1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Leviafan [203]
1 year ago
7

The phone calls that Tom receives during the dinner are an indicator that?

English
1 answer:
Kruka [31]1 year ago
8 0

Answer:

he and Daisy are not a happily married couple.

Explanation:

In Francis Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby," the narrator describes an uncomfortable situation while having dinner at the Buchanan's house. As a matte of fact, both Tom and Daisy do not get along and have extramarital relationships on their own, which they intend to hide beneath false appearances.

Hope this helps! :>

You might be interested in
What does this mean “Late land of slavery” PLEASEEEE SOMEONE PLEASE HELP ME
taurus [48]

Answer:

Du Bois certainly is an important thinker, but a poet? Yes, a poet. The paraphrase 'late land of slavery' is from a poem.

4 0
2 years ago
Is violence ever justified? argumentative essay​
djverab [1.8K]

Answer:

Violence is a central concept for describing social relationships among humans, a concept loaded with ethical and political significance. In some, probably most, circumstances it is evident that violence is unjust; but, some cases appear more debatable to someone’s eyes: can violence ever be justified?

As Self-Defense

The most plausible justification of violence is when it is perpetrated in return of other violence. If a person punches you in the face and seems intentions to keep doing so, it may seem justified to try and respond to the physical violence.

It is important to notice that violence may come in different forms, including psychological violence and ​verbal violence. In its mildest form, the argument in favor of violence as self-defense claims that to violence of some sort, an equally violent response may be justified. Thus, for instance, to a punch you may be legitimate to respond with a punch; yet, to mobbing (a form of psychological, verbal violence, and institutional), you are not justified in replying with a punch (a form of physical violence).

In a more audacious version of the justification of violence in the name of self-defense, violence of any kind may be justified in reply to the violence of any other kind, provided there is a somewhat fair use of the violence exercised in self-defense. Thus, it may even be appropriate to respond to mobbing by using physical violence, provided the violence does not exceed that which seems a fair payoff, sufficient to ensure self-defense.

An even more audacious version of the justification of violence in the name of self-defense has it that the sole possibility that in the future violence will be perpetrated against you, gives you sufficient reason to exercise violence against the possible offender. While this scenario occurs repeatedly in everyday life, it is certainly the more difficult one to justify: How do you know, after all, that an offense would follow?

Violence and Just War

What we have just discussed at the level of individuals can be held also for the relationships between States. A State may be justified to respond violently to a violent attack – be it physical, psychological, or verbal violence to be at stake. Equally, according to some, it may be justifiable to respond with physical violence to some legal or institutional violence. Suppose, for instance, that State S1 imposes an embargo over another State S2 so that inhabitants of the latter will experience tremendous inflation, scarcity of primary goods, and consequent civil depression. While one may argue that S1 did not impart physical violence over S2, it seems that S2 may have some reasons for a physical reaction to S2.

Matters concerning the justification of war have been discussed at length in the history of Western philosophy, and beyond. While some have repeatedly supported a pacifist perspective, other author stressed that on some occasions it is unavoidable to wage wars against some offender.

Idealistic vs. Realistic Ethics

Explanation:

built diff

5 0
1 year ago
Read the excerpt below from act 2.1 of The Tragedy of Julius Caesar and complete th
shtirl [24]

Answer:

the irony in this is Oh, that we then could come by Caesar's spirit And not dismember Caesar. it's saying that if we dismember caesar his spirit will still be in him but if we kill him his spirit will leave his body

Explanation:

me is smart

5 0
1 year ago
Read 2 more answers
What is 2x2 divided by 9
kirza4 [7]
4/9 or .44 repeating
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which word is a coordinating conjunction in this sentence? He loves watching cricket, but he has no time to spare for sports.
lys-0071 [83]

the answer would be making some times

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • The phrase greet them gladly, given them welcome" is an example of
    10·1 answer
  • Verb Tenses Hurry up! Our plane (leave) ______________________ in two hours, and we can’t be late!
    11·2 answers
  • What is the purpose of chapter 4 Into the wild
    11·1 answer
  • What does the enzyme reverse transcriptase do?
    8·1 answer
  • If you like writing this one is for you.
    10·1 answer
  • PLZ ANSWER I HAVE LIKE 5 MIN
    12·2 answers
  • Study the sentences below. The information looks like a paragraph, but it’s not. Can you figure out why? An Italian named Marcon
    13·1 answer
  • Chapter 6
    10·1 answer
  • Shayla feels bad that Jace was making fun of Alex. This is an example of....
    15·2 answers
  • BRAINLIEST TO THE FIRST CORRECT ANSWER
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!