Answer:
Double denial results in a statement. In logic when you use a doble denial, it results as an afirmation.
Original sentence: <u>I have nothing.</u>
Negated sentence: <u>I don´t have nothing.</u>
Explanation:
In this sentece the word nothing helps us make the same sense in both sentences. I have nothing has the same meaning as the sentence: I don't have nothing. Both sentences mean the same but one of the has a denial.
Not having nothing is the same thing as having nothing.
They maintain and plow the local roads..
(I will continue in the comments)
I believe the answer is: a. to enhance credibility
Personal experience would give the readers with a certain level of assurance that the writers at least know what they are talking about.
For example, let's say that there are two authors of a self defense book. The first author has an experience as a president's bodyguard while the second author is a full time web designer. Most people would most likely see the first author as the more credible one.
The correct answer is the conventional stage of morality.
The conventional stage of morality is characterized by conformity to authority and laws, fixed rules and maintenance of social order. An individual in this stage of morality believes that breaking rules and laws are always wrong and warrant punishment. Since Sander believes that anyone breaking rules set by authority figures should always be punished, even when the rules are not valid and even when special circumstances are factored in, he is operating in the conventional stage of morality as defined by Kohlberg.
<span>The
type of decision that increases a nation's sphere of influence is called an
Expansionist policy. This is a form of an aggressive and radical nationalism
where expansionism is the main goal. Expansion in terms of military and
economic context that caused a lot of major conflicts and colonization in
history. </span>