1) Why was the Crippen case important? The case was so important because Dr. Crippen was accused of poising his wife and putting pieces of her remains in the basement cellar. The pathologist concluded that the tissue found had a scar that Cora had on her body. This was the first case of forensic science. 2) What was Crippen accused of?
Ethical statements, Ayer said, cannot be verified analytically or synthetically so the truth of such phrases is unknowable and the language used is non-cognitive. Instead, ethical propositions can be no more that the expression of an emotion which will always be personal or subjective. For example to say “Abortion is good” is to express a subjective opinion about the moral issue of Abortion. For Ayer such statements can be no more than an expression of subjective emotion – leading some to label this approach to ethical language as the “boo hooray” theory. But does this strictly subjective understanding of ethical language and statements accurately reflect what is going on when we use such language?
Hurston had this to say in Their Eyes Were Watching God: A Casebook: I dislike insincerity, and most particularly when it vaunts itself to cover up cowardice. Pessimists and grouches and sycophants I do despise. (18) At any rate, the title suggests that Walker isn’t about to delve anywhere near objectivity in her essay. She’s taking a stance. (Interestingly, Zora Neale Hurston, being an anthropologist, might have looked upon this essay with her eyebrows raised.
He also makes a conscious decision about what information to include and what to leave out in order to support his point of view and the anti-war message the representation is trying to give out. Representation 2 however is biased and does not give any factual information and due to this it cannot be
So that when he does, he can understand the book better. That is one of the things that Their Eyes were Watching God lacked, making it a good story, but not a great book. One instance proven by Wright is when he says, “Turpin’s faults as a writer are those of an honest man trying desperately to say something; but Zora Neale Hurston lacks even that excuse. The sensory sweep of her novel carries no theme, no message, no thought”( ¶ #5). When he says there is “no thought” he means that there is nothing in the book that makes the reader think.
Whereas, Pamela Paul’s essay contains information provided solely by her, which can be seen as bias to some readers. The reader may see Pamela Paul as an over protective mother, this will then undermine her valid points on the potential carcinogens in
Nonstandard diction refers to expressions that are not considered legitimate words according to the rules of Standard English usage. Nonstandard diction includes "ain't," "theirselves," "hisself," "anyways," "alot" (the accepted version is "a lot"), and "alright" (the accepted version is "all right"). Most good dictionaries will identify such expressions with the word "Nonstandard." ( When you refer to information contained in Joe’s book (and everyone is required to do this) but have no reference, your essay is not theoretically sophisticated. You must have references even if you do not directly quote.
In this passage George Orwell makes the assertion that amongst the confusion of long literary or political critiques, the writing often becomes meaningless as a result of improper language and jargon. The use of such “meaningless” words allows them to be openly interpreted and often abused in political writing. What one might regard as Democracy, another would describe as Fascism, but neither carries a definition in this instance, but merely a positive or negative connotation. Consequently, these meaningless words often allow the reader to be deceived by the author. Orwell’s Six Rules 1) Do not use metaphors that you are use to reading in other texts.
Although it may seem as if this critique of Robert B. Stinnett’s Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor presents a less than stellar picture of the author in regards to his impartial tone of narration and faulty investigative tactics, I still found the book’s arguments generally compelling and at least worthy of serious examination. The same rule of thumb should apply to reading any documents in the world of conspiracy theory: disregard nothing and question everything. Right or wrong or unresolved, even the most convincing statements must never be taken at face value. Works Cited/Bibliography Eland, Ivan. “The Way Out of Iraq: Decentralizing the Iraqi Government.” Independent Institute Policy Reports (1996) : 36 pgs.
She concluded Brigit might not have done the tests accurately because of the previous reading. Instead of addressing this issue she decided to avoid the confrontation and shoulder the responsibility of retesting everyone. In my opinion passive communication, although avoid confrontation is not effective because Brigit is left unaware she completed the tests inaccurately. This is an injustice to her and the students because she will continue to make this mistake unknowingly. The more effective way to handle this in my opinion would be to ask Brigit to demonstrate how to complete the test and show her what she is doing incorrectly.