<p>
What makes you think they weren’t praising his writing?</p>
<p>“Very human, very understandable”</p>
<p>What was the answer? I didn’t think it was sympathetic, because while being sympathetic needs understanding, it didn’t seem like the author was giving Descartes compassion for his feelings thus being sympathetic to him - we don’t even know how Descartes would react. It didn’t seem to be sarcastic because reading the entire paragraph in a sarcastic tone didn’t work; it wasn’t mocking. Impartial didn’t make sense, because why else write an entire paragraph talking about how Descartes doesn’t deserve criticism? I put apologetic, since I thought the author was defending him from criticism and wrote earlier “not at all does Descartes deserve criticism” 
I think I’m overthinking this, though, which usually means the answer’s wrong</p>
<p>kirby:</p>
<p>I put sympathetic and I’m getting the same feeling. I actually think he was a bit sarcastic, what would he be apologetic about?</p>
<p>It’s definitely sympathetic.</p>
<p>I didn’t detect any sarcasm.</p>
<p>Sensing sarcasm is reading into the text too much. CB doesn’t require you to make inferences pretty much ever. Therefore, based on what was said directly in the text, sympathetic is correct.</p>
<p>sharkSAT- I could imagine him smirking about how it was “typical for humans”. Only sarcastic humans criticize human behavior,lol.</p>
<p>Yes what was NY/DC court one?</p>
<p>i said that it was questioning the integrity of the NY/DC</p>
<p>I don’t think that “sympathy” is correct. Why would he feel sympathetic. Even if a situation is “understandable,” I don’t think that he feels any sort of feelings or impulses of compassion…I’m so confused:(</p>
<p>for NY/DC i chose the option about how they were examples of how certain enforcements were being placed to prevent harsh judicial techniques from being used.</p>
<p>“i said that it was questioning the integrity of the NY/DC”…huh??? NY/DC were not supportive of the corruption of the legal system, though.</p>
<p>yeah, it’s not like he was actually feeling sorry for human kind.</p>
<p>Placid
Sleep
Apocryphal
Foreboding… Elation
Profound
Curtail
Impair…minimize</p>
<p>Lawyer’s tone = affronted
“very understandable” = sympathetic</p>
<p>add more plz.</p>
<p>^Exactly! Additionally, he is not necessarily “supporting” the ideals of Discartes, either. Moreover, I felt that he had an emotional disconnect from Discartes, and used his ideas only for strengthening his argument…!</p>
<p>well the people were questioning what the NY/DC courts were aiming for it said so in the passage.</p>
<p>Wait, it was “sever” not curtail- you can’t get partial funding</p>
<p>and what was the apocryphal question?</p>
<p>Yeah I put NY/DC were putting in stuff to prevent to harsh tactics…Is this right?</p>
<p>But by definition sympathy is: “harmony of or agreement in feeling, as between persons or on the part of one person with respect to another.”</p>
<p>though the author states that this is reasonable, he does not PERSONALLY feel any sort of emotional connection with his ideas.</p>
<p>You can get partial funding! My school only gets partial funding from local businesses and as a result the club I run gets partial funding. The partial is compared to previous funding. It is curtail. It said she lost MOST, not all, of her money.</p>
<p>“well the people were questioning what the NY/DC courts were aiming for it said so in the passage.”</p>
<p>No, the NY/DC people were questioning the harsh tactics used by other lawyers.</p>