This question is missing the options. I've found the complete question online. It is the following:
A novel’s main character, Jefferson, refuses to speak to his sister because she hurt his feelings when she lied to him. What kind of conflict is driving Jefferson’s actions?
A. character vs. nature
B. character vs. society
C. character vs. self
D. character vs. character
Answer:
The kind of conflict driving Jefferson's actions is:
D. character vs. character
Explanation:
<u>A conflict is a struggle between two opposing forces.</u> In literature, there are some common types of conflict, such as character vs. self, character vs. society, or character vs. nature. Conflicts can also be external (caused by an outside force) or internal (taking place in the character's mind).
<u>According to the instructions in the question, the kind of conflict described is character vs. character, that is, Jefferson vs. his sister. The two characters are the opposing forces in this case. Their struggle was caused by the sister lying to Jefferson, which led him to refuse to speak to her.</u>
Answer: A
Explanation: because you don't need unimportant details
Answer:
D. “in groves all around Basra grow the best dates in the world”
Explanation:
Perspective based on the question could either be subjective or objective, subjective perspective has to do culled or extracted opinions based on personal volition, belief or desire. In most cases, subjective opinions aren't physically measurable as facts used to backup such opinion might be based on sentiment or exposure. Objective perspective on the other hand is usually well established as opinions of this sort can be physically evaluated. Hence, from the passage, the sentence, “in groves all around Basra grow the best dates in the world" is based on subjective perspective.
Answer:
See below
Explanation:
"Students should not play politics" is a tone-deaf argument used by gatekeeping politicians who shut their doors to the struggling youth. For how many years have students complained about their schooling system, only to be turned down due to a lack of funds? When students try to participate in shaping the world, <em>their </em>world, they're treated like children. Students are expected to attend school full-time without being paid or publicly acknowledged. "Students should not play politics" holds little ground and defense for those who use it. What if a student is <em>studying</em> politics? Shouldn't they be able to use their expertise to contribute to political conversations? All inclusivity issues aside, politics will eventually become outdated if the people who run it refuse to listen to students and the younger generations. Most politicians are old and their views are outdated... why not listen to the people next in line? In conclusion, "students should not play politics" is only a restrictive, weak argument at its very core.
Please post the essay so that we can see it!
