Answer:what best describes him (a proud-man)
Explanation:
It would be transitive. A transitive has a direct object, something that it the verb is acting on. The verb is belive. The direct object is what it's acting on, so, what is he believing? In music. He is believing on the music, so since it has a direct object, it's transitive.
It would be intransitive if it didn't have a direct object:
<em>I believe.
</em><em>He believed.
</em><em />
But as soon as you add any kind of direct object it's transitive:
<em>I believed him.
</em><em>He believed the dog.</em>
Answer:
Today was a good day, not only for me, but the environment too. On this special day, I got to see my family after a long time, and it was quite delightful. We had such a fun time, all while causing the least pollution to our beloved Earth. There were countless things we had done and I did not regret any of it. For one thing, we used candles, which saved electricity. The only thing I missed was the firecrackers, but that was okay, because it would allow us to live another year. Overall, it was a great time, and the fact that we were also helping the Earth, made it even better.
(hope this helped!)
Answer:
Nietzsche’s philosophical thoughts on morality argue that a moral code is not in our nature, while
Zimbardo’s argument is that we shouldn’t expect our decisions to be
influenced by morality alone. Nietzsche’s thoughts on morality are
grounded in opposition to Christianity. He begins his argument by
quoting from the Bible, “If thy eye offend thee, pluck it out,” before
labeling the Christian idea as “stupidity” (Paragraph 1). Nietzsche argues
that sensuality is in opposition to Christianity and that the church
“always wanted the destruction of its enemies; we, we immoralists and
Antichristians” (Paragraph 5), adding that “Life has come to an end
where the ‘kingdom of God’ begins” (Paragraph 8). In contrast, Zimbardo
bases his argument on science and proposes that the electric shock
experiment by psychologist Stanley Milgram “provides several lessons
about how situations can foster evil” (Paragraph 5). He also uses
conclusions from a 1974 experiment by Harvard anthropologist John
Watson, as well as his own simulated jail experiment, the 1971 Stanford
Prison Experiment, to help support his argument.
