2 prompt paper into one (analysis and comparison) will go further into details w writer

Prompt 1 – Violence: Analysis and Comparison What is the problem? The world is saturated with violence. Angela Davis and Michael Fleming discuss the nature of violence. In your own words, explain the scope of their discussions, the ways in which their arguments are similar and/or different and the impact of their arguments upon your understanding of violence. *As signposts to help you develop your analysis and comparative framework, think through and include the following: a)  Clearly lay out the arguments of Davis and Fleming separately b)  What are the reasons for their claims? c)  Are their arguments similar? If yes, how so – specifically? If no, how? d)  Are their arguments different? If yes, how so – specifically? If no, how? e)  Given the scale of violence, what does each author say about a solution (or lack of a solution) to the problem? f)  If a solution was presented, what is it? Why is it viable? If the author indicated that there is no solution to the problem of violence, what is the ground for her/his assertion? g)  What contemporary examples can you draw from to highlight their viewpoints about the problem? Prompt 2 – Death, Dying and Living: Analysis and Comparison What is the problem? Death awaits everyone. Bob Plant and Claire Wineland discuss the nature of death. In your own words, explain the scope of their discussions, the ways in which their arguments are similar and/or different and the impact of their arguments upon your understanding of death and dying. *As signposts to help you develop your analysis and comparative framework, think through and include the following: a)  Clearly lay out Plant’s arguments about the problem he intends to address b)  What does Plant mean by the banality of death? Why does he think ‘this’ distinction is key to talking about death? c)  What does Wineland say about death and dying? How does she support her articulations? d)  Although Plant and Wineland base their views from different stances, do they have similar viewpoints? If yes, what are they specifically? If no, how are the perspectives different? e)  Given the inevitability and imminence of death, what does each say about living/life? Why is this important to grasping the nature of death and dying? f)  What contemporary examples can you draw from to highlight their viewpoints about the problem?