Answer:
wait wht do u mean ???????
The best choice here is C. unreliable narrators are often used to confuse the reader, or keep them on their toes. reliable narrators see things clearly and relay events truthfully, but unreliable narrators see things from a warped point of view that can keep readers in the dark.
we don't necessarily always feel sorry for unreliable narrators; sometimes their misfortune is self-inflicted (A). unreliable narrators only give you their warped perspective, and they could potentially alter or misinterpret the actions of other characters, so choice B is incorrect. while unreliable narrators might irritate readers because they prove to be confusing, that isn't their sole effect on a reader. their warped perspective is meant to make you question them, and try to look for hidden meanings or hints.
Answer:
b) Appeal to ignorance, present in an argument in which the arguer relies on the supposition that, due to a lack of conclusive evidence, the conclusion of an argument should be accepted.
Explanation:
The logical fallacy of appeal to ignorance is when an argument's conclusion is based on the absence of any evidence proving against it. In other words, an appeal to ignorance is when an arguer relies on the supposition that the lack of any evidence proving otherwise makes his conclusion acceptable and right.
In the given case of the existence of aliens, the speaker decides that <em>"[since] no one has yet been able to [prove that aliens exist]", </em>therefore, it must be true and accepted that <em>"aliens do not exist."</em> This argument follows the logical fallacy of an appeal to ignorance.
Thus, the correct answer is option b.
I believe the answer you’re looking for is “Meals”
So u know how ur doing and so u dont hurt ur self
