Has evolved to mean the most correct and complete explanation for human behavior, the scientific study of behavior and mental processes.
Answer:
Wallerian degeneration.
Explanation:
Wallerian degeneration.
Wallerian degeneration is nothing but a well organized morphological and biochemical change that results in axons, microphases distal to the site of injury and degenerates those sites. It is some what a cascade of cellular and molecular events.
Answer:
Exercising its check on the power of the legislations.
Explanation:
The supreme court belonged to the judicial branch of the government. As a form of check and balances, the judicial branch has the power to check the legislative branch by conducting a judicial review.
In a judicial review, the supreme court will evaluate the laws proposed by the congress and see if any part of the law proposal violates the United States constitution. If there's a part that violate it, the supreme court can deemed the proposed law as "unconstitutional" and the law cannot be passed by the Congress.
Answer: "Digital citizenship" is a new government program designed to develop b. the ability to participate in society online.
Explanation: "Digital citizenship" is a program developed by the government in response to the increasing value of technology and the growing use of Internet mainly among young people and adults. "D<u>igital citizenship" gives people more tools for them to learn how to use technology</u> in a more effective way and, at the same time, how <u>to participate in society and establish a link with other citizens through the Internet.</u>
Answer:
What follows is a bill of indictment. Several of these items end up in the Bill of Rights. Others are addressed by the form of the government established—first by the Articles of Confederation, and ultimately by the Constitution.
The assumption of natural rights expressed in the Declaration of Independence can be summed up by the following proposition: “First comes rights, then comes government.” According to this view: (1) the rights of individuals do not originate with any government, but preexist its formation; (2) the protection of these rights is the first duty of government; and (3) even after government is formed, these rights provide a standard by which its performance is measured and, in extreme cases, its systemic failure to protect rights—or its systematic violation of rights—can justify its alteration or abolition; (4) at least some of these rights are so fundamental that they are “inalienable,” meaning they are so intimately connected to one’s nature as a human being that they cannot be transferred to another even if one consents to do so. This is powerful stuff.
At the Founding, these ideas were considered so true as to be self-evident. However, today the idea of natural rights is obscure and controversial. Oftentimes, when the idea comes up, it is deemed to be archaic. Moreover, the discussion by many of natural rights, as reflected in the Declaration’s claim that such rights “are endowed by their Creator,” leads many to characterize natural rights as religiously based rather than secular. As I explain in The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law, I believe his is a mistake.
