Cruel best describes the narrator's father according to the narrator.
c. Cruel
<u>Explanation:</u>
"Native Son" is a novel by African American creator Richard Wright. In it, he recounts to the account of Bigger Thomas, who is an African American youth living in Chicago during the 1930s. The storyteller is portrayed as an individual that is unsociable, a horrendous individual, that can't collaborate well with others, possibly somewhat modest, this can be comprehended due to his issues as a dark man and how bigotry influenced him every single through hey life. He was, for the most part, furious, and simultaneously, he had the option to get the consideration of individuals.
Whatever they saiddddddddddd
so i wanna start off with saying it asks for three lines ok and the other guy here who put answers only gave you two lines and they are both wrong
The party that "would make war" is the Confederacy. The party that "would accept war" is the Union. The tone of Lincoln's second inaugural address is subdued and weary. He states that the war has gone longer than it should. In this sentence he assigns both parties a responsibility for the war that has divided the nation.
Answer:
It fails to support its claim with specific, credible evidence and uses a disrespectful tone.
Explanation:
When giving arguments in favor or against a specific subject, they must be supported by reason and logic as well as credible evidence that can be compared with reality. They also need to be coherent with the things you are stating, this has to be done in a respectful tone as you are open to the idea of others comments and counterarguments. You are supposed to show you are right with these arguments, not by insulting or despising others.
In my opinion, this excerpt fails in both. It is not respectful and it's arguments are not strong enough.
He states that there is not proof of who is right or wrong on the debate adressed, he needs to support this with evidence. Who states that?
He the concludes that "no valid judgment can be made for everyone on whether smartphones should be banned from teens." This seems as an opinion based on his own reasoning.
After this, he starts making judgments about the people supporting the restriction, calling them naïve. This is not polite or useful. As I said, this is not based on evidence, he is contradicting himself as he stated in the first lines that there was no evidence of who was rigth or wrong.
The next lines express just his opinions based on his values and thoughts, evidence to support them is never presented.