Question

question 3 (1 point)
in floor 5, uncle mark presents an implicit argument about revenge and violence.
which evaluation best explains how reasoning and evidence affect the strength of uncle mark’s argument?
○ a his argument is strong because it uses firsthand experience to expose the long - term consequences of violence.
○ b his argument is flawed because it contradicts the rules without explanation.
○ c his argument is weak because it relies only on emotion without personal experience.
○ d his argument is ineffective because will immediately rejects it.

question 4 (1 point)
which two these statements best support a formal, objective argument analyzing how floor 5 develops the theme of revenge while fairly addressing a counterclaim?
□ a floor 5 demonstrates that revenge feels justified to will because the rules promise respect and protection, even though uncle mark’s experience exposes the lasting consequences of violence.
□ b uncle mark is completely right, and will would be wrong to question the rules because revenge is the only response that earns respect.
□ c uncle mark’s appearance proves that the rules should be abandoned immediately, and will’s desire for revenge has no reasonable justification.
□ d through uncle mark’s testimony, reynolds challenges the logic of revenge while acknowledging the emotional pull of loyalty, grief, and fear that influences will’s thinking.

Explanation:

Question 3

• Option a: If Uncle Mark uses firsthand experience to show long - term consequences of violence, that's a strong use of evidence, so the argument would be strong.
• Option b: There's no indication the argument contradicts "Rules" without explanation, so this is not a good evaluation.
• Option c: The argument being based only on emotion without personal experience would make it weak, but we need to see which is correct. If Uncle Mark's argument is about revenge and violence, using firsthand experience (as in option a) is a better support for a strong argument.
• Option d: Just because Will rejects it doesn't mean the argument is ineffective. The strength of the argument is about reasoning and evidence, not Will's reaction.

So the best evaluation is option a.

• Option a: It shows how Floor 5 develops the theme of revenge (by showing Will's feeling of revenge being justified and Uncle Mark's experience) and addresses a counterclaim (about the long - term consequences of violence).
• Option b: Saying Uncle Mark is completely right and Will is wrong to question is not a fair address of a counterclaim, it's one - sided.
• Option c: Saying the Rules should be abandoned immediately is not a fair and objective analysis, it's extreme.
• Option d: Through Uncle Mark's testimony, Reynolds challenges the logic of revenge while acknowledging the emotional pull (loyalty, grief, fear) which is a fair analysis of the theme of revenge and addresses the emotional aspects as a counter - like element.

So the two statements that best support a formal, objective argument are option a and option d.

Answer:

a. His argument is strong because it uses firsthand experience to expose the long - term consequences of violence.

Question 4