Answer:
C. It pokes fun at the professed selflessness of people who propose
solutions to society's problems.
Explanation:
One of the proposal described just before this concluding excerpt is selling the poor Irish one year old children to abroad as a source of food. According to the proposer (a narrator and not Jonathan Swift himself), this selling will make Irish people rich. After this proposal the narrator wants to convince readers of his selflessness. This is very satiric and satirizes the professed selflessness of such proposers. The proposer is wanting himself to be believed very sincere after saying that he can not sell his own children, because they are old.
Option A, B and D are not correct. Firstly because the proposal is a satire and the proposer is not Jonathan Swift himself, but just a narrator - a satirized self professed selfless proposer. Secondly as this proposal is a satire, there is no mention of satirizing or poking fun in any of these options.
Answer:
Although Georgia's economy has suffered various setbacks throughout the 20th century, it improved however since the mid 1990s with agriculture and machinery manufacturing helping to it, but mainly <em>due to</em> <em>Mining</em> and the development of <em>energy industries</em>, particularly the extraction of <em>coal, natural gas, petroleum</em> and other below the surface minerals.
Explanation:
Yes. I agree. But It needs to be a paragraph doesn't it? That;s not a paragraph.
Answer:
I think B. rhyming of a poem sorry if i'm wrong
Explanation:
Answer:
C. No faith is strong. Only strong have biceps. No faith has biceps.
Explanation:
The question above is related to the topic of "Syllogism." This is a type of reasoning which consists of a <em>premise or</em><em> </em><em>premises</em> and a <em>conclusion.</em> The conclusion is logically derived from the premises. In order to do this, the two premises have to be joined together.
Among the choices above, letter B<em> shows a conclusion that has been logically derived from the first two premises.</em> Its premises support the conclusion.
<em>"No faith has biceps."</em> is a valid argument because it is supported by a premise <em>("No faith is strong.")</em> and another premise <em>("Only strong have biceps.")</em>.
"Only strong have biceps" also means that "All biceps are strong."
