Answer:
Acquiring a job in the postal service may be difficult in the future
Explanation:
It is Acquiring a job in the postal service may be difficult in the future because postal carriers, postal service mail sorters, proccesors, and processing machine operators both have a loss. Carriers are loosing about 26,000 and carriers, sorters, and operators are loosing about 30,000 people. Loosing that many people will lead to it being less likely to work at a post office.
The inference is that Frye’s claim relate to the topics; critical reading, viewing, and writing as it's vital in understanding the information and applying them in different situations.
<h3>How to illustrate the information?</h3>
It should be noted that thinking is one of the greatest gifts of human beings which also helps them develop language.
As the world progressed through the knowledge era, it was essential for human beings to think critically and make proper decisions. Critically viewing or reading or writing a piece would require one to take a neutral stand, precise, authentic, and persuading.
In this case, the inference is that Frye’s claim relate to the topics; critical reading, viewing, and writing as it's vital in understanding the information and applying them in different situations.
Learn more about inference on:
brainly.com/question/25280941
#SPJ1
Explanation:
So we'll so so so so spa suits
I’m not entirely sure because there was no text to read in order for me to find an exact answer. However, if I had to guess based on the subject and the quality of the sentences written I would go with B or D, in that order.
The other two (A, C) are suggesting that altruism is not ever really done out of sheer empathy (they take a negative, or pessimistic point of view. Some might even call it realistic), and that anything done “for the good of others” always has an ulterior motive; be it power, likability, future wealth, or something that would benefit they and theirs in the soon to bear future). Essentially, no one does ANYTHING out of sheer good will and kindness. Thus, why not do things anonymously without flaunting their name about? Why? Because by telling everyone so-and-so donated X amount of dollars to said people or organizations, now it is KNOWN how generous they are, which immediately makes them likable or popular.
However, without having read the text, I believe, whether people believe it or not - there is still an element of “pure altruism” given in some folks. SOME people are able to not care for anything of themselves, but only to the cause which they are giving. I also believe whole- heartedly, whether it’s true or not , selflessness to some capacity is essential to human survival, and humans HAVE empathy built into our core being, so it is entirely possible. That, of course, is just an educated (hopeful) guess.
