<span> Wilson was mad (as in crazy). </span>
Hi!
The statement that best explains this is:
The allusion highlights ideas that relate to the murder of King Hamlet.
We see that in the myth of the Trojan War, Pyrrhus eventually kills Priam (the King of Troy). Pyrrhus was elated to have done this deed, and that to with Priam's wife, Hecuba, beholding the sight. Priam had caused the war that had eventually resulted in he death of Pyrrhus's father, Achilles, and so by killing him, Pyrrhus was successful in avenging his father.
The reason Hamlet alludes as this particular story is to establish that his motive is similar to that of Pyrrhus's in that Hamlet seeks to avenge the death of his father by killing the King, Claudius, in the presence of his own mother, and Claudius's wife, Gertrude.
So just to be clear, the hints at the following roles:
Hamlet as Pyrrhus
Claudius as Priam
Gertrude as Hecuba
I must admit that I am totally dependent on e-mail, I suppose most of the people I know feel the same way about it.
Answer:
The two sentences which support the overall argument with facts are:
<em>- Statistics show that most vaccines are more than 90% effective in preventing diseases.</em>
<em>- However, when people are not vaccinated, they are at risk of catching diseases that others are immune to.</em>
Explanation:
These two sentences (above) present factual information like statistics and what the risks are when getting vaccinated and therefore support the argument with facts.
<em>The sentences in between these factual supporting sentences present additional information which help explain and elobarate on the factual information provided.</em>
