whos fault is it that romeo and juliet died

/in /by

Who is most at fault for the deaths of Romeo and Juliet? – Although there are many characters in this play that have contributed to Romeo and Juliet’s death, Friar Laurence is the person most to blame. Friar Laurence’s actions throughout the play resulted in the two star crossed lovers’ death.

Why is it Romeo’s fault that they died? – Romeo Montague’s fatal flaw was his impulsiveness due to falling in love and marry Juliet, becoming a murderer, and taking his own life . One reason Romeo was impulsive is because he fell in love with Juliet and married her only a day after meeting her.

Why is it Juliet’s fault they died? – She hated the thought of marrying a man she didn’t love, and was willing to take a chance on dying in order not to marry him. This caused her death because when Romeo thought she was dead, he killed himself, which caused her to kill herself when she woke up.

Why is it Tybalt’s fault? – The first reason is that Tybalt is to blame is that he killed Mercutio and was killed by Romeo. The second reason is that Romeo was banished because he killed Tybalt. The third reason is that Juliet would have never faked her death if Romeo was never banished.

Why was Friar Lawrence’s fault? – Friar Laurence is at fault for their deaths because he married Romeo and Juliet, did not have a good plan set up, and left Juliet alone in the tomb.

Who is responsible for the death of Romeo and Juliet conclusion? – Their deaths cause the altercation between Lord Capulet and Lord Montague to end. Throughout this wild plot, Lord Capulet and Friar Laurence’s actions are to blame for Romeo and Juliet’s death. Lord Capulet was one of the individuals that contributed to the termination of Romeo and Juliet’s lives.

Is Friar Lawrence the one to blame? – Friar Laurence is mostly to blame for the tragic events in Romeo and Juliet, because of he did things in secret, not communicating clearly, and not executing his plans. The first reason why Friar Laurence is to blame is because he married Romeo and Juliet.

Is Mercutio responsible for Romeo and Juliet death? – Mercutio is to blame for Romeo’s and Juliet’s deaths because he Convinced Romeo to go to the Capulet party, Defended for Romeo and Cursed both families. Mercutio convinced Romeo to go to the Capulet Party. Benvolio and Romeo are talking when Mercutio enters.

Who do you think is most responsible for Juliet’s feigned death and why? – Capulet is to Blame in William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. Juliet’s arrangement to Paris had brought her death because it had resulted in the potion plan which had caused Romeo and Juliet to die.

how did scrooge change from the beginning to the end

/in /by

How did Scrooge change at the end? – At the end of the novella, Scrooge has completely transformed into a philanthropic and altruistic individual rather than a misanthropist. This notion is made clear when it says, “I am as light as a feather, I am as happy as an angel, I’m quite a baby”. Scrooge has changed his outlook and his behaviour.

What did Scrooge become by the end of the story? – Overjoyed, Scrooge commits to being more generous and compassionate; he accepts his nephew’s invitation to Christmas dinner, provides for Cratchit and his family, and donates to the charity fund. In the end, he becomes known as the embodiment of the Christmas spirit and as a “second father” to Tiny Tim.

What is Scrooge like at the end of the novel? – By the end of the story, Scrooge is a changed man, sharing his wealth and generosity with everyone. According to Dickens’s description, Scrooge is cold through and through. No warmth could warm, no wintry weather chill him. Dickens uses pathetic fallacy to represent Scrooge’s nature.

How does Scrooge change in Stave 1? – In stave one he is presented as selfish, rude, angry and lonely. ‘Warning all human sympathy to keep its distance. ‘ he is thoroughly dislikeable. Through the attentions of Marley’s ghost and the journey Scrooge takes through the past present and future Scrooge changes and becomes likable.

How does Scrooge change throughout the play? – In Scrooge we see a man who is transformed from a greedy, selfish miser into a generous and good-natured character by the end. He is shown the error of his ways by the ghosts that visit him and is redeemed by his own willingness to change.

How did the spirits change Scrooge? – When the spirits take Scrooge to the past present and future, Scrooge undergoes a major transformation Dickens demonstrates this by showing that Scrooge changed from a lonely, greedy man, that didn’t like Christmas and dislike people to a generous man that likes Christmas and was more accepting of other people.

How does Scrooge’s view of money change from the beginning of the play to the end? – How does Scrooge’s view of money change from the beginning of the play to the end? He did not like Shari g his wealth with others. Then he realized that it was better to share money with others and the less-fortunate.

