Paul Revere<span> wasted no time in capitalizing on the Massacre to highlight British tyranny and stir up anti-British sentiment among his fellow colonists. As you will see, Revere's historic engraving is long on political propaganda and short on accuracy or aesthetics.</span>
The correct answer is; criterion validity.
Further Explanation:
Karen developed the test so that she can measure the hostility in her workplace. She used previous employees who had been terminated on the basis of anger management issues. This has a high degree of criterion validity.
Her test is based on the prediction of an outcome and not on just factual information. This does work in some cases but only when the behavior closely matches the behavior of a previous case used in developing the test. If the cases are not very similar the test may not be conclusive.
Learn more about workplace hostility at brainly.com/question/6659394
#LearnwithBrainly
Answer:
Pls subcribe my channal then i will be able and
The faith of the iranian origin is the baha'i faith
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.
