<span>authorities on many a subject, and close with a rhetorical flourish. Lincoln had ... a classroom, Lincoln. Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution ... municator: his skill in the use of figurative language, of ... phors, and they thus lose their power to evoke a vivid image ... How Lincoln Won the War with Metaphors.</span>
Hmmmm… I’d say it’s A, B and C don’t really have a correct definitions of “summarize”
So you would set up the equation like this:
4/1 x 1/6
so
4 x 1 = 4
1 x 6 = 6
Can you simplify? Yes, both the numerator and denominator is divisible by 2
Answer: 2/3
When you're arguing you want to make your point as objective as possible, for this you have to be impartial so that your proof is strong.
Comparing the opposite side's views to something unpleasant is useless since this kind of comparison holds no proof that your argument is true. <em>Incorrect</em>
If you include only general details the audience will understand, you might not be able to communicate the specific points of your argument, therefore you wouldn't be able to prove it is accurate. <em>Incorrect</em>
To make your argument effective you have to use specific details to refute the opposite side's views. That way you'll present the specific points in which your argument will stand, you will communicate logical and objective ideas about your argument and they will work to prove it. <u><em>Correct</em></u>
If you appeal to emotion, your argument will be subject to possible biases since the way a person or group feels towards something doesn't prove it right or wrong. <em>Incorrect</em>
