is liable to be chased and bitten by the dogs, so the animals becomes inhibited. Or, if an animal is no longer useful, he may be killed as in the example of the Boxer, the loyal believer, who is tricked into climbing into a truck that takes him to the glue factory.

Which plant cell organelles are visible under a compound microscope?

A compound light microscope is a tool for magnifying small objects so that they can be studied more easily by humans. The average classroom light microscope has a magnification of 40x, 100x, and 400x, meaning it has the capacity to make an object appear 40, 100, or 400 times as large as its actual size.  

The organelles in a plant cell vary in size. Some organelles are visible with a compound light microscope, while other organelles can be seen only under a more powerful tool, such as an electron microscope. In most plant cells, the organelles that are visible under a compound light microscope are the cell wall, cell membrane, cytoplasm, central vacuole, and nucleus. 

Some plant cell organelles are too small to be seen with a compound light microscope. Plant cell organelles that are invisible under a compound light microscope include mitochondria, ribosomes, endoplasmic reticula, and golgi bodies.

In the novel The Outsiders, what does Sodapop mean when he tells Ponyboy, “You're bleedin' like a stuck pig”?

At the beginning of the novel, Ponyboy gets jumped and beat up by a group of Socs. Fortunately, the rest of the Greaser gang comes to Ponyboy's aid and chases the Socs off before they seriously harm him. When Sodapop looks at the gash in Ponyboy's head, he says, "You're bleedin' like a stuck pig" (Hinton 7). Sodapop's comment is a common idiom that refers to anything that bleeds profusely. There are several different origins of the idiom "bleeding like a stuck pig." The most likely origin of the idiom is that when pigs are slaughtered, their jugulars are cut with a sharp knife, causing the pigs to bleed out rapidly. When Sodapop sees the way that Ponyboy is bleeding profusely, he uses this common idiom to express how much blood Ponyboy is losing.

What were the major characteristics and leaders of the Indian nations living west of the Mississippi in 1860?

It is hard to categorize all the native Americans living west of the Mississippi in 1860 through a few characteristics.  The Plains Indians were heavily dependent on their horses and following the buffalo.  While they did winter in river valleys, most of the spring and summer grazing season was spent in warfare against other tribes and hunting the buffalo.  Indian warfare was not about how many people could be killed, but rather how brave one's fighters were.  It was considered honorable to touch your enemy in battle, and it was common for a group of young men to steal another tribe's horses.  

Around the Pacific Coast and Snake River in Idaho, fishing was common.  Many Indian groups around the Oregon Trail had already become dependent on forts and trading posts, and the gatherer tribes of northern and central California had been nearly driven to extinction due to the California gold rush and the Spanish mission movement.  The Indian of the American Southwest such as the Apache conducted raids against American mining camps, Mexican settlements across the border, and Navajo herdsmen.  The Navajo were mainly known for their sheep and their elaborate dress and artwork.  

Tribes did not have one leader who spoke for the whole nation, much to the consternation of the American government, who wanted to sign treaties with one group in order to get land rights.  Many tribes also had war chiefs and shamans, so the word "chief" can mean different things here.  Cochise was a leader of the Comanche Indians during the Red River War, and Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse were leaders of the Lakota Sioux.  Red Cloud also led the Lakota in the late 1860s in the effort to keep the settlers off the Bozeman Trail, and he is the only native leader to have a successful war against the U.S.  Geronimo was one of the last Apache leaders to surrender his small group, and Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce nearly escaped with his band to Canada in a chase that was chronicled by the major newspapers in the East.  

"Piggy and Ralph, under the threat of the sky found themselves eager to take a place in this demented but partly secure society. They were glad to...

The irony in this passage is primarily situational.  The opposite happens from what is expected.  The quotation you cite occurs in Chapter 9 when Ralph and Piggy join Jack's group in the feast, the re-enactment of the pig hunt, and ultimately in the murder of Simon.   Part of the irony lies in the characterization of Ralph and Piggy.  These two characters along with Simon are the sanest and most moral characters in the novel. Yet they are "eager" and "glad" to participate in a cruel and barbaric ceremony.  

The theme that is presented here involves the need to belong.  Because of their fear of the storm and the darkness, Piggy and Ralph would rather be part of a society--any society--than be alone. So when they willingly join the group, they take on the characteristics of the group and become savage murderers.  

Further situational occurs in the reversal of order and disorder.  The fact that there is  a type of order in this "demented" society is not expected.  The boys know their parts as they become hunters circling a pig.  For them, this order is a type of security that "hem[s] in the terror."  Ironically, there is no true security in this group.  It can turn on its own and kill cruelly, without mercy. The terror within the group is much more deadly than the storm.  When Simon enters the circle, the hunters including Ralph and Piggy attack him viciously.  Their play-acting escalates into an actual murder.  

What is the strategic management process? What is each phase of strategic management? What methodologies are available for strategic management?

