Most substances that are considered addictive have the ability to stimulate our natural systems of reward, thereby producing a spike in <u>dopamine</u> in the <u>Mesolimbocortical pathway</u>.
It is well established that the mesolimbic pathway's dopamine plays a significant part in the pleasurable effects of both food and illicit drug usage. DA-containing neurons in the ventral tegmental region, which project to the nucleus accumbent, are stimulated by pleasant meals and addictive substances (NAc).
A dopaminergic pathway in the brain, the mesolimbic pathway is also referred to as the reward pathway. The pathway links the ventral striatum of the basal ganglia in the forebrain to the ventral tegmental region in the midbrain. The olfactory tubercle and nucleus accumbent are parts of the ventral striatum.
Learn more about dopamine in the <u>Mesolimbocortical pathway</u> here:
brainly.com/question/14288517
#SPJ4
The answer is, in the particular case of the Koran, is more complex than a very Manichean yes or no. The reason is that according to core Islamic theology, the Koran is the direct, verbal revelation of Allah (Islamic God) to Muhammad and it establishes a set of religious principles that are considered to be literal, universal, perfect and thus unchangeable since it would be a mortal