Located in southern Europe, Greece is made up of the mainland and hundreds of small islands spread throughout the Ioanian, Aegean, and Mediterranean Seas. As a peninsula, the people of Greece took advantage of living by the sea.
<span>They were fishermen They were traders They were sailors </span>
The mountains in Greece did not have fertile soil good for growing crops, like in Mesopotamia, but the mild climate allowed for some farming.
<span>They grew barley, wheat, olives, and grapes They raised sheep </span>
The Greeks, like many other ancient civilizations, felt deeply connected to the land they lived on. While living on the land helped to develop a strong sense of pride in their country, the distance between the islands and the mountains did not help to support unity in Greece. The Minoans and Mycenaeans of ancient Greece used their geography to their advantage
http://tccl.rit.albany.edu/knilt/index.php/File:Greecemap.png
Answer:
well for me I think
Explanation:
it's a good idea it's part of the tactics
Because having multiple people introduce the same bill or law is no necessary it takes the mind set of both the house and senate and plus they have many rules within both chambers of congress therefore they have to follow the rules that each member of that chamber voted on to put into place and they also have to follow the state and governmental laws as well
Critical thinking could be used in this example to actively engage with the proposition and propose an alternative or another proposition. Maybe in my own life experience I've known women who drive better than man, so I already have first hand example of how this is a misbelieve, but in order to prove this i have to go a step further.
---
Skepticism should refrain us from making statement from things we don't know yet. The proposition is a generality and thus already tell us that is a prejudice, but moreover when we are talking about things without having knowledge is a good scientific practise to step back and know the argument before speaking.
---
Objectivity is what we should aim when examine datas and proposition. Once we have the data, we could objectevely tell if this proposition respects the truth or not. Some importance should also be given to the motivation and the qualitative data, and not only the raw quantitative data, as reading and analyse only one type could lead to more misunderstading.
---
Curiosity is what we should always bring to the table in everyday matter. In the proposition, we could step back and ask why this is a well consolidates rumour, or why are the reasons behind this saying. Curiosity should be the driven to explain the world in a more complex and rich way comparing to the way other people may live.
---
Other examples of proposition that could be examine by the scientific approach are almost endless. "Women are not good at STEM fields" for example, or "Men generally are more qualified leaders". It is possible to argue that every proposition could be examine in a scientific approach, and maybe we all should do it so.
The answer to the question that you are seeking an answer to, is true.
