Answer and Explanation:
I carried out the taste test with the members of my family, where everyone, with their eyes closed, had to taste pepsi and coke, tap water and bottled water, a bottle of expensive wine and a bottle of ordinary wine. After drinking from each pair, the participants had to express their considerations about each drink and say which was their favorite.
Regarding Coke vs. Pepsi the result was the most surprising. Among the 10 participants, 6 failed to recognize the products and chose pepsi as the drink that tasted the best. The surprising thing is that these participants had previously informed that they did not like Pepsi, which shows that the visualization of the product interferes with the reception of the product by the consumer.
Regarding tap water and bottled water the result was as expected. All participants showed preferences for bottled water, stating that tap water had a strong flavor from chemicals, such as chlorine, used in it.
Finally, the test with expensive wine and cheap wine had well balanced results and most participants were surprised by the taste of cheap wine, stating that they would drink again without any problem.
Answer:
Phineas Gage has a rod driven into his skull by accident which resulted in brain injury. The rod was known to pass through and destroyed his frontal lobes.
He would have benefited well if several treatment and plans were given such as psychosocial support after the damage to his cerebrum. He would have also benefited well from vocational rehabilitation intervention. They would have helped a lot on his recovery from the accident.
The Classic Hollywood narrative is well suited to give the impression of speed. its tradition of concise exposition and tightly woven plotting can carry us along swiftly. Classic Hollywood often centers stories on characters with definite traits who want to achieve specific goals. Classical narrative <span>ties one scene to another.</span>
Answer:
The use of the term "ethical" sometimes is a bit too lax when applied to evaluate situations. However, sometimes, it can also be too harsh. In response to your two questions, these would be the answers:
1. The ethical question here would be whether Greedy was right in overusing a benefit that the charitable organization had with the First California Bank. As President of the organization, it is in the hands of Greedy to ensure not just development, but also sustainable development of the organization. However, in the course of his attempts to improve the growth and efficacy of Send Me Money, he abused the benefit of the overdraft, and not to just any extent, but to the negative balance of 10.000 dollars. Although his intentions were in favor of the organization, and he used the money wisely, there still lies the question of if he could not have accomplished just as much, without abusing a benefit that could very well mean the end of the organization. So the ethical issue is that although the intention of Greedy was in the benefit of the organization, he did not take the best interest of it into account, because if he had, he would have tried to accomplish his goals without bringing the debt so high.
2. I disapprove of the way that Bill Greedy acted because he could have accomplished much more realistic goals and not placed the organization at risk by raising the debt to a bank to such high levels. Even if he increased fundraising efforts, it is evident that these were not successful, as the debt is so high.
