An explanation of how a value judgment would have no objective truth because there is a difference in opinion/perspective.
<h3>What is an Objective Truth?</h3>
This refers to the truth that is spoken without the <em>use of bias</em> that is accurate.
Hence, we can see that a value judgment is the assessment of a thing as being good or bad based on the standards and priority of a person.
A factual statement on the other hand is either true or false and would remain the same, irrespective of perspectives or opinions.
Read more about objective truths here:
brainly.com/question/17133736
#SPJ1
Please elaborate on your question
Answer:
A "Although the ruler of a small nation, King Leopold had deep pockets and an obsessive desire to own an empire." (Paragraph 5)
C "Leopold determined the nature of its administration, and Leopold was the principal recipient of such profits as accrued from the undertaking." (Paragraph
Explanation:
Part A's answer is option A.
King Leopold had an obsessive desire to own an empire which is why he wanted the African territory of the Congo.
He believed that the wealth the country possessed was wasted on the African inhabitants which was why he ruled the country and determined the nature of its administration personally and any profits that came from the Congo went to him first.
The meaning of the phrase "thou art wedded to calamity" is that you often have disaster around you.
Calamity means disaster.