How does Scrooge change throughout the Christmas carol? – In Scrooge we see a man who is transformed from a greedy, selfish miser into a generous and good-natured character by the end. He is shown the error of his ways by the ghosts that visit him and is redeemed by his own willingness to change.

How does Scrooge change after the ghost of Christmas past? – The main role of The Ghost of Christmas Past is to help Scrooge begin his process of change. By showing him memories of his past, the ghost reminds him of the goodness that used to be in him and of the people he used to love. This begins to melt Scrooge’s frozen heart and causes him to rethink his way of living.

Which spirit changed Scrooge the most? – The spirit who helped Scrooge change the most is The Ghost of Christmas Present because he helped Scrooge to to care about others, celebrate Christmas, and learn empathy. First of all, Scrooge starts to care about others. The Ghost of Christmas Present took Scrooge to visit the home of his clerk, Bob Cratchit.

How do you think Scrooge changed his life after the experiences with the ghosts? – 1. How do you think Scrooge changed his life after these experiences with the ghosts? Answer: He became sympathetic and started to understand the pain and suffering of the needy. He no longer believed Christmas to be humbug but a time to make merry in the midst of people one loves.

how did the great compromise guard against tyranny

/in /by

How did compromise guard against tyranny? – By dividing the power of government, no one person or group would be able to become tyrannical because another person or group would have the power to keep them in check. The Great Compromise ensured no one person or group gain all of the power in government by dividing the power in many ways.

How did the checks and balances guard against tyranny? – In addition to this separation of powers, the framers built a system of checks and balances designed to guard against tyranny by ensuring that no branch would grab too much power.

Who did the Constitution guard against tyranny? – In order to protect against tyranny by either the state or national governments, the Constitution provided for federalism, a system of checks and balances, separation of powers and balance of power between the small and large states in order to ensure no single institution would have excess power.

What did the Great Compromise do? – Their so-called Great Compromise (or Connecticut Compromise in honor of its architects, Connecticut delegates Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth) provided a dual system of congressional representation. In the House of Representatives each state would be assigned a number of seats in proportion to its population.

What was the first guard against tyranny? – The Constitution guarded against tyranny in ways such as having the federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and the large and small states both treated equally. The first guard against tyranny was Federalism; a system of government in which power is divided…show more content…

What are 4 ways the Constitution guard against tyranny? – The Constitution guards against tyranny by using four important practices: federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and by ensuring representation of large and small states. Federalism divides power between a central government and the state governments.

How did the Constitution guard against tyranny answers? – The constitution guards against tyranny in three main ways: the separation of powers, the bill of rights, and checks and balances. These three things prevent absolute power falling into the hands of one person or one group of people. Overall, the constitution does a pretty good job of guarding agains tyranny.

How did the Constitution guard against tyranny packet? – Framers guarded against tyranny by giving each branch fair opportunity to stop the other branch(es) from doing anything unconstitutional.

How did the Constitution guard against tyranny essay? – The three main ways the Constitution protects against tyranny are by using Federalism to make the state government more powerful and balance it with the central government, equally dividing the power of government between the three branches and making it possible for the three branches of government to check each other …

When did the Constitution guard against tyranny? – Philadelphia 1787: How The Constitution Guards Against Tyranny.

How does the Constitution guard against tyranny of the majority quizlet? – It guards against tyranny because nobody has all the power and it is divided equally. When one branch checks the other one to make sure nobody has too much power. Each state has two senators and for each state, the number of representations depends on the population.

What was the third guard against tyranny? – The third guard against tyranny was checks and balances which means each branch can check on each other. This makes sure that one branch cannot have to much power.

What conflict did the Great Compromise solve? – The Great Compromise solved the issue of the representation of states by creating two houses. This is called a bicameral legislature.

Why was the Great Compromise so important? – The Great Compromise settled matters of representation in the federal government. The Three-Fifths Compromise settled matters of representation when it came to the enslaved population of southern states and the importation of enslaved Africans. The Electoral College settled how the president would be elected.

How did the Constitution guard against tyranny answers? – The constitution guards against tyranny in three main ways: the separation of powers, the bill of rights, and checks and balances. These three things prevent absolute power falling into the hands of one person or one group of people. Overall, the constitution does a pretty good job of guarding agains tyranny.

