Voters elect members of the legislative branch.
I believe that it’s a tie between British and Russian that have the least land but I think the answer is British (land in green)
The correct answer would be option E, Selective Perception.
You typically fail to consciously perceive that your own nose is in your line of vision. This best illustrates the Selective Perception.
Explanation:
When a person ignores or forgets the stimulus which is causing more emotional discomfort or contradicting its beliefs, then the person is said to be engaged in Selective Perception.
The given example is the simplest one, which tells us that because focusing on our nose while watching or looking at anything cause emotional discomfort, we all use to consciously ignore that our own nose is in our line of vision.
Similarly, if a teacher's favorite student has been found guilty in some wrong doings, the teacher will quickly forgets the student's act, because according to the teacher's belief, the student is best among all others and she does not want to contradict her this belief with the student's act, so she forgets quickly what the student did.
Learn more about Selective perceptions at:
brainly.com/question/8636330
#LearnWithBrainly
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.
