The great artist Michelangelo once said, "The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark." Do you agree or disagree with Michelangelo’s statement? Take a position on this issue. Support your response with details and specific examples.

I agree with Michelangelo

Explanation:

The message he was trying to pass across is that, there is danger in settling for less than aiming for the top. Most people are afraid to set their goals high so that they wont fall short in achieving it. They are afraid of setting high goals because they think they might not achieve it. But that is not a problem because when people set higher aim and fail to achieve their mark, they may be bound to try again. And by doing so, they may likely not take a short cut because of where they have set their sight.  The problem with this approach is that it makes people settle for lesser than their capacity. And when people settle for less, then there is danger. The danger of this is: it can cause people to take a short cut or to compromise because they might feel the higher mark is not for them or its far above them or its too much of stress. Example, if a student study just to get a pass for  a medical examination as compared to studying for an A. If both student passes the exam, both cannot be compared, not because of their grades but the mindset they carry. If the student that set his mind on A is to treat a patient, he might want to treat the patient to the best of his abilities and  he is likely to value excellence. But if the student with the mindset to get a D is to treat a patient, he might compromise because he wants to settle for the less. Like in the olden days, there was a time when nobody can run the 4-minute mile until Britain's Roger Bannister did it in 1954. If he had not settled for less at that time, we may still believe no human being can do that. So settling for less is like caging the mind.

can you give a picture of the map, i'll be able to update my answer!

the most likely outcome of fewer loon territories is that hawks would increase in proportion because the benefit of victory would be greater. hawks and loons are natural rivals of resources and victories in the game, since the lakes drying up affected the loons, the hawks would be benefited from the drought.