How did the Constitution guard against tyranny essay? – The three main ways the Constitution protects against tyranny are by using Federalism to make the state government more powerful and balance it with the central government, equally dividing the power of government between the three branches and making it possible for the three branches of government to check each other …

How did the Constitution set up a strong but not tyrannical government? – The U.S. Constitution They separated the powers of government into three equal branches of government: the executive (the president), the legislative (Congress), and the judicial (the Supreme Court). Each branch can check the other to prevent corruption or tyranny.

How does the Constitution guard against tyranny of the majority quizlet? – It guards against tyranny because nobody has all the power and it is divided equally. When one branch checks the other one to make sure nobody has too much power. Each state has two senators and for each state, the number of representations depends on the population.

what is beneatha’s dream in a raisin in the sun

/in /by

What is Beneatha’s dream for herself? – In the play A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry, Beneatha Younger’s dream is to become a doctor and build a career/life for herself without anyone providing for her which connects to the American Dream through her independence, hard-work, and determination.

What is Beneatha Younger dream? – Lesson Summary Beneatha Younger is one of the main characters in Lorraine Hansberry’s famous play A Raisin in the Sun. She is a college student who dreams of becoming a doctor and leaving behind the poverty and racism that ties her family down.

How was Beneatha’s dream altered? – Beneatha’s dream is to become a doctor. She believes that her dream was deferred when she was born since she is coloured and a female. Although she fights this, her dream is deferred even more when Walter looses the money which she needed to get into medical school. The final character is Walter.

How are Beneatha dreams deferred throughout the play? – His dream has been deferred by his poverty and inability to find decent employment. Over the course of the play, his understanding of his dream of gaining material wealth evolves, and by play’s end, it is no longer his top priority.

What does Beneatha Younger want? – Beneatha is an attractive college student who provides a young, independent, feminist perspective, and her desire to become a doctor demonstrates her great ambition. Throughout the play, she searches for her identity.

What does Beneatha fear in A Raisin in the Sun? – ‘ In this scene, Beneatha has learned that her brother, Walter Lee, has lost the money that Mama set aside to pay for her medical school tuition. She feels hopeless and powerless to improve the situation and feels Walter Lee’s bad decision has ripped away her dreams.

How does Walter feel about Beneatha’s dream? – Walter, believes Beneatha should give up on her dream of becoming a doctor. In the story, he states, ¨If you so crazy ´bout messing ´round with sick people- then go be a nurse like other women- or just get married and be quiet… ¨(Hansberry 38). Her attitude towards his response was very fitting for the situation.

What does Beneatha want to become? – Beneatha is an attractive college student who provides a young, independent, feminist perspective, and her desire to become a doctor demonstrates her great ambition. Throughout the play, she searches for her identity. She dates two very different men: Joseph Asagai and George Murchison.

Why does Beneatha not want to be a doctor anymore? – Why didn’t Beneatha want to be a doctor anymore? she’s sees no human battle worth fighting no human life worth saving . she decided to go to Africa instead. she doesn’t want to have to treat the oppressors.

What does Beneatha learn by the end of the play? – Unsurprisingly, Beneatha seems to not be into George at all by the end of the play. When we leave Beneatha at the play’s conclusion, she is even considering marrying Asagai and practicing medicine in Africa.

Why did Beneatha want to be a doctor in the first place? – Why didn’t Beneatha want to be a doctor anymore? She used to think that fixing people’s ailments was the best thing to do. Now she thinks that physical ailments aren’t the problem of society.

which choice correctly labels the form used in brutus’ and mark antony’s eulogies?

/in /by

Which form does Mark Antony’s speech use? – Mark Antony’s speech uses blank verse, which matches his passion and emotion. —-Brutus’ speech is written in blank verse, which is used to show rational thought.

Which form does Brutus speech use? – Brutus’ speech is written in blank verse, which is used to show rational thought. Mark Antony’s speech uses prose, which matches his passion and emotion. Brutus’ speech is written in iambic pentameter, which is used to show rational thought. Mark Antony’s speech uses prose, which matches his passion and emotion.

What is the style of Brutus funeral speech? – In his funeral speech, Brutus creates a earnestand honest tone through the use of loaded words,…show more content… Brutus delivers a speech after the assassination of Julius Caesar and uses loaded words, which are words meant to stir emotions.

