Select a current or proposed creative media franchise, individual, or artifact to analyse and evaluate. Assess your choice against the elements discussed in the module. Learning Outcomes Assessed by this Assignment This assignment assesses the following module learning outcomes: You should consider your choice carefully, so you can consider the following aspects in your assignment. 1.Where has this project originated? What social, political, economic, cultural and historical factors can you identify that inspired its creation or the creation of some of its elements? 2. Evaluate the successful of this project,or its lack of success. Identify evidence-based reasons as to why it has or hasn’t succeeded. 3. Assess the opportunities for creativity in your choice,from the inception of the idea, to the opportunities afforded to readers,participators, audiences, viewers, or users. How is this creativity organised and structured? 4. Identify and define the relationship between creativity and commercial opportunity within your chosen focus. How are participators encouraged to develop content? Who benefits from that content development? How?5. What theoretical underpinning, from the module content, can you make use of to explain the creative processes at work in your chosen study?
The primary central matter contended by Dawkins is that the size and the intricacy of the universe entice us to imagine that there was a maker, a God. Science be that as it may, figured out how to liberate us from clarifying everything around us utilizing the word God. Science deals with noting question dependent on proof. Religion utilizes confidence to overlook the inquiry and pushes it to God. He further contends that the main time confidence becomes possibly the most important factor is when there is no proof. Dawkins’ second point expresses that the logical technique is the suitable method to settle on agnosticism and Christianity. He clarifies that religion is about science and their cases are likewise viewed as logical cases. He contends that science underpins skepticism. He backs this up by utilizing a speculative circumstance in which in the event that he was addressed in court by a legal advisor concerning whether the hypothesis of development drove him to skepticism, he would answer yes. The third point contends that it is extremely enticing to reason that there is a creator who made the universe as it is a direct result of its flawlessness. Religion utilizes God to sidestep the issue by saying God made it. He says that Darwin’s hypothesis of advancement demonstrates to us how multifaceted nature is clarify through straightforwardness. Along these lines Darwin demonstrated is that a ‘plant’ may not really have a ‘planter’ (God). In his fourth point, Dawkins clarifies that religion trains us to not scrutinize our confidence and this keeps us from defending our activities as long all things considered for the sake of God. He contends that having a confidence legitimizes horrendous acts since it enables us to abstain from thinking. Accordingly this clarifies the silly demonstration that was done ever of. He additionally advance distrust since it energize us don’t have confidence in anything without searching for proof. His fifth point expresses that religion isn’t the wellspring of our ethical quality. He contends that regardless of whether we take versus that suit us for a heavenly book, despite everything we pick this versus with our own discernment. In this manner we dint require the sacred book in any case. He utilizes development to clarify our desire for good deeds. He clarifies that there is somethng that is causing our ethical agreement has moved over decades. This move is unquestionably not cause by religion this is on the grounds that a religious sacred text does not change after some time where as our ethical agreement do. In his last point, he contended that the revival of Jesus Christ is a minor issue and it is disgraceful of the universe. He further clarifies that rather than the propose that humankind is made in the picture of God by God himself, all lives multifaceted nature can be clarify by getting it from basic start by intelligible levelheaded means. 2) What were the qualities and shortcomings of his contentions? Amid the discussion Dawkins’ contention about how stunning the sheer greatness and multifaceted nature of the universe entices us to adore a maker. He says that we decipher the sentiment of stunningness into an inclination to revere a God. He adds that it is anything but difficult to state than a planner tuned the universe. As per him, this says nothing and it is just utilizing God to dodge the issue. He demonstrated that regardless of how complex anything possibly, it doesn’t essential need a fashioner. He demonstrates this utilizing Darwin’s hypothesis to clarify something as intricate as life. Other than that, Dawkins likewise notice another essential point which is that science has liberated us from our wants to disclose things to a maker. He portrays that science chips away at noting question where as religion disregards the inquiries. He couldn’t help contradicting the statement by Steven Jay Gould which essentially expresses that religion and science don’t cover. He contemplates science and religious cases are logical cases. The logical reasoning is the proper method to choose whether these cases are valid. He even discussed distrust which instructs us to look for proof as opposed to indiscriminately have confidence in something. This is parallel to the logical strategy for portraying our condition and nature. Another solid contention passed on by Dawkins was his conclusion about confidence. He conceives that confidence just comes to play where there is no proof. This can be seen amid the discussion when he said ‘on the off chance that confidence is proof based, we wouldn’t need to call it confidence’. In addition, he contends that when we certainly have confidence in the confidence, it grants us to act sanely; this is on the grounds that the words confidence can legitimize any demonstration regardless of how preposterous or shameless it might be. This can be proposed when he said ‘confidence is a horrendous weapon that legitimizes the awful execution of awful act’ In conclusion, he contended that our profound quality is autonomous from religion. He expresses that in the event that we think we require a divine being or a sacred book to be moral, it implies that we are hoodwinked. When we pick versus that we feel reasonable from a sacred book, we are really choosing what our profound quality ought to be founded on our soundness. Accordingly, he contends that we don’t require neither a sacred book nor God in any case. In alternate cases, we have a religion simply because of the dread of God or the dread of not going to paradise. These demonstrations are not moral in any case. Over the span of the discussion, Dawkins demonstrated a few shortcomings. Among them is that he can’t pass on his point about the proposition plainly. The proof for this can be seen all through the whole discussion. In his first endeavor to expand any of the six postulations, he couldn’t express his thoughts in a straight forward way. It is just in his answer where we can improve thought of what he was attempting to state. Other than introduction, he additionally shown frail contentions in the second proposal. The second proposition was ‘science underpins secularism and not Christianity’. His contentions were for the most part about the statement given to him. The statement by Jerry Coyne states that the genuine discussion was among logic and superstition. Science is nevertheless one type of realism and religion is the most widely recognized superstition. The following piece of him contention was about the statement by Steven Jay Gould. As referenced, the statement expresses that religion and science don’t cover. Dawkins clarifies why he can’t help contradicting the statement and discussion about the logical strategy for taking care of an issue. In any case, during the time proposal, he didn’t clarify why or how science underpins skepticism. John Lennox For this paper, we have chosen to pick John Lennox. We picked Lennox in light of the fact that by and by, the two of us are being raised in a Christian family and have in reality, constantly needed to take in more about Christianity and its puzzle of thousands of years. Rundown down what were the 6 theory they were discussing. What were the primary concerns of that debater and what confirmations did he give to help his central matters? Confidence is visually impaired, Science is proof based. John Lennox contends that confidence isn’t visually impaired, at any rate not for Christian confidence. Christianity has its own proof to help this case. Science bolsters skepticism, not Christianity. John Lennox question that the Holy Bible anticipated the formation of the universe, and that no one but God could have made it.>