<p>here’s the link:
<a href=“http://www.oneonone.info/xjfh37skq9d7j65q_files/8%20ETS%20May%2007%20(Sun)%20IUBB.pdf[/url]”>http://www.oneonone.info/xjfh37skq9d7j65q_files/8%20ETS%20May%2007%20(Sun)%20IUBB.pdf</a></p>
<p>I’m so confused with section 8, question 17. It’s a level 5 so I know it’s hard, but I honestly just can’t figure out why the answer is justified (the answer is on the bottom - I don’t wanna post it here in case you guys wanna figure it out by yourselves) </p>
<p>Thanks!!!</p>
<p>The most telling argument to refute Bligh’s account is that a full military investigation of a subsequent event, presumably including the testimony of multiple witnesses, some if not all of whom were officers, found Bligh to be a bully. The next best answer cites his dispute with a single individual, the ship’s carpenter. This account cites only one individual and leaves uncertain what might have caused the dispute between them, even though the characterization of the carpenter as ‘loyal’ makes clear the writer’s attitude. Both of these details contradict Bligh’s presentation of himself as the innocent victim of a group of sailors who were motivated by the attractions of Tahiti and not by any behavior on Bligh’s part.</p>
<p>P1 says Bligh had no idea that his men were upset with him.
P2 says he was mean as hell (he should have known this)- which disproves the argument of P1, so anything that proves P2 is the answer…simple.</p>
<p>Now, by process of elimination…
A) This says nothing of his realtionship with his crew - discard
B) This is moot, we know he was the CAPTAIN - discard
C) This is about the sailor, not Bligh - discard
D) This supports P2
E) not relevant to Bligh’s character - discard</p>