What is the difference between Brutus and Antony’s speech? – Brutus’ speech was very short and to the point and spoke to the logic of the people in the crowd. For example, Brutus spoke in a detached way about Caesar’s death while Antony spoke to the emotions of the crowd by crying and talking about all the good things that Caesar did for Rome.

What rhetorical devices did Mark Antony use in his speech? – Throughout his speech, Antony uses the rhetorical strategies of Ethos, Logos, and Pathos to convince the audience that he is right and his opponents are wrong. Mark Antony delivers a speech to the people of Rome, in memoriam of Caesar.

What rhetorical strategies did Mark Antony use in his speech? – Pathos and logos were used as a means of persuasion throughout his speech. He also used lots of literary devices in his speech like irony, bandwagon, strawman, appeal to pity, and symbolism.

Why is Brutus speech in prose? – Brutus speaks to the people in prose rather than in verse, presumably trying to make his speech seem plain and to keep himself on the level of the plebeians. He quickly convinces the people that Caesar had to die because he would have become a tyrant and brought suffering to them all.

How does Mark Antony use imagery in his speech? – In Mark Antony’s speech, he uses pathos to convey the power and destruction of persuasion. Shakespeare incorporates imagery to convey a warning that power leads to destruction. He does this through Julius Caesar’s ambition with an exaggerated metaphor where Caesar compares himself to the Northern star.

How did Brutus use logos in his speech? – Brutus used logos and ethos in his speech. To fortify his speech, he used logos which is logic and reason. In his speech, he says listen to my reasons and he goes onto his reasons that Caesar would have become ambitious and enslaved them all. He said that was one of the reasons he killed him.

How were Brutus and Antony’s speeches similar? – There were not many similarities between the two speeches except they both showed love towards Caesar; however both speeches did a very good job on impacting the people of Rome. Brutus made the people believe it was the right thing to kill Caesar, but Antony turned it around and turned all the people against him.

How would you describe Antony’s speech at Caesar’s funeral? – Antony tells the crowd to “have patience” and expresses his feeling that he will “wrong the honourable men / Whose daggers have stabb’d Caesar” if he is to read the will. The crowd, increasingly agitated, calls the conspirators “traitors” and demands that Antony read out the will.

Which speech was more persuasive Brutus or Antony? – ​Mark Antony’s speech was more effective to convince the audience than Marcus Brutus because he persuaded the citizens, but also spoke highly of the conspirators. ​As mentioned before, Antony was able to convince the people of Rome because he used pathos to appeal to their emotions.

What are the major differences in Brutus and Antony’s speeches which speech was more effective in your opinion? – Antony’s speech at Caesar’s funeral in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar was more effective than Brutus’ because Antony used a multifaceted emotional argument, instead of relying on one assertion, as Brutus had. Because of this, Antony was able to sway the crowd to his side, against Brutus and the Conspirators.

What do Brutus and Antony have in common? – They both share common techniques such as repetition. Antony and Brutus both use the word honorable. Brutus says “I honour him: but as he was ambitious, I / slew him. There is tears for his love; joy for his valour; and death for his ambition.” (JC.

How is Brutus a foil to Antony? – Brutus to Antony The traits of deception, ambition, and treachery that define Antony contrast with Brutus’ honesty and naiveté. Another contrast between them is the simplicity of their intentions when they speak. Antony often speaks loftily and with passion, as when he weeps over Caesar’s body.

Did Antony use pathos? – Antony displayed the persuasive technique of Pathos by repeating words, showing them Caesar’s body, and presenting Caesar’s will. In the beginning of Antony’s speech, he spoke of Brutus as an honorable man, but in this case he repeated the word, making the connotation of honorable negative.

How does Antony use verbal irony in his speech? – Mark Antony’s speech contains two examples of verbal irony. The first example is when he refers to Brutus and the other murderers as ‘honorable men. ‘ We know that Mark Antony does not think Brutus or the other assassins are honorable; he planned for his speech to cause outrage about the murder of his friend.

How does Antony use repetition in his speech? – Antony uses repetition of the phrase ‘Brutus is an honorable man’ to devastating effect. Antony lists all of Caesar’s great aspects and his seeming lack of ambition, but then interjects that he must have been ambitious because Brutus says he was and ‘Brutus is an honorable man.

