What is the significance of the setting of Romeo and Juliet?

The most important thing about the setting of Romeo and Juliet, from a dramaturgical perspective, is the fact that the play takes place in Italy. Shakespeare’s source material is an Italian story, and Italians were thought of as especially passionate in the Elizabethan imagination. In fact, for a writer of that era who wanted to tell a story about hotheaded, violent, passionate, irrational people, the easiest way to make the characters credible would be to set the story in Italy. Elizabethans thought it the perfect place for a story about love at first sight, easily-provoked street brawls, murders for family honor, and passion-driven suicides. The stories about Italy made it seem as though those sorts of things were a daily occurrence. Shakespeare would turn to Italy for many stories about people behaving rashly or violently, not only in this play but also in both comedies and tragedies such as The Two Gentlemen of Verona, Othello, and The Merchant of Venice.

On what page of John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men is the quote "I seen him goin' in your house?"

The quote -- "I seen him goin' in your house" -- can be found on page 16 of the electronic version of John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, the link to which can be found below. The passage in question occurs late in Chapter Two of Steinbeck's novel, and occurs in the context of Curley's attractive but exceedingly promiscuous wife's entry into the men's bunkhouse ostensibly while searching for Curley. The wife, never named, has a reputation among the ranch-hands as someone prone to infidelity, and that fact that she is married to the boss, Curley, makes her appearance foreboding. George, the diminutive but intelligent and tough newcomer, senses danger when Curley's wife comes sniffing around the bunkhouse, and knows she is not there for her stated reason. As George curtly responds to her presence, Slim, the confident, handsome and competent leader among the men, happens along, prompting the following exchange:

Slim’s voice came through the door. “Hi, Good-lookin’.”

“I’m tryin’ to find Curley, Slim.”

“Well, you ain’t tryin’ very hard. I seen him goin’ in your house.”

George, of course, is grateful for her departure, and her brief appearance has confirmed the warnings about the hazards she poses if the quick-to-anger Curley assumes the worst about her interactions with any of the ranch-hands.

How did the field of psychology develop?

Many trace the development of psychology to diverse philosophers that date back to over a thousand years before the common era and encompass traditions that stretch from Greek, to Persia, to China, to Egypt, to India. However, the history of psychology as an institutionalized discipline in the (modern) academy has a shorter history and is conventionally affiliated with the experimental studies of Wilhelm Wundt in the year of 1879 - who started the first psychology research lab at the University of Leipzig in Germany. Along with experimental psychology the emergence of the field was closely knit with a particularly applied practice and the specific space of the clinic beyond the research lab of the academy. Early goals of the field were both to generate explanations of mental differences (associated with the practices of classification and quantification - e.g. anthropometrics and psychometrics- such as the work of Sir Francis Galton) and to cure/heal/treat abnormal or pathological psyches or mental dispositions (associated with the practices of interpreting the unconscious - e.g. psychoanalysis - such as the work of Sigmund Freud). By the 20th century new schools of thought rose to prominence, such as behaviorism (and the work B.F. Skinner and Ivan Pavlov) - which prioritized empirically observable behavior -- e.g. what the body did -- over speculations on the mind. The next wave of thought that transformed the field is known as humanistic psychology (associated with the work of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers), which concerned itself with understanding the human experience -- and the power of free-will and self-determination. Today, the field has a range of faces from developmental to cognitive to social psychology, all of which are layered on top of and interpenetrated by the rich traditions and legacies that proceed them and laid the foundation of the discipline.  

What is t to the negative 4th power

Hello!

By definition, the negative power of something is the inverse of the positive power with the same magnitude:

`t^(-n)=1/t^n.`

This definition is essential because it preserves the properties

`a^n*a^m=a^(n+m),` `(a^n)^m=a^(n*m)` and `(a*b)^n=a^n*b^n.`

So the answer is: `t^(-4)=1/t^4.`

Why did Jem destroy Mrs. Dubose's flower garden?

