What is Farquhar's motivation? Why did he do what he did?

Because he was an "original secessionist," which means he sided with the South at the beginning of the conflict between North and South during the Civil War, he is also described as "ardently devoted to the Southern cause," meaning he is passionate about all things Southern.  However, the story vaguely says that he cannot serve in the war as a soldier ("Circumstances of an imperious nature, which it is unnecessary to relate here, had prevented him from taking service with the gallant army..."). But, Farquhar "did what he could. No service was too humble for him."  Thus, when a man dressed as a Confederate soldier tells Farquhar about the advance of the Union army to the Owl Creek Bridge, and how there is plenty of kindling under the bridge that could be lit and burn down the bridge, Farquhar jumps at the chance to help the Southern cause in any way he can.  

What did Senator Pittman believe was the reason for Republican opposition to joining the League?

Key Pittman was a senator from the state of Nevada that served as Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations and president pro tempore. Pittman was a staunch supporter of the League of Nations and Woodrow Wilson. The question you ask is about a Senate speech that Pittman gave in November of 1919. It would be very difficult to answer this question without understanding some background on the political players of the day.

The president, Woodrow Wilson, was a second term democratic president and was not in very good health, having suffered a stroke. The League of Nations was the hallmark of his Fourteen Points and, in fact, the only part of his legacy that was included in the Treaty of Versailles. The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and were led by Wilson's chief political rival Henry Cabot Lodge. Lodge did not want the United States in the League of Nations because he thought it would compromise America's ability to make decisions unilaterally. Wilson was not at all interested in compromising on any parts of the Treaty and insisted the Congress ratify it unconditionally.

Pittman insinuates in his address to Congress that the Republicans are using the issue for political gain. The implication is that they are being deceitful to the American people and playing on their fear of being involved in further global conflicts. In doing so, they help their own political interest to take the White House in the 1920 election and maintain power in both houses of Congress.

What is the difference between The Lady Sings The Blues book and the play Lady Day at Emerson Bar and Grill?

Both the book, The Lady Sings The Blues, and the play, Lady Day At Emerson Bar and Grill, tell the story of Billie Holiday (1915-1959), an American jazz singer and song-writer.

The difference between the two is that the book is an autobiography of Holiday's life, while the play centers on an actress (acting as Holiday) singing tunes which tell of the most pertinent experiences of Holiday's life.

You can read a biography of Billie Holiday at the PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) website here.

As for Holiday's autobiography, some contend that the book consists of factual inaccuracies. However, many critics admit that the book highlights the authenticity of Holiday's unique voice as she tells the story of her colorful life. From the pages of The Lady Sings The Blues, Holiday speaks poignantly about abusive relationships, heroin addiction, the Jim Crow laws and racism, incarceration, alcoholism, and teenage prostitution. Holiday's autobiography was released simultaneously with her album of the same name, in 1956. The 1972 film of Holiday, starring Diana Ross as Holiday, and Billy Dee Williams as her husband, Louis McKay, was loosely based on Holiday's autobiography.

You can read a review of Billie Holiday's book here.

As for the play, Lady Day at Emerson Bar and Grill, the most famous Broadway performance of Billie Holiday's story is the one in which the inimitable Audra McDonald stars as Holiday. McDonald's performance won her critical acclaim and many awards. In between famous tunes like What a Little Moonlight Can Do and T'aint Nobody's Business If I Do, McDonald, as Holiday, recounts tales of love lost and of supreme heartache.

You can see the Broadway website describing Audra McDonald's performance here. The last Broadway performance of Lady Day at Emerson Bar and Grill was in 2014.

A critique of the play by the New York Times can be read here.

In Life of Pi, what are some reasons that prove that humans are the most dangerous animals?

When Pi first introduces the belief that man is the most dangerous among all animals, he discusses what zoos around the world have to deal with when visitors interact with the animals. Humans are not only disrespectful to a zoo's animals, but they can be deadly. For example, in chapter 8, Pi lists many things that visitors have done to innocent zoo animals throughout the years. Part of that list is as follows:

". . . we have in mind people who feed fishhooks to the otters, razors to the bears, apples with small nails in them to the elephants and hardware variations on the theme: ballpoint pens, paper clips, safety pins, rubber bands, combs, coffee spoons . . . " (29).

The list goes on after that, too. Then he lists all the types of animals who have died because of such cruelty.