How does Mark Antony use ethos in his speech? – In Antony’s speech he uses ethos by stating, “I will not do them wrong, I rather choose To wrong the dead, to wrong myself and you, Than I will wrong such honorable …show more content…

how does this example of dramatic irony create tension

/in /by

How does dramatic irony create tension? – Using Dramatic Irony for Suspense Dramatic irony lends itself well to crafting suspense and tension. The audience is always one step ahead of the characters. This builds inevitable suspense as the audience has to eagerly wait for a tragedy or conflict they know is coming.

How does dramatic irony add emotional tension or power to a story? – What is this? Looking at dramatic irony as a narrative device, it can be seen as a literary tool for creating tension in a story. The main way that it does this is by giving the reader knowledge about events or actions that are about to take place, before the characters within the text have this knowledge.

What type of irony builds tension? – Dramatic irony occurs when the audience or reader knows what is happening, but the characters do not. Of all the types of irony, dramatic irony is the best at building tension. The audience waits for the proverbial shoe to drop.

How does dramatic irony increase suspense? – Writers use dramatic irony as a plot device to create conflict, suspense, empathy, and humour. When the audience knows more than the characters, it forces them to anticipate and fear the moment, and to hope that the character might find out the truth sooner. It creates an intense empathy with the character’s situation.

What is the effect of dramatic irony? – Writers use dramatic irony as a tool to create and sustain the audience’s interest. It generates curiosity. It also creates tension in that the audience is encouraged to fear the moment when characters learn the truth that the viewer already knows and how he or she will deal with it.

What is an example of a dramatic irony? – If you’re watching a movie about the Titanic and a character leaning on the balcony right before the ship hits the iceberg says, “It’s so beautiful I could just die,” that’s an example of dramatic irony. Dramatic irony occurs when the audience knows something that the characters don’t.

What is meant by dramatic tension? – Dramatic tension is created when there’s a question about whether a character will accomplish their goal. Dramatic tension has 4 key ingredients: a clear goal, opposition, stakes, and urgency.

How do you explain tension in drama? – Tension arises in drama when a problem is faced, by differences between characters or when other elements such as mood and focus are drawn on to create a sense of the unknown. Tension can be represented physically through movement such as tug-o-war (mimed or real) or through emotional responses.

Why is tension used in drama? – This is the building and release of tension in drama. Tension is a growing sense of expectation within the drama, a feeling that the story is building up towards something exciting happening. Without tension in a scene it is hard to keep the audience engaged with what is happening so the work may be flat and dull.

How is dramatic irony used in The Importance of Being Earnest? – Another instance of dramatic irony in act II was when Gwendolyn said how honest Jack is, but when she said this Jack was playing Ernest. Gwendolyn said how “Ernest has a strong upright nature. He is the very soul of truth and honour. Disloyalty would be as impossible to him as deception.” (Act II,page 80).

What is dramatic irony in drama? – /drəˌmæt̬.ɪk ˈaɪ.rə.ni/ the situation in which the audience of a play knows something that the characters do not know: The dramatic irony is created because neither the fairy rulers nor the human lovers know what the outcome of Puck’s actions will be. Literature. action hero.

How do authors create dramatic irony? – Dramatic Irony Literary Definition Dramatic irony occurs when the reader is in a position of superior understanding, knowing more than the unwitting character does.

How does dramatic irony create suspense in the final scene of the play? – Dramatic irony is a drama technique in which the audience knows something that the character doesn’t. Because of this understanding, the words and actions of the characters take on a different meaning. This can create intense suspense or humor, depending on the writer’s intention.

How does irony affect the audience? – Most forms of irony display a disparity between what the characters think can, should, or will happen and what actually transpires. This can spark strong feelings in the reader and serve as a way to teach practical or moral lessons.

How does dramatic irony create suspense in the final scene of the play? – Dramatic irony is a drama technique in which the audience knows something that the character doesn’t. Because of this understanding, the words and actions of the characters take on a different meaning. This can create intense suspense or humor, depending on the writer’s intention.

How is dramatic irony used in The Importance of Being Earnest? – Another instance of dramatic irony in act II was when Gwendolyn said how honest Jack is, but when she said this Jack was playing Ernest. Gwendolyn said how “Ernest has a strong upright nature. He is the very soul of truth and honour. Disloyalty would be as impossible to him as deception.” (Act II,page 80).