Strategic management consists of two overarching processes: (1) identification of objectives followed by the design of one or more strategies to achieve them and (2) implementation and evaluation of the strategy. The first process requires analyzing and evaluating the internal and external environments of a business to ascertain strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT analysis). The second process requires evaluating the implementation and success of the strategy, which may be replaced if poorly implemented or unsuccessful. 

The first step in the most common framework of the strategic management process, then, is evaluation and assessment of the internal and external environments. The internal environment includes organizational culture, employee performance, management performance, barriers to performance, communication structure, and organizational structure. External environment includes competitors, marketplace pressures, government regulations, social and environmental systems, and monetary and economic conditions. The framework in which strategic planning is developed uses a prescriptive approach for evaluation, assessment, and design of a strategic plan, while a descriptive approach is used for implementation and efficacy analysis.

On his death bed, what does Mr. Hooper say he sees on the everyone's faces, and why is this so important to the story of "The Minister's Black...

When Mr. Hooper is on his deathbed, he looks all around him at the spectators who have gathered. He asks why these people tremble when they look at him when they should be trembling at the sight of one another instead. He finds it ironic that the veil — just a small piece of fabric — makes him seem so terrible, prevents people from taking any pity on him, and compels children to flee from him, as each person in the room also wears a figurative, unseen veil. Mr. Hooper says,

When the friend shows his inmost heart to his friend; the lover to his best beloved; when man does not vainly shrink from the eye of his Creator, loathsomely treasuring up the secret of his sin; then deem me a monster, for the symbol beneath which I lived, and die!  I look around me, and lo! on every visage a Black Veil.

The veil itself is just a symbol. It isn't intrinsically terrible; rather, what it represents frightens people. The people fail to realize the veil's symbolism and fear the veil instead. This is important because Mr. Hooper finally confirms the veil is a symbol of each person's "secret [...] sin," as well as the way we try to hide our sinfulness from everyone else, even our closest friends, spouses, and God. We have many clues about the veil's meaning before now, but Mr. Hooper finally verifies its meaning in these lines.

How might someone consider the 1950s to be a tale of two Americas or a decade of paradox?

The 1950s were a decade of prosperity in the United States. At the same time, it was a decade of discontent. Because different people experienced the decade in such different ways, we could say the decade was a tale of two Americas.

Today in the United States, supporters of Donald Trump want to “make America great again.” Many feel the 1950s were a time when America was great. One major reason why people feel this way is because the United States' economy was growing and no other country’s economy was nearly as strong as ours. Because of this, Americans were starting to enjoy a better standard of living and the knowledge that no other country's citizens lived better than they did. The problem, however, is that the people enjoying this prosperity were mainly white Americans (who also made up a higher percentage of the population than they do now). America was great for many of them, but less so for some other groups.

The two main groups who would have felt America was not great were minorities (mainly African Americans) and women who wanted more from life than to remain in their traditional roles. For these people, the 1950s were not a great time. African Americans still faced legalized segregation and discrimination. Racism was an accepted aspect of American society. For women, opportunities to do anything other than homemaking or relatively menial jobs were scarce. Both groups did not feel America was a great place for them.

In this sense, the story of the United States in the 1950s is a story of two Americas. White, traditionalist America enjoyed economic prosperity. People from that group knew they dominated the society in the country that dominated the world. This was a great time for them. For others, however, the 1950s were a decade of oppression and lack of opportunity. Thus, different groups truly experienced the 1950s in the US in different ways.

why did the cold war start and when

The Cold War began shortly after the end of World War II in 1945. The reason the Cold War started was the the Soviet Union (Russia) violated international agreements about how war-torn Europe would be governed and rebuilt. One such agreement they violated was that territories recaptured from Germany would be given democratic elections. Instead of instituting democratic elections, the Russians set up what were essentially puppet communist governments controlled by the Soviet Union. Angered by this, the United States and the other western democracies refused to "appease" Russia as they had Germany prior to World War II. Instead, they instituted a policy of containment, in which they would not fight the Soviets directly but would seek to prevent them from expanding their territory and ideology into new places. This is why the United States fought several conflicts to promote democracy and prevent communism from spreading during the Cold War.

Why and how does cultural relativism mitigate ethnocentrism? Is cultural relativism desirable?

"Cultural relativism" can mean several different things, and much of the debate over its desirability can be traced to this ambiguity. Descriptive cultural relativism is basically undeniable: Cultures do, in fact, differ in their social and moral norms. But normative culture relativism is not as obviously true: It isn't clear how, if at all, our treatment of people in different cultures should vary based on their culture's norms. So the normative sense of cultural relativism that says we ought to judge other people by the standards of their own culture could be right, but isn't necessarily.

