architecture\nthe modern philosophy of \out with the old, in with\nthe new\ has been used and abused for…

architecture\nthe modern philosophy of \out with the old, in with\nthe new\ has been used and abused for years. often\ntimes, it has more to do with making a profit rather than\na legitimate need for something new. across the united\nstates, beautiful, historic architecture is frequently\ndestroyed to make way for malls, high - rise apartment\nbuildings, grandiose homes, and other structures.\nunfortunately, little is done to protect our history.\nover the past several years, it has become\nincreasingly common for big - name developers to tear\ndown victorian, craftsman, and colonial buildings. this\ndestruction is often performed with the thought that it is\nthe property that holds the true value, not the structure\nthat sits on it. likewise, homeowners have begun to\nvalue their propertys location over the house they have\nspent many years living in. little regard is given to the\npainstaking details and craftsmanship that went into\nthese buildings, nor the innate beauty of hand - carved\nwoodwork and ornamentation. \out with the old, in with\nthe new\ has resulted in people no longer appreciating\nthe history and artistic integrity of our countrys oldest\nbuildings and failing to realize that once \the new\ is\nbrought in, \the old\ is lost to us forever.\nit is bad enough that developers and private citizens\nare blind to the beauty around them; what is worse is\nthat local governments refuse to step in and prevent this\ndestruction. cities and towns need to stand up to large\ndevelopers that flash money around in the name of\nprogress. rather than allowing developers to tear down\nold buildings simply to put up new ones, local\n\nselect the correct answer.\nhow does the second paragraph refine the idea that its important to protect historically significant architecture?\na. it provides reasons that the architecture should be preserved.\nb. it provides solutions for protecting historical architecture.\nc. it provides evidence that the architecture can be useful for new developers.\nd. it provides examples of what the government has done to protect the architecture.

architecture\nthe modern philosophy of \out with the old, in with\nthe new\ has been used and abused for years. often\ntimes, it has more to do with making a profit rather than\na legitimate need for something new. across the united\nstates, beautiful, historic architecture is frequently\ndestroyed to make way for malls, high - rise apartment\nbuildings, grandiose homes, and other structures.\nunfortunately, little is done to protect our history.\nover the past several years, it has become\nincreasingly common for big - name developers to tear\ndown victorian, craftsman, and colonial buildings. this\ndestruction is often performed with the thought that it is\nthe property that holds the true value, not the structure\nthat sits on it. likewise, homeowners have begun to\nvalue their propertys location over the house they have\nspent many years living in. little regard is given to the\npainstaking details and craftsmanship that went into\nthese buildings, nor the innate beauty of hand - carved\nwoodwork and ornamentation. \out with the old, in with\nthe new\ has resulted in people no longer appreciating\nthe history and artistic integrity of our countrys oldest\nbuildings and failing to realize that once \the new\ is\nbrought in, \the old\ is lost to us forever.\nit is bad enough that developers and private citizens\nare blind to the beauty around them; what is worse is\nthat local governments refuse to step in and prevent this\ndestruction. cities and towns need to stand up to large\ndevelopers that flash money around in the name of\nprogress. rather than allowing developers to tear down\nold buildings simply to put up new ones, local\n\nselect the correct answer.\nhow does the second paragraph refine the idea that its important to protect historically significant architecture?\na. it provides reasons that the architecture should be preserved.\nb. it provides solutions for protecting historical architecture.\nc. it provides evidence that the architecture can be useful for new developers.\nd. it provides examples of what the government has done to protect the architecture.

Answer

Brief Explanations:

The second paragraph describes developers destroying historic buildings (Victorian, Craftsman, Colonial) and homeowners prioritizing location over structure, then emphasizes the loss of history, artistic integrity, and irreplaceability of old buildings. These are reasons why such architecture should be preserved. It does not provide solutions, evidence of utility for new developers, or government actions.

Answer:

A. It provides reasons that the architecture should be preserved.