I inferred you are referring to this excerpt from the text;
"Most people measure their happiness in terms of physical pleasure and material possession. Could they win some visible goal which they have set on the horizon, how happy they could be! Lacking this gift or that circumstance, they would be miserable. If happiness is to be so measured, I who cannot hear or see have every reason to sit in a corner with folded hands and weep. If I am happy in spite of my deprivations, if my happiness is so deep that it is a faith, so thoughtful that it becomes a philosophy of life, — if, in short, I am an optimist, my testimony to the creed of optimism is worth hearing."
<u>Explanation</u>:
The author here uses her personal experience of been deaf-blind to assert that an individual's happiness is not dependent on his or her circumstances. Helen says "I who cannot hear or see...I am happy in spite of my deprivations if my happiness is so deep that it is a faith, so thoughtful that it becomes a philosophy of life."
We notice her use of convincing language such as when she says "my testimony to the creed of optimism is worth hearing", this language gives her message a convincing feel.
A, because giving only one half of an argument without the counter leads to misinformation
Answer:
i really don't know his time estimate but his daily routines are going to work early in the morning and late aimless walks alone down the avenues.
First, what is the title and author of the work to which you refer?
Answer:
the first one
Explanation:
I could be wrong, I'm sorry
