Imagine you are a service-disabled veteran and made your hobby of building model airplanes into a small
business that produces very small remote control aircrafts capable of long sustained flights. You are
ready to reply to a U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules solicitation.
Write a six to eight (6-8) page paper in which you:1.Describe the electronic submission process and the security measures present in this approach.
Analyze the advantages over classic paper solicitations.2.Analyze whether or not your company has as much of a chance of having its bid accepted as a much
larger corporation (e.g., Boeing) does. Support your analysis.3.Speculate on how you would negotiate during the contract award process once your solicitation is
accepted.4.Determine the value of your most favored customer or class of customers to GSA. Analyze its impact on
your small business.5.Compare and contrast the advantages of being a small company over being a lager firm (e.g., Boeing) in
terms of contract administration and management.6.Assess the different marketing methods used to market to the federal government. Select three (3) most
effective methods you would use to market your product or service to the U.S. government. Provide a
rationale for your selection.
The Science of Life and Death in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein GuidesorSubmit my paper for investigation frankensteinFar from the awesome and far-fetched story that Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein presently appears to us, the novel was proclaimed by one commentator upon distribution to have “a quality of reality joined to it, by being associated with the most loved ventures and interests of the times.”1 Among these were the logical examinations concerning the conditions of life and passing. Significant vulnerability encompassed these classes—to such an extent that it was not fantastical that Frankenstein ought to affirm: “Life and demise appeared to me perfect limits” (ch. 4). He was not the only one in thinking about that the limit among life and demise was fanciful and that it may be penetrated. Stressed by the potential powerlessness to recognize the conditions of life and passing, two specialists, William Hawes and Thomas Cogan, set up the Royal Humane Society in London in 1774. It was at first called the “General public for the Recovery of Persons Apparently Drowned”; its points were to distribute data to assist individuals with reviving others, and it paid for endeavors to spare lives (the Society paid more cash if the endeavor was fruitful). Numerous individuals couldn’t swim as of now in spite of the way that they worked and lived along London’s streams and channels. There was a yearly parade of those “raised from the dead” by the Society’s strategies, which may well have included individuals who had proposed self destruction as well. One such appears to have been Mary Shelley’s mom, the women’s activist, Mary Wollstonecraft, who in the wake of jumping from Putney Bridge into the Thames in the profundity of despondency, grumbled “I have just to mourn, that, when the harshness of death was past, I was brutally breathed life into back and hopelessness.” The joke on her “coldhearted” treatment may well allude to the endeavors of the Humane Society in saving her.2 The tremendous stories of obvious restorations from the dead by the Society took care of the open’s anxiety that it was difficult to be certain whether an individual was really dead and, subsequently, fears of being covered alive developed. There was a logical reason for the open’s nerves. The French Encyclopédie recognized two sorts of death, “deficient” and “outright”: “That there is no solution for death is an adage broadly conceded; we, in any case, are eager to attest that passing can be cured.”3 In London, James Curry, a doctor at Guy’s emergency clinic and one of the Shelleys’ PCPs in 1817, composed a book that gave data on the best way to distinguish what he called “supreme” from “evident” death.4 In the book, he contended that the festering of the body was the best way to be totally certain an individual was dead. There was enthusiasm for conditions of “suspended movement, for example, blacking out, unconsciousness, and dozing. Mary Shelley followed contemporary logical language when she portrayed scenes of blacking out inside the novel. At the point when Victor Frankenstein makes the animal, he falls as a result of an anxious ailment and depicts himself in this state as “inert.” In this occasion, it is Clerval who “reestablished” him to “life” (ch. 5). Elizabeth swoons on observing the body of William: “She blacked out, and was reestablished with extraordinary trouble. At the point when she again lived, it was distinctly to sob and moan” (ch. 7). The language here is of a real