The correct answer is:
Taney cannot deny Scott citizenship because it is a federal right.
Before the civil war, only white men with property could vote, and only white people could be United States citizens. African Americans that were born in the United States territory are all citizens, by the The 14th Amendment (1868). So a perfect counterclaim to the claim in the excerpt would be the chosen one because his citizenship is a Federal right by The 14th Amendment.
Answer:
Conflict in literature refers to any problem the protagonist has to overcome in order to solve a given situation and reach a goal or accomplish its mission. The conflict is a must-have asset for any literature for it gives the meaning to the whole text, there has to be a problem to be solved, a mountain to climb, a goal to reach, this is the importance of the conflict. There are 2 types of conflict, internal and external conflict.
Internal conflict are the problems that happen inside the protagonist´s mind , a struggle between two feelings fighting each other up to the point the protagonist succumbs to one or none of the feelings and reach a conclusion. There are only 2 types of internal conflict, man versus self and man versus sickness that sometimes can also be a psychological disease and its still man versus self.
On the other hand External conflicts involve every problem that can be caused by an external source, this being, another person, the nature, a machine, etc.
On the story No dogs barks the author introduces the conflict slowly, it seems to be an external conflict at the beginning since Ignacio was wounded and his old father was carrying him to help him, but as the story goes on it turns into an internal conflict as the father realizes that wasn’t his son anymore and has an internal problem in which his feeling of guilt with his dead wife won’t let him drop his son and let him die as he explains how badly his son has repaid all of his hard work raising him, he grew up to be a murderer and even as his father was dying while helping Ignacio, he didn´t even helped him hear the dogs bark. At the end by letting go of his son the conflict is solved and they finally reach where the dogs bark.
Explanation:
<span>True</span>
<span>
</span>
<span>Dialogue certainly is the best
method to use when analyzing a character because we can learn so much. Let’s say you are reading a story where the
main character reads a sign a person standing on a street corner is holding
that says, “Can you spare some change?”
After reading that sign, the main character walks up to that person and
yells in his face, “Why don’t you go get a job!?” What can be learned from this interaction? What can be deciphered from this is that the
main character is insensitive to the plights of others and apparently incapable
(or unwilling) to see things objectively and from a perspective other than his
own so much so that he jumps to conclusions and feels the person is just lazy
when, in fact, the person may have just recently lost a job, has bills that
need immediate paying, and/or is perhaps waiting for unemployment benefits to
become active while looking for a new job.
As you can see, thus, dialogue can be quite useful in analyzing a
character.</span>
I thinks its individual happiness because... utilitarianism. A system of ethics according to which the rightness or wrongness of an action should be judged by its consequences. The goal of utilitarian ethics is to promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
what is this question again? please try to reword it
