Question

prepared to share your original ideas in a class discussion.

1. how would you respond to the different scenarios presented in the text? would you choose to eat the bread? why or why not?
2. how does each unique context affect the meaning of the bread? why do you think the author chose to present these ethical dilemmas to the reader?
3. what do you think was atwoods purpose in writing this text? do you think that the text could be written about any object, or is it important that it is about bread? explain your thinking.

Explanation:

1. Responses to scenarios would depend on personal ethical and practical considerations. For example, if the bread is obtained unethically (stolen), one might choose not to eat it. Reasons could include moral principles like honesty and respect for property rights.
2. The context gives the bread different symbolic meanings. In a religious context, it may represent communion; in a survival - ethics context, it could be about basic needs vs. moral rules. The author likely presents ethical dilemmas to make the reader think about moral decision - making.
3. The author's purpose might be to explore ethical concepts through a relatable object like bread. It could be written about any object, but bread is common and has many cultural and symbolic associations, making it a good choice for exploring ethics.

Answer:

1. Responses vary based on personal ethics. Reasons for eating or not eating could be moral or practical.
2. Context gives bread different symbolic meanings. Author aims to prompt moral thinking.
3. Author explores ethics. Bread is a relatable choice but could be any object.