First motive: they were ordered as soldiers.

Cited from the first paragraph. The author ties back in what he was talking about and then goes on to explain it even further.

The author gradually explains how the motives could surpass religion, and gives specific examples of where this could be applied. It isn't ridiculous to think that Osama bin Laden was upset by the U.S. destroying natural resources as opposed to "desecrating sacred soil".

The author provides support for the opposing claim. From what we have learned in this class, I am able to assume that he will provide even more support for his own claim. This is a great way to leave the reader without any unanswered questions.

Many of the hijackers believed that they would be rewarded for this suicide mission in the next life. The directions that were written for these hijackers provided comfort to them and tried to remind them of their religious obligations for partaking in this mission. However, I agree that there must be other motivations.

This is the goal of the author. To point out that the religious motives were not the only ones.

They say 2: He builds off of the previous statement which is a they say moment in of itself. However in this moment, he talks about mob violence being substituted for what was the law. Or maybe rather that the law was being enforced through mobs.

They say moment 1: They say the decree showed that the rulers of the church in South France did not like how popular heresy had become.

He is trying to come up with his own understanding for it all, because the actions of these people go against what one would think everyone believed in. He cannot understand the reasoning for this violence.

A type of cleansing. They used the girl for what they believed she was worth, which killed her in the end.

"Why does he title the chapter "The Wild Beast"?"

I do not understand how the refugees could consider this to be ordinary. Maybe in the sense that it was often that something like this happened? Or that because it happened so often, they were used to it? It is so violent, that it is hard to believe that even after having witnessed these types of things many times they would consider it to be "ordinary".

It is disgusting that people could be so cruel and violent because of a prejudice, and then lie about it in attempt to cover their tracks.

This idea of 'cleansing' had brainwashed people. Friends were killing each other because they were convinced that something was wrong with them.

Does not provide a claim

This provides a challenging claim and great support in the way that could tell a story.

This provides a claim and support. However, it is not done well. The support is listed rather than provided in a manner that could tell a story.

I see this as two strong claims. There is no support as to how the revolutionary state reinforced the monarchy's traditions of authoritarian rule and centralized government.

Opposite of the last question, it could be seen as some kind of support for a claim concerning that the first modern nation-state in Europe was not formed by France.

This could be seen as some kind of support for a claim concerning how the first modern nation-state in Europe was formed.

There is no support for why the story is a worthwhile tale or why it is seen as a patriarchal apology for religious violence.

I like how you tied this in so smoothly with the original assertion. His killings are influences by his ancestor, like you said, and could maybe subconsciously anger him in a way that encourages him to commit more violent acts.

This cycle is was causes them to be even more enraged.

It is here specifically where others imitate their anger.

I think you are on to an interesting path. Each perceives themselves as being greater and having the omen that is most desired. I am a little confused however, because if the omen is the model, then what is the subject? Would the model not be the person who possesses the omen?

Abel has become the model because of the way that he values his sacrifice. God rewards him for his sacrifice, causing Abel to believe that his sacrifice is of great value, and in return influences Cain to place great value on the sacrifice.

We subconsciously base our opinions off of others opinions. This is a very clear example of mimetic desire that could leave to mimetic rivalry.

This is the basis for mimetic theory.

By explaining what a writer might be thinking in attempt to anticipate a reader's thoughts, the author himself anticipates the readers thoughts for his own writing. In the previous paragraph he several times iterates that a veteran writer is always thinking ahead or rethinking what he has already written. He anticipates that the reader will grow tired of this repetitive nature, and reiterates his point once more by giving examples of what the writer might think. The reader is able to connect with the writing in a way that ties the author's thoughts all together. (3: Anticipate their reactions).

By explaining what a writer might be thinking in attempt to anticipate a reader's thoughts, the author himself anticipates the readers thoughts for his own writing. In the previous paragraph he several times iterates that a veteran writer is always thinking ahead or rethinking what he has already written. He anticipates that the reader will grow tired of this repetitive nature, and reiterates his point once more by giving examples of what the writer might think. The reader is able to connect with the writing in a way that ties the author's thoughts all together. (3: Anticipate their reactions).

Here the author offers a variety in the way that he writes to lighten up the text (4: Offer them variety and wit to lighten their work). Not only does he clearly explain his point to the reader, he does so in a way that is casual and personable. The phrasing does not make the reader feel dumb, but at the same time reassures their understanding of a writer "communicating privately with himself". The author merely rewords his idea in the second half of the sentence, as one might do in a conversation.

Reasoning for sacrificing themselves. Even if this is not the biggest of the reasons, it is of greater value to them.

They believe they are sacrificing themselves for a greater purpose. The author is reminding them and helping them to convince themselves of this.

The author is reminding the bombers that they will feel at peace after their task. "Afterwards begins the happy life,... and eternal bliss". This persuasion seems shallow and sort of like a last ditch effort. This is the most basic of reasons, and is maybe supposed to remind the bombers of why they started on this path.

Extraordinarily persuasive. The author points out that they bombers should consider the fact that their lives will end soon so they must take advantage of the time they have left.

Here the author provides specific textual support for the task they are going to carry out.

These instructions are to help the suicide bombers to understand why they are carrying out this task. To them, it is the way that they are able to show their dedication to their God, sacrificing their own life. What I don't understand is why the suicide bombers have to also take the lives of others in order to show this dedication?

I am interested to see what I am able to learn about my own opinions throughout this course. I had never thought about constitutions and such to be "sacred", but in their own sense they are. Analyzing views and various religions will allow me to have a more educated opinion on the topic.