The worst that humans become, though, is demonstrated when they act like wild animals for survival's sake. It's as if all rules of human decency fly out the window when people face imminent death. The cook is the worst example of a dangerous animal because he cuts off the leg of the sailor without flinching. Also, humans can lie to achieve their wicked goals, which is exactly what the cook does to get Pi and his mother to help him amputate the leg:

"It was the cook's idea. He was a brute. He dominated us . . . I can still hear his evil whisper. He would do the job to save the sailor's life, he said, but we would have to hold him" (304-305).

The evil whisper shows the character of the cook. When Pi and his mother discover that the amputation was for fish bait, rather than to save the sailor's life, they are heartbroken because of such betrayal and evil.

One more example of how humans are the most dangerous animals is when they become cannibals. Other than a hyena, who accidentally eats parts of another hyena during a hunt, not many animals eat their own kind. The cook not only dissects the sailor and eats his flesh, but he also kills Pi's mother and feeds her to the fish. Curiously, though, after the cook kills Pi's mother, his mouth is bloody after throwing her body overboard (311). The cook, therefore, is the epitome of how humans can be the most dangerous animals in the world.

What do George and Lennie have that other working men do not have?

This story is set during the Great Depression (1929-39). It was difficult to find and secure work, so men had to travel or do what they could to get jobs. George and Lennie are migrant workers. This was typical of ranch workers as many of them would have to move to other areas to find jobs. More than often, such workers would usually travel alone. Going alone and having no relationship or familial restrictions and obligations made it easier to move about. There was nothing to tie a man down. It was a lonely life. 

George occasionally complains that Lennie holds him back for these reasons. Going alone, George would be lonely but he would be freer to move to different places. But the friendship they have is what sets them apart from other workers. This outweighs the freedom that George would have on his own.

Lennie delights in hearing about the dream of their own farm but also in hearing about the bond of their friendship. He repeatedly asks George to tell him about these things. Of the friendship and how this makes them different from everyone else, George says: 

Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no fambly. The don't belong no place. They come to a ranch an' work up a stake and then they go into town and blow their stake . . . 

George adds that such lonely men having nothing to look forward to. Lennie prods George to go on. George says that he and Lennie are different because they have each other to talk to. Therefore, they don't have to waste all of their money (stake) at a bar with no place to go. Their friendship bonds them together and they use this bond to keep dreaming about the farm. This also sets them apart from the other workers. They have (a dream of) a future. 

What are the lower fixed point and upper fixed point in the Fahrenheit scale?

Fahrenheit scale is one of the three commonly used temperature scales (other two being Celsius and Kelvin scales). This was developed by Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit, a German physicist. This scale was based on three fixed points. The lower fixed point of 32 degrees corresponded to freezing of water. The upper fixed point of 212 degrees corresponded to boiling of water. The third fixed point of 96 degrees corresponded to human body temperature (which was later corrected to 98.6 degrees, the value we use today). Fahrenheit scale is not as commonly used in today's world, as the Celsius scale. There are some countries such as, United States that still use it; rest of the world uses the Celsius scale. We can easily convert between the two scale using the formula:

C = 5/9  (F-32),

where C and F are temperatures in Celsius and Fahrenheit.

hope this helps. 

In Oedipus Tyrannus, should we view Oedipus as tragic only, or can we find something heroic in his actions and end?

The answer to this really depends on your working definition of "tragedy" and of "hero". Since Oedipus Tyrannos was written in ancient Greece, it makes sense to use the Aristotelian definition of tragedy and the Homeric model of the hero.

The Homeric hero is a typical figure of oral-traditional epos. Most Homeric heroes are flat and static. In other words, they have a few striking characteristics -- Nestor is wise, Odysseus clever, and Achilles strong -- but they do not have fully developed three-dimensional characters. Even though they undergo many conflicts and adventures, they rarely (with limited exceptions) display self-awareness or evolve over time as characters. One can certainly argue that Oedipus conforms to this in that his horrifying recognition of his identity is not a matter of internal psychological self-knowledge but rather simply correct apprehension of external circumstances. The unhappy ending of the play does not negate the notion of an heroic type of character; Hector was certainly a noble and heroic character in the Iliad, and yet he died and his corpse was desecrated. 

Greek tragedy is continuous with Homeric epic in the sense that most tragedies are set chronologically in the period just after the Trojan war and contain characters from the heroic age. Like heroic characters, the protagonists of tragedy are noble, and the actions in which they engage are of "a certain magnitude". Oedipus is the king of Thebes and his acts, like those of the Greek leaders during the Trojan war, have a significant impact on the lives of everyone around him. Where he differs from the traditional heroic mold is having an essential character flaw that contributes to his downfall. In other words, one could say that Oedipus, like most tragic protagonists, is a flawed hero.