Icould have given up, but i thought about my grandmother. she always told me that "people who believe that science is the answer to everything are missing out on everything else." with her words in mind, i searched some more. there were many facts that hinted that dragons may not be fictional. i noticed that cultures across the world all described dragons in similar ways. this was odd because they had no way to communicate with each other. i found dragons mentioned in more than just stories. they appeared in old legal papers, in the travel logs of marco polo, and in the bible. i saw that the chinese calendar uses a different animal each year. dragons are included along with eleven real animals. i began to believe it was a real possibility that all of these people were talking about a creature that actually existed. writing in a complete sentence, what is the main idea of the passage?

a fable" i don’t have much to go on

idk

explanation:

depends on your school

when i was in high school i took ap biology my senior year and it was the hardest one for me because my teacher finished the material within the first month of school and then went on to doing advanced college level it was horrible. but at a nearby school ap biology was one of the easier aps. also, it depends on what you are interested i like math a lot so ap calculus was easier for me than most but i hate history so ap us government was harder for me than most.

"character is what you are in the dark." dwight lyman moody, in this very witty quotation of his, states we act and think differently when we are "in the dark", that is, when the spotlight is not on us and everyone can see us and consequently judge us. when reading, we tend to be sympathetic to some characters and their dilemmas. by being so, we are saying to ourselves that we agree with those characters' acts and choices, even if they are morally questionable if we have common sense in mind. dwight lyman moody's quotation applies very well to "crime and punishment", by   19th century russian writer fiodor dostoyevsky. raskolnikov, the main character, a former law student who spends his days reflecting upon life and its misery, draws a fatal conclusion: mankind is divided in two main categories: ordinary and extraordinary people. the first are the ones who lead a run-of-the-mill existence and are full of imperfections; the latter are the ones who are spiritually superior, the ones who always know better, and have the right to judge the ordinary ones, as well as eliminate them if for common good. raskolnikov considers himself as belonging to the extraordinary category and decides to kill an old lady who is a money lender and in whose house he rents a small room. raskolnikov compares himself to napoleon, who had the undeniable right to execute tons of people during the war in order to save his nation. of course what the main character decides to do is a horrendous crime, but as readers we feel it is the right thing for him to do, since the victim is a mean old woman who only thinks about money and keeps humiliating her younger sister. what one experiences is a mixture of sympathy and empathy for the character, even though he decides to commit homicide, which is not at all accepted or tolerated by civilized citizens. however, since readers are "in the dark", they allow themselves to feel in ways they would probably never dare to confess to anyone, no matter how nasty or vicious a character can be. after all, they are just reading and doing no harm. in other words, readers are in the dark and can be who they are without being judged.