in this conversation, which discussion technique does anna most clearly show? daniel: this is all well and good, but we're assuming plato is giving us the real facts about socrates. here, chambers writes, "it's possible socrates refused to back down because he wanted to do the right thing. it's equally possible his ego took over his tongue, in which case he could be considered conceited and righteous. yetplato leads us down the path to piety." so if im reading this right, socrates might not be the amazing guy plato makes him out to be. jennifer: but even if it was his ego that got in the way, didn't he still make a sacrifice? he could have begged the jury to let him go. anna: but plato didn't write anything about socrates's ego, right? daniel: i'm not sure. didn't read plato's account, just chambers's article. a. identifying missing information. b. synthesizing claims. c. confirming the question. d. establishing roles