Read the passage and then explain how the explicit and implicit details help the reader make the following inference: Charity will blame Larry for missing her bobsled
tryout. Use specific examples from the text and explain why you chose those
examples
Passage
It's a lovely summer day, and Larry and Charity have an hour of free time
before Charity's bobsled tryout. They decide to go to Spollen Park to play
Frisbee. The park is huge and has very high walls and gates that are locked
every night at sunset, though park rangers do patrol late at night. As they're
playing, Larry accidentally throws the Frisbee high up in a tree. He slowly
walks to the tree trunk, but when he looks up, he instantly gets dizzy and
nervous. Charity shoves him aside and climbs the tree to get the Frisbee. Way
up in the tree, though, Charity's foot gets stuck in a branch, and she can't get
unstuck by herself. Way down below, Larry yells for Charity to hurry up, and
just then he notices that the sun is starting to set. He looks up, and Charity is
scowling down at him with her arms crossed,

i believe it true i guess because you are the one that is writing so you should know what you are putting in your essay.

because each is self-sufficient.  

answer: d.she abandons people when they least expect it.

in the monk's tale, we encounter seventeen stories that relate historical events. all of these stories have tragic commonalities. they tell the stories of heroes who, despite their success in life, all met sad ends. the monk blames these sad outcomes on fortune. one of fortune's traits is that she abandons people when they least expect it. this is one of the most common themes of medieval tragedies.

formal arguments

in written, formal arguments, the best way to build credibility with readers is to provide them with evidence. no matter what your argument might be and which side you agree with, citing strong evidence to back up your claim leaves the opposition with little to argue.

emotional appeal is often used in oral arguments. written arguments, however, rely on four main types of evidence. as you read further, you will see that some types are more credible than others and "hold more water" so to speak.

statistical evidence

the strongest type of evidence in formal writing is statistical evidence. this ranges from true, hard data presented as a percentage or number, to survey-type data. for example, statistical evidence could be:

4 out of 5 experts claim

85% of women in the united

7 members were present

statistical evidence can be proven as fact. you can actually go out and find hard information to prove your particular claim.

testimonial evidence

the use of celebrities as credibility evidence can be considered testimonial in nature. many people look up to celebrities as role models in their lives. good or bad, when a person chooses a life-path that takes them into public light, there will be many others out there who want to emulate the celebrity. these celebrity endorsements provide the second-strongest type of evidence found in formal arguments.

testimonial evidence can also be collected from experts and authorities in a given field. doctors, dentists, lawyers often provide expert testimonials. their authority is not often questions. they are expected to "know their stuff."

anecdotal evidence

when storytelling is involved as evidence, anecdotal evidence is being used. due to its less objective nature, anecdotal evidence is not extremely strong. when coupled with statistical or testimonial evidence, anecdotal evidence can be highly effective in determining credibility or proof.

storytelling, although based on fact, can include quite a bit of opinion, thus making it less objective. usually, eyewitnesses are used as providers of anecdotal evidence. they saw or experienced the phenomenon at hand are telling their version or side of the story.

analogical evidence

when information is scarce about something and little is known, analogical evidence is often used in a formal argument to increase credibility of the proof. if the phenomenon in question is new and little is known about it, analogical evidence that pulls in known factors about a similar phenomenon to show parallels can be an effective way to provide proof.

due to limited knowledge about the phenomenon, in this situation, analogical evidence can be regarded as the weakest type of evidence used in formal arguments. one can only imagine and hope that the comparison-phenomenon is close enough that the results can be applied to the new phenomenon.

in the

all that really matters in a formal argument is whether or not the writer has credible evidence to back up what they want to say or what they are thinking. so often, we hear people say, "prove it! " to one another.

one last little formal arguments not only provide credible evidence to support claims, don't forget that acknowledgment of the opposing point of view in an argument also strengthens the entire product.