8 HOURS DELIVERY: PLAGIARISM FREE AND QUALITY WORK GUARANTEED.

Based on his “Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals”, reconstruct, in broad str

Based on his “Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals”, reconstruct, in broad strokes, Kant’s theory of moral action. In the process, provide your own example applying the decision-making process Kant describes to determine what the morally correct action might be in a given situation. Finally, based on his discussion in “I and Thou” and “Elements of the Interhuman”, how might Buber respond to Kant’s general approach to morality? (A strong submission will outline Buber’s general stance and substantiate it with a discussion of at least two unique points – one of comparison, one of contrast between the two thinkers’ views.)
answer every part of it as directly, thoroughly, and precisely as possible, explaining key ideas in your own words and citing evidence from the course’s assigned text
Relevance: Did you properly and fully address the prompt questions as they were asked?
Completeness/thoroughness: Did you answer every part of the question, explaining in your own words all the important key points of the content along the way?
Evidence (textual) provided: Did you make a solid case for your interpretation of the text by citing evidence in support of your specific claims about the author’s ideas?
Clarity/Precision of Expression: Did you write clearly, make your thoughts as transparent as possible to the reader, and choose words that aptly described what you meant to say? Did you include the material that is necessary in order to directly and completely respond to the question, avoiding confusing the reader with tangential thoughts?
Proper scholarship (citation format): Did you choose a coherent citation style and consistently stick to it? Did you cite readings that were assigned for the class?
-Answer the question as if you were answering someone who asked you in person (i.e., give a relevant, direct, complete answer; this does not mean that you should speak imprecisely or too informally).
– Explain key ideas in your own words, giving the reader the impression that you understand what you’re saying, but whenever attributing a claim to an author, cite (and in the few cases you directly quote, make sure to explain the quote).
– Don’t bother with flowery/drawn-out introductions or conclusion paragraphs; if you write these paragraphs at all, make them a very brief and to-the-point summary of the points you will make (or have made). In such a short submission, it’s likely better to skip them entirely and jump right into answering the question.
– Expect to include citations [but not necessarily direct quotes] often. Your citations are there to provide evidence that your claims about an author’s ideas are based in specific passages of the text, and to give your reader an easy way to understand how your claims constitute a direct interpretation of that text.
– You may cite the lectures, but your main source of evidence for your claims should be the text.
– This is an exercise in textual interpretation, not an encyclopedic summary of a thinker’s ideas. You should give only what background information is necessary to clarify your response to the prompt question, as it becomes relevant to the points you’re making.

In your own words, being certain to explain every claim you make with a relevant

In your own words, being certain to explain every claim you make with a relevant quote from the text that clearly supports what you say about it, explain what Socrates says about the four cardinal virtues in book 4 of the Republic. Where and how are they introduced? When Glaucon says “I accept this as your account of courage,” why does Socrates say “I accept this as your account of civic or political courage” (430c). What is this political courage opposed to? What other kind of courage is there, and what does this have to do with the “longer road” he describes in book 6? Be certain to reference the passages in the text that discuss this and explain what they mean.

Prompt: In Ways of Seeing, John Berger writes, “A people or a class which is cut

Prompt: In Ways of Seeing, John Berger writes, “A people or a class which is cut off from its own past is far less free to choose and to act as a people or class than one that has been able to situate itself in history. This is why – and this is the only reason why – the entire art of the past has now become a political issue” (33). Consider the ways in which certain people or groups are “cut off from [their] own past” in the work(s) you have chosen. Who or what is it that cuts them off from that past? What means do they use to cut others off from their past? To what extent do those cut off attempt to recover or rewrite that past? How do they use the recovered or rewritten past for political purposes? What is the relation between the past in general and politics? What does this suggest about the politics of historical narrative(s)?
Use artwork from Ways of Seeing to support

