Answer:
Atticus says that Bob Ewell must be crazy to attack Jem and scout, it is the only explanation he could think of that will justify a man to attack innocent children.
Heck Tate disagrees and says Bob Ewell was just mean and had enough liquor in him to make him brave enough to attack children, implying that he was a coward.
Of the two, Heck Tate's explanation is the most correct and the one that aligns with how I feel about Bob Ewell.
Explanation:
Atticus cannot understand what could possibly make a man want to kill children unless the man is mad, so he says Bob Ewell was crazy.
Heck Tate however, assures him that Bob Ewell was not crazy but just "mean as hell" and a coward on top of that, so his attack on the children was inevitable.
Heck Tate's explanation is the correct one.
Persuasion becomes more agreeable and beneficial when one attacks with consciousness. The attack is done well if the values of the person being persuaded is brought upon the subject of the conversation. During the Biblical times, talking to Kings and asking favor from them meant that the persuasion should incorporate his values in order to make it more effective.
Bro as naive as a 30 year old man that still believes he’ll become a professional basketball player
The answer to your question would be success.
