<span>The Jungle and the Progressive Era. The publication of Upton Sinclair's 1906 novel The Jungle produced an immediate and powerful effect on Americans and on federal policy, but Sinclair had hoped to achieve a very different result.</span>
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.
<span>There are many scientists in history that have made important discoveries. However, through time these discoveries are proven wrong, or built upon.
The article should not be used because it has outdated information. Although the author has worthy credentials, the information is what is important. If the information is wrong, the source should not be used.
The answer is D.</span>
Correct answer is <span>Voltaire wrote that Candide "had one great advantage over Martin." Martin had no hope (77).</span>
