it is possible to be part of multiple nations simultaneously. however, in times of crisis, it is essential that loyalty to your country of residence take priority over any other loyalties.
I haven't ever done position papers in grade 11. I'm having a hard time deciding if I should present arguments of for or against. Can I please get some examples?
To what extent should we embrace the perspectives reflected in the source?
If I choose for:
1) can I talk about the French nationalism how napoleon became a hero in France as he created the lycee school system, the bank of France, civil laws and road and sewer systems. He created many reforms after French Revolution
I fail to see what Napoleon's accomplishments have to do with loyalty to the place one lives. Napoleon may have been popular in France, but he was not popular in Italy after he conquered much of that peninsula and imposed a harsh rule there. Would an Roman living in Paris support Napoleon's rule over his homeland when his relatives back home might have opposed Napoleon? Where would his obligation lie? Does he have an obligation at all, or can he make up his own mind? If he wanted to stay in France, he might want to keep his sympathies for Rome quiet, but... I'm not sure that's a good example. See if you can find a better one. I know of one that I can toss out. My great-great grandparents had come from Germany in 1864. When World War I came along and the USA joined the war in 1917, my great-great grandfather's sympathies were all for the USA. He had not become a citizen, but had lived here for 53 years, his children and grandchildren were all American-born. He had no loyalty to Germany, although he was, technically, still a German citizen.
Ohhh okay. That's a really good example. I can think of many like those but I'm having a hard time finding some for social 20-1 curriculum.
To determine whether to present arguments for or against the given statement, "To what extent should we embrace the perspectives reflected in the source?", it is important to understand the content of the source and the specific perspectives it presents. Without the source provided, I am unable to analyze the perspectives reflected in it. However, I can guide you on how to approach this type of question.
1. Read and analyze the source: Carefully read the source and identify the key perspectives or ideas it presents. Take note of the arguments and evidence provided by the source to support these perspectives.
2. Consider the context: Consider the context in which the perspectives are presented. Are they supported by reputable sources or experts? Do they align with commonly accepted values or beliefs?
3. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses: Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the perspectives. Are the arguments logical and well-supported, or are they based on assumptions or limited evidence? Consider the credibility of the author or the source itself.
4. Consider different viewpoints: Reflect on whether there are alternative perspectives that challenge the ones presented in the source. Look for counterarguments or contradictory evidence that may offer a different viewpoint.
5. Formulate your stance: Based on your analysis, determine whether you agree or disagree with the perspectives in the source. This will guide you in determining whether to present arguments for or against.
Since I don't have the specific source, I'm unable to provide examples or take a stance on your behalf. However, once you have thoroughly analyzed the source, you can develop well-supported arguments and counterarguments that reflect your evaluation of the perspectives presented. Remember to provide evidence and reasoning to support your points effectively.