Send a modern person (or group of people) to Dante’s Inferno. Explain the sin for which they are being punished and how their punishment fits the sin

Send a modern person (or group of people) to Dante’s Inferno. You will need to explain the sin for which they are being punished and how their punishment fits the sin The topic is Dante’s Inferno. The rubric is: Should be 1.5-2 pages in length and written in narrative form. Should contain an original idea and include details and sensory descriptions in line with creative writing. Character writing: Should focus on a modern person or group of people. Should explain the sin they are being punished for and how their punishment fits the sin. They should be in an already existing Circle made by Dante. Circle Writing: Should describe an original Circle of Hell as invented by the student. Include a description of WHO is sent to this circle and WHAT sins they have committed and HOW they are punished. Writing displays a clear understanding of “Contrapasso” as seen in Dante’s writing.

What is a good theory of development? How is good development related to ethics?

Canada today is a wealthy, stable, pluralist and democratic country, but things were not always so. A century or two ago, Canadians were a lot poorer and lived much shorter lives than they do today; our government was a lot less democratic, and the threat of political violence was common. Our social and political values were very different back then, and governments often imposed the religious beliefs and practices of the dominant groups on other members of society. Yet Canada evolved, some would say developed, into the country we know today. That process of social, economic and political change was not smooth or linear. It was highly disruptive, often contested and sometimes violent. Along the way, there were winners and losers. If Canada can rise from being a marginal collection of colonies on the fringes of two empires, a place torn by social, religious, political and ethnic tensions, a country whose relations with its neighbour were for decades tense and even violent, to being a stable, prosperous and democratic country living in peace with its neighbour, can other countries not do the same? You are expected to answer theoretically whether other countries are able to do the same, applying the problems of a theory, different perspectives, and main assumptions. You may combine more than one theory together if you feel this will best help you answer the question. You can pick a case study to focus on to assist you in answering the question. Question two: (Canada’s position towards fragile states) By 2010, the lackluster results of interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq were leading the U.S. and other Western governments to rethink their approach, particularly given the fiscal constraints generated by the global economic recession. FCAS governments were also questioning prevailing priorities and calling for new approaches. Their calls were informed by surveys, coordinated by the OECD Development Assistance Committee, on the implementation of the Paris Declaration and the Principles for International Engagement in the Fragile States. Those surveys showed that Western donors were not meeting their commitments on issues like donor alignment on national priorities, or on linking rapid action with long-term engagement, despite significant advances in some FCAS (OECD 2010). Using democratization, good governance, or human security, or any combination of the three, what are Canada`s approaches to dealing with fragile states? To what degree do you think that they are effective? Question three: (On the conception and meaning of development) The 1970s literature on ethics and development shows an interest in reflecting on the question of development in a way that was fundamentally different from the mainstream. This position was particularly expressed by a group of scholars that in spite of being surprisingly liberal in their theoretical tenets, viewed development from an ethical perspective. Although development ethicists essentially do not represent a unified perspective, they shared a unified question that is directly related to the conception of good development. What is a good theory of development? How is good development related to ethics? Provide a good description of the conception from one theoretical perspective of your choice.

The genre of war: How is the aesthetic or style of “realism” conveyed in the text (film, memoir, etc)? Does the text realistically capture war and combat experience?

For your final writing assignment, write a 10-12 page paper on the literature of war analyzing any kind of text — from traditional literary works to graphic novels, TV, videogames, anything —that has relevance to our coursework this semester. You may choose to continue working with our common course materials or select a literary/cultural text(s) that you think is worth examining more closely. You may write on a single text or, in keeping with the mid-term paper assignment, compare and contrast how one war or era has been represented with that of another war or era. Rather than trying to cover all the various genres associated with the literature of war, you should draw your comparisons against similar forms or modes of representation (that is, focusing on novels of each war, memoir/first-person accounts, fiction films, etc.). Continuing along the same lines as our discussion board work, you might consider addressing one of the following topic areas: The genre of war: How is the aesthetic or style of “realism” conveyed in the text (film, memoir, etc)? Does the text realistically capture war and combat experience? How would you describe the “tone” of the writing or the film? The epistemology of war: How does the text lay claim to knowing the “truth” of war? Does the text acknowledge the ways in which even combat experience is mediated and shaped by prior representations of war? The gender of war: How are gender roles represented in the text? How are men and women (or their absence) depicted, and how might those depictions contribute to certain fictions (ideological messages) of masculinity and femininity? The rhetoric of war: To what extent could the text be considered a work of propaganda (promoting a one-sided, intentional and unequivocal message)? Is the text invested in such national-cultural myths of America as the City on a Hill (moral superiority), altruistic idealism (social and political superiority) or technological invincibility (military superiority)? Does the text provide some kind of reasoning or rationale for going to war? Is the suffering and sacrifice given justification? Why indeed do we fight? In order to ground your discussion and analysis in scholarship, your paper should incorporate at least three of our course readings (or five sources total if you would like to use class discussions as a source to be cited).

