Logical evidence is represented by Justice Warren who gives his reason in this passage because Warren is drawing a reasonable conclusion that segregating children is psychologically harmful. Thus, the correct option is C.
<h3>What is Evidence?</h3>
In literature, Evidence may be defined as a classification of literary devices that emerges in distinct varieties of reports and theories, in the form of paraphrasing and references.
By analyzing the given passage written by Justice Warren, it clears that he draws a reasonable conclusion on the topic of segregation of children in public schools on the basis of logical evidence.
Therefore, the correct option for this question is C.
To learn more about Evidence, refer to the link:
brainly.com/question/1256677
#SPJ1
Anglo-Saxons liked to gather in the lord's great hall, to eat and drink, and to listen to songs and stories. They loved tales about brave warriors and their adventures. A favourite story told how Beowulf, a heroic prince, kills the fierce man-eating monster Grendel, and Grendel's equally horrid mother. The story of Beowulf was first written down in the 8th-9th centuries, but long before that the story was told around the fire. The storyteller played music to accompany the songs and poems, on a small harp or on another stringed instrument called a lyre
Idk i just need to do this so i dont watch bideosp
Answer:
Explanation:
On March 4th, when Charlie took the Rorschach Test, he was supposed to view the images of the inkblots and freely imagine what he saw in them. But Charlie only saw the inkblots for what they were: blobs of ink. Even when Burt tells him to imagine, to pretend, to look for something there in the card, Charlie can't. He struggles to give a true description of the cards, pointing out how one was "a very nice pictur of ink with pritty points all around the eges," but again, this isn't the response that the psychologist is looking for.
Like ambiguously shaped clouds in which people "see" images of people and animals, the inkblots have enough random, busy shapes on them for people to interpret them as many different things--people, animals, scenes, conflicts, and so on. The idea is that the psychologist will pay attention to what a person thinks he or she sees in the inkblots, which is supposed to provide insight on what that person thinks and feels overall.
As a result of Charlie's inability to properly take this test, he worries that he's failed and that he won't be a candidate for the treatment to increase his intelligence. And while he gets frustrated with himself during the test, and while Burt seems to get almost angry--as evinced when his pencil point breaks--I wouldn't say that Charlie is angry in this situation.
But what this scene does reveal about his character is that perhaps he's already smarter than we expect. By insisting on seeing the inkblots for what they really are, and by failing to imagine scenes and images that are false or skewed, Charlie shows that he's not just honest but scrupulous. This early evidence of his good character foreshadows the upcoming conflicts he has with the men at the bakery as well as the researchers themselves, who are less scrupulous.