How does the dramatic irony of the play build as Oedipus learns about his past? – Oedipus the King is a classic example of dramatic irony because the entire focus of the play is on Oedipus unknowingly condemning himself by demanding to know the truth about the murderer of the former king. The entire action of the play is built on the dramatic irony that the murderer that Oedipus seeks is himself.

what do emile durkheim, karl marx, and max weber all have in common?

/in /by

What do Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx have in common? – Two of sociology’s greatest thinkers, Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim, both viewed religion to be a vital aspect of society. They both believed it to be socially constructed; man created religion, religion did not create man. Society created religion to meet certain needs of its members.

What did Karl Marx and Max Weber have in common? – Both Karl Marx and Max Weber were considered as pillars and founding fathers of sociology. Their contributions were also considered classical sociological theories. Both of them provide a scientific and systematic study to society.

Who are Emile Durkheim Karl Marx and Max Weber? – Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim, and Max Weber are indispensable for understanding the sociological enterprise. They are among the chief founders of the discipline and among the foremost theorists of modernity, and their work can stimulate readers to reflect on their own identities and worldviews.

What are the key ideas of Durkheim Marx and Weber? – Marx’s theory based on social critique and conflict, wherein Durkheim emphasizes on social factors. Weber believes social relation shaped by politics, economics and culture and individual act has subjective meaning.

How are Durkheim and Weber similar? – Emile Durkheim & Weber were two sociologist those mainly tried to make us understand society taking the religion as a base element. They both focused on religion as an important constituent of society.

How do the theories of Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim relate to conflict theory and functionalism? – Two of the key functionalist thinkers are Emile Durkheim and Talcott Parsons while conflict theory was first proposed by Karl Marx. For functionalists, slow social change is preferred for stability while conflict theory sees radical change as key in actualizing an egalitarian society.

What is theory of Karl Marx and Max Weber about social stratification? – Marx’s main argument is. that class is determined by economic factors alone, whereas in contrast, Weber. argues that social stratification cannot be defined solely in terms of class and the. economic factors which affect class relationships.

What are the major differences between Karl Marx’s view of capitalism and Max Weber view of capitalism? – Weber viewed capitalism mainly in cultural and sociological terms. He believed that Western capitalism is rooted in religion, Protestantism in particular. Marx saw capitalism as an economic device. The theorist claimed that capitalism exacerbates social stratification.

What is the central difference between Karl Marx’s understanding of stratification and Max Weber’s? – In conclusion, the major difference between Marx’s view of social stratification than Weber is that Marx emphasized that the major cause of social stratification is due to different class groups in the society, especially the two major groups, i.e. Bourgeoisie and Proletariat.

What did Emile Durkheim believe? – Durkheim believed that society exerted a powerful force on individuals. According to Durkheim, people’s norms, beliefs, and values make up a collective consciousness, or a shared way of understanding and behaving in the world. The collective consciousness binds individuals together and creates social integration.

What did Max Weber believe? – Max Weber is famous for his thesis that the “Protestant ethic” (the supposedly Protestant values of hard work, thrift, efficiency, and orderliness) contributed to the economic success of Protestant groups in the early stages of European capitalism.

How does Marx’s concept of the division of Labour differ from Durkheim’s? – According to Marx, division of labour is imposed on workers so that the capitalists may benefit. Durkheim stresses cooperation, whilst Marx stresses exploitation and conflict.

What is Durkheim’s theory? – Durkheim believed that society exerted a powerful force on individuals. According to Durkheim, people’s norms, beliefs, and values make up a collective consciousness, or a shared way of understanding and behaving in the world. The collective consciousness binds individuals together and creates social integration.

What are the two main differences between Max Weber and Karl Marx’s theories of social stratification? – Orientation: class is an important concept in sociology. Thesis statement: Marx argues that class is determined by economic factors, whereas Weber argues that social stratification cannot be defined solely in terms of class. Marx’s perception of class is primarily economical: 1.

What is Karl Marx’s theory? – Key Takeaways. Marxism is a social, political, and economic theory originated by Karl Marx that focuses on the struggle between capitalists and the working class. Marx wrote that the power relationships between capitalists and workers were inherently exploitative and would inevitably create class conflict.

how did john proctor change in the crucible

/in /by

How does Proctor changed from the beginning of the play? – Answers 1. Proctor certainly matures. He laments his behavior with Abigail, Instead of blaming his wife Elizabeth, for his affair, he places guilt squarely on his own shoulders. By the end of the play John has gone from self-righteous philandering to trying to keep any good that is left in his name.

