This question refers to the story "The Scarlet Ibis" by James Hurst.
1. The story "The Scarlet Ibis" is told from the perspective of Doodle's older brother. This child is referred to in the story as "Brother." There are several reasons why the story might be told from Brother's perspective. First, the story focuses on the relationship between the two brothers. Therefore, it is more informative for the reader if a brother narrates the events, as opposed to another member of the family. Moreover, Doodle has a developmental problem, which makes Brother the most reliable narrator of the two.
2. If the story was written from the parents' perspective, there would be significant changes in tone and mood. It is likely that the parents would not understand the connection between the brothers in the same way that Brother understands them. Moreover, it is also likely that the parents would have more pity and compassion for Doodle than Brother has.
3. If the scene was rewritten from Old Woman Swamp's point of view, it is likely that the scene would feature both brothers more prominently. First, it might show the struggle that Doodle faces earlier, which might indicate to the reader that Doodle might be in danger. Moreover, this point of view would probably focus less on the inner thoughts of Brother and more in the way the brothers interact with one another.
Answer: Every day, we make hundreds of choices.
Explanation: We choose what to wear, what to do when we get home from work or school, and how to respond when someone makes fun of us. Sometimes we also make big decision, such as what kind of school to go to, what career to pursue, whether to get married, and whether to have a child. Sometimes people make decisions that are even bigger than these because the decisions affect hundreds or millions of people - decisions about war and peace or about changes in the laws. Even if we ourselves don't make such big decisions, we need to understand how they are made. Most of the time, we make these choices without thinking. For small, routine choices such as how to respond when your friend starts a conversation with you, you do not need to think. You have learned how to talk and how to behave in a friendly way without thinking at all, and your habits serve you well. You could behave differently than you do, of course, but your behavior is probably fine as it is. In other cases, though, you THINK about your decisions, from what to wear in the morning to how to spend your money. Sometimes people make choices without thinking when they really ought to think a bit. For example, we sometimes say things that hurt people's feelings and then we feel bad for having said them. Can you think of other examples of things we do because we didn't think first? WHEN it is worth thinking about decisions and, mostly, HOW to think about them once you start thinking. It will teach by example. You will be given a problem about decision making. First, think about the problem and try to answer it. You can discuss the problem with someone else. Then turn the page and look at the answer carefully. Where do these answers come from, and why are they right? The answers come from a field of study called decision theory. It is taught in colleges and graduate schools. It is sometimes used as a way of making very important decisions such as whether to have surgery or where to locate an airport. People who study decision theory and write about agree about some things and disagree about others.
I guess it would be easier for us to define the disadvanatges if you tell us about the technologies you want to mention. For example, it is hard to think of technology and nature together but even advances like Artificial Intelligence (AI) that could not be further removed from the natural world are helping conservation efforts. Well, at least I tried to answer your question. More help you can get if you check the tips at Prime Writings site. Good luck with it!
1. I would say the correct answer is C. <span>It led him to believe that violent resistance to white people is both necessary and justified. The problem was not just the taking away of Native American lands; the problem was that the white men cheated. Black Hawk was a famous war leader in more than one conflict, aligning even with the white men from Britain and Canada against their common enemy.
2. In my opinion, the correct answer is D. </span><span>He uses ethos, suggesting his behavior was an ethical and just reaction against the deceitful and immoral behavior of the white men. He isn't trying to manipulate his audience's opinion. He appeals to ethos, relying on their capability to recognize the right and justified cause. When the land where they lived was devastated, of course they were right to do something about it.</span>
