Generate the answer for a given question. The question requires common knowledge of English. Make sure that the answer is in detail, long, consistent with the context, and requires general knowledge of English. To be less repetitive, please vary your language for each question. Give a proper explanation to answer, and if necessary, provide the definition of various terms. And conclude your answer if it's long. If you have used other resources (e.g., Merriam Webster's.) to answer the question, include citations in your answer. You don't need to paraphrase the context of your resources, but make sure that your answer is consistent and complete.

Input: Consider Input: Wikipedia says: A postscript may be a sentence, a paragraph, or occasionally many paragraphs added to, often hastily and incidentally, after the signature of a letter or (sometimes) the main body of an essay or book. When all letters were handwritten, and adding a new thought to the letter would have likely involved rewriting the entire letter, a postscript had obvious practicality. Now, however, one can just as easily add the thought to the main text.

Output: I use a P.S. rather often in my emails, when the content of the P.S. is unrelated to the rest of the body of the message. For example, if I was writing two or three paragraphs about a database problem to a colleague, but I knew his wife had been recently released from the hospital, I might end the message with something like: P.S. I hope your wife is doing better. That's an easy way to make an abrupt transition to something unrelated to the rest of the message. Such modern usage isn't driven by an inability to conveniently insert the text (which is easily done electronically) it's more a matter of how much that closing thought is related to the rest of the message. P.S. You know you can't believe everything you read on Wikipedia, right?


Input: Consider Input: I was watching this video. At around 30:00, Chomsky exaplins that he never went to Chemistry class nor to Chemistry lab and he got a A nevertheless. Then he makes a joke: 'This approach has a name. It's called No Child Left Behind' (31:12 into the video). Can you explain the joke to me? I know that No Child Left Behind is an act of Congress, but I still can't get the joke.

Output: No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was a US Act of Congress which mandated that all schools which receive federal financial assistance (for the education of children from low-income families) had to administer an annual standardized test to all students. According to NCLB, each year, fifth graders must do better in the standardized test than the previous year's fifth graders. Schools that fail to achieve this for two or more consecutive years were required to take certain measures in order to 'improve the school'. As you can see, NCLB was an act centered around standardized testing. Students'and by extension their schools'performance was measured and scrutinized by the test scores. A common criticism of standardized testing is that it leads teachers to focus on test performance, instead of aiming to help students achieve in-depth understanding of the overall curriculum. Chomsky talks about how he wasn't able to successfully carry out experiments in the chemistry lab, and yet scored an A by filling out a paper with the results of the experiments, which were quite obvious. He mentions that the this test-centered approach to education had been going on for about 10 years with 'no reported progress', since, he believes, 'serious education' is different and does not focus on standardized test scores. When Chomsky mentions that this failing approach to education has a name, 'No Child Left Behind', the audience laughs and cheers in order to express their agreement with his ridicule and criticism of this act. The reason they laugh is that he refers to his chemistry lab experience as 'No Child Left Behind', even though it predates the passing of the unpopular act by several years.


Input: Consider Input: I am referring to someone who makes people 'buy' what he says and gets things done by them through nothing but clever speech something one can describe as crafty or beguiling, but not fraudulent. I pondered over con man and con artist for a while but those terms seem to hold a hint of crime, so those terms won't fit in. I am wondering if there is a more suitable phrase or word.


Output: Sophistry is crafty speech intended to deceive, not necessarily out and out lying. So then a sophist is someone who does it. This is mostly just to win arguments though, not necessarily to get people to do things. That would be a demagogue, but that is someone, yes, who is clever with words but in a very specific way, appealing to the listener's baser instincts.


