Write a research proposal about Policy purposel on participatory budgeting
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.
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 Answer
Sample Answer
Research Proposal: Policy Purpose on Participatory Budgeting
Introduction:
Participatory budgeting (PB) is an innovative approach to democratizing decision-making processes in public finance. It involves the active participation of citizens in determining how public funds are allocated within a community. This research proposal aims to examine the policy purposes of implementing participatory budgeting in government entities. By exploring the potential benefits and challenges, this study seeks to contribute to the understanding of how participatory budgeting can be effectively utilized to enhance public participation, transparency, and accountability in budgetary decision-making.
Research Questions:
What are the policy purposes behind implementing participatory budgeting?
How does participatory budgeting contribute to enhancing public participation and democratic processes?
What are the potential challenges and limitations associated with implementing participatory budgeting policies?
Methodology:
This research proposal suggests employing a mixed-methods approach to gather comprehensive data and insights. The proposed methodology includes the following steps:
Literature Review: Conduct an extensive review of academic literature, policy documents, and case studies related to participatory budgeting and its policy purposes. This step will provide a theoretical foundation for understanding the concept and its potential benefits.
Quantitative Analysis: Utilize surveys or questionnaires to collect quantitative data from government officials, policymakers, and citizens who have experience with participatory budgeting. The survey will focus on identifying the policy purposes guiding the implementation of participatory budgeting.
Qualitative Analysis: Conduct in-depth interviews or focus group discussions with key stakeholders, including government officials, community leaders, and participants with firsthand experience in participatory budgeting. These qualitative interviews will offer insights into the challenges, benefits, and lessons learned from implementing participatory budgeting policies.
Comparative Analysis: Compare and analyze different case studies from diverse regions that have implemented participatory budgeting policies, examining variations in policy purposes, implementation strategies, and outcomes.
Data Analysis: Analyze the collected data using appropriate quantitative and qualitative analysis techniques such as statistical analysis and thematic coding. Summarize the findings and identify recurring themes related to policy purposes, benefits, and challenges associated with participatory budgeting.
Expected Findings:
Based on the research questions and methodology proposed, the expected findings of this study include:
A comprehensive understanding of the policy purposes driving the implementation of participatory budgeting.
Insights into how participatory budgeting contributes to enhancing public participation and democratic processes.
Identification of potential challenges and limitations in implementing participatory budgeting policies.
Conclusion:
This research proposal aims to explore the policy purposes of implementing participatory budgeting policies. The findings will contribute to the existing body of knowledge on participatory budgeting and inform policymakers about the potential benefits, challenges, and considerations associated with its implementation. By understanding the policy purposes behind participatory budgeting, policymakers can design more effective strategies to promote citizen engagement, transparency, and accountability in budgetary decision-making processes.
