The use of the internet is relatively new in the history of mankind, but its use as a source of information is taken for granted these days. But one should not take that very information for granted as anyone can put anything on the internet. That does not keep people from using it as if it is always trustworthy. Does this trust in the internet harm society?
This trust easily keeps people ignorant when it is put into unreliable sources. Wikipedia is easily editable, and that makes it unreliable to a certain degree. It does, however, list some reliable sources. which are easily accessible. But when people trust Wikipedia without consulting its sources they are easily deceived. Famous people are quoted on the internet all the time, but these quotes are rarely backed up by sources. When people believe these quotes to be authentic anyway, they perceive a false narrative of history. The deception people fall into and, in extension, the false narrative of history they perceive, harms society in at least two ways. First, it gives people a false sense of security when they perceive history as better confirmed to their beliefs than it really is. Second, when people are deceived, they make decisions based on their deception. Thus, the internet, when used without reliability, is harmful to society.
What type of ut-clause is this in the following quotation from Cicero (De Officiis, L. I, 43)? Id autem tantum abest ab officio, ut nihil magis officio possit esse contrarium.
A result clause.
In the following quotation from Luke 2:14 are the two "ἐν"'s best translated two different ways, and if so, how? Explain. Δόξα ἐν ὑψίστοις θεῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς εἰρήνη ἐν ἀνθρώποις εὐδοκίας.
Yes, the first is best translated "in" and the second, "among". The first is followed by ὑψίστοις, which does not have an expressed subject and is therefore best to take as a neuter substantive, most likely implying a place. Because the second is followed by ἀνθρώποις, translated "men", "in" would not make sense here.