What is the purpose of John Proctor’s change in character? – His change is important because it shows how much he wants to prove to Elizabeth that he loves her and not Abigail. This is because he chose to stay with his statement which said that Abigail was a fraud and he chose that which would get him hung.…

How did John Proctor change in the crucible Act 3? – Hi Daniele, Here is what I have found for you: John Proctor’s character changes from the beginning of The Crucible to the end in that he is initially reluctant to accept blame for his unfaithfulness to Elizabeth and his affair with Abigail but is, in the end, willing to do anything to save Elizabeth, including …

Which character changed the most in the crucible? – In the Crucible, many of the characters go through changes because of the intensity of the situation. But there is only one character that I think changed the most, and that is John Proctor who is the protagonist of the novel The Crucible by Arthur Miller.

How has Proctor changed from the beginning of the play What do his actions in Act III reveal about his character? – Answers 1. Proctor certainly matures. He laments his behavior with Abigail, Instead of blaming his wife Elizabeth, for his affair, he places guilt squarely on his own shoulders. By the end of the play John has gone from self-righteous philandering to trying to keep any good that is left in his name.

What type of character is John Proctor? – John Proctor’s personality traits include honesty, integrity, and bravery. However, he also succumbs to lust for Abigail Williams, his tragic flaw. At the beginning of the play, he is concerned mostly with protecting his reputation by hiding the affair.

What is John Proctor’s tragic flaw? – John Proctor’s tragic flaw is his excessive pride, and he expresses it abundantly throughout the play. In Act I, it states, “ Proctor: Abby, I may think of you softly from time to time.

Why is John Proctor important in The Crucible? – John Proctor was an extremely important character in The Crucible. The story would not have had a plot of conflict without him. He changed through his character developing, through his decision making, and through the conflicts and obstacles. John Proctor was a cheater, but changed to the Salem Hero.

What does John Proctor represent in The Crucible? – The character John Proctor seems to represent and show the viewpoint of a real man, unaffected by hysteria; a difficult thing to portray during the 1950’s in the USA, due to the fear and hate of Communism and the ‘witch’ hunt for communists. John Proctor is the central character of the play.

What does John Proctor do in Act 1 of The Crucible? – Proctor’s Kindness and Anger John Proctor is a kind man in many ways. In Act One, the audience first sees him entering the Parris household to check on the health of the reverend’s ill daughter. He is good natured with fellow villagers such as Giles Corey, Rebecca Nurse, and others.

How is John Proctor a tragic hero? – In Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible, John Proctor represents the tragic hero because he is a well respected man of noble stature, he is conflicted due to his fatal flaw which his over excessive pride, which leads him to make unwise decisions ultimately leading to his downfall.

How did characters change in The Crucible? – In the play, The Crucible by Arthur Miller, Each of the characters of Proctor, Hale, and Elizabeth changed from the beginning of the play to the end of the story. Proctor becomes more honest; Hale becomes more skeptical, and Elizabeth becomes more forgiving.

How is John Proctor a dynamic character? – One of the characteristic that make Mr. John Proctor such a dynamic character is the fact that he admitted his mistake. John admitted to committing adultery with Abigail Williams “I have which broke one of the Ten Commandments “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. This is one of the most important of the Ten Commandments.

What character in The Crucible does not change? – Reverend Parris and Reverend Hale are two characters in “The Crucible” that did change, and Ezekiel Cheever is one that did not.

Which character from The Crucible shows external character development? – Reverand Hale: External- Initially, he is in conflict with the “accused” and the families of the accused, such as when he has a discussion about the validity of the justice system with Proctor, Corey, and Nurse when their wives are arrested in Act Two.

What happened to John Proctor in Act 1? – John Proctor, a local farmer, enters Parris’s house to join the girls. Proctor disdains hypocrisy, and many people resent him for exposing their foolishness. However, Proctor is uneasy with himself because he had conducted an extramarital affair with Abigail.

What happened between Abigail and John Proctor prior to the opening of the play? – What happened between Abigail and John Proctor prior to the opening of the play? They apparently had an affair.

