Answer:
b. rationalizing.
Explanation:
Scott's behavior and thoughts are examples of <em>rationalizing </em>in the face of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance comes from conflicting beliefs and behaviors which produce mental discomfort. When Scott, who is diabetic, eats sugar he feels uncomfortable. He has to find a reason why eating sugar is healthier for him than saccharine. Finding a reasonable argument for doing what he really wants to do is rationalizing.
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Because it is an heavy object you need to stabilize the object with cribbing
Substantive disagreement may never be resolved because it leads to clashes of opinions.
A disagreement or argument is said to be substantial if it centers on the presentation of divergent viewpoints regarding the truth or the adherence to opposing ideals.
There must be a means to distinguish substantive disagreement (SD) from conceptual disagreement if legal concepts can be the subject of SD. Arguments that persons debating a certain philosophical problem are only having a linguistic argument are one approach to reject the substantiveness of the issue. For instance, it has been argued that the seeming conflict over the mind/brain identity thesis is only a word one and that there is no real controversy over whether or not mental traits are the same as neurological ones.
To know more about Substantive disagreement refer to:
brainly.com/question/28085499
#SPJ1
Answer:
Federalism in Nepal: Issues and Challenges ... concentration of power and opposed to every effort of the devolution of power. ... A country may have federal ... autonomous regions and districts elected by the people in order to strengthen.
Explanation:
