The foods that are described to be at temperature danger zone should be within the temperature of 42°F and 134°F and this is a matter of choice.
Most of the time in science, foods that are been out within the temperature of 42°F and 134°F is been considered to be in danger zone.
This is because at this temperature, Germs that can bring about foodborne illness grow very quickly on foods as regards this temperature.
Therefore, at temperature danger zone, food would be kept within 42°F and 134°F .
Learn more about Danger Zone at:
brainly.com/question/1217620
Answer:
This is a philosophical approach, it must be taken into account that in ethical theory there is a large number of moral coincidences, such as: it is wrong to steal and its universality, in ethical theories. But there are also many differences between ethical theories, one very important and which divides them into two types, are the Materialist ethical theories and those that are not. Materialistic ethical theories are those that in general tell us what we must do to achieve good and to be good, that is, they are content ethics pursues a series of ethical norms about what we must do, they condition the rules or norms to persecuted objects.
In the ethical theories indicated there are differences, those of materialistic tendencies: first: the tendency of divine command very similar to the naturalistic theory of Saint Thomas, which defends the good with the approach to a supreme God and follows the law of divine origin . Second: DJMill's utilitarianism good is the pleasure or absence of pain and is achieved through pleasure actions. Now it is pointed out that Kantism (non-materialist) corresponds to being a formal ethic whose author was Kant, defends good with the only morally good, a good intention and seeks to achieve good in the imperative, categorical, acts in a way that he can wish without contradiction , points out that the maxim is taken as a universal law. Kantina's law is called formal and comes before material ethics.
Explanation:
ACT doesn't determine wither or not you are smart enough for something, it is a test that everybody hypes up to make it a big deal when the only thing it determines are your strengths and weaknesses.
You may be wondering what exactly is on the test. Basically, most of what you learned in high school! The ACT is a test of knowledge, unlike the SAT, which tests aptitude or, as some say, intelligence. Theoretically, if you did well in high school, you should do well on the ACT. However, the ACT focuses more on the skills you’ve learned than on memorization of facts, so you do not have to remember everything you ever learned. Instead, if you learned how to read and understand what you read, solve math problems, reason scientifically, and write clearly, you are in great shape!
