Answer:
Umm for protection? Like walls in shelter.
Explanation:
:/:/
Answer:
Mia and David exemplify characteristics associated with Social Psychology
Explanation:
Social psychology is a scientific study that deals with how human behavior is influenced by other people in a particular social context. For example, Mia in the question wears a skirt, loves shopping and has no problems with having long hair because her social circle comprises girls who exhibit the same traits. Likewise, David loves sporting and participating in aggressive activities because boys in his social circle do the same. You can see that in both cases, Mia and David's behavior are influenced by their peers (social context).
Answer:
Developmental psychology looks at how thinking, feeling, and behavior change throughout a person's life. ... Developmental psychologists study a wide range of theoretical areas, such as biological, social, emotion, and cognitive processes.
Explanation:
it's help
A manufacturing system is a mode of production where the value of the items predominates.
<h3>What are the fundamentals of manufacturing?</h3>
Three fundamental elements must be present in a production system: Raw materials or components utilized as inputs in the manufacturing process. Processes are the strategies and tactics utilized to change inputs into the intended results. The goods or services produced as a result of manufacturing are referred to as outputs.
<h3>What role does the manufacturing system play?</h3>
New materials and procedures can be easily included into manufacturing systems because of their design. Because of the ongoing decline in the amount of direct labor employed in manufacturing, the cost of materials—including materials handling and energy—now makes up the majority of the cost of the finished product.
To know more about manufacturing system visit :
brainly.com/question/28478997
#SPJ4
Despite wide recognition that speculation is critical for successful science, philosophers have attended little to it. When they have, speculation has been characterized in narrowly epistemic terms: a hypothesis is speculative due to its (lack of) evidential support. These ‘evidence-first’ accounts provide little guidance for what makes speculation productive or egregious, nor how to foster the former while avoiding the latter. I examine how scientists discuss speculation and identify various functions speculations play. On this basis, I develop a ‘function-first’ account of speculation. This analysis grounds a richer discussion of when speculation is egregious and when it is productive, based in both fine-grained analysis of the speculation’s purpose, and what I call the ‘epistemic situation’ scientists face.
