Answer:
This best illustrates the value of negative reinforcement.
Explanation:
Negative reinforcement refers to removing an aversive stimulus. For example, in the given scenario, the father put the movie in to get rid of the constant crying and whining of the son. He did not do so out of love or any other positive emotion. We, as humans, practice negative reinforcement multiple times to cope up with certain situations. The idea is more common among parents with young children.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
In seventeenth-century England, working for wages was widely associated with servility and loss of liberty. Only those who controlled their own labor could be regarded as truly free. Based on this understanding, the type of worker that would claim the most personal liberty and freedom were farmers.
During the 17th century in England, farmers could say that they were the ones with more personal freedom. However, the falling prices of wool and grains affected farmers du to the agricultural depression of that time. Grain fell by 12% while wool fell by 30%.
Your answer is: <span>a power specifically named in the Constitution</span>
The answer should be bilingual, I hope it helps you! I actually might become bilingual soon but isn't like you care right. Have a great day or evening! :)
Grant and Sherman used the strategy of total war to shorten the war in their favor, using the many deaths of enemies to save lives on their side. We may never know if more would've died if they didn't use the tactic, but in my opinion civilian lives were not theirs to take. Soldiers agreed to die, but civilians didn't, making total war, in my opinion, not right. Others may say that their lives were a necessary sacrifice towards a common goal, but, in my opinion, if one side uses total war, can't the other side use it too for a horrible end? Form your own opinion, but that is mine.
