What do the stories of survival in the last paragraph suggest to the reader about the narrator? Support your answer using details from the text. "The only good thing about the day being so hot was the sight the solar stills presented. Every cone was covered on the inside with drops and rivulets of condensation. The day ended. I calculated that the next morning would make it a week since the Tsimtsum had sunk. The Robertson family survived thirty-eight days at sea. Captain Bligh of the celebrated mutinous Bounty and his fellow castaways survived forty-seven days. Steven Callahan survived seventy-six. Owen Chase, whose account of the sinking of the whaling ship, Essex, by a whale inspired Herman Melville, survived eighty-three days at sea with two mates, interrupted by a one-week stay on an inhospitable island. The Bailey family survived 118 days. I have heard of a Korean merchant sailor named Poon, I believe, who survived the Pacific for 173 days in the 1950s. I survived 227 days. That's how long my trial lasted, over seven months."

cabeza de vaca was an spanish explorer and n his long exploration of 11,000.km. from florida to present-day mexico, he went through a series of calamities and setbacks that only added to his deeds. he applied his religious creed with the humanist idea, always current and universal, that all men were equal before god and destiny without any discrimination. as an explorer, he became a slave to the tipinoga, then his shaman pointer, later and after an operation of heart to an indian (from which both came alive) he achieved stardom and became a hero followed by a crowd that professed unusual respect and admiration.

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.

xd

explanation: