The correct answer is C) People can disagree about what the right thing to do is without abandoning the idea that there is a right thing to do.
What is the example of George Washington's death designed to show in the discussion of moral disagreement?
Answer:
"People can disagree about what the right thing to do is without abandoning the idea that there is a right thing to do."
That is the importance of tolerance and respect with discussing any topic with another person that has a different point of view than yours.
Regarding George Washington, he made a lot of contributions to the new nations. He helped the Americans win the war and establish a lasting republic. He was considered to be a good leader and one of the best Presidents of the United States, knowing that he had to deal with two factions inside his cabinet: Federalists and Antifederalists. So he had to lead respecting different opinions and points of view that frequently seriously opposed each other.
According to Adam Smith, the self-interest represents the personal gain of the individual and actions he takes in order accomplish that self interest. He was a staunch believer in the free market and was against government regulations because he thought that the free market would most benefit the individual and therefore the society. The competition is what makes the the manufacturers produce better products and more of them, while this will spur the costumers to buy those products. When many act in their own self interest, the market will give both to the manufacturers and the consumers.
FALSE! He actually said jesus was greater than him ;)
When used a wepion hope it helps you
Answer:
d. officers becoming personally involved with informants.
Explanation:
An informant is a person who gives his testimony in relation to a situation as a way to help in the investigation of something. These people cannot be considered a witness of a situation, because they are not formally obliged to speak the truth about the facts of the situation (the witness is obliged to speak the truth), and they can tell fanciful, uncooperative and incorrect information.
In this case, it is extremely unethical for the information that an informant provides to be overestimated, because that information may be false. moreover, an informant cannot be intimidated or coerced into contributing to a given situation, nor can he be deceived about its relevance in the investigation, through false praise. However, in terms of ethics and morals, nothing prevents officers from personally getting involved with informants.
