Answer: I woke up. It was blurry, the sun was shining on me, ugh so much light! "Wake up Summer!" someone yelled at my face, I didnt know who it was, my vision was still blurry, then the person who yelled at my face, handed me some water to drink. I hear the ocean, swish-swoosh, I felt the sand on my hand, I got up and saw sand. Where Im I? "Summer, you finally up!" Happiness came from that voice, but I didnt know who she was. "Who are you?" I said, "Summer, its me KT! Cmon lets go find Dana!" She said her name was KT but I still didnt know who she was, or Dana whoever she is. "Whos Dana?" I was so confused. "Summer, stop playing games!" KT said.
The answer is proletariat
The dialogue should be presented as a conversation between two people, where there is an exchange of ideas and opinions between those involved.
<h3>How to write a dialog?</h3>
- Use two or more characters.
- Show how each character understands a specific subject.
- Have one character speak after the other has spoken.
- Keep the dialogue dynamic, where each character contributes to the evolution of the subject.
Carbon footprints refer to the amount of carbon dioxide that each person, machine, and the industry produces.
Based on this, you can create your dialogue by having one person defend the reduction of carbon footprints, in favor of preserving the environment, while the other person asks how this will be done without harming the economy and industrial production.
Learn more about dialogs:
brainly.com/question/11001554
#SPJ1
C.Sarah glared icily at Jenn when she stole her last French fry.
In the first text, Zimbardo argues that people are neither "good" or "bad." Zimbardo's main claim is that the line between good and evil is movable, and that anyone can cross over under the right circumstances. He tells us that:
"That line between good and evil is permeable. Any of us can move across it....I argue that we all have the capacity for love and evil--to be Mother Theresa, to be Hitler or Saddam Hussein. It's the situation that brings that out."
Zimbardo argues that people can move across this line due to phenomena such as deindividualization, anonymity of place, dehumanization, role-playing and social modeling, moral disengagement and group conformity.
On the other hand, Nietzsche in "Morality as Anti-Nature" also argues that all men are capable of good and evil, and that evil is therefore a "natural" part of people. However, his opinion is different from Zimbardo in the sense that Nietzsche believes that judging people as "good" and "bad" is pointless because morality is anti-natural, and we have no good reason to believe that our behaviour should be modified to fit these precepts.