There is also methodological cultural relativism, which is a method that many sociologists and anthropologists use to sort of temporarily suspend judgment about other cultures until they get all the facts in. This is probably a good thing, but it's a very weak sense of relativism; in the end they still go home and publish in Western academic journals according to Western cultural norms. It doesn't even require any particular relativism: You can just have the norm in your own culture that you don't judge other cultures until all the facts are in.

"Ethnocentrism" can also be an ambiguous word. It normally means something quite negative---the tendency to view people of your own culture as inherently superior and people of other cultures as inherently inferior. It frequently results in hatred and even violence. But sociologists also use "ethnocentrism" in a sort of technical sense, to mean simply that we judge people of other cultures by the standards of our own culture. This latter is not obviously wrong---one culture's ideas can in fact be more correct than another's, and it may turn out that we happen to live in the culture that has the best ideas.

I think a key point to keep in mind here is that it matters why you are using the moral standards you are. Is it simply because you grew up with them, and never questioned them? That is probably ethnocentrism. But have you actually analyzed those norms, challenged them, confronted them with evidence, and yet they still held up? Then what you are doing is definitely not the negative kind of ethnocentrism, though it may be "ethnocentrism" in this broader more technical sense.

Indeed, it's not clear that the strongest form of normative cultural relativism is even coherent. Most cultures are not cultural relativists; that is, most people in most cultures do not think that one should judge others only by the standards of the others' own culture. They think that their standards are the objectively correct ones that everyone should use. So in order to be a cultural relativist, you need to judge people only by their own culture, but the only culture that actually tells you to do that is your own culture, namely the subculture of Western academic sociologists. So you are in the end still judging based on your own culture, and you are still faced with the question of why your culture's norms are better than anyone else's. Or in fact you could justify being an imperialist, because Western culture has a historical tradition of imperialism and you could simply be acting according to the norms of your own culture---so how can anyone judge you as wrong?

Yet I understand where normative cultural relativism comes from; it is an attempt to respond to, and in some sense atone for, the extreme violence and destruction created by colonialism and imperialism. One of the things that our imperialist forebears did was judge other people based on their own culture, so if we don't do that, maybe we won't be imperialists! But that doesn't actually follow. That wasn't what made them imperialists, and indeed getting rid of it doesn't necessarily stop us from being imperialists.

A much better approach in my opinion is the concept of universal human rights. By a gathering of global consensus (or something close to consensus), we have established global human rights principles such as those set down in the UN Charter. These are rights that everyone agrees everyone should have. Furthermore, these rights are precisely the sort of rights that explain what is wrong with colonialism and imperialism. What made our forebears imperialists was not that they judged according to their own culture, but that they violated (what we now recognize as) universal human rights. Yet ironically many cultural relativists actually oppose universal human rights, arguing that they are somehow imposing Western values on everyone else---something that I think many of the people from non-Western cultures who helped design and ratify the UN Charter may find baffling.

Why are the pearl buyers excited about kino's pearl?

The pearl buyers are excited about Kino's pearl because of its magnificent quality and size.

The news has swept the town: "Kino has found the Pearl of the World." It is a fantastic pearl of great size and quality that generates dreams in the minds of all that hear of it. "Every man suddenly became related to Kino's pearl" as he dreams of what he could do with such a pearl. Envy also fills the hearts of people so that Kino now becomes "curiously every man's enemy." (III)

Unfortunately, Kino and his wife Juanita are unaware of the poison of envy in so many that their pearl has created. When the neighbors come to see the beautiful pearl that Kino holds in his hand, some become jealous of Kino, wondering how such luck could come to any man. Kino's brother Tomas asks,"What will you do now that you have become a rich man?" (III)

When the dealers hear of this marvelous pearl, they are excited because they have also learned that a peasant has found it. Such a man knows not how these dealers work together; furthermore, he is not aware that they all work for the same man. So, they conspire together on how they will pretend that the pearl is worth little because it is too big and has imperfections. (IV)

How does John Keats personify autumn in the poem "To Autumn"?

The personification of autumn begins immediately in the first stanza. Autumn and the sun are compared to a pair of people whispering secrets to each other.  

Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness, 

   Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun; 

Conspiring with him how to load and bless 

   With fruit the vines that round the thatch-eves run; 

The two people are said to be close friends, and they conspire with each other about various plans. I picture a couple of my junior-high students whispering to each other in the back of the classroom.  

In the second stanza, the personification continues. This time, autumn is sitting on the granary floor and has hair that is blowing in the wind. 

Sometimes whoever seeks abroad may find 

Thee sitting careless on a granary floor, 

   Thy hair soft-lifted by the winnowing wind; 

Later in the same stanza, autumn is given a few various jobs. Autumn is a common laborer taking a nap alongside the harvest, and then a few lines later autumn is called a "gleaner." A gleaner is someone who gathers the remaining food after the reaper has gone through.  

How does Junior view God in The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian?

