Answer:
A. He does not include any information about Soviet technology for comparison to support his point.
Explanation:
While he does talk about how America will surpass its previous accomplishments, he never gives comparisons with Soviet Technology
Answer:
Both accepted fate to be ultimate in determining one's life course
Explanation:
In the Myth of Sisyphus, Sisyphus was eternally condemned by the gods to push a rock up a hill, only to have it fall down on him again. Meursault however, is a person who is accused of murder, sent to jail for over a year, and is then executed. What both these characters have come to realize is that they are forced to live in these situations created by fate, therefore they might as well enjoy or at least get used to them.
Meursault is forced to live in a cell without any pleasures, such as his cigarettes or the love of a woman. When this happens, Meursault recalls what his mother told him.
She said that one could get used to just about anything. When Meursault realizes and understands that this is just part of his punishment, he becomes indifferent, as he always does, and accepts his situation. Though Meursault had mentally accepted his situation, his body still suffers withdraw symptoms and sexual urges. Eventually however, his body got used to it as well. He passively defies punishment by accepting his situation and enjoying himself in jail. That is when Meursault's punishment isn't a punishment anymore. When Meursault is condemned to death, he does not act surprised, although he wishes he did not have to die. After a while he accepts that too. It did not matter to him that he is going to die, since he reasoned that he would have to face the same dilemma in a few years anyway.
What does the idiom, "it's raining cats and dogs" mean?
We can collaborate on the project together.
These artifacts are from the Neolithic Era.
Teacher, may I please use the lavatory?
If the structure isn't built right, the ceiling could collapse!
What is the isotherm on the map?
The medicine will help alleviate the pain.
The answer is B: ad hominem.
A logical fallacy is a failed form of argument that reaches a conclusion by means of invalid proofs that are not justified. Ad hominem (which could be translated as “against the man”) is one such logical fallacy and it involves an argument based on a direct attack of a person´s character or circumstances when they are not related to the content of the argument itself.
