Answer:
The answer is the indigenous approach.
Explanation:
This type of instruments was created to study the mind and behaviour of native people, and was specifically designed for them. This way, the information on the instruments is unbiased and researches may have a more accurate representation of their findings.
One of the key elements of this approach is studying the relationship of a cultural context in personality.
Limited liability can best be defined as the legal provision that "shields owners of a corporation from losing more than what they invested in a firm".
<u>Option:</u> C
<u>Explanation:</u>
Limited liability is basically where the monetary obligation of an individual is restricted to a fixed sum, most generally the amount of an investment of an individual in a business or partnership. If a limited liability corporation is sued then the plaintiffs sue the company, not its shareholders or investors.
Limited liability covers a proprietor so he or she can't lose more money than he or she has invested in a company. In other terms it refers to the amount of risk that an investor takes when investing in an organization.
Answer:
<h3>I think this might help you</h3><h3>
Explanation:</h3><h3 />
<h3>With the flu season swiftly approaching and the H1N1 already affecting large numbers across the world, New Hampshire faces the possibility of a flu epidemic. In such an instance, what action would the state or federal government take? The possibility of a massive quarantine gets thrown around every time a flu epidemic exists, but is such an action an infringement of the rights of individuals living in a free nation? Or is the common good of preventing the spread of infection more important?
</h3><h3>
</h3><h3>Even the current health care debate reflects the tension between individual rights and the common good. Over the past months New Hampshire town halls have been crowded with individuals taking a side in the individual rights/common good debate. Some have expressed the view that health care initiatives are in the interest of a healthier state and nation. Others claim that compulsory health insurance impedes individuals’ right to the best health care money can buy. Can the individual rights vs. common good debate help us understand some of the ideological tension behind the current health care discussion?
</h3><h3>
</h3><h3>As many of these examples show, this month’s question is largely political, but it can also flow into other areas of thought. There’s the philosophical and moral question of the Donner Party; if you and five others were stranded and starving, and your only hope of getting out alive is to eat the first member who passed away, would you do it to save the rest of the group? There is the question that comes up around the disabled. Do you build special infrastructure to accommodate the few who are disabled even if that meant the cost to do this would jack up prices. Then there is the commercial/environmental side. What is more important, buying a cheaper car that fits your personal budget and your personal tastes or a more expensive and efficient auto that would help save the environment? What do you think?
</h3>
Answer:
A <em>66 percent is sufficiently important to render the American Public universal</em>, but the argument should add the results of the poll immediately and focus on the opposing views.
Also expounding about why some of those 66% are in support of investing in renewable energy, it could be because they are concerned about the economy and not just about the atmosphere, or they live in an area that produces maize for bio-ethanol.
A poll shows only a piece of information, no matter how scientific it is.