At several points, Junior views God with anger in The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian. After Eugene, the friend of Junior's father, is shot, Junior is overcome with grief. He searches for answers in the writings of Euripides, who wrote that to lose one's land is to lose everything. As a response to the loss not only of Eugene but to the greater losses that Native Americans have suffered, Junior writes, "More than anything, I wanted to kill God" (page 173).

Junior also believes that God is a type of cosmic jokester who likes to play jokes on people. After his basketball team at Reardan, a mostly white team, beats Wellpinit, the team that his friends such as Rowdy and other Native Americans from the reservation play on, Junior says, "But God has a way of making things even out, I guess" (page 196). He says this because Reardan goes on to lose the championships, which makes them cry the same way that the players on Wellpinit did when they lost. Junior generally believes that God can intervene in his life in very direct ways. When he imagines his dad having an accident in his car, Junior says, "Please, God, please don't kill my daddy" (page 203). He thinks that God is immersed in the details of his life. 

Was the suppression of rights during WWI a valid solution to protecting America?

It is ironic that during the "war to protect democracy" America went the other way and stifled freedoms that would be normal in peacetime.  America passed another Sedition Law, making it illegal to speak out against the war.  American postmasters looked in the mail for German words and letters going abroad.  It was even illegal to organize work stoppages in war industries.  Thousands went to jail for their opinions on the Allies or about the nature of war itself. 

That being said, you cannot take the Sedition Laws and Anti-Espionage Laws out of context.  In the decades leading up to the war, America was the prime location for immigrants from Europe.  Irish immigrants hated Britain and wanted to see a German victory.  Some German immigrants considered themselves German no matter where they went--there was even a small, yet visible German "Fifth Column" in America which succeeded in blowing up factories, most notably the Black Tom Munitions Plant in New Jersey.  There were also socialists who said that this war was a war about greed and capitalism and they tried to organize strikes--this was the view taken by Socialist and presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs.  Of course, there was still the fear of anarchists in the country whose assassination of Francis Ferdinand started the war in the first place.  The American government was scared of all of these potential troublemakers and issued draconian laws to protect itself.  America has done this in times of war such as when Adams drafted the Alien and Sedition Act in 1798 to chase potential French Revolutionaries away from America.  The Wilson administration was able to use this as a precedent.  

In the poem "The Road Not Taken " by Robert Frost, do you think it is on a positive side that he chose "the road less travelled by"?

In Frost's poem, "The Road Not Taken," all we know from the narrator is that his having chosen the less traveled road has "made all the difference" (line 20).  Whether this is a positive or a negative choice as applied to any particular individual is a matter of opinion.  Bear in mind that no matter which the narrator had chosen, it would have "made all the difference" (line 20).

Which is positive and which is negative depends, I would say, on the kind of personality one has.  A person who is risk-averse is likely to be happier in the end following a more traveled road.  A person who is risk-seeking is likely to be happier following the less-traveled road.  This is because the roads are a metaphor for our paths through life.  At many junctures, we decide to do what most people do, to follow a path where most people have gone before, or to follow a path that is a bit different, one that is more likely to bring about atypical results.  To apply this to the lives of most people I know, for example, one graduates from high school, goes to college, gets a job, gets married, and has children.  However, some I know decided not to go to college but to go travel through Europe for ten years or join the Peace Corps.  A few went to New York and became starving artists. My brother spent a few years on the road as a musician and dancer.  For him, the road was a great choice.  The less-traveled road can lead to great adventures and it can also lead to some very hard times. 

Think about what kind of person you are.  To decide whether this is a positive or negative choice means viewing the choice from your own perspective, since all the narrator tells us is that it made a difference, which is meaningless in a way, since if he had been presented with five different paths to follow, the choice of any would have made a difference. 

How could I summarize the plot of Every Day by David Levithan in five to seven sentences?

Because the plot of a story has exactly six elements, your question sets up a perfect scenario for a tiny plot summary of Every Day.  The plot always begins with the exposition, when the reader learns about the character and the setting.  During this part of the story, the reader learns about A, who lives in a body only for 24 hours before switching to another one.  Next comes the inciting incident (that some call the conflict):  the problem in the story that needs to be solved.  This particular incident here is when A falls in love with Rhiannon when he inhabits the body of Justin.  This is followed by the rising action, when the tension begins to mount.  Many things happen in the rising action of Every Day.  In fact, in almost every moment of the rising action, A is trying to reach Rhiannon through another body.  Meanwhile, he is foiled a bit by other bodies that he has previously inhabited. The tension continues until it reaches the story's climax:  the height of the tension.  There is no doubt that the climax of the story is when Rhiannon and A figure out that they cannot have a regular relationship.  The climax is followed by the falling action, when things begin to return to normal:  A knows the result of their climactic decision is best for Rhiannon.  By the time of the resolution, the original conflict has been solved in some way.  In fact, A takes his "new" body (Katie) on an adventure in order to disappear.  If you apply these ideas to your assignment for Every Day, it should be easy to write five to seven sentences having to do with the plot.

