Answer:
Impressionist
Explanation:
The manufacture of oil plant in tubes made it possible for 19th century European artists to make painting a portable activity. The spontaneity and directness of painting outdoors is evident in works by impressionist artists.
Impressionism is basically a 19th-century art movement characterized by relatively small, thin, yet visible brush strokes, open composition, emphasis on accurate depiction of light in its changing qualities, ordinary subject matter, the inclusion of movement as a crucial element of human perception and experience, and unusual visual angles.
Good and bad pointsGood points of duty-based ethics<span><span>emphasises the value of every human being<span>Duty-based ethical systems tend to focus on giving equal respect to all human beings.This provides a basis for human rights - it forces due regard to be given to the interests of a single person even when those are at odds with the interests of a larger group.</span></span><span>says some acts are always wrong<span>Kantian duty-based ethics says that some things should never be done, no matter what good consequences they produce. This seems to reflect the way some human beings think.Rossian duty-based ethics modified this to allow various duties to be balanced, which, it could be argued, is an even better fit to the way we think.</span></span><span>provides 'certainty'<span>Consequentialist ethical theories bring a degree of uncertainty to ethical decision-making, in that no-one can be certain about what consequences will result from a particular action, because the future is unpredictable.Duty-based ethics don't suffer from this problem because they are concerned with the action itself - if an action is a right action, then a person should do it, if it's a wrong action they shouldn't do it - and providing there is a clear set of moral rules to follow then a person faced with a moral choice should be able to take decisions with reasonable certainty.Of course things aren't that clear cut. Sometimes consequentialist theories can provide a fair degree of certainty, if the consequences are easily predictable.Furthermore, rule-based consequentialism provides people with a set of rules that enable them to take moral decisions based on the sort of act they are contemplating.</span></span><span>deals with intentions and motives<span>Consequentialist theories don't pay direct attention to whether an act is carried out with good or bad intentions; most people think these are highly relevant to moral judgements.Duty-based ethics can include intention in at least 2 ways...If a person didn't intend to do a particular wrong act - it was an accident perhaps - then from a deontological point of view we might think that they hadn't done anything deserving of criticism. This seems to fit with ordinary thinking about ethical issues.Ethical rules can be framed narrowly so as to include intention.</span></span></span>Bad points of duty-based ethics<span><span>absolutistDuty-based ethics sets absolute rules. The only way of dealing with cases that don't seem to fit is to build a list of exceptions to the rule.</span><span>allows acts that make the world a less good place<span>Because duty-based ethics is not interested in the results it can lead to courses of action that produce a reduction in the overall happiness of the world.Most people would find this didn't fit with their overall idea of ethics:</span></span></span>
...it is hard to believe that it could ever
<u>Answer:
</u>
Face validity of an instrument refers to the style of questions on an instrument that enables the respondents to determine the purpose of the questions by merely reading the questions is a TRUE statement.
<u>Explanation:
</u>
- The purpose of the questions enumerated on a given instrument is often very easy to comprehend.
- It allows the respondents to easily devise what issues or subjects are the questions associated with.
- Once the respondents get an idea of what the questions are about, they can plan how to tackle them or otherwise just simply prefer to leave them.
Answer:
lack of fairness
Explanation:
seems like the best choice
Warning against permanent foreign alliances of these two warnings shows more foresight.
Explanation:
George Washington was the first president of the USA and was a man of incredible political acumen and foresight.
He was widely respected across the globe and in his country but understood that foreign alliances are volatile and can shift goalposts often.
He was predicting in a sense, World War 1, which could have impacted USA much worse had they been part of the elaborate war alliance developed before the war started.
Fortunately for them, until then they were in isolation.
