When Voltaire released Candide: Ou, L’Optimisme in 1759, Michel-Guillaume Jean de Crèvecour was preparing to cultivate his garden on the Pennsylvania frontier. Like Candide’s naive protagonist, Crèvecour, weary of the civilized world's atrocities, longed for a peaceful rural life, which he enjoyed for nineteen years until the American Revolution disrupted it. His collection, Letters from an American Farmer, conveys themes through twelve essays, appearing as though written by one new to writing. The opening letter clearly sets the theme: the decay of European civilization positions the American frontier as a beacon of hope for humanity’s renewal. Crèvecour questions why people visit Italy just to admire temple ruins and dilapidated amphitheaters, which cause sadness, whereas he finds joy in the modest beginnings of society emerging throughout the colonies, as forests are turned into fields and thirteen provinces form with simple livelihoods and political order. He describes himself as "a Tabula rasa," a blank slate imprinted with vivid impressions. Likewise, he views America as a fresh canvas to build a new society and way of life. Crèvecour may be seen as a romanticized Locke follower, yet he tempers idealism with practicality, acknowledging reality’s imperfections. The book offers a raw, sincere testimony of a man striving to believe in the ideal life championed by Rousseau. Modestly, suited to one who learned English at sixteen, Crèvecour admits his writing limitations and opts to record his thoughts plainly. His style lacks smooth colloquial flow, except in moments of passion. Despite the enthusiasm, his depiction isn’t exaggerated. He portrays Colonial America as a "new continent; a modern society," held together by "the silken bands of mild government" where laws are followed not out of fear but because "Americans are equitable." In his view, America’s divide between rich and poor is narrower than Europe’s, contrasting with Europe’s "great lords who possess everything, and of a herd of people who have nothing," whose people suffer from poverty, hunger, war, harsh laws, prisons, and punishments. Playfully embracing the nickname "farmer of feelings" given by a respected English correspondent, he expresses emotionally how America is a place where "individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men, whose labors and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world."
hope this helps
Answer:
The individuals who endorsed the US Constitution asserted that they represented the voices of their state's residents. They held this power as they were chosen by the populace as their delegates, based on their roles within the state or their active involvement in local policy matters.
Explanation:
The purpose of establishing the US Constitution was to enhance governance for the American citizens. Everyone engaged in the drafting and adoption of this constitution acted as representatives of their state's populace, carrying an obligation to advocate and make decisions on behalf of those individuals.
This authority was granted by the citizenry, and it was shared among the representatives based on their social standing and connection to the governing policies enacted within the community.
I think the correct answer is D. I hope this provides some assistance.
Read "What makes good people do bad things?", by MELISSA DITTMANN
Which statement best supports Zimbardo’s belief that individuals aren’t inherently “good” or “evil”?
A. “‘Any of us can move across it... I argue that we all have the capacity for love and evil — to be Mother Theresa, to be Hitler or Saddam Hussein.’” ( Paragraph 3)
B. “In one condition, they overheard an assistant calling the other students ‘animals’ and in another condition, ‘nice.’” ( Paragraph 8)
C. “The same social psychological processes… that acted in the Stanford Prison Experiment were at play at Abu Ghraib, Zimbardo argued.” ( Paragraph 16)
D. “As such, the Abu Ghraib soldiers' mental state… may have further contributed to their ‘evil’ actions, he noted.” ( Paragraph 18)
Answer: A. “‘Any of us can move across it... I argue that we all have the capacity for love and evil — to be Mother Theresa, to be Hitler or Saddam Hussein.’” ( Paragraph 3)
Explanation:
Zimbardo posits that the distinction between good and evil is not fixed, suggesting no one is born strictly into either category. Rather, everyone has the potential to traverse this boundary, particularly when influenced by specific situations. For instance, the mindset of the soldiers, combined with insufficient oversight and accountability, was involved in the mistreatment of an Iraqi prisoner at Abu Ghraib.
Answer:
1,3
Explanation:
I had a similar thought upon reading... the passage provides necessary background details and sets up the play's context with these two points.
