Which of the following arguments is an argument of value? a. if mansa musa had never converted to islam, mali would have never become wealthy. b. because mansa musa made a pilgrimage to mecca, we can assume he was a muslim. c. mansa musa was an excellent leader and one of africa's greatest muslim kings. d. mansa musa's conversion to islam brought the kingdom of mali into the islamic world.

If there is just on correct argument in here, we can say it is option:

B. Because Mansa Musa made a pilgrimage to Mecca, we can assume he was a Muslim. Option C could be, too, He was very known as one of the greatest's muslim kings.

- The kingdom of Mali was already in the slamic world, what refutes option D, to confirm it is not correct

- As far as what we can learn about Mansa Musa reign, there is no such thing as "his conversion" to islam, he was muslim before his reign, and he was wealthy, just like his Kingdom. The fact he was muslim had nothing to do with Mali's weath. That confirms option A is not correct.  

from the point of view of the king he did nothing wrong because he believes that all property is his property

but to the colonists he is doing wrong because they get no say in the way their own home is used

hope this

scribe

slaves and scribes

scribes