What is Scrooge's attitude towards having a responsibility to the poor in A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens?

When two gentlemen stop at Scrooge's offices early in Stave I of A Christmas Carol, one of them asks Scrooge to make "some slight provision" for the "poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time." He adds there are thousands who are in need of just the common comforts.

Scrooge gruffly asks the man if there are not any prisons, or workhouses, and he is told that there are. Then Scrooge inquires if the Treadmill and the Poor Law are yet in effect. Now, the two gentlemen begin to understand the innuendos of Scrooge, so they tell him that those places do not furnish Christian cheer. They wish to buy some meat and drink, and "some means of warmth." When one of the men asks, "What shall I put you down for?" Scrooge says nothing, adding,

I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry.

Scrooge contends he supports the institutions about which he has asked and this support costs enough, arguing those who are badly off must go to these institutions. When one of the gentlemen says many people would rather die than go to these places, Scrooge coldly replies,

If they would rather die... they had better do it and decrease the surplus population.

In this passage, Charles Dickens mimics the words of Thomas Malthus and mocks his ideas about the dangers of population growth. Malthus contended that because people reproduce exponentially and the food supply only increases arithmetically, populations would eventually outgrow the food supply. Malthus argued population control would have to exist, whether in the form of disease, wars, or some other method, to decrease the surplus population. Also, Dickens satirically rails against the horrible conditions of the poorhouses and the workhouses in the Victorian Age. In fact, there was so much contagious disease in the poor and workhouses that many physicians refused to attend to the sick there.

What is an example of imagery in the story "The Most Dangerous Game" by Richard Edward Connell?

Arguably, the most effective imagery in Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" is the light/dark imagery that prevails throughout the story.

Rather than contrasting the light and darkness, however, Connell cleverly creates an interplay with the light and dark: The light deceptively lures or attracts rather than providing safety, as is often the case.

In the exposition of the story, as Rainsford is alone on the deck, he thinks to himself, "It's so dark that I could sleep without closing my eyes, the night would be my eyelids--" This observation foreshadows this interplay of light and dark as Rainsford is lured by the lights in this intense darkness.

Yet, at first there is the traditional suggestion of the safety of light in this part of the story. For instance, that Rainsford is in danger when he falls overboard is indicated by "the receding light of the yacht," and also in this description:

[T]he lights of the yacht became faint and ever-vanishing fireflies, then they were blotted out by the night.

After Rainsford finally drags himself onto a shore, he sleeps until late in the afternoon of the next day. Having heard gunfire, Rainsford follows its direction, but darkness is falling:

[B]leak darkness was blacking out the sea and jungle when Rainsford sighted the lights.

Rainsford follows the way to these lights as he thinks of the traditional safety of light, but he soon discovers that they all emanate from one huge structure, a palatial chateau, complete with threatening pointed towers and set upon a cliff on three sides. Still, he is drawn to these lights, the only ones in the darkness, just as the sailors are drawn to the flash of lights leading into the deceptive channel of Zaroff where, like moths drawn to light, the sailors eventually meet death.

The sinister nature of both darkness and light continues throughout most of the narrative. On the first day of the hunt, for example, Rainsford tries to put as much distance as possible between him and the general as he repeatedly doubles back on his trail in order to confuse the hunter. By the time night falls, he is exhausted; so, knowing that it would not make sense to blunder through the dark, Rainsford climbs a tree, taking care not to leave any sign of his having touched this tree. As he rests on one of the thick branches, Rainsford thinks to himself, “...only the devil himself could follow that complicated trail through the jungle after dark.” But, he is wrong, as the general emerges toward morning and stops beneath his tree, lights a cigarette, and then casually departs.

What does the third stanza of "Still I Rise" mean?

The third stanza of Angelou's "Still I Rise" is based upon a series of similes.  Throughout the poem, the narrator, an African-American female, is making the point that nothing that white people have done to African-Americans throughout hundreds of years will stop them from overcoming their obstacles and succeeding.  This stanza shows this with a comparison of the sun, the moon, the tides, and hope. The sun rises each day, as does the moon. The tide rises.  Hope, we all know, rises, too, no matter how bad things get. It is human to hope, even in the worst of times. So the narrator is telling the reader she is like all of these phenomena, and she will continue to rise, to triumph over the adversity that African-Americans have endured since they were brought forcibly to American shores.    

To what extent do you feel that human beings need rules in order to be moral?

This question is closely related to the age-old “nature v. nurture” debate. Do people behave the way they do because of rules imposed on them by society, or are they obeying innate (from the inside) laws instilled in them from some other source? If there is a god who instills a sense of morality into our beings, then we are not wholly dependent on rules.

Since your question asks for an opinion, I'll tell you what I think, and why.

