Answer:
i would say :B
Explanation:
u don't know this person, u don't know if there trust worthy, and u might make things worse since he doesn't know u.
Answer:
D) systematic desensitization.
Explanation:
Systematic desensitization: In psychology, the term systematic desensitization is described as the behavioral technique that is used to treat anxiety, phobia, and intense fear. By using this technique, the psychologist engages a person or client in various ways of relaxation exercise and therapy and moderately exposes the person or client into anxiety-provoking stimulus, for example, place, object, animal, etc. Systematic desensitization is based on the classical conditioning principle.
In the question above, the approach used by Sal's therapist is systematic desensitization.
<span>The major dilemma regarding limited government that was discussed during the ratification debates involved the balance between the ability of a government to do harm to its people and to help its people. More specifically, founders were concerned that a government too weak to do harm to citizens would also be too weak to do good for its citizens.</span>
Answer:
recover damages
Explanation:
From the explanation above,we can deduce or conclude that this is a clear case of fraud in which the aforementioned parties which are Don(victim)a and Eve(perpetrator) of this case of fraud.
First and foremost,we should have an idea of what fraud means or connotes-It is an intentional or purposeful act deception by a individual(s) or body as the case may be towards another individual(s) or entity for the purpose of financial or material gains,not minding the medium in which it was portrayed.And it centres around lies,in order to convince or confuse the victim as the case maybe.
So in this case,Eve having lied to Don about having access to a stock-trading algorithm which could multiply an investment and thus,it wasn't so,then Don would have to file a suit and a proof of injury is required to recover damages in order to void the contract and get back money paid earlier on the basis of the contract,instead of affirming the contract because no sort of financial gains were made in the stock-trading transaction.
Both yes and no. Yes as in the massacre happened and many of the people shot civilians during the massacre. They weren't as in Captain Preston was found not guilty and many historians believe that he did not order the soldiers to attack but that the soldiers attacked of their own free will. There are even many who claim that it was self defense and that nobody was guilty except for the colonists.