1. Summarize the Allegory of the Cave as it relates to reality and how it prese

1. Summarize the Allegory of the Cave as it relates to reality and how it presents characteristics of a metaphysical question.
2. How is the theory of forms relevant in this story and what is its relationship to ideas?
3. Provide a personal example to support your explanation of what is real in the context of the story of the cave.
4. Has your understanding of reality or what is real changed? Do to understand truth to be different now? Explain your personal claim with 2-3 arguments of support.
please answer the essay with these four questions I have also attached screenshots of the rubric

Module 4: Corporate Social Responsibility & Stakeholder Leadership Module 4 Corp

Module 4: Corporate Social Responsibility & Stakeholder Leadership
Module 4 Corporate Social Responsibility & Stakeholder Leadership
Overview
This module explores the discourse of “corporate social responsibility:” its ethical meaning, social applications, and conceptual limits.
Learning Objectives
Upon successful completion of this module, you will be able to:
Ask and venture answers to the following key ethical questions: Is corporate social responsibility ethically important? Are objections to it ethically defensible? What might those objections be, and what assumptions underlie them?
Examine the way in which changing social attitudes impact ethical standards and best practices.
Test concepts from this unit by applying them to a practical problem of business ethics and justice in the workplace.
Key Concepts
This module focuses on the following major topics:
Four key assumptions underlying opposition to the notion that corporations have ethical duties beyond increasing shareholder value. Are these assumptions credible?
The impact of the attitudes of Millennials as a population of customers and stakeholders on issues around corporate social responsibility
A case study to help us explore the viability and ethical value of participatory corporate self-governance
Summary of Module Learning Activities
This section outlines the activities that you will complete in this module. It is recommended that you complete the readings in the module prior to submitting the assignments.
Read: Ciulla et. al readings
Page 1 of 5 in Module 4
Proceed to the next page by clicking the Next button at the bottom of the screen.
Purpose
The midterm paper allows you to analyze the conceptual and normative issues surrounding the assigned materials for a module of your choice up through the midway point in our course.
Directions
Now you should know your topic for the midterm paper. You should start collecting resources for your paper.
About cited sources: throughout your paper, you must reference at least 3 different authors we have encountered during the semester so far, at least 2 of whom must be drawn from Module 1. Note that these requirements permit some overlap in the assigned materials you use and cite. The acceptable range is 3-6 separate sources cited throughout your paper (1-2 per section). Please cite sources following APA style.
Grading
The midterm paper will be graded on a 100 point scale. It is worth 25% of your course grade.
Please review the rubric below to understand how the assignment will be graded.
Page 4 of 5 in Module 4
Proceed to the next page by clicking the Next button at the bottom of the screen.
Rubric
BLHV 231 Paper Grading Rubric
BLHV 231 Paper Grading Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction/Thesis
25 pts
Exceeds Expectations
(1) Exceptional introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic. (2) Thesis is exceptionally clear, well-developed, and a definitive statement.
20 pts
Meets Expectations
(1) Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. (2) Thesis is clear and arguable statement of position.
15 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
(1) Weak introduction. (2) Purpose of paper is unclear or thesis is weak or missing.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent Knowledge
25 pts
Exceeds Expectations
(1) Exceptionally critical, relevant, comparison and contrast of articles. (2) Excellent understanding of the articles.
20 pts
Meets Expectations
(1) Critical and relevant comparison and contrast of articles. (2) Good understanding of the articles.
15 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
(1) Limited or no appropriate comparison and contrast of articles. (2) Some misunderstanding of the articles.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent Application: Comparative Analysis of Readings
25 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Excellent analysis and thoughtful application of ideas to one’s own work.
20 pts
Meets Expectations
Good analysis and some application of ideas to one’s own work.
15 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
(1) Lack of sufficient analysis. (2) Lack of application of ideas to one’s own work.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting: Grammar & Mechanics
25 pts
Exceeds Expectations
(1) Writing is clear and relevant, with no grammatical and/or spelling errors – polished and professional. (2) Reference section properly formatted. (3) APA Style Manual is followed consistently.
20 pts
Meets Expectations
(1) Most ideas are stated clearly and are related to the topic, with only minor grammatical and/or spelling errors. (2) Reference section adequate. (3) APA Style Manual is followed in most areas.
15 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
(1) Many ideas require clarification and/or are off-topic or have marginal relevance to the assignment. (2) Grammatical and/or spellings errors throughout the paper. (3) The paper is very challenging to read due to poor writing flow. (4) Improper reference section. (5) APA Style Manual is not followed consistently.
25 pts
Total Points: 100
Required Readings for Purchase
Ciulla, J. B., Martin, C. & Solomon, R. C. (Eds.) (2018). Honest Work: A Business Ethics Reader (Fourth Edition). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN-13: 978-0190497682 [Henceforth referred to as Ciulla et al. ]
