The organisation of ideas depends on the type of essay you have. You would need full training to understand more deeply:
All the best
Your aim in your essay is to provide clear, relevant main points which are well developed, explained and linked. Your other aim is to provide accurate grammar and vocabulary in English. Those examples might be appropriate to use one example but certainly not more than that. Once you make your point, move on – don’t become repetitive. Your Japanese example is confusing for people who don’t understand Japanese but your example from the Philippines is clearer. Remember this is not about filling your essay will all your ideas – it is about being selective and deciding what to include and what to exclude.
SparkNotes: The Prince: Study Questions & Essay Topics
sorry for not writing the question clearly , Here is what i mean.
In this video ,you have mentioned about not writing the conclusion in short reports ( 1:10 secs in video ) ,as you mean to say not to write conclusion in writing task 1 . But when i was going through a page 168 of cambridge book 8, i found a answer with a conclusion . so i got confused as iam following your classes for preperation.
Hope you will clear me out on this.
Free Machiavelli Prince papers, essays, ..
And therefore all this ado about Adam’s fatherhood, the greatness of its power, and the necessity of its supposal, helps nothing to establish the power of those that govern, or to determine the obedience of subjects who are to obey, if they cannot tell whom they are to obey, or it cannot be known who are to govern, and who to obey. In the state the world is now, it is irrecoverably ignorant, who is Adam’s heir. This fatherhood, this monarchical power of Adam, descending to his heirs, would be of no more use to the government of mankind, than it would be to the quieting of men’s consciences, or securing their healths, if our author had assured them, that Adam had a power to forgive sins, or cure diseases, which by divine institution descended to his heir, whilst this heir is impossible to be known. And should not he do as rationally, who upon this assurance of our author, went and confessed his sins, and expected a good absolution; or took physic with expectation of health, from any one who had taken on himself the name of priest or physician, or thrust himself into those employments, saying, I acquiesce in the absolving power descending from Adam, or I shall be cured by the medicinal power descending from Adam; as he who says, I submit to and obey the paternal power descending from Adam, when it is confessed all these powers descend only to his single heir, and that heir is unknown?
I'll discuss this in this essay, emphasizing the following theses
2. Because in this of Gen. xxvii. Isaac foretells that the Israelites, the posterity of Jacob, should have dominion over the Edomites, the posterity of Esau; therefore, says our author, “heirs are lords of their brethren:” I leave any one to judge of the conclusion.
The Prince Summary | GradeSaver
If Noah did divide the world between his sons, and his assignment of dominions to them were good, there is an end of divine institution: all our author’s discourse of Adam’s heir, with whatsoever he builds on it, is quite out of doors; the natural power of kings falls to the ground; and then “the form of the power governing, and the person having that power, will not be (as he says they are, O. 254,) the ordinance of God, but they will be ordinances of man:” for if the right of the heir be the ordinance of God, a divine right; no man, father or not father, can alter it: if it be not a divine right, it is only human, depending on the will of man: and so where human institution gives it not, the first-born has no right at all above his brethren; and men may put government into what hands, and under what form they please.