assess how you evaluate types of play, and how each type promotes healthy development in early childhood.
Play is important in children’s development. Children learn from solitary play and playing with others (cooperative play). Play helps simulate and develop friendships and socioemotional skills. Children learn to think, problem solve, and test their beliefs about the world through play. They learn to cooperate, share, and make decisions. For this assignment, create a brochure or newsletter explaining to families and other constituents the importance of play.
Sample Solution
Firstly, Vittola discusses one of the just causes of war, most importantly, is when harm is inflicted but he does mention the harm does not lead to war, it depends on the extent or proportionality, another condition to jus ad bellum (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314). Frowe, however, argues the idea of âjust causeâ based on âSovereigntyâ which refers to the protection of political and territorial rights, along with human rights. In contemporary view, this view is more complicated to answer, given the rise of globalisation. Similarly, it is difficult to measure proportionality, particularly in war, because not only that there is an epistemic problem in calculating, but again todayâs world has developed (Frowe (2011), Page 54-6). Furthermore, Vittola argues war is necessary, not only for defensive purposes, âsince it is lawful to resist force with force,â but also to fight against the unjust, an offensive war, nations which are not punished for acting unjustly towards its own people or have unjustly taken land from the home nation (Begby et al (2006b), Page 310&313); to âteach its enemies a lesson,â but mainly to achieve the aim of war. This validates Aristotleâs argument: âthere must be war for the sake of peace (Aristotle (1996), Page 187). However, Frowe argues âself-defenceâ has a plurality of descriptions, seen in Chapter 1, showing that self-defence cannot always justify oneâs actions. Even more problematic, is the case of self-defence in war, where two conflicting views are established: The Collectivists, a whole new theory and the Individualists, the continuation of the domestic theory of self-defence (Frowe (2011), Page 9& 29-34). More importantly, Frowe refutes Vittolaâs view on vengeance because firstly it empowers the punisherâs authority, but also todayâs world prevents this action between countries through legal bodies like the UN, since we have modernised into a relatively peaceful society (Frowe (2011), Page 80-1). Most importantly, Frowe further refutes Vittola through his claim that âright intention cannot be used as an excuse to wage war in response to anticipated wrong,â suggesting we cannot just harm>
GET ANSWER
Firstly, Vittola discusses one of the just causes of war, most importantly, is when harm is inflicted but he does mention the harm does not lead to war, it depends on the extent or proportionality, another condition to jus ad bellum (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314). Frowe, however, argues the idea of âjust causeâ based on âSovereigntyâ which refers to the protection of political and territorial rights, along with human rights. In contemporary view, this view is more complicated to answer, given the rise of globalisation. Similarly, it is difficult to measure proportionality, particularly in war, because not only that there is an epistemic problem in calculating, but again todayâs world has developed (Frowe (2011), Page 54-6). Furthermore, Vittola argues war is necessary, not only for defensive purposes, âsince it is lawful to resist force with force,â but also to fight against the unjust, an offensive war, nations which are not punished for acting unjustly towards its own people or have unjustly taken land from the home nation (Begby et al (2006b), Page 310&313); to âteach its enemies a lesson,â but mainly to achieve the aim of war. This validates Aristotleâs argument: âthere must be war for the sake of peace (Aristotle (1996), Page 187). However, Frowe argues âself-defenceâ has a plurality of descriptions, seen in Chapter 1, showing that self-defence cannot always justify oneâs actions. Even more problematic, is the case of self-defence in war, where two conflicting views are established: The Collectivists, a whole new theory and the Individualists, the continuation of the domestic theory of self-defence (Frowe (2011), Page 9& 29-34). More importantly, Frowe refutes Vittolaâs view on vengeance because firstly it empowers the punisherâs authority, but also todayâs world prevents this action between countries through legal bodies like the UN, since we have modernised into a relatively peaceful society (Frowe (2011), Page 80-1). Most importantly, Frowe further refutes Vittola through his claim that âright intention cannot be used as an excuse to wage war in response to anticipated wrong,â suggesting we cannot just harm>
Is this question part of your Assignment?
We can help
Our aim is to help you get A+ grades on your Coursework.
We handle assignments in a multiplicity of subject areas including Admission Essays, General Essays, Case Studies, Coursework, Dissertations, Editing, Research Papers, and Research proposals
Header Button Label: Get Started NowGet Started Header Button Label: View writing samplesView writing samples