An Turkles argument speaks to the superiority of face to face conversations over technology-aided or enabled communication such as emails and texting.
Turkle indeed alludes to the advantages given by the use of technology such as email and texting services etc to modify our conversation/message to perfection.
In her opinion, this is at best superficial in the long run and does not replace the good old fashion face to face (albeit "imperfect") mode of communication which allows for deeper connections that technology can ever allow.
She notes in paragraph 11 that Human relationships are worth a bundle, complicated and challenging. She indicates that humans have acquired the habit of using technology to make these interactions seem "flawless". According to Turkle, this shifting behaviour towards a perfect representation of self has only reduced conversation to electronic connections and that this has devalued the worth of human interactions which whose real benefit is in connecting with one another.
According to her, online connections don't present a substitute for real conversations Explanation:
Answer: A
The most relevant piece of evidence for this claim is option A. Option A is the only one that specifically describes how our lives have improved due to the exploration of outer space. Option B tells us about changes, but does not state that the changes have been positive. Option C describes exploration, but does not describe how we have benefitted from it. Finally, option D discusses the benefits we might someday experience, but not the ones we already enjoy in the present.
There are two types of adjective clauses: Restrictive and Nonrestrictive adjective clause. A nonrestrictive adjective clause consists of words within the sentence that can be omitted, but not changing or affecting the meaning of the sentence. These clauses are usually separated by a pair of commas. On the other hand, restrictive clause is the opposite.
In the options given, the sentence that contains a nonrestrictive adjective clause is: The sandwich, which had been prepared hours earlier, was soggy and unappetizing.
I think this would be to illustrate their massive discontent with things the way they are and to force the introduction of measures that severely quell existing liberties. There is no suggestion as to what is being discussed but it could be like the rise of the Nazis in Germany in WWII or of Mussolini in Italy perhaps.
“They were conscious that they were not as other animals.”
“If they worked hard, at least they worked for themselves.”
“All animals were equal.”
