Leading questions: By using leading questions, I would conclude that Dolores did not "come out on the side of the angels." I would first ask what were the possible outcomes? Dolores could have hit the obstacle in the road and the bus would have still swerved and gone over through guardrail into the sand pit. Dolores could have hit the obstacle and the bus may not have gone into the sand pit. Dolores could have swerved and avoided the obsta
cle and the bus may not have gone into the sand pit. Or Dolores could swerve and send the bus into the sand pit, which was the outcome that actually happened. Half of the options led to the destruction of the bus, but only one option offered safety for all involved. Dolores gambled on that option. This reasoning begs the question, what is "the side of the angels?" I believe this means the possibility of the greatest good. Unfortunately, the greatest good did not happen, and Dolores failed to come out on the side of the angels; but she made the right choice in trying for that outcome.
Inductive Reasoning: Inductive reasoning looks at the details to analyze the big picture and determine the rule. Using inductive reasoning, I would examine the following details: After two years, Dolores can still recount every detail of that morning drive, which indicates that she is haunted by her choice. Dolores immediately quit her job as school bus driver following the accident, even though she had done the job for 20 years without incident. Dolores says she is moving forward with her life, but despite her new jobs, I think she is stuck with the others in the sweet hereafter. These details lead me to conclude that Dolores did not come out on the side of the angels. She feels guilty for the accident, and she wishes she didn't.
Deductive Reasoning: Deductive reasoning looks at the general or big picture to analyze the details. It uses reasoning like syllogisms to come to logical conclusions. With deductive reasoning, my analysis would be that Dolores was driving the bus. The bus driver is responsible for what happens to the bus and the children. Therefore, Dolores is responsible for the death of the children and the accident. I would also have to say that the side of the angels is the side of righteousness or good. The death of 14 children was not good for the town. Therefore, Dolores did not come out on the side of the angels.
Inference: Inference uses knowledge you already have and the information in the text to make an educated guess. In this case, I know that angels are the emissaries of God who some believe to be all powerful, just, and loving. If this is true, then the accident was not what angels would want. The death of the children was not fated to their families or the town. If God loves everyone, then God would not want people to suffer, so again the accident had nothing to do with angels. I can infer that Dolores is suffering too because I know that people who suffer trauma relive it again and again, as Dolores seems to do with the accident.
