As the Greeks studied science, they started to realize that they didn't need the gods to explain the natural occurrences like disease, famine, weather, and etc. They started to look less highly of the gods and have proven these anomalies in an another way that can be explained. If they figured famine was due to drought or weather change, why need gods to explain to people that it is their gods own will and power.
Both the French<span> and the </span>British<span> colonists were helped by their </span>Indian<span> allies. An ally is a friend in a war. The </span>British<span> army and </span>British<span> colonists were helped by the Iroquois </span>Indians <span>defeated the </span>French<span> in 1763.</span>
Answer:
Parliamentary Democracies
Explanation:
Democracies always involve the peoples opinions as do some Parliaments! If the people don't like the people in charge they can be removed by the people!
Answer: A) Hobbes thought people were innately violent.
<u>Further explanation</u>:
Both English philosophers believed there is a "social contract" -- that governments are formed by the will of the people. But their theories on why people want to live under governments were very different.
Thomas Hobbes published his political theory in <em>Leviathan </em> in 1651, following the chaos and destruction of the English Civil War. He saw human beings as naturally suspicious of one another, in competition with each other, and violent toward one another as a result. Forming a government meant giving up personal liberty, but gaining security against what would otherwise be a situation of every person at war with every other person.
John Locke published his <em>Two Treatises on Civil Government </em>in 1690, following the mostly peaceful transition of government power that was the Glorious Revolution in England. Locke believed people are born as blank slates--with no preexisting knowledge or moral leanings. Experience then guides them to the knowledge and the best form of life, and they choose to form governments to make life and society better.
In teaching the difference between Hobbes and Locke, I've often put it this way. If society were playground basketball, Hobbes believed you must have a referee who sets and enforces rules, or else the players will eventually get into heated arguments and bloody fights with one another, because people get nasty in competition that way. Locke believed you could have an enjoyable game of playground basketball without a referee, but a referee makes the game better because then any disputes that come up between players have a fair way of being resolved. Of course, Hobbes and Locke never actually wrote about basketball -- a game not invented until 1891 in America by James Naismith. But it's just an illustration I've used to try to show the difference of ideas between Hobbes and Locke. :-)
