Answer: Jeff Bezos and Mackenzie Scott
Explanation: The divorce was 38 billion dollars
Answer:
All of them
Explanation:
The king condemning his own peaceful actions to be the cause of violence is in complete contradiction to one another. An oddity occurs and the action is in complete contrast to the outcome. One cannot justify that the corresponding actions may have led to the specific outcome. such is also the case in the example:
a; condemning a robbed man for having too much money does in no way justifies the action of robbing. Blaming a source that was done only for the reason of ones own satisfaction.
b; condemning Socrates for his truth to force people to make him drink the hemlock, is as absurd as the above example.
c; condemning Jesus for his devotion to God shows that the intention of the action was completely different but the outcome was in complete contrast.
Answer:
place and region
Explanation:
hope this helps sorry if not
please give thanks and vote for Brainliest
It is true that John is using extinction to change Edgar's behavior.
He is making his behavior of constantly telling jokes 'extinct' by letting his colleagues know that they shouldn't encourage him to continue behaving the way he is behaving. Thus, eventually, given that he is no longer 'rewarded' with his colleagues' laughter, he will completely change his behavior and stop joking around when it's not appropriate.