Describe the setting where you gathered your observations or gained your experiences.

Formulate a sensitizing idea or hypothesis — a way of conceptualizing the observations and experiences you wish to relate. a. Cite where you got the idea, or if it is original, what extant idea or framework it is similar or related to. Use the materials we have read, supplemental reading materials, and library resoures. Ragin and Amoroso give many examples of the concepts that guide inquiry when they illustrate points in their chapter on qualitative research strategies. By now, we have learned that theory and method go together, like a horse and carriage. b. State your idea in a way that sets up your project. 2. Describe the setting where you gathered your observations or gained your experiences. This is a methodology section in the sense that you tell how it is that you know what you know. You may gather novel observations in a public setting, or you may rely on recollections of experiences. If you use recollections, you should be specific about the context in which you had the experiences — where, when, how, etc. 3. Relate or document your observations or experiences. You may follow whatever organization you think is appropriate to your particular project. If you are observing, then organize your observations according principles or rules, or some other conceptual format that allows you to “classify” what you (Ragin and Amoroso give many examples in the chapter on qualitative research). Or, you may prefer to use a narrative approach. 4. Relate the concepts or sensitizing ideas to the documents. Sometimes it is easier to integrate steps 3 and 4. It all depends on your conceptual framework and the type of documents you are using. 5. Draw out an insight, make a concluding statement or otherwise finish-up your paper with a BIG idea. There are several journals that specialize in publishing qualitative research. You might want to spend a little time browsing them for examples you can follow. My suggestions are Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Symbolic Interaction, and Qualitative Sociology Note: If choose to collect observations of public life or use recollections of your experiences in public, report only those activities that take place in the public realm. Follow Lyn Lofland’s definition of a public realm: “those areas of urban settlements in which individuals in copresence tend to be personally unknown and only categorically know to one another … the public realm is made up of those spaces in a city which tend to be inhabited by persons who are strangers to one another or who ‘know’ one another only in terms of occupations or other nonpersonal identity categories (for example, bus driver -customer” (Lofland, Lyn, The Public Realm: Exploring the City’s Quintessential Social Territory, page 9). This means that you observe and report only those activities that are public. In public, people have a reasonable expectation that they may be observed. You must not report names or offer any information that could identity a person or group. In general, a reader of your report should not be able to recognize individual identity. Place identity, or at least an accurate descriptions of places, may be important for providing context for you report, but you may prefer to use made up names of places to ensure the public nature of your observations. Confidentially can be ensured by limiting your observations to what happens in the public realm, and by interpreting these interactive encounters from the perspectives of abstract concepts of the public realm.

Discuss how does your selected medium for your project shape the possibilities for communication and the probable ways that audiences might engage with your project?

CONSIDERATIONSAND EVALUATIONThere are three key things to consider when designing and implementing your project: audience, affordances of your chosen medium, and interventionwith course materials.Since many formats for the project may leave some or much of these considerations implicit, itis recommended that students include some written information separatefrom the projectproductthat explains what sorts of decisions were made with respect to audience, affordances, and intervention(e.g. a paragraph ina document accompanying your submission).(1) Audience:who is your target audience?What other audiences mightview or hear your product. In other words, who might be auditors, overhearers, eavesdroppers? How haveyour choice of medium and the content of your project(e.g. how academic/ technical your content is) responded to your identified audiences?(2)Affordances:how does your selected medium for your project shape the possibilities for communication and the probable ways that audiences might engage with your project? How was your choice of medium related to your target audience? Are there any ways that your selected medium has limited what you were able to accomplish with your project?(3) Intervention:how does your project’s intervention connect to course materials and key theories about language and social justice? If you have chosen for these theories to remain implicit in your final product, why did you make this choice? Be as specific as possible about which theories, which aspects of which theories, and where you got this information from.Students will be evaluated primarily in terms of how each project addresses these three considerationsin the final product and/or in an accompanying document. If these considerations are primarily addressed in theaccompanying document, it needs tobe fairly clear to mehow the accompanying document is connected to the final product (in other words, if a student writes a great accompanying document but that document has nothing to do with the final product, the student will not have earned a high mark on the project).The evaluation is holistic and fairly subjective and there is no rubric for this assignment beyond this information. Try not to worry too much about evaluation, please also source this book does not include the other 4 sources (Avineri, Netta, Laura R. Graham, Eric J. Johnson, Robin Conley Riner, and Jonathan Rosa (eds.). (2019). Language and Social Justice in Practice. New York: Routledge.[LSJ]