Answer:
The best option is D. decreasing costs while increasing positive consequences
Answer: Normative ethics would generally ask what right action is. ... Metaethics, on the other hand, would call into question what it means to say that any action is "correct", whether this type of evaluation is objective or subjective, universal or particular
Explanation :
Egyptians were better off with a democratically elected regime. The benefits of a democracy by far surpasses the excesses of a military dictatorship, in that in a democracy, freedoms and liberties are protected.
however, the Egyptian situation was different because the democratically elected president became the enemy of freedoms and liberties such as freedom to worship, and promoted radical brotherhood views.
the problem was with the way the transition was handled, as the military ought to have let parliament or the people decide the course of society. the problem, however is, with religion such as Islam the achievement of the democratic ideals is a long shot?
The answer is b.discovery
100% sure its right .
Life without easy access to water would make it extremely hard to live. Without easy access to water people would have to be extremely careful with what they do with the water that they can get because it will make it harder for them to collect. Without access to water there would be a lot of people fighting over what little water there is. So lets just say a world with little access to water would be a terrible situation to be in and hope that it does not happen.
Hope this helps.
