Effective listening better than talking

by | Feb 24, 2023 | Economics

 

is effective listening better than talking??

Sample solution

Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell. 

In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.


This question has been answered

God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.

Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.

To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.

 

References

Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.

Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.

Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.

Sample Solution

The answer to this question depends on the context, as the most effective form of communication is typically a combination of both listening and talking. However, there are certain situations where listening may be more effective than talking. For example, if someone comes to you for advice or help with an issue they are facing, it may be best for you to listen rather than talk so that they can feel heard and understood. Listening also allows you to obtain valuable information and insight into another person’s thoughts and feelings that would not otherwise be accessible through simply talking.

In addition, active listening—which involves paying close attention while being respectful and non-judgmental—is often regarded as an essential skill in interpersonal communication because it helps foster understanding between two or more people by encouraging meaningful dialogue. Engaging in active listening allows individuals to gain a better grasp on their own perspectives while simultaneously gaining perspective from others; this process often brings clarity and resolution to conflicts or misunderstandings that cannot necessarily be achieved through just talking alone.

Finally, when done correctly, effective listening can provide a deeper connection between two parties involved in a conversation because it encourages empathy towards one another; something that is difficult to achieve when only one side talks without considering what the other has said first before responding back with remarks of their own eventually afterwards eventually too.. Thus overall , sometimes it really is better for us all just sometimes even still too -to take some time out from our day in order just purely focus instead solely then upon actively engaging truly collaboratively together within any given particular momentary discussion here at hand (or perhaps even alternatively instead too online) over here currently right now anyways already today then again afterall either way still whether simultaneously live inside an actual physical space/room somewhere near by -or albeit potentially instead maybe virtually across many miles away as well…

Sample Solution

The answer to this question depends on the context, as the most effective form of communication is typically a combination of both listening and talking. However, there are certain situations where listening may be more effective than talking. For example, if someone comes to you for advice or help with an issue they are facing, it may be best for you to listen rather than talk so that they can feel heard and understood. Listening also allows you to obtain valuable information and insight into another person’s thoughts and feelings that would not otherwise be accessible through simply talking.

In addition, active listening—which involves paying close attention while being respectful and non-judgmental—is often regarded as an essential skill in interpersonal communication because it helps foster understanding between two or more people by encouraging meaningful dialogue. Engaging in active listening allows individuals to gain a better grasp on their own perspectives while simultaneously gaining perspective from others; this process often brings clarity and resolution to conflicts or misunderstandings that cannot necessarily be achieved through just talking alone.

Finally, when done correctly, effective listening can provide a deeper connection between two parties involved in a conversation because it encourages empathy towards one another; something that is difficult to achieve when only one side talks without considering what the other has said first before responding back with remarks of their own eventually afterwards eventually too.. Thus overall , sometimes it really is better for us all just sometimes even still too -to take some time out from our day in order just purely focus instead solely then upon actively engaging truly collaboratively together within any given particular momentary discussion here at hand (or perhaps even alternatively instead too online) over here currently right now anyways already today then again afterall either way still whether simultaneously live inside an actual physical space/room somewhere near by -or albeit potentially instead maybe virtually across many miles away as well…

factors. A case in point is Ely’s characterization of risk taking. In a study accomplished in 1986 (as cited in Nga, 2002), he clarifies that taking risks is intrinsically related to classroom participation and self-confidence. Ely ascertains a key pedagogical factor that was not comprised in previous definitions of the term and that is required in a language class: willingness to participate. According to Hongwei (1996) classroom participation may demonstrate for language learners a noteworthy chance to practice and improve their skills in the target language. On the other hand, Lee and Ng (2010) state that another classroom factor correlated with the willingness to speak is the teacher’s role and whether it can decrease student inhibition to participate in the second language class.

Since there have been numerous various approaches to the term risk taking, the effort to define it and its educational rationale have modified so much that research on learner differences has not come to a unified explanation of the term yet. In spite of this fact, one of the most general definitions of risk taking is found in the words of Beebe, one of the leading researchers in the field. In her analysis of risk taking, she attentively captures most of its essential characteristics. She characterizes the term as a “situation where an individual has to make a decision involving choice between alternatives of various desirability; the consequence of the selection is uncertain; there is a possibility of failure” (Beebe, 1983, p.39). Her definition of risk taking resonates with the observations of other authors, for example, Wen & Clément’s uncertainty of consequences and the choice of actions mentioned by Bem. Beebe (1983) does not comprehensibly clarify the pedagogical implication of risk taking; although, from her definition of the term, teachers and learners can conclude that the risk of being right or wrong, i.e. failure, is inherent to learning to speak a second language.

 

 

From all the specifications of the risk-taking construct reviewed so far, we can state that risk taking is not an isolated construct but is closely related to other fundamental learner variables such as classroom participation and willingness to communicate in a second language. What should be highlighted from the literature on risk taking is that this term requires interplay between the learner and the decisions that he makes, his willingness to participate, and the educational setting.

Definitely the definitions of risk taking have also caused research to account for the particular traits that a risk taker should have. In regard to the requirements that learners have to meet in order to be assumed risk takers, one of the most powerful reports corresponds to Ely’s dimensions. According to Ely’s (as cited in Alshalabi, 2003) first dimension, risk takers are not suspicious about utilizing a newly encountered linguistic component. The second dimension refers to risk takers’ willingness to use linguistic components perceived to be complicated or difficult. According to Alshalabi (2003) this dimension clarifies why risk

This question has been answered.

Get Answer