Disease, blankets for food not sure about the food part
Answer: Language without communication
Explanation:
Language without communication is defined as communication in which message is shared or exchanges between people without using verbal means.Non-verbal methods are used for communication such as body language, facial expression, actions etc.
According to the question, Mrs Watts and Jason are involved in communication without any language.Mrs. watts told Jason to sit through action .Jason did not properly understood the message through this medium so, he nodded but didn't sit.
Answer:
TRUE
Explanation:
The word philosophy means love of wisdom. It makes perfect sense. Philosophy is a branch of human science that seeks to understand the complexities of nature and humanity. These are profound questions, such as where we came from, where we are going, and many other questions that natural science cannot answer. Philosophy seeks to give man greater wisdom and ability to reflect on universal issues.
The Virginia Plan was favored by large states. It had two houses of congress and representation was based on population. It was to create a strong national government.
The New Jersey Plan was favored by small states. It had one house of congress and stated each state should have equal representation. It was similar to the articles of confederation.
I would choose the Virginia Plan. Their representation was based on each states population. This would allow for fair say in government matters because a state would only have as many votes as people.
Answer:
This is an example of masked-man fallacy.
Explanation:
The masked-man is a fallacy in which two people or objects are mistakenly considered to be either identical or completely different. The most common example used to explain it is the following:
I know who Joshua is.
I don't know who the masked man is.
Therefore, Joshua is not the masked man.
In the example above, Joshua and the masked man are considered different, unrelated. <u>In the situation we are analyzing here, the opposite happens. To reach the conclusion that Tamiko stole Maya's shoes, we are making the huge mistake of not considering any other possibility. Tamiko could very well have an identical-looking pair of shoes; Maya could have lent Tamiko her shoes and forgotten about it, and so on. Therefore, assuming that the shoes are the same, that they belong to Maya and have been stolen, is a result of wrong reasoning and an example of masked-man fallacy.</u>