B.
Read this line, out loud.
It was a short pause that contributed to the flow of things. This applies even in a sentence.
Answer:
someone's coat was found in the lobby.
Tellez effectively creates a suspenseful atmosphere and setting to lay out the theme first by establishing to the reader and “the man” are not allies (something seemingly not known by “the man”, then adding to it by his masterful use of contrast. Tellez clearly establishes that the two characters are not on the same side when the narrator remarks to himself, “He went on talking. He evidently took it for granted that I was on the side of the existing regime.” (Tellez, 1). This occurs when Captain Torres (“the man”) enters the shop requesting a shave and begins discussing his plans for the captured rebels. Furthermore, this assessment by the narrator also makes apparent that he thinks Torres does not know he is not oh his side. By doing this, tension and suspense is generated between the two characters, although it appears that only one is aware of what has transpired.
The name of the fallacy with the statement "The Gorps would have you believe that all you need to be happy is green beans, but those of us with heads on our shoulders know better'' is <em>argumentum ad lapidem </em>or appeal to the stone. This is the answer because the speaker is implying that the argument of Gorps is absurd but he is not providing any information or evidence that it's absurd. His only evidence is that 'those among us with heads on ours shoulders know better' and that's it.
True. Because those two things lead to complex concepts.
