<span>Short-term memory is the part of memory that is typically used to simply store information for a short period of time, milliseconds on average. Working memory, in comparison, allows for us to take these short-term memories, recall them, and manipulate them in ways that short-term memory is incapable of handling.</span>
Answer:
John Smith depicts the Amerindians as “savage devils” because their lifestyles were completely
opposite. The Native Americans had a dark lifestyle, and were not familiar with the idea of
He should be better known for his prophetic vision of America, both in his use of what would become a
dominant motif of early America – a Paradise of Endless Opportunity for the hard-working individual – and his
depiction of the inevitable conflict between the Europeans and the Amerindians,
1.
Smith employs a
Providential World View
in his History (a typical view in his day), in which God is
involved in all events of humankind, although Smith can be very selective in choosing when to
acknowledge God and when he wishes to acknowledge his own prowess. Smith consistently misreads
the Native Americans’ motives and disallows them any true virtue of their own. Powhatan offerschange that the Europeans were bringing to America. The cultural biases drove Smith’s opinions The president uses mass media to support political agenda. Media technologies enable the political leaders to reach a
Explanation:
According to the Constitution, the amount of time the president and vice president serve in the office together for one term is four years. They can be reelected only once.
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.
King george, queen whatever, and the spanish dictators, and the tsar
