Turn in your answers to me (in my office or my department mailbox) in typed/printed/neatly handwritten form by 4:00 p.m. on Monday, February 16.
Limit your answers to the word limits shown at the end of each question. (Note: 1 standard-format page is about 325 words.) These limits are for your and my protection, so you won't feel driven to write a dissertation and I won't have to read one. You need not reach the stated number of words in order to provide an excellent answer (or to get an excellent grade). As a matter of fact, I have built some slack into the word limits, so your reaching the word limit may make me think your answer worse rather than better.
Follow this standard format. The quality of your writing should meet these writing standards.
ANSWER ALL OF QUESTION I AND ANY TWO OF QUESTIONS II-IV
I. Recall that social criticism involves an identification of the symptoms, a diagnosis of the problem, a prognosis of what will happen if the problems go unaddressed, and a prescription for how these problems should be addressed. This question asks you to identify each of these for the Lerner text, i.e., what are the symptoms Lerner identifies, what is his diagnosis, etc. You may choose to argue that Lerner does not address that issue. At the other extreme, you might find that he says so much that it can't be summarized within the word limits given; if so, then discuss what you consider the most important things he says about it. (I will be grading in part on the importance of what you choose to focus on, not just how well you describe it.) Oh, yes — I'm not asking you to discuss Lerner's prescription, since he lays it out so directly in Chapters 7 & 8.
II. Lerner sees the absence of meaning as being the center of a wide variety of problems in our society. However, it is not always clear whether the connection actually exists (or exactly what the connection is) between the absence of meaning and the problem he mentions. So this question asks you to look at Lerner critically: for which of these problems does Lerner least convince you that there is a connection between meaning and the problem? Describe the problem and then explain why you believe Lerner's case is weak or flawed. You can argue that there is no connection at all, or you can argue simply that Lerner does a poor job of explaining the connection. [Limit: 325 words]
III. It is obvious that Lerner considers lack (or loss) of meaning as a central problem in our society. However, where does this lack (or loss) itself come from, according to him? Be specific about the causes he sees and where he discusses them. [Limit: 325 words]
IV. What does Lerner mean by "ethical and spiritual advancement"? Use examples from the text to back up your definition / interpretation. [Limit: 325 words]
The University of Minnesota is an
equal opportunity educator and employer.
Copyright © 2004 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights
reserved.