Identify the point of disagreement between the two viewpoints. Then write a sentence that synthesizes this information to form a conclusion about the topic. Viewpoint 1:
Human cultures around the world feature groups of people working together within communities. Though there are those who have been able to live in the wild independently, their ability to take care of themselves probably came from being raised by and interacting with other people. Humans are not like some badgers or jaguars that live and hunt alone. Instead, humans are highly social creatures, similar to dolphins and gorillas. We build extended social networks that allow us to live peacefully and comfortably without having to do everything ourselves.

Viewpoint 2:
Beyond being fed and protected as infants and young children, people don't need communities to survive. The sole function of a community is to pass on and enforce social customs, such as manners and traditions. These customs are not necessary for a human's survival. Plenty of people have gone out into the world alone to survive off the land and discover new things. The skills of survival are innate — we will find ways to keep ourselves alive, whether we're part of a community or not.

How can you paraphrase this, this is about golden age fallacies. these are all rational people who know that older is not necessarily better, but many are taken in by this fallacy and seem no longer able to reason with any degree of reliability

Read the excerpt from act 1 of a doll's house. helmer: nora! [goes up to her and takes her playfully by the ear.] the same little featherhead! suppose, now, that i borrowed fifty pounds today, and you spent it all in the christmas week, and then on new year's eve a slate fell on my head and killed me, and— nora: [putting her hands over his mouth]. oh! don't say such horrid things. helmer: still, suppose that happened, —what then? nora: if that were to happen, i don't suppose i should care whether i owed money or not. helmer: yes, but what about the people who had lent it? nora: they? who would bother about them? i should not know who they were. helmer: that is like a woman! but seriously, nora, you know what i think about that. no debt, no borrowing. there can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. we two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle. nora: [moving towards the stove]. as you , torvald. how does the interaction between helmer and nora advance the plot? nora realizes that helmer will completely disapprove of her having borrowed money, so she has to continue to keep it a secret from him. nora realizes that she and helmer have the same ideas about financial issues, and the conversation brings them closer together later in the play. helmer realizes that nora is more responsible with money than he originally thought, and he trusts her more with finances later in the play. nora realizes that helmer knows a lot more about borrowing and lending, and she will seek his input later when she needs it.

Easy brainliest btwhow is the underlined pronoun used in the sentence? last night he served *them* a special dinner. a. direct object b. subject c. possessive d. indirect object