Try C and if im not right i am so sorry
According to Merton's typology of prejudice and discrimination, Xavier is an unprejudiced nondiscriminator, whereas Reuben is a prejudiced nondiscriminator.
<h3>Unprejudiced vs. Prejudiced</h3>
Xavier and Reuben cannot be accused of discrimination of African Americans since they both accept them in their chess club. However, there is a big difference between Xavier and Reuben, even if their behavior is the same.
Xavier truly believes African Americans are as intelligent as white Americans, which means he is unprejudiced. Reuben, on the other hand, does not hold the same belief. He is prejudiced against African Americans, thinking they have weak cognitive abilities.
Therefore, even though both can be considered nondiscriminators, Xavier is unprejudiced, whereas Reuben is prejudiced.
Learn more about nondiscriminators here:
brainly.com/question/13782165
#SPJ12
Anselm argued that an ideal being is important to exist. during this argument God is an excellent being thus he should exist that is understood because of the ontological argument. Guanilo thought this argument was absurd and he viewed the other. one thing doesn't exist simply because it's excellent and he used the instance of an ideal island. The island is ideal thus in step with Anselm's view it ought to exist however the island stop to exist thus Guanilo planned this argument to be reductio ad absurdum. as compared they each agree that as a result, of one thing is ideal it doesn't exist however in distinction saint believed that God was an exception to the present because God is a whole totally different matter and Gaunilo doesn't believe God is an exception to the present view, though he Guanilo believes in God he doesn't consider the ontological argument as proof of Gods existence.
- Dr. Dunn studies the way that children of different ages organize information in their memory. His research focus is primarily on <u>cognitive</u> development.
