Blog

In Shakespeare's Macbeth, how can Malcolm face his country's problems after the reign of Macbeth?

Since Macbeth ends with the death of its titular character, we're unable to say for sure exactly how Malcolm can or will face Scotland's undoubtedly numerous problems, and thoughts on this question will be pretty speculative. However, based on what we know of Malcolm, and based on what we know of Scotland's post-Macbeth woes, it's possible to make some guesses.

First, let's consider the actual problems Scotland faces: as the play progresses, Macbeth becomes an...

First, let's consider the actual problems Scotland faces: as the play progresses, Macbeth becomes an increasingly paranoid tyrant, killing allies (and, at certain times, his allies' families) in order to consolidate power. Thus, Scotland will face some power vacuums brought on by the collapse of prominent aristocratic families. Moreover, the country as a whole is likely to be wary and distrustful of any kind of government for quite some time; after all, why should citizens of Scotland trust a new monarchy if the last one abused them in order to gain power?

Now, let's consider Malcolm: a cautious and clever individual, Malcolm is smart enough to leave Scotland after his father's death, and to return again to orchestrate Macbeth's downfall. Also, in a somewhat calculating way, Malcolm motivates Macduff to use the death of his family as motivation to seek revenge against Macbeth. Furthermore, at the end of the play, Malcolm presents us with a depiction of dignified royalty, promising to restore peace and order to Scotland. As such, it seems as though Malcolm not only knows how to play the political game, but also how to instill hope in the hearts of his subjects, and his intentions seem to be mostly noble. In that case, though we can't be sure exactly how the country's fortunes will play out after Macbeth's demise, we can hypothesize that Malcolm will use his nobility and political intelligence to restore some stability and confidence to Scotland.

In "The Bet" by Anton Chekhov, does the bet prove whether capital punishment is better than life imprisonment?

Whether or not the experiment of the lawyer and the banker has proven that capital punishment is less cruel than life imprisonment is debatable even at the end of the narrative of "The Bet." It has, however, demonstrated that forced isolation is a terrible thing, although the lawyer has had some periods of enlightenment and enjoyment.

In one of his stories, writer Joseph Conrad's character observes, "Meaning depends upon sharing." For the lawyer, all his...

In one of his stories, writer Joseph Conrad's character observes, "Meaning depends upon sharing." For the lawyer, all his intellectual betterment becomes meaningless because he is isolated. In the letter that the young man writes at the end of his term, he boasts of all he has learned and vicariously experienced, along with the wisdom he has acquired. Yet, from what he has learned from the writings of many men, he has become cynical about the world and his fellow man in what he terms the vanity of their desires:

You have lost your reason and taken the wrong path. You have taken lies for truth and hideousness for beauty.

Without someone with whom to share his ideas, without someone by whom he can measure himself and his ideas, the lawyer finds no real meaning to life, instead perceiving knowledge and learning as worthless. His years of learning are all vain, empty, and illusory for him because he cannot put ideas to use or share them with anyone or anything. While it is better for the lawyer than if he were to have been put to death, his life now has become a punishment, not a reward.

After reading the lawyer's letter, the banker realizes that his bet has subjected the young man to an agonized life, and he is deeply moved. He feels "so great a contempt for himself" that he lies for hours on his bed because his "tears and emotion kept him for hours from sleeping." His life, too, has become a punishment because of the cruelty he has inflicted upon the once young lawyer.

What is the exigence of the book "Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking" by Malcolm Gladwell?

In any work, the exigence provides the impetus for an author to speak out or to write about an obstacle or dilemma. The exigence involves the desire to effect change and to convince others that the change is necessary. So, you can say that exigence is the purpose for a particular work.

Thus, the exigence for the book is that "decisions made very quickly can be every bit as good as decisions made cautiously and deliberately." Gladwell wants to dispel the notion that good decisions are only made through careful deliberation. He argues that there are benefits to making split-second decisions, especially in times of stress or danger; he refers to "thin-splicing," where we make decisions based on relatively little information.

Gladwell contends that we can change our lives for the better if we will only explore the value of intuition in specific circumstances. He maintains that, if we took our instincts seriously (and learn when we can trust them and when we can't), it will "change the way wars are fought, the kinds of products we see on the shelves, the kinds of movies that get made, the way police officers are trained, the way couples are counseled, the way job interviews are conducted..."

Basically, Gladwell wants his readers to be aware of the possibilities that await them by acknowledging that "there can be as much value in the blink of an eye as in months of rational analysis." He asserts that we can learn how to make better "snap judgments," and in doing so, we will learn how to be successful in the working world as well as in our personal lives. Gladwell provides an example for his hypothesis in the introduction to the book.

Accordingly, in September 1983, Gianfranco Becchina, an art dealer, approached the J. Paul Getty Museum about buying his supposedly sixth century male kouros, a nude statue positioned with the left leg forward and arms at the sides. To aid the museum in its research, Stanley Margolis, a geologist from the University of California, spent two whole days examining the surface of the statue with a high-powered stereomicroscope. He took samples and examined them, eventually coming to the conclusion that the statue was thousands of years old.

However, three other experts took a look at the statue, and without examining it or performing tests on it, immediately concluded that the statue was a fake. Frederico Zeri (an Italian art historian), Thomas Hoving (a former director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art), and Evelyn Harrison (an expert on Greek Sculpture) all instinctively felt an "intuitive repulsion" within moments of seeing the statue. How did they know that the statue was a fake? All concluded within seconds that the statue had an unseemly look of "freshness" about it. It looked like it had never been in the ground.