One day, Scout and Jem walked by Mrs. Dubose's house. She was sitting on her front porch and she called to them. First, she accused them of playing hooky from school. Then she accused Jem of damaging Miss Maudie's scuppernong arbor. She also told Scout that she should be wearing a dress. Jem encouraged Scout to ignore Mrs. Dubose and go home.

Mrs. Dubose then called out again, talking about Atticus defending Tom Robinson. She used a derogatory term to describe Tom. Jem became enraged that anyone would say such a thing and speak of his father negatively. He stormed off.

Later, Jem walked down the street with Scout's baton. They walked by Mrs. Dubose's house. Then Jem did something that shocked Scout. It was something she knew Atticus would be appalled by:

We had just come to her gate when Jem snatched my baton and ran flailing wildly up the steps into Mrs. Dubose's front yard, forgetting everything Atticus had said, forgetting that she packed a pistol under her shawls, forgetting that if Mrs. Dubose missed, her girl Jessie probably wouldn't. He did not begin to calm down until he had cut the tops off every camellia bush Mrs. Dubose owned, until the ground was littered with green buds and leaves.

How does Harper Lee presents ideas about society in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird?

Harper Lee explores the fictional county of Maycomb throughout the novel, To Kill a Mockingbird, and portrays the various levels of society in unique ways. As a whole, the community of Maycomb is filled with helping citizens who treat others with respect. Despite their innocent demeanor, Harper Lee exposes their deep seeded prejudice towards African Americans and lower-class white citizens. The majority of society receives its news via gossip and rumors. Several characters throughout the novel are discriminated because of their different lifestyle choices. Boo Radley and Dolphus Raymond become victims of negative rumors because they stand out from the status quo.

Harper Lee portrays the upper-class female citizens of Maycomb as hypocritical Christians. During Aunt Alexandra's missionary circle, several ladies share their views on race and religion, which happen to be both ignorant and hypocritical. Lee uses these characters to suggest that tolerance is not associated with affluence. Lower class citizens of Maycomb are portrayed as both hard-working and lazy. Lee uses the Cunningham and Ewell families to suggest that integrity is learned and passed down from father to child. Lee portrays the African American community of Maycomb to be closely knit and supportive of each other. The congregation's donations to Helen Robinson and their appearance at Tom's trial depict their support for each other. In many ways, the black community of Maycomb is more tolerant than the white community, which suggests that race and character are not related.

Harper Lee also shares her ideas on the education system throughout the novel. Scout's teacher, Miss Caroline, does not facilitate and encourage Scout's enthusiasm for reading and writing. Instead, Miss Caroline adheres to the rigid education system that impedes learning, rather than supports it. The judicial system in Maycomb's society is seriously flawed and affected by prejudice. Tom Robinson is wrongly convicted, and Lee suggests that injustice is commonplace throughout the South in the 1930's. Harper Lee portrays Macomb's society to be steeped in traditional beliefs and resistant to change.

What does Emerson think of people who call for consistency in thought and action and who fear being misunderstood?

In his essay "Self-Reliance," Ralph Waldo Emerson repudiates those who desire acceptance and who want consistency of thought and action. 

Very much the individualist, Emerson holds the mantra of "trust thyself" rather than surrendering oneself to conformity. For, to conform because of fear of being misunderstood and the need to be accepted is to surrender one's individuality. 

Trust thyself....Accept the place the divine Providence has found for you....Great men have always done so.

Asking such questions as "Is it so bad to be misunderstood?" Emerson points to great men who were misunderstood by their contemporaries: Jesus, Pythagoras, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, etc. (Herman Melville once said, "Failure--one's writings not being accepted--is the true test of greatness.") Because they were stalwart in their beliefs and the value of their discoveries, these famous men contributed invaluably to the world. 

Emerson terms those who seek conformity as "cowards," while those who maintain the "integrity of [their] minds" are to be admired because they hold what is truly sacred. Thus, in order to retain one's manhood, one's self-respect, individuals must never surrender themselves to the "joint-stock company" of a society that would take away individual liberties and demand imitation and conformity. Clearly, then, Emerson rails against a person's consistency with others in thought and action from fear of being misunderstood.