This course offers a selective introduction to the study of philosophy through the critical examination of ethical issues arising within situations calling for responsible leadership. We will apply theoretical principles to selected case studies from professional life. Our aim is to practice careful, critical analysis of problems of right and wrong conduct around finance, marketing and advertising, corporate governance, international human rights, data science, global business, distributive and social justice, environmental policy, COVID-19 and similar public health crises, and national and global democratic citizenship.
Week 4
09/13-09/19
Module 4: Corporate Social Responsibility & Stakeholder Leadership
Readings:
Christopher D. Stone, “Why Shouldn’t Corporations Be Socially Responsible?,” p. 179
Paul A. Argeenti, “Corporate Ethics in the Era of Millennials,” p. 198
Case 5.1: “Mondragon Cooperatives,” p. 200
Purpose
This assignment is designed to provoke thinking, and have you thoughtfully examine and make explicit your fundamental assumptions and beliefs about the topic.
This image is currently unavailable Directions
Your reflection piece is to be roughly 1 page long (250-300 words), typed and double-spaced. Remember that the maximum length requirement is an important aspect of this assignment. Please cite sources following APA style.
On Corporate Social Responsibility and Stakeholder Leadership
Your task in this paper is twofold:
First, from this week’s readings, you have a choice.
(A) Select one of the two main readings — Stone or Argeenti. In your paper’s first part, briefly explain the central argument of the piece. What is the author primarily trying to convince you of, and why? Devote no more than half your reflection piece to this expository task. (B) Address this week’s case study — Case 5.1: “Mondragon Cooperatives.” In your paper’s first part, briefly explain the scenario that leads to our study questions.
Second, depending on whether you chose to write about one of the main readings or the case study, clearly and succinctly explain (A) whether you are convinced by the author’s argument, and why or why not, or (B) how you would answer study questions 1-4. Be sure to spell out your reasons use at least one concrete example to illustrate your perspective.
Your assignment will be submitted to the Turnitin plagiarism prevention service via Canvas. Your assignment content will be checked against Internet sources, academic journal articles, and the papers of other students, for common or borrowed content. Turnitin generates a report that highlights any potentially unoriginal text in your paper.
You are allowed one attempt to submit the final version of your assignment as repeated submissions checked via Turnitin will produce inaccurate and high similarity scores that indicate possible plagiarism.
This image is currently unavailable Grading
The reflection piece will be graded on a 100 point scale. All Reflection Pieces will contribute 20% towards your final course grade. Please review the rubric below to understand how the assignment will be graded.
Page 3 of 5 in Module 4
Proceed to the next page by clicking the Next button at the bottom of the screen.
Rubric
BLHV 231 Reflection Piece Assignment Grading Rubric
BLHV 231 Reflection Piece Assignment Grading Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent Reflection
50 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Reflection demonstrates a high degree of critical thinking in applying, analyzing, and evaluating key course concepts and theories from readings, lectures, media, discussions activities, and/or assignments. Insightful and relevant connections made through contextual explanations, inferences, and examples.
40 pts
Meets Expectations
Reflection demonstrates some degree of critical thinking in applying, analyzing, and/or evaluating key course concepts and theories from readings, lectures, media, discussions activities, and/or assignments. Connections made through explanations, inferences, and/or examples.
30 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Reflection lacks critical thinking. Superficial connections are made with key course concepts and course materials, activities, and/or assignments
50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePersonal Growth
30 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Conveys strong evidence of reflection on own work with a personal response to the self-assessment questions posed. Demonstrates significant personal growth and awareness of deeper meaning through inferences made, examples, well developed insights, and substantial depth in perceptions and challenges. Synthesizes current experience into future implications.
24 pts
Meets Expectations
Conveys evidence of reflection on own work with a personal response to the self-assessment questions posed. Demonstrates satisfactory personal growth and awareness through some inferences made, examples, insights, and challenges. Some thought of the future implications of current experience.
18 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Conveys inadequate evidence of reflection on own work in response to the self-assessment questions posed. Personal growth and awareness are not evident and/or demonstrates a neutral experience with negligible personal impact. Lacks enough inferences, examples, personal insights and challenges, and/or future implications are overlooked.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Quality
20 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Well written and clearly organized using standard English, characterized by elements of a strong writing style and basically free from grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling errors.
16 pts
Meets Expectations
Above average writing style and logically organized using standard English with minor errors in grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling.
12 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Poor writing style lacking in standard English, clarity, language used, and/or frequent errors in grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling. Needs work.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTimeliness
0 pts
0 points deducted
Reflection is submitted on or before deadline.
0 pts
1-5 points deducted
Reflection is submitted within 1 day (24 hours) after the deadline.
0 pts
6-10 points deducted
Reflection is submitted 2-3 days (49-72 hours) after the deadline.
0 pts
Total Points: 100

