Answer:
trust vs. mistrust
Explanation:
Trust vs. mistrust: This is given by Erik Erikson's in his theory of psychosocial development and is the very first stage. The stage starts from the birth period of the child and lasts till twelve months. In this stage, a child believes that his or her parents or caregivers will provide and fulfill his or her basic needs.
The parent's or caregiver's quick response to the child's needs, then the child will develop the foundation of trust. If in case the needs of a child don't get fulfilled consistently a child may develop suspicion, anxiety, and mistrust.
In the question above, the primary developmental task of the stage described is trust vs. mistrust.
Answer: a sequence pattern
Explanation:
Data mining is the process of discovering unknown patterns in large amount of data. Data mining helps in developing smarter marketing campaigns and to predict customer loyalty.
Data mining reveals clusters where three or more database elements occur.
There are two types data mining namely; supervised data mining and unsupervised data mining.
In supervised data mining; it begins with user telling the data mining software to test for specific pattern in a data set.
Unsupervised data mining software is good at recognizing sequence, affinity and predictive pattern.
It was divided into 60 townships.
The three powerful dynasties that developed after Alexander the Great's death were. Ptolemy dynasty, Seleucus dynasty and Antigonid dynasty. For Ptolemy dynasty, they were absorbed with the Roman Empire and because their rulers were not effective, they were under control by the Romans in Egypt. For the Seleucus dynasty, they lost control over the Asia Minor against the Roman Empire and was abolished by Pompey the Great. Antigonid dynasty lost their war against the Romans because of the three "fetters" of Greece through three wars.
Answer:
Explanation:
By exercising its power to determine the constitutionality of federal and state government actions, the Supreme Court has developed a large body of judicial decisions, or “precedents,” interpreting the Constitution. How the Court uses precedent to decide controversial issues has prompted debate over whether the Court should follow rules identified in prior decisions or overrule them. The Court’s treatment of precedent implicates longstanding questions about how the Court can maintain stability in the law by adhering to precedent under the doctrine of stare decisis while correcting decisions that rest on faulty reasoning, unworkable standards, abandoned legal doctrines, or outdated factual assumptions.
