Answer:
The two requirements for federal courts to exercise diversity jurisdiction is-
1. the plaintiff and defendant must be citizens of different states
2. the amount in controversy must be greater than $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
Explanation:
I hope this helps!!!!
Creo que su Antropología es el estudio de la humanidad. La disciplina examina la interacción de factores culturales, sociales, económicos, políticos, naturales y ambientales en el desarrollo de los seres humanos.
Answer:
The fact that a written constitution is difficult to amend is both an advantage and a disadvantage at the same time. Written constitution are mostly rigid, with cumbersome amendment procedure, which leads to the problem of how to easily amend it to make it suit changing needs and time.
Explanation:
CONSTITUTION IS the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it. b : a written instrument embodying the rules of a political or social organization.
Answer:
B) Empathy accuracy model
Explanation:
THIS IS A PROCESS THROUGH WHICH A PERSON CAN INFER THE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS OF ANOTHER PERSON. To read other people's feelings accurately is fundamental skills that help a person to adjust in different aspects of life. It is a sub-area of interpersonal perception. It is the study and research related to stable and enduring disposition traits and attribution and more study about the unstable and transient disposition of current thoughts and feelings of a person.
This phenomenon was given by a psychologist named William Ickes and colleagues. roughly we can analyze it as a mind-reading.
This phenomenon is used to screen out the selection of police, therapists, psychologists, etc.
Answer:
<h3>I think this might help you</h3><h3>
Explanation:</h3><h3 />
<h3>With the flu season swiftly approaching and the H1N1 already affecting large numbers across the world, New Hampshire faces the possibility of a flu epidemic. In such an instance, what action would the state or federal government take? The possibility of a massive quarantine gets thrown around every time a flu epidemic exists, but is such an action an infringement of the rights of individuals living in a free nation? Or is the common good of preventing the spread of infection more important?
</h3><h3>
</h3><h3>Even the current health care debate reflects the tension between individual rights and the common good. Over the past months New Hampshire town halls have been crowded with individuals taking a side in the individual rights/common good debate. Some have expressed the view that health care initiatives are in the interest of a healthier state and nation. Others claim that compulsory health insurance impedes individuals’ right to the best health care money can buy. Can the individual rights vs. common good debate help us understand some of the ideological tension behind the current health care discussion?
</h3><h3>
</h3><h3>As many of these examples show, this month’s question is largely political, but it can also flow into other areas of thought. There’s the philosophical and moral question of the Donner Party; if you and five others were stranded and starving, and your only hope of getting out alive is to eat the first member who passed away, would you do it to save the rest of the group? There is the question that comes up around the disabled. Do you build special infrastructure to accommodate the few who are disabled even if that meant the cost to do this would jack up prices. Then there is the commercial/environmental side. What is more important, buying a cheaper car that fits your personal budget and your personal tastes or a more expensive and efficient auto that would help save the environment? What do you think?
</h3>
