Dialogue is the best method to use when analyzing a character. true or false

True

Dialogue certainly is the best method to use when analyzing a character because we can learn so much.  Let’s say you are reading a story where the main character reads a sign a person standing on a street corner is holding that says, “Can you spare some change?”  After reading that sign, the main character walks up to that person and yells in his face, “Why don’t you go get a job!?”  What can be learned from this interaction?  What can be deciphered from this is that the main character is insensitive to the plights of others and apparently incapable (or unwilling) to see things objectively and from a perspective other than his own so much so that he jumps to conclusions and feels the person is just lazy when, in fact, the person may have just recently lost a job, has bills that need immediate paying, and/or is perhaps waiting for unemployment benefits to become active while looking for a new job.  As you can see, thus, dialogue can be quite useful in analyzing a character.

True

Explanation:

Dialogue reveals all the nuances, complexity and individual features that are specific of a certain character.  

The words that they use, how they express to others, their accent, opinions, language or jargon are all essential elements used to convey the psychology, motives, and traits of a character.

based on the biblical principle proverbs 16: 32, i agree with the author of the passage "better is it that it takes longer to be angry than the strong " to the extent that i share the philosophy that the nobility of heart demonstrates the strength of a person. those who are very proud, get angry easily and show their anger toward others are really weak, but those who are noble and do not constantly obfuscate or contain their feelings of anger, are strong people