Purpose This assignment is designed to provoke thinking, and have you thoughtful

Purpose
This assignment is designed to provoke thinking, and have you thoughtfully examine and make explicit your fundamental assumptions and beliefs about the topic.
This image is currently unavailable Directions
Your reflection piece is to be roughly 1 page long (250-300 words), typed and double-spaced. Remember that the maximum length requirement is an important aspect of this assignment. Please cite sources following APA style.
On Advertising and Marketing Ethics
Your task in this paper is twofold:
First, from this week’s readings, you have a choice.
(A) Select one of this week’s two main readings — Goldman or Savan. In your paper’s first part, briefly explain the central argument of the piece you chose. What is the author primarily trying to convince you of, and why? Devote no more than half your reflection piece to this expository task.
(B) Address this week’s case study — Case 7.3: “Hucksters in the Classroom.” In your paper’s first part, briefly explain the scenario that leads to our study questions.
Second, depending on whether you chose to write about one of the main readings or the case study, clearly and succinctly explain (A) whether you are convinced by the author’s argument, and why or why not, or (B) how you would answer study questions 1-4. Be sure to spell out your reasons use at least one concrete example to illustrate your perspective.
This image is currently unavailable Submission
Submit your reflection as an attachment (.doc or .docx).
Upload your Reflection Piece to Canvas by Sunday 11:59 p.m. US Eastern Time. Click the Submit Assignment button on the upper right corner of the screen. Scroll below for the File Upload box to choose and attach your file for uploading to Canvas.
Your assignment will be submitted to the Turnitin plagiarism prevention service via Canvas. Your assignment content will be checked against Internet sources, academic journal articles, and the papers of other GU students, for common or borrowed content. Turnitin generates a report that highlights any potentially unoriginal text in your paper.
You are allowed one attempt to submit the final version of your assignment as repeated submissions checked via Turnitin will produce inaccurate and high similarity scores that indicate possible plagiarism.
This image is currently unavailable Grading
The reflection piece will be graded on a 100 point scale. All Reflection Pieces will contribute 20% towards your final course grade. Please review the rubric below to understand how the assignment will be graded.
Page 3 of 4 in Module 6
Proceed to the next page by clicking the Next button at the bottom of the screen.
Rubric
BLHV 231 Reflection Piece Assignment Grading Rubric
BLHV 231 Reflection Piece Assignment Grading Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent Reflection
50 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Reflection demonstrates a high degree of critical thinking in applying, analyzing, and evaluating key course concepts and theories from readings, lectures, media, discussions activities, and/or assignments. Insightful and relevant connections made through contextual explanations, inferences, and examples.
40 pts
Meets Expectations
Reflection demonstrates some degree of critical thinking in applying, analyzing, and/or evaluating key course concepts and theories from readings, lectures, media, discussions activities, and/or assignments. Connections made through explanations, inferences, and/or examples.
30 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Reflection lacks critical thinking. Superficial connections are made with key course concepts and course materials, activities, and/or assignments
50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePersonal Growth