I believe that our moral sense comes from a combination of society's rules and something that is imprinted in our minds or hearts by God. If we did not have an innate sense of right and wrong, we would live in a society in which life was much more of a survival-of-the-fittest affair. Granted, the fittest certainly do fair better than the weakest members of society, but for the most part everyone is cared for to some degree. Social programs that feed and house the poor may be controversial, but they do point to our desire to at least do something for them.

Imagine a world in which no one had a pre-programmed sense of right and wrong. Why would anyone do anything for anybody else unless it was in their own best interest? Instead, we live in a world where we feel compelled to make the rules that protect the rights of others, even sometimes at our own expense.

We also live in a world in which nearly every parent willingly sacrifices their own gain for their children's benefit, without hope of a material reward. People may scoff at that and say, sure, that's because we instinctually love our offspring. But why do we possess that instinct? It must have been put there for a reason.

Likewise, why do we have a conscience? We know when we have done something morally wrong. Our conscience won't let loose of us—even if we try to deny it ourselves.

But there is another side to this issue. As a teacher I see all kinds of kids every year. A few come from unfortunate home situations in which they don't learn as much about the rules of moral behavior as others. Sometimes these kids seem more likely to violate moral standards than others. This suggests that it is still important to create and use rules to build on the morality naturally occurring within us.

Finally, I don't think we could even create rules if we didn't have a sense of morality to start with. Why would we want to? Why would we care? But it's also true that if we suddenly lifted all of our laws and rules, we would undoubtedly have many immoral things happen—like the looting we see when a government falls apart.

So the argument goes around and around, and that's probably because, to finally answer your question directly, we need rules to behave morally, but we also need a sense of morality with which to craft our rules.

What is an example of a linguistic or structural technique used in Act III, Scene 3 of Macbeth?

Though Act III, Scene 3 of Shakespeare's Macbeth is short, it has some remarkable structural and linguistic devices at play that are worth examining. The component I want to focus on is the regular rhyming pattern used within the dialogue, as it is both a linguistic and structural device that lends considerable rhythm to the text. As an example, check out the first six lines of the scene:

FIRST MURDERER: 

But who did bid thee join with us?

THIRD MURDERER: 

Macbeth.

SECOND MURDERER: 

He needs not our mistrust, since he delivers
Our offices and what we have to do
To the direction just.

FIRST MURDERER: 

Then stand with us.

As you can see, Shakespeare utilizes a repeated rhyme within the murderers' dialogue to create a poetic rhythm and pattern. This decision is both linguistic and structural because it ties the language of the scene more closely together, making the violent event to come (Banquo's murder) more compact and ruthless. Indeed, the brutal events of the scene are hauntingly juxtaposed by the murderers' rhythmic, poetic language. 

Shakespeare uses a similar linguistic and structural device when he depicts the Weird Sisters. Just as the murderers' dialogue is glued together by regular rhymes, so too is the witches' conversation ordered by a poetic, rhyming pattern. Throughout the play, Shakespeare used tightly crafted poetry to hint at (and juxtapose) the dark deeds and the villainous sides of human nature. 

What event marks the beginning of the modern world? The Renaissance? The Enlightenment? Or the French Revolution? Why?

Arguably, the Renaissance was the precursor for the events that you mention, in addition to the Protestant Reformation. Therefore, we could say that the Renaissance marks the beginning of modernity.

The Renaissance, culturally, is characterized by the emergence of humanism -- that is, a current of thought that places Man, or humanity, at the center, eschewing the supernatural as well as the supreme influence of the Church. Whereas Christianity taught us that human beings are innately sinful, humanists put forth the idea that we are inherently good and decent and that rational thought -- not salvation -- would provide the solution to our problems.

The Renaissance, which means "rebirth" in French, elevated Classical ideals of beauty and touted the importance of education. Literature did not go away during the Middle Ages -- stories were, in fact, very important to courtly life and, during the early 14th-century, "The Canterbury Tales" became the first Romance that was accessible to middle-class audiences. However, literacy became more widespread during the Renaissance after the invention of Johannes Gutenberg's printing press around 1440. (Note: There is Western bias here. The earliest document printed by movable type is the Jikji, an anthology of Zen teachings, printed in 1377. This evidence shows that the first printing press was, in fact, invented in Korea. However, the Korean press was rudimentary. Gutenberg's press was more technologically advanced, employing a matrix and hand mold, allowing for simpler and faster production).

Politically, more modern ideas of leadership also emerged. Niccolo Macchiavelli's "The Prince" encouraged the idea that a savvy political leader would prefer to be feared over being loved. He used the powerful Medici family as his model. In England, during the latter part of the Renaissance in the mid-16th century, Henry VIII appropriated the Protestant Reformation for his own selfish purposes and disavowed Catholicism, thereby declaring himself head of the Church of England, which led to the creation of Anglicanism.

