It is morally impermissible to treat people differently unless there are factual differences between them.
Factual differences. The possibility that the facts with respect to which this Agreement is entered into may differ from the facts that each Party currently knows or believes to be true is recognized and accepted by each of the Parties. The Parties concur that any such discrepancies in reality will not cause the termination or revocation of this Agreement, which shall remain in full force and effect.
If there is a disagreement regarding the interpretation, application, operation, or any alleged violation of the Agreement between the Employer and any employee(s), or between the Employer and the Union, the employee(s) shall continue to work in accordance with the Agreement until the disagreement is resolved.
Learn more about Factual differences here
brainly.com/question/21864490
#SPJ4
Answer:
The correct answer is:
B) Children who grow up in households with more books are more successful in school.
Explanation:
The normative economic analysis refers to the model in which a mechanism is studied looking for its possible results, depending on the variables around it. This analysis not only involves the technical evaluation of the situation or mechanism, but also includes the personal appreciation in a way in which ideal situations and ethics are present too.
Answer: Char is d. thinking critically
Explanation:
What is critical thinking?
Critical thinking means you evaluate every information objectively in order to make a logical judgement with tangible reasons. This means you evaluate the sources from where the information was found , you scrutinize and examine the facts,observable results and all the findings.
People who can think critically are able to make reasonable judgements and conclusions from any given information and they can differentiate between what is useful information and what is not for them to come to a decision or resolve an issue.
Chat exercises further analysis the information from his friend in order to eliminate any biases and that is critical thinking.
This is the kind of concept a utilitarian would agree on. If the result is positive for a large group of people, we should seriously consider doing it.
However, I would like to comment on this concept. In my opinion (and that's what you're asking for) there are situations in which the ends don't justify the means. You can e.g. think about mass-bombings to fight against terrorism. However, the possibility exists that innocent people will be hit, and will die. Therefore, the end don't always justify the means (in my opinion).
