The conversation between Simplicio and Salviati (or Sagredo, for that matter) depicts a discussion between proponents of two profoundly different theoretical paradigms, or worldviews. Simplicio is deeply committed to Aristotelian-Ptolemaic view of the cosmos, while the other two attempt to change his view to the Copernican view. In what way(s) does it make sense for Simplicio to be committed to the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic view? Explain two of Salviati’s reasons for mistrusting the assumption made by Simplicio that we should take Aristotle’s view to be correct about the nature of the universe. Note: There are numerous approaches to answering the questions posed. Choose the arguments you find most compelling. The task of this paper is to explain those arguments clearly and in detail. Explain your answer using evidence from the Dialogues or any other relevant material we have looked at so far in the course.
orporation, with the power hierarchy supporting an isolating and competitive environment. Within this setting, it is not just an individual who is guilty; sometimes, the entire corporation is at fault. But, since we cannot imprison a corporation, general control penalties do not apply to white collar crime (Gottschalk, 2016). The obedience to authority and the multi-faceted issue of all the different players makes white collar crime a very convoluted topic in the criminal justice system. Dealing with these crimes in the justice system is therefore just as ambiguous as theorizing and conceptualizing. However, some notable contributions have been made in the 20th century, including the expansion of federal criminal law and reach of federal fraud statutes (Anello & Glaser, 2016). The Second Circuit has contributed to the development of white collar jurisprudence over the last century, finally allowing for national conversations, court decisions, law, practice, procedure, and punishment of white collar crimes (Anello & Glaser, 2016). Contributions from empirical research have also led to the creation of white collar crime units, as well as more grant money and publicly available systemic data for in-depth research (Reurink, 2016). Finally, criminological contributions have brought about discussion of the separation between individual and group rights (Michalowski, 1979; Reurink, 2016). For white collar offenders, this could make prosecutions and conceptualization much clearer, leading to better research and outcomes to tackle this problem. Conclusion No crime exists until someone in power says that something is a crime. With regards to labeling and white collar crimes, the law is selective. Criminal law targets selectively and unequally, promoting and protecting white collar crimes and disproportionally criminalizing and stigmatizing drug offenses and other crimes by ordinary citizens (Carrington & Hogg, 2002). The capitalist system tends to favor the privileged and demonize the oppressed. Contributions to both criminology and criminal justice are promising, showing a revitalized interest in labeling theory and crimes of the powerful. Critical criminology has opened the door for national dialo>GET ANSWER