Thus, the Renaissance is key to the emergence of modernity for three reasons: firstly, its daring proposition that faith in humanity is more important than faith in God; secondly, the invention of Gutenberg's printing press, which made it easier to share and spread information; thirdly, its dismantling of the supreme power of the Catholic Church in favor of a form of Christian faith which encouraged a more direct communication with God and personal access to Scripture.

These three events were revolutionary and, without them, the Enlightenment, which further questioned the infallibility of the Church and relied very much on print to spread ideas, would not have happened. Nor would the Scientific Revolution which preceded it. Finally, it was Enlightenment ideas which contributed to both the American and French Revolutions. One could, thus, view modernity as a time line which begins with the Renaissance and continues to our present day.

How is the society in 1984 similar to and different from contemporary America?

The type of society depicted in 1984 bears a number of similarities and differences to contemporary America. One of the most striking differences is the nature of political power. In Oceania, the Party came to power in a violent Revolution. In the modern United States, the government is democratically elected.

Moreover, the citizens of the modern US have a number of rights and freedoms which are protected by legislation, like the Constitution, and cannot be denied by the government. In contrast, in Oceania, Party members live a very restricted life of which every aspect is controlled by the Party. They cannot date who they like, for example, or complain about their poor standard of living. Proles are the only exception to this rule; they live as they please, but only because the Party does not view them as a political threat.

Both the Party and the United States use surveillance to monitor their citizens. In 1984, the Party installed telescreens in the homes of Party members and in the public places they frequent. These devices constantly monitor the conversations and actions of every Party member. While surveillance in modern America is not as invasive, it has steadily increased since the 1980s, driven in part by the modern threat of terrorism (see the first reference link). 

Please also see the second reference link provided for more information.

How old is the speaker in "Loveliest of Trees, the Cherry Now" by A. E. Housman?

The speaker of this poem is twenty years old.

He reveals his age in the second stanza:

Now, of my threescore years and ten,

Twenty will not come again,

And take from seventy springs a score,

It only leaves me fifty more.

Recall that a "score" of anything is twenty of them. Remember Abraham Lincoln's mention of "four score and seven years ago" in his Gettysburg Address? He meant "eighty-seven years ago." However many scores you have, just multiply that by twenty, and add the rest: (4 x 20) + 7 = 87.

Getting back to the poem, what this second stanza means is, "Of the total seventy years that I'll probably get to be alive, I'll never again be twenty like I am now. So if you subtract twenty from seventy, I've only got fifty more years to enjoy life!" (Saying "threescore years and ten" is saying "seventy years:" [3 x 20] + 10 = 70.)

It's really important to read that whole stanza when you're trying to figure out how old the speaker of the poem is. If you stopped after reading the first two lines of the stanza, you might think that the speaker is seventy instead of twenty--you might misinterpret the first two lines as "Now since I'm seventy, I'll never again be twenty." But after you read all four of those lines, you understand that the first two lines are actually saying, "Now, since I probably only get seventy years of life, my current age of twenty is never going to happen again."

You might have guessed that, instead of someone who's barely out of his teens, it's more likely that an older gentleman of seventy would be out walking, looking at beautiful trees and thinking about how life is so short and valuable. But the speaker of this poem is actually a twenty-year-old doing just that!

Should reporters have interviewed the terrorists and their hostages while the 1985 hijacking of TWA 847 was still unfolding? What should have been...

Part of the point of terrorist activities is to create publicity. Terrorists are attempting to achieve political or personal goals with acts that manipulate the fears and worries of ordinary people. They may gauge the success of their actions by the degree to which their acts are publicized. Thus, giving this sort of intense media coverage to terrorists is in a sense to be complicit with terrorism and to help terrorists achieve their goals and, even worse, to encourage future terrorists. After all, if a tactic succeeds, people will continue to use it. 

Although state censorship of news media is wrong, in this case, it would have been far better for the media to have covered the story with simple factual reporting, buried in world news sections, rather than in blaring headlines. Also, leaking military plans before the fact may have breached the needed operational security, interfering with the hostages' rescue. While news media do need to hold the military accountable, they should delay treatment of specific operational details until after the fact.

That said, terrorism is often the result of desperation. People feel their voices and issues are ignored by the international community. Thus the media, by proactively reporting issues such as persecution of minority groups, can play a role in preventing terrorism. 

Finally, one should note that in an era of big data, the media responds to the number of people who click on a story. Thus, the blame for giving terrorists the attention they seek lies less in the media than in a reading public who will only pay attention to celebrity gossip and acts of terrorism, rather than read world news as it unfolds and work to elect politicians who remain engaged with the world's problems and injustices. Treating hostages as celebrities rather than focusing on the actual issues behind the terrorist acts turns politics into a circus rather than a serious ethical arena.

what are some examples of research questions about mathematics in elementary grades?