existence lost and reestablished; while Elizabeth is oblivious, she is portrayed as being dead. There were not kidding endeavors, as well, to restore the really dead. In the last 50% of the eighteenth century, the Italian doctor Luigi Galvani found that frog’s legs jerked as though alive when struck by a flash of power. In her 1831 Preface to Frankenstein, Mary Shelley specifies how conversations on this thought one could electrically invigorate a dead muscle into obvious life—known as “galvanism”— came to impact her story. Numerous and long were the discussions between Lord Byron and Shelley, to which I was a dedicated however about quiet audience. During one of these, different philosophical tenets were talked about, and among others the idea of the rule of life, and whether there was any likelihood of its ever being found and imparted. Maybe a carcass would be vivified; galvanism had given token of such things: maybe the segment portions of an animal may be made, united, and endued with essential warmth. Night melted away upon this discussion, and even the witching hour had passed by, before we resigned to rest. At the point when I put my head on my pad, I didn’t rest, nor might I be able to be said to think. My creative mind, unbidden, had and guided me, gifting the progressive pictures that emerged in my brain with a clarity a long ways past the standard limits of dream. I saw—with shut eyes, yet intense mental vision—I saw the pale understudy of unhallowed expressions bowing adjacent to the thing he had assembled. I saw the repulsive apparition of a man loosened up, and afterward, on the working of some ground-breaking motor, give indications of life, and mix with an uncomfortable, half essential movement. Galvani’s nephew, Giovanni Aldini, advanced from frog legs to endeavoring the restoration of hanged lawbreakers, utilizing the “Murder Act” of 1752, which added the discipline of dismemberment to hanging. In 1803, Aldini had the option to try different things with some accomplishment upon George Forster, who had been seen as blameworthy of killing his better half and youngster. Spectators report that Forster’s eye opened, his correct hand was raised and gripped, and his legs moved. M. Aldini, who is the nephew of the pioneer of this most intriguing science, demonstrated the prominent and better powers of galvanism than be a long ways past some other energizer in nature. On the primary use of the procedure to the face, the jaws of the expired criminal started to shudder, and the abutting muscles were terribly twisted, and one eye was opened. In the resulting some portion of the procedure, the correct hand was raised and held, and the legs and thighs were gotten under way. Mr Pass, the beadle of the Surgeons’ Company, who was formally present during this trial, was frightened to such an extent that he kicked the bucket of trepidation not long after his arrival home.5 In Mary and Percy Shelleys’ heartbreaking individual lives, there is a lot of proof that they accepted the dead could be effectively restored. For instance, Percy Shelley composes of their youngster, William Shelley’s last disease: “By the aptitude of the doctor, he was once revived after the procedure of death had really initiated, and he lived four days after that time”.6 Death, it appears, could be switched. In the years paving the way to Mary Shelley’s distribution of Frankenstein, there was an open discussion in the Royal College of Surgeons between two specialists, John Abernethy and William Lawrence, on the idea of life itself. Both of these specialists had joins with the Shelleys: Percy had perused one of Abernethy’s books and cited it in his own work and Lawrence had been the Shelleys’ doctor.7 In this discussion, questions were gotten some information about how to characterize life, and how living bodies were diverse to dead or inorganic bodies. Abernethy contended that life didn’t rely on the body’s structure, the manner in which it was sorted out or masterminded, however existed independently as a material substance—a sort of fundamental rule, “superadded” to the body. His rival, Lawrence, thought this was a strange thought and rather comprehended life as the working activity of all the body’s capacities—the aggregate of its parts. Lawrence’s thoughts were viewed as being excessively radical: they implied that the spirit, which was regularly observed as being much the same as the fundamental standard, didn’t exist either. Lawrence had to pull back the book in which he had distributed his talks and leave the clinic post he held, however he was reestablished after freely reprimanding the perspectives he had advanced. The scene indicated how questionable the classifications of life and dead had become and given further motivation to Mary Shelley’s epic.>GET ANSWER Let’s block ads! (Why?)