im pretty sure its 1 plz tell me
Action because a verb is a doing word
A person can think however they want. Actions, like many have said, define a person in the end. Someone can advocate for peace with malicious intent, but they will still likely be remembered for advocating peace and not for their impure motivations. If these contradicting images are revealed to the public, that is still an act against that person, and is no longer a thought.
However, this is only from the public's view. When it comes to people, they may as well be the embodiment of their thoughts. Everything is fueled by something. The same person who seeds their own goals under the guise of peace will not think of themselves as one who acts with the intentions of bringing peace. They will be looking to call forth whatever it is that they want, and be aware that what they present to the public is not the truth.
So, both points are arguable. It depends on whether you value the individual or the community. Actions are what are remembered, and thoughts are a person's reason. Even today, this comes into relevancy because people want to know why certain figures in history did what they did. Thoughts make a person human, after all. Without thought, seperation of man and beast would be nigh impossible. Without action, man would have been left behind long ago. Both thought and action are important indeed.
I believe the correct answer is: The narrator's superior pigs and his demand that the villagers pay for the damage done to his pigs creates tension between the narrator and the villagers.
In this excerpt from the story “In a Native Village” from the “Ridan the Devil and the other stories”, written by Louis Becke, main conflict begins with narrator’s conviction that his pigs are superior and had done no wrong to other villagers when they escape from his property:
“Next morning the seven piglets were returned one by one by various native children. Each piglet had, according to their accounts, been in a separate garden, and done considerable damage… I gave each lying child a quarter-dollar.”
Their next escape resulted in losing their tails while confronting the other pigs, for with the narrator demanded a considerable payment as he regarded this as their escape from the “cruel death”. This situation cumulated the tension between the villagers and the narrator and resulted in their fraud and narrator shooting his own pig.
Therefore, I would say that the narrator advances the plot of the story with his demand that the villagers pay for the damage done to his superior pigs, which creates tension between the narrator and the villagers.