Here are some areas of interest and questions that arise in mathematics teaching in the elementary grades:

Curriculum -- What content should be taught? When should it be taught? What are the objectives to teaching a specific idea or group of ideas? How should the content be arranged within a particular year and across the elementary grades? When should algebraic ideas be introduced?

Learning -- How important is discovery learning? How can discovery learning best be utilized in the classroom? What is the most effective use of manipulatives? Which fosters better retention - teaching for understanding or practical applications?

General -- How effective is homework? How much time should be devoted to practicing skills? How should classes be organized? How can we implement differentiated instruction especially as related to gifted or remedial students? Should we insist that elementary teachers be math specialists? Should we integrate computer assisted instruction, and if so what are the long term ramifications and limitations? How should gender inequality be addressed at the elementary level?

How should I write a bed time speech for children?

I think that bedtime speech means the same thing as bedtime story.  You can prepare your speech in the same way that you would prepare any other speech.  Before beginning, you must consider two main things -- your message and your audience.  As the question mentions, your audience is children.  Next is your message.  It's a story, but what is the story about?  If the child is a girl, perhaps something about a princess.  It doesn't have to be a princess, but I would make the protagonist a female.  If you are speaking to a boy, then make the main character a male.  If the child is young, then the story line is going to have to be short and simple.  They simply do not have the attention span to last for much beyond ten minutes.  Based on my own three children, the story should be exiting, but not scary.  Remember, the child is hearing this before bed.  You don't want your story to cause the child to lay awake in fear for the next hour.  Keep your language simple, and use a lot of color in your narration because it will help with visualization.  Some people feel differently about this last part, but I like to end bed time stories with an actual ending.  Bring the story to a close rather than leaving it with a cliffhanger.  Again, you want the child relaxed and ready for sleep.  You don't want them continuing to think about the story until very late at night.    

`h(x) = ln(2x^2 + 1)` Find the derivative of the function.

`h(x) = ln (2x^2+1)`

First, apply the formula:

`(ln u)' = 1/u * u'`

So, the derivative of the function will be:

`h'(x) =1/(2x^2+1)*(2x^2+1)'`

To take the derivative of the inner function, apply the formula:

`(x^n)' = n* x^(n-1)`

`(c)' = 0`

So h'(x) will become:

`h'(x) =1/(2x^2+1) * (2*2x + 0)`

`h'(x) = 1/(2x^2+1) * 4x`

`h'(x)=(4x)/(2x^2+1)`

Therefore, the derivative of the given function is `h'(x)=(4x)/(2x^2+1)` .

What steps in the control process will be important as Starbucks tries to reduce the number of paper cups it uses? How can Starbucks maintain its...

The control process has four parts (some experts combine the statement of steps two and three):

1. Establish standard performance measurements.


2. Measure performance.


3. Compare performance to standards.


4. Take corrective action.

Assume the Starbucks vision and mission statements, strategic plan, and organizational objectives—the bedrock of performance control and corrective action—are up-to-date and reflect current sustainability, non-toxic materials, and green practices standards. The steps in the control process that will be important as Starbucks reduces paper cup use are to establish standards for what is an eco-friendly and sustainable number of paper cups to use; measure actual performance in paper cup use; compare that measured quantity to the established standards; and develop and take corrective action.

Since steps one, two, and three are in part or wholly matters of research and leadership discussion, step four will prove the most challenging. In exploring corrective action plans, Starbucks will have to investigate what potential solutions already exist in the marketplace for reducing plastic-lined paper cup use. For instance, if it is determined that reusable glass containers should replace paper cups, in part or wholly, that corrective action employs an already existing solution: glass bottles and cups. Barring a readily implemented, currently available marketplace solution, Starbucks may determine corrective action requires innovating a presently unknown solution. Consequently, the fourth step of taking corrective action may be the most important—and challenging—of the four needed steps.

In "The Luncheon," how did the lady react when the narrator ordered only mutton chops?

When the narrator ordered only mutton chops, the lady is incredulous, and she criticizes him for ordering such a filling dish. She claims she never ate anything as heavy as chops, as it would overload her stomach. For his part, the narrator only orders the mutton because it is the cheapest dish on the menu. Because he is a struggling writer at the time, the narrator knows he can't indulge himself if he wants to be able to afford the bill.

When his dish arrives, the lady once again lectures the narrator about eating such a "heavy luncheon." In truth, the narrator only orders one mutton chop. For her part, despite professing she never eats a large luncheon, the lady has salmon, caviar, asparagus, a peach, ice-cream, and coffee for her meal.

To add insult to injury, just as she chooses a ripe peach from the basket the waiter brings over, the lady lectures the narrator about eating meat. Seemingly oblivious to the expense the narrator incurs on her behalf, the lady again lectures her host as they leave the restaurant. The narrator knows he will be penniless for the month, but tells us his revenge came later. Years after the luncheon, the narrator discovers the lady now weighs twenty-one stone (almost three-hundred pounds).