Explanation:
In 1651, Thomas Hobbes famously wrote that life in the state of nature – that is, our natural condition outside the authority of a political state – is ‘solitary, poore, nasty brutish, and short.’ Just over a century later, Jean-Jacques Rousseau countered that human nature is essentially good, and that we could have lived peaceful and happy lives well before the development of anything like the modern state. At first glance, then, Hobbes and Rousseau represent opposing poles in answer to one of the age-old questions of human nature: are we naturally good or evil? In fact, their actual positions are both more complicated and interesting than this stark dichotomy suggests. But why, if at all, should we even think about human nature in these terms, and what can returning to this philosophical debate tell us about how to evaluate the political world we inhabit today?
The question of whether humans are inherently good or evil might seem like a throwback to theological controversies about Original Sin, perhaps one that serious philosophers should leave aside. After all, humans are complex creatures capable of both good and evil. To come down unequivocally on one side of this debate might seem rather naïve, the mark of someone who has failed to grasp the messy reality of the human condition. Maybe so. But what Hobbes and Rousseau saw very clearly is that our judgements about the societies in which we live are greatly shaped by underlying visions of human nature and the political possibilities that these visions entail.
Answer:
Good job, but I really wanted to see it. Even if John told me no.
Explanation:
And I slap the hardest but out of the pictures, probably the nun
Answer:
Fought eighteen days apart in the fall of 1777, the two Battles of Saratoga were a turning point in the American Revolution. On September 19th, British General John Burgoyne achieved a small, but costly victory over American forces led by Horatio Gates and Benedict Arnold. Though his troop strength had been weakened, Burgoyne again attacked the Americans at Bemis Heights on October 7th, but this time was defeated and forced to retreat. He surrendered ten days later, and the American victory convinced the French government to formally recognize the colonist’s cause and enter the war as their ally.
On September 19, 1777, Burgoyne attacked. The fiery Arnold prodded Gates out of his defensive mentality, winning permission to lead Morgan’s men and Henry Dearborn’s light infantry into the woods to block a British flanking column. For most of the afternoon, a furious struggle raged around and across a clearing called Freeman’s Farm; Arnold poured in fresh regiments until the jittery Gates broke off the action, leaving the battered British in possession of the ground in what came to be known as the Battle of Freeman’s Farm.
Is this good?
Explanation:
Answer: A.
Explanation:
The first amendment is freedom of speech.
