Answer: i need a pic of it but ill answer it was about the wonder wonman
Explanation:
<span>In these two stories or literary novels"Sixteen" by Maureen Daly and "Through the Tunnel" by Doris Lessing "who are both authors or wordsmiths, Maureen Daly and Doris Lessing" uses a theme, subject, or topic matter of their characters or dramatis personae who are wanting to prove, validate, and justify themselves to someone. However, the differences, distinctions ,or variation of these two stories or literary novels becomes starkly useless , entirely obsolete, and exhaustively and consummately kaput when who or whom the two characters or dramatis personae aspire to prove, validate, and justify themselves to. In "Sixteen" by Maureen Daly the principal character, main character, or dramatis personae seems to be attempting or trying really and truly hard to prove, validate, and justify herself to the reader, that she is insightful and perceptive enough and popular enough to congruous be telling this story or literary novel. But in "Through the Tunnel" Jerry attempts or tries really and truly hard to prove, validate, and justify himself to the older, mature looking men he looks up to and withal to himself. Throughout each story or literary novel, the characters or dramatis personae attempt or try to prove, validate, and justify something to themselves or other people or characters. In Doris Lessing's short story or literary novel"Through the Tunnel"" by Doris Lessing" the principal character, main character, or dramatis personae who or whom we can apperceive or apperceive as Jerry opportunely accommodated or made acquaintance himself with a group of older, mature looking men hanging around in a wild-looking bay, cove ,or estuary full of rocks. These two completely and totally different short stories or literary novels "Sixteen" by Maureen Daly and "Through the Tunnel" by Doris Lessing are both chock full of kindred spirits predicated on the absolute fact that both characters or dramatis personae attempt </span> <span>or try to prove, validate, and justify something to someone, but they are different because those someones are different in these two stories or literary novel. While both stories or literary novels are starkly different in subject, theme ,or topic matter that both principal characters, main characters, or dramatis personae attempt or try to prove, validate, and justify themselves to someone. In "Sixteen," by Maureen Daly it is the reader. In the story or literary novels "Through the Tunnel," by Doris Lessing it is the older, mature looking men and later himself that makes Jerry to push past his inhibitions and fears and conquer or overcome them . The second homogeneous or same attribute or kindred characteristic between the two stories or literary novels is that the people or characters who had transpired to repeal the principal characters, main characters ,or dramatis personae which of course whom never present themselves again, are the leading cause that prompts both characters or dramatis personae in these two stories or literary novels by of course being ostentatious with their earnest and veracious and genuine general and exhaustively simply authentic and true feelings and motivations all throughout these two stories or literary novels.</span>
As she grinned, her chin flabbed from her old age .
sorry im not really sure what you mean by meaningful but <u>i hope this helps </u>
The skepticism is characterized by an atittude of doubting, questioning and/or not believing something or someone.
As we can see in “Of Cannibals”, Montaigned used skepticism to justify his arguments on his opinion about clever people. For instance:
1) “They never show you things as they are” – The author also said that clever people “cannot help altering history a little”, and then he says that they never show things as they really are; meaning that since he believes that clever people tend to change facts and information, the consequence of it is that their speech isn’t 100% honest. Therefore, he is skeptical when it comes to the true nature of those facts.
2) (...) And to give credence to their judgement and attract you to it, they are prone to add something to the matter, to strecht it out or amplify it” – Now the author claims that clever people try to convince others by adding details or facts to what actually happened. He believes that once the fact is amplified, it gets more attention and credit. In this case, he is being skeptical in regards to judgements and opinions, suggesting that clever people aren’t really honest in their judgements as they want others to “buy their ideas” and because of it they will tell things in a way that will persuade people to do what they want and believe what they say.
The answer is B <span>overlooking the baby, the building gives employees a spectacular view.</span>
