english answer all questions each question has different instructions
PART I
1.For this homework assignment, review Chapter 10, “The Art of Metacommentary” (pp. 131-149) in They Say, I Say. In this chapter, you learn …”metacommentary is a way of commenting on your claims and telling others how — and how not — to think about them” (131).
The topic of this assignment relates to the MeToo Movment (Links to an external site.), which traces back to 2006 and became prominent in 2017. The movement has focused on women speaking out against sexual harassment and harassers, especially in the workplace. Famous women in sports, acting, and politics (Links to an external site.) have revealed they were sexually harassed by men in positions of power over them. Countless men in prominent positions have lost their jobs (Links to an external site.), reputations, or been sentenced to prison on the basis of multiple accusations. (Donald Trump, unique among these men, has been accused by 20 women, but he has suffered no consequences.)
The article you can read and listen to here is an National Public Radio (NPR) Interview that explores whether sexual harassers can and/or should be rehabilitated.
After you have studied the article/interview, you are to write a 200-300 word paragraph, clearly stating and supporting your own point of view on the topic of redemption for sexual harassers. In the paragraph, you are required to use three templates for metacommentary that will help the reader understand exactly what position you are taking (or not taking). Further, give your paragraph a title that also serves as metacommentary.
Here are some templates you might choose (although if you prefer, you can choose others from the chapter):
- In other words
- My point is not____________, but it is
- Essentially, I am arguing that….
- For example,
- But above all,
- In sum then,
PART II Falter.
1.After watching this interview, how has your understanding of Falter increased? To exemplify, quote a passage from the book that the interview has helped you understand better, and explain why.
2.Bill McKibben, in his book you’re reading, titled Falter, claims that human overuse of fossil fuels may eventually lead to the end of the “human game,” i.e. human survival as a species. The book is titled Falter because, according to McKibben, humans are in the process of losing the game as climate change brings increasingly disastrous consequences.
In Part I (7-80) McKibben overwhelms the reader with brutal facts in order to detail current conditions around the world and makes predictions about what the future holds. He characterizes droughts, fires and floods; heat waves, air and ocean pollution; changes in ocean ph and rising waters, and more.
For this post, discuss ONE of the changes McKibben writes about. What startles you most about the current situation he describes and what worries you most about his prediction for the future? State also whether you find his prediction plausible, and explain why or why not.
3.Although Bill McKibben sees the advantages of gene editing (CRISPR) for improving human life through conquering disease, he strongly opposes the use of it– as he states it — to alter human nature. What are McKibben’s specific objections to using gene editing to modify human traits?
Also, assess whether McKibben seems to offer a balanced and thorough argument, and finally state your own opinion on this issue. Your response should contain specifics based on the reading.
(If you want a clear and thorough summary of CRISPR, its potential, and issues surrounding its use, you may read this article, CRISPR gene editing explained: what is it and how does it work?.”
4.For this post, choose (and type out for everyone to read) a passage that you consider most thought-provoking, unexpected or strange from the assigned readings in Falter..
Anaylze the content of the passage, and explain why you found it so noteworthy.
