Question

1. read the following excerpt from \the value of a sherpa life.\

want to know what a sherpa life is worth? you only need to review the numbers that i reported last year: lower pay, lower standards for rescue insurance, lower payouts on accidental - death coverage in general. and, perhaps most significantly, the amount of time that sherpas spend making laps through the deadly khumbu icefall and up the lhotse face, ferrying loads for predominantly western expeditions so that clients can arrive fresh and minimize their exposure to the hazards of the mountain . . .
. . . but for about $200 per policy, at least one kathmandu - based insurance company will cover sherpas for $23,000. even that is clearly insufficient to cover the loss. what’s left instead is a patchwork of charity, in which some families find help from climbers to send their kids to school and others don’t.

how does this section support schaffer’s overall claim? in what ways does what he describes show how the sherpas’ lives are devalued and the risks they face diminished?

1. read the following excerpt from \the value of a sherpa life.\

the change i’d most like to see would start at the very beginning of the tragedy, when outfitters describe what has happened to these men, in words that, at this point, sound rote. a typical blog post on an expedition website follows a predictable pattern, like this one from earlier this month: our team is overwhelmed with sadness . . . we hang our heads in sorrow. but after sorrow should come an acknowledgement of the deep sense of responsibility that is tied in to hiring somebody to do such a dangerous job—for an end result that’s ultimately meaningless.

how does this excerpt reflect schaffer’s point of view or purpose in \the value of a sherpa life\? what phrases advance his point or view purpose?

Explanation:

Question 2

1. Support for Overall Claim: Schaffer's overall claim is about the devaluation of Sherpa lives. The excerpt uses numerical evidence (lower pay, low insurance payouts like $23,000 for ~$200 policy) and the description of Sherpas' dangerous labor (spending time in deadly areas to ferry loads for Westerners) to show their lives are undervalued.
2. Devaluation and Risk Diminishment: Lower pay and insurance payouts show economic devaluation. Sherpas’ exposure to deadly hazards (Khumbu Icefall, Lhotse Face) while clients stay safe, and insufficient insurance (charity as a patchwork) show their risks are minimized in value (diminished) as their lives are seen as less worthy of proper compensation or safety measures. The "patchwork of charity" also shows a lack of systematic support, further devaluing their lives.

1. Reflecting Point of View/Purpose: Schaffer’s purpose is to critique the way Sherpas’ deaths are handled (trivialized, with no real accountability). The excerpt shows his view that outfitters’ responses (like rote blog posts) lack true accountability.
2. Phrases Advancing Point: Phrases like "rote" (shows insincere, repetitive responses), "predictable pattern" (criticizes unoriginal, uncaring responses), "after sorrow should come an acknowledgement... of responsibility" (argues for accountability, showing current responses lack it), and "hiring somebody to do such a dangerous job—for an end result that’s ultimately meaningless" (criticizes the lack of purpose in risking Sherpas’ lives) advance his point about the need for accountability and the trivialization of Sherpas’ deaths.

Answer:

• Support for Claim: The excerpt uses data (low pay, low insurance payouts) and descriptions of Sherpas’ dangerous labor (ferrying loads in deadly areas for Westerners) to show their lives are undervalued, supporting Schaffer’s claim about Sherpa life devaluation.
• Devaluation/Risk Diminishment: Lower pay, low insurance ($23,000 for ~$200 policy, insufficient to cover loss), and Sherpas’ exposure to deadly hazards (while clients avoid risk) show their lives are devalued. The reliance on charity (unreliable support) and minimizing Sherpas’ risk exposure (by having them do dangerous work) diminishes the recognition of their risks.

Question 3