What are the statements and can you please send the passage or a summery of the passage?
<u>Explanation:</u>
First, we need to note that an anthropocentric view (one who believes in Anthropocentrism) involves the view that only humans determine moral standing.
Thus, as regards the statement about forest usage by Gifford Pinchot, an anthropocentric view would debate that there should be sustainable use of the forest even though the majority can use this resources.
Answer:
Adrenaline works directly on receptor cells in muscles to speed up the contraction rate of the fibres, ready for fighting or fleeing. High levels of adrenaline can therefore lead to muscles twitching uncontrollably, making us shake.
Explanation:
Hey there!
I assume we're talking about Animal Farm.
First of all, this statement alludes to the fact that they're trying to say that animals are good, and humans are bad- because that's the main idea in most parts of the book. The animals have risen up and created their own rules for the farm in the wake of the human oppression previously not occurring and brought to life by the speech of Old Major. There are two main problems:
First of all, the whole farm runs on animals - however, pigs remain sovereign. The problem is, although most animals do have four legs, some animals, like swans, birds, and chickens, don't. That means they're left out and perhaps their contribution to the farm can be lost as a result of the fact that their physical anatomy betrays the ideals of the Commandments.
Secondly, we discussed before how this leaves out humans. However, they need humans- especially for the windmill at the beginning. If you remember, Napoleon actually had to make deals with some, and those proved to be very beneficial. This pretty much means that Napoleon is trying to dictate the beliefs of the beings he rules, but breaks and bends his own rules when he wants. After all, he became the leader after a revolution on the farm and uses his attack dogs in place of military force. Sound familiar? Napoleon represents Joseph Stalin, and most other characters represent people from history. One of the main points of this book is looking at it from another perspective. The animals mean something, it's more a book about the actions of people.
Hope this helps!
Answer:
Despite the barbaric intent of General Zaroff's desire to hunt human beings, he still displays a sense of honor and chivalry that he must have maintained from his military days. When he announces that he plans to hunt Rainsford that night, Rainsford wonders what he can expect if the impossible happens--if he wins.
His clothes essentially depict him as an aristocrat, someone of a higher social class than Rainsford. He is very distinguished looking; we assume he might be Russian because of Ivan who is a Cossack (like a Russian cavalryman).
General Zaroff is so skilled at hunting that he no longer finds enjoyment in hunting simple game like deer or ducks because he finds it too easy. He has been hunting for an extensive amount of time and he likes the challenge of hunting game without instinct but with reason. Rainsford is also a very smart and skilled hunter which interests General Zaroff for some exciting game.
General Zaroff began hunting humans because he became bored with hunting animals. He claimed that he lost interest in hunting animals, and he eventually realized that the reason was that he had become such a great hunter that the animals never eluded him. So as he found that hunting animals meant no challenge to him anymore, he interested in hunting humans.
Explanation:
Resource You Can Use:
https://www.sparknotes.com/short-stories/the-most-dangerous-game/character/general-zaroff/
I hope this helps you in any shape or form.