Thus, three people understood more about the nature of the statue in the first two seconds of looking than a team of museum experts after fourteen months. Gladwell's book is indeed, about the power of the instant impression.

Why is it necessary to convert partly paid up preference shares into fully paid up shares before redemption?

Partly paid up preference shares are shares that the shareholder has not entirely paid for either at the time of incorporation or issuance. During incorporation and issuance, the shareholder is allowed to pay an amount less than the face value of the share. However, the company expects the remainder of the cost at face value to be paid at some point in the future. Fully paid up preference shares are shares that have their face...

In most jurisdictions, the Companies Act requires partly paid up preference shares be paid up in full before they are redeemed by the shareholder. The logic behind the concept holds that the firm cannot pay for what the shareholder does not completely own. The shareholder of partly paid up preference shares is considered to be in debt, and it is only after they completely service the debt that they can claim the full value of the shares. It is also important to note that the price to be paid by the company at redemption is established during issuance and is based on the face value.

What is the meaning of sections 12, 17, and 32 of Walt Whitman's poem "Song of Myself"?

Below, you'll find basic explanations for sections 12, 17, and 32 of Walt Whitman's "Song of Myself."

12: this section describes the movements of both a butcher boy (217-18) and a group of blacksmiths (219-24). Though the images seem random, they function as one of the poem's many "slice of life" sequences. These sections, which generally focus on seemingly random scenes from everyday life, seek to capture the beauty of ordinary existence. Thus, Whitman transforms...

Below, you'll find basic explanations for sections 12, 17, and 32 of Walt Whitman's "Song of Myself."

17: this short section promotes the universality of Whitman's poetic message. Whitman says "These are really the thoughts of all men in all ages and lands" (355), and in making this statement, he asserts that "Song of Myself" taps into a universal experience of the self that is relevant for all times and for all peoples. The description of a universal human experience is one of Whitman's primary poetic goals.

32: Whitman begins this section by contrasting the peace of animals with the anxiety of human society, thus illustrating the latter's absurdity. Then, he transitions into a specific description of taming a wild stallion, only to assert that he can "out-gallop" (708) the noble beast. In that case, though Whitman acknowledges the folly of human society in comparison to the peace of the animal world, he still asserts the supremacy of the human individual.

In the play Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller, Willy misses the distinction between being loved and being well-liked. What are the consequences...

Willy misses the point and confuses "being loved" with being "well-liked" as it is evidenced in the fact that he takes almost for granted the love of his wife, Linda, and seems more eager to please and satisfy someone who shows him only shallow emotions when he enters the affair with "The Woman."

Linda gives Willy every possible validation he would need. She calls him "handsome," "smart," and she continuously showers him with complements and kind comments that would assure any normal man that he is loved.

Still, Willy grew up without real love. His father and, later on, his brother left him at an early age having to fend for himself in all matters of support and personal worth. Willy may very well have never known what it feels to feel loved, and so he embarked in a never-ending quest to be "liked." After all, to be "liked" often carries with it a lot of instant gratification, which Willy savors.

In his affair with "The Woman," Willy constantly asks her why she picked him, why she likes him, and other things that have nothing to do with true, emotional connection. As such, he also lacked this connection with just about everyone, including his own adult children.

The consequences of this lack of distinction are crass. Because of his ridiculous need for validation, Willy nearly destroys his marriage. While the marriage was saved, his relationship with Biff became permanently damaged when the latter found out about the affair. Willy also breaks relationships with coworkers, going as far as (supposedly) slapping someone when he heard the person call him a "Walrus."

I’m fat. I’m very—foolish to look at, Linda. [...] a salesman I know, [...] I hear him say something about—walrus. And I—I cracked him right across the face. I won’t take that. I simply will not take that. But they do laugh at me. I know that.

Willy is aware, fully aware, that he is NOT well-liked. Perhaps, he has never been well-liked, judging from the poor way that the treats his friends and neighbors. Therefore, this is one of the consequences of his desire to be well-liked: he fails. He tries too hard, and he loses each and every time. If he knew and validated love, and those who love him, he would not have to be in this endless cat-and-mouse chase for validation that has led him nowhere.

How do food-borne illnesses affect the public’s perception of the risks of food contamination?

The actual chances of negative health impacts from food contamination and food-borne illnesses and the public perceptions thereof are two related issues. Often, the two are only distantly related to one another, as public perception is influenced by what is trending in media, sometimes leading to inaccurate risk perception.

In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention track food-borne illnesses. Over the past few decades, the most common sources of food-borne illnesses...

In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention track food-borne illnesses. Over the past few decades, the most common sources of food-borne illnesses have been fresh fruits and vegetables, but contaminated poultry was actually responsible for a slightly higher percentage of deaths. Another government website which lists recent recalls shows frozen vegetables and some prepackaged salads and salad ingredients have topped recent recall lists.

Consumers tend to worry more about chemical contaminants and pesticide residues than the more common microbiological forms of contamination, possibly due to the extensive media coverage of such issues as contaminated milk in China.

Several studies reported by the FDA suggest that experience of a food-borne illness or awareness of vulnerability (especially in consumers over 60) increases the degree to which people research the topic and follow recommended safety procedures. Awareness of food-borne illnesses tends to be highest among the well-educated and those who have personal experience of food-borne illnesses. Also, efforts by government agencies to educate the public about proper food handling have increased the number of people aware of food-borne illnesses and how to prevent them.