How did characters change in The Crucible? – In the play, The Crucible by Arthur Miller, Each of the characters of Proctor, Hale, and Elizabeth changed from the beginning of the play to the end of the story. Proctor becomes more honest; Hale becomes more skeptical, and Elizabeth becomes more forgiving.

How is John Proctor a tragic hero? – In Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible, John Proctor represents the tragic hero because he is a well respected man of noble stature, he is conflicted due to his fatal flaw which his over excessive pride, which leads him to make unwise decisions ultimately leading to his downfall.

the access and legitimacy paradigm focuses on:

/in /by

What is the access and legitimacy paradigm? – The idea that diversity should be implemented in order to gain market share in diverse markets is sometimes called the Access and Legitimacy Paradigm. Hiring diverse workers can give you access to markets that otherwise might be tough to conquer.

Which of the following is a difference between the access and legitimacy paradigm and the learning and effectiveness paradigm? – The access and legitimacy paradigm focuses on the surface-level diversity dimensions of sex, race, and ethnicity, whereas the learning and effectiveness paradigm focuses on integrating deep-level diversity differences, such as personality, attitudes, beliefs, and values, into the actual work of an organization.

Which of the following is a similarity between the discrimination and fairness paradigm and the access and legitimacy paradigm? – Which of the following is a similarity between the discrimination and fairness paradigm and the access and legitimacy paradigm? Both focus only on the surface-level diversity dimensions of sex, race and ethnicity.

What are the three diversity paradigms? – Three different paradigms of diversity management, namely, discrimination and fairness, access and legitimacy, and learning and effectiveness, will be explored.

Who is the focus of learning and effectiveness paradigm? – The learning-effectiveness paradigm This “learning-effectiveness” paradigm reflects the Resources Theory that advocates that diverse employees should be considered as the resources for the company.

What paradigm is important in diversity management? – The Discrimination-and-Fairness Paradigm. Using the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm is perhaps thus far the dominant way of understanding diversity.

Which paradigm focuses on equal opportunity fair treatment recruitment of minorities and strict compliance with the Equal Employment Opportunity laws? – Affirmative Action – purposeful steps taken by an organization to create employment opportunities for women and minorities. Most common method of diversity management – focuses on equal opportunity, fair treatment, recruitment of minorities, and strict compliance with the equal employment opportunity laws.

Which of the following is a difference between a diversity program and an affirmative action program? – Which of the following is a difference between a diversity program and an affirmative action program? A diversity program aims at creating a positive work environment where no one is advantaged or disadvantaged, whereas an affirmative action program aims at compensating for past discrimination.

Which of the following is a difference between surface level diversity and deep level diversity? – Which of the following is a difference between surface-level diversity and deep-level diversity? Surface-level diversity is immediately observable, whereas deep-level diversity usually reveals itself at a later stage.

Why does diversity matter in organizations? – Diversity is a key ingredient for better decision-making among teams. Homogenous groups may be susceptible to groupthink,20 while diverse teams can leverage a greater variety of perspectives and are likely to consider information more thoroughly and accurately.

What is meant by managing diversity? – Managing diversity means acknowledging people’s differences and recognizing these differences as valuable; it enhances good management practices by preventing discrimination and promoting inclusiveness. Good management alone will not necessarily help you work effectively with a diverse workforce.

How do you manage workforce diversity in an organization? – › 7-tips-to-manage-a-diverse-wor…

What is integration paradigm? – 1. The Collaborative Integration Paradigm describes the relationships among purposes for collaboration, types of partners, and degrees of integration from diverse individual, organizational or disciplinary partners into the processes and outcomes of the collaboration.

What is meant by Paradigm Shift? – Accordingly, a paradigm shift is defined as “an important change that happens when the usual way of thinking about or doing something is replaced by a new and different way.” More than 50 years after Kuhn’s famous book, these definitions may seem intuitive rather than technical.

What is personal paradigm? – A personal paradigm is essentially the lens through which you see the world. If you don’t create your own self-paradigm, you’re left to piece together a self-image that’s based on the opinions and feedback you get from others.

What is the difference between diversity and affirmative action quizlet? – A diversity program aims at creating a positive work environment where no one is advantaged or disadvantaged, whereas an affirmative action program aims at compensating for past discrimination.

Which of the following are true considering managerial implications of attributional tendencies? – Which of the following are true considering managerial implications of attributional tendencies? The role of internal causes of behavior is usually exaggerated. The way employees perform depends on the attributions they make for their performance.