Part D In this part of the activity, you will evaluate your three critiques of the poem. You will first need to recall what you learned about intentional and affective fallacies in this unit. W. K. Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley coined both terms. The term intentional fallacy refers to the idea that an author’s purpose or intention in writing a work of literature has no importance in appreciating or critiquing that work. The term affective fallacy refers to the idea that how a work affects a reader or what emotions it arouses in the reader have no importance in appreciating or critiquing that work. Read this Knowledge Article to learn more about New Criticism and the affective and intentional fallacies.

Evaluate your response to part A. Explain the disadvantages of emphasizing background information, such as historical context when critiquing a poem. Be sure to include examples from your analyses.

in a place once known as north america, now known as panem, is a very rich city surrounded by twelve districts. every year because this very rich city, known as the capitol, is so rich and likes to think they control all the districts - which they do - there is something known as the hunger games! this is where two children, one boy and one girl from each district from the ages of twelve to eighteen, have to leave their families and compete in the hunger games, a live event that is aired on tv's all over panem. when katniss everdeen, aged sixteen from district 12, has to volunteer to take the place of her twelve-year-old sister prim after prim's name is called forth to become the 23rd member to compete in the 74th hunger games, she promises to prim that she will win! katniss doesn't believe she's coming out alive - but she's not going down without a fight.

because district 12 is so poor, katniss has been close to death many times from starvation but she's made it through it. but this is a different kind of close to death; this katniss doesn't know if she can survive.

she doesn't want to hurt, or kill anyone but when it comes down to it katniss' instinct is to survive. but when she starts to have confusing feelings about the boy from her district who is also her fellow contender, things get worse, and then she teams up with the girl from district 11 and only one person can survive. but who will it be? will her feelings get the better of her? will she let someone else win so they don't have to die? if katniss is going to win she's going to have to be brutal. she's going to have to kill!

what is the sentence?

bikhri bikri zulfain..ye behki behki chaal

yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

it is yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

hope this