Answer:
it seem that when car approaching toward the waiting car the radio frequency seem to be high and it seem to be low if moving away from the waiting car.
Explanation:
when waiting at traffic light to go green and listening radio station at particular frequency and then a car with playing same radio station and passing with constant speed then it seem that when car approaching toward the waiting car the radio frequency seem to be high and it seem to be low if moving away from the waiting car.
Max Weber believed that! You might find more answers to your other questions on a quizlet i found. https://quizlet.com/177714831/kin-249-quiz-2-flash-cards/
Answer:
C) retroactive interference
Explanation:
Retroactive interference occurs when one forget the previously task which was learnt very recent due to learning of the task.
The later learning interferes of the individual with the earlier learning. The new memories disrupt the old memories.
<u>In the given case study, Jessica being confused is an example of retroactive interference.</u>
Answer:
<em>Socio-cultural force</em>
Explanation:
The socio-cultural aspect of a country reflects the social and cultural life of the people domiciled in that country. Socio-cultural forces entail traditions, lifestyles and values that a particular society has, which affect their decision making.
United States culture promotes individualism which is normally shaped up by the values they learn from their society. On the contrary, the Japanese are expected to conform to group expectation and all these variations are a product of sociocultural force.
It is true that the principle of double effect used by the principle of discrimination holds that there is a difference between directly intending some end and foreseeing that one's actions might result in that end.
Answer: Option A
<u>Explanation:</u>
The principle of double effect which establishes its doctrine is based upon ethics and morals. The principle of discrimination determines an action to be either being good or bad according to morals.
In clear terms the doctrine says that the performance of an action which brings about a moral good reaction or conclusion but it comes at a cost of some side effects which is bad according to morals, can be considered as ethical right in purview of the side effect being not intentional and purely coming out of action with no intention.