30 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Conveys strong evidence of reflection on own work with a personal response to the self-assessment questions posed. Demonstrates significant personal growth and awareness of deeper meaning through inferences made, examples, well developed insights, and substantial depth in perceptions and challenges. Synthesizes current experience into future implications.
24 pts
Meets Expectations
Conveys evidence of reflection on own work with a personal response to the self-assessment questions posed. Demonstrates satisfactory personal growth and awareness through some inferences made, examples, insights, and challenges. Some thought of the future implications of current experience.
18 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Conveys inadequate evidence of reflection on own work in response to the self-assessment questions posed. Personal growth and awareness are not evident and/or demonstrates a neutral experience with negligible personal impact. Lacks enough inferences, examples, personal insights and challenges, and/or future implications are overlooked.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Quality
20 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Well written and clearly organized using standard English, characterized by elements of a strong writing style and basically free from grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling errors.
16 pts
Meets Expectations
Above average writing style and logically organized using standard English with minor errors in grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling.
12 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Poor writing style lacking in standard English, clarity, language used, and/or frequent errors in grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling. Needs work.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTimeliness
0 pts
0 points deducted
Reflection is submitted on or before deadline.
0 pts
1-5 points deducted
Reflection is submitted within 1 day (24 hours) after the deadline.
0 pts
6-10 points deducted
Reflection is submitted 2-3 days (49-72 hours) after the deadline.
0 pts
Total Points: 100
This course offers a selective introduction to the study of philosophy through the critical examination of ethical issues arising within situations calling for responsible leadership. We will apply theoretical principles to selected case studies from professional life. Our aim is to practice careful, critical analysis of problems of right and wrong conduct around finance, marketing and advertising, corporate governance, international human rights, data science, global business, distributive and social justice, environmental policy, COVID-19 and similar public health crises, and national and global democratic citizenship.
Required Readings for Purchase
Ciulla, J. B., Martin, C. & Solomon, R. C. (Eds.) (2018). Honest Work: A Business Ethics Reader (Fourth Edition). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN-13: 978-0190497682 [Henceforth referred to as Ciulla et al. ]
Course Learning Objectives
Upon successful completion of this course, you will be able to:
Examine our assumptions and commitments about what living responsibly requires of us.
Evaluate and critique key concepts and theories within the philosophical study of ethics.
Recognize and apply core ideas in a variety of subject matter areas, including marketing and finance, social and economic policy, and the ethical dimensions of timely issues such as big data, global corporate citizenship, and environmental stewardship.
Apply an understanding of ethical standards and principles to a range of practical issues and situations.
Study and practice the skills of effective, ethical leadership in a range of collaborative activities around challenges in professional life.
Investigate privacy issues and other moral problems surrounding the collection and usage of data-knowledge.
Practice careful analysis and dialogue in order to become better citizens of a free and plural society where we exchange reasons for our beliefs and actions in a civil and public-spirited way.

R‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍ESEARCH PAPER: Topic: If you could commit immoral acts with

R‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍ESEARCH PAPER: Topic: If you could commit immoral acts without getting caught, would there be any reason to be moral? Components 1) Abstract – 350 words minimum 2) Introduction – 275 words minimum 3) Body (Arguments / Substance 1200 words minimum) 4) Conclusion – 250 words minimum 5) Bibliography – 6) Literature Review – 450 Words minimum Total 2525 Words minimum DO NOT PLAGIARIZE OR COPY ANYONES WORK! ? TITLE – If you could commit immoral acts without getting caught, would there be any reason to be moral? ? ABSTRACT ? 1 . Topic(s) from this course that you will address directly ? 2. Why it’s important, philosophically and materially ? 4. Who the main authors/positions you will discuss/address will be ? 5. WHAT YOU WILL ARGUE ? 6. End with THESIS statement ? Should be 350 words minimum ? Introduction ? Body ? Provide direct quotes from each source in the body (4 sources I provided as attachments and 4 of your own scholarly) ? Defend your sustained argument for your thesis against actual and possible objections ? This is where you argue for your point and defend YOUR thesis against actual and possible objections/ ? Also include footnotes ? Conclusion ? BIBLIOGRAPHY – IMPORTANT!!! Use the 4 sources I have uploaded and then find 4 of your own scholarly research (philosophical sources) – So total 8 sources (4 I have uploaded and you find 4 philosophical scholarly ones) – Cite using Chicago Manual of Style (CMS) ? LITERATURE REVIEW (What is it) A literature review is the part of your paper that summarizes the main points and discusses and evaluates the arguments of the literature on your cho‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍sen topic. Please UPDATE your literature review to include each author’s argument for the main point that you will be focusing on, and the reasons for that point; b) direct quotes and citations from each source that support your analysis and argument; c) any objections to the point or reason and d) replies to those objections (please be sure to outline all the objections and replies raised in class and in discussions) – Tells your reader the state of scholarship about a given topic. What are the ‘received views’? – Organizes the major points, parts, or arguments of each source you will use so that it is ready to use in your paper/project. Format of Literature Review – Introduction: Explain why this research topic is important. Outline what direction your review will take: ., what aspects of the topic you’re focusing on. – Body: Present your summaries of the sources in a clear, logical, and coherent manner. . Present in order of importance, two sides of a controversial problem, differences in perspective or viewpoint. – Note: Describe only the main theories or claims that are directly relevant to YOUR topic. – Ensure your final list of references includes all sources you’ve discussed, and use the citation style required in philosophy (Chicago Manual of Style preferred). What to include for each source: 1. Summarize main point of each of the sources you have selected. 2. Provide a direct quote from each of the sources. 3. Provide the reason or argument for the main point. 4. Do the reasons support the main point? Why or Why Not? 5. Outline all objections or replies RMBR DO NOT PLAGIARIZE OR COPY OTHER PEOPLES WORK. C‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍ITE EVERYTHING YOU USE!

I‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍ need an APA format research paper topic on research on the

I‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍ need an APA format research paper topic on research on the problems with eating meat (moral, environmental, and health). My professor suggested that the ARFF website might be helpful. The research paper must be at least 5 pages in length, including a title page and a page of references. A minimum of four references must be used as sources and must be listed on the reference page. Re‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍ferences should be listed in APA format, and any quote must be properly attributed. Again, use double-space line spacing, normal 1-inch margins, and 12-point type in Times New Roman font. Papers should demonstrate the ability to write in proper grammatical sentences and use proper paragraph structure. Be sure to include my name on the paper itself and also be sure to number my pages‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍.

Your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to watch the film, The Young Karl M

Your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to watch the film, The Young Karl Marx by the director Raoul Peck, and then contribute with a short reflection in the form of a Canvas Discussion post. The film tells the story of Marx, Engels and The Communist Manifesto.
n excellent post will not only thoughtfully reflect on the film, but will also consider it in relation to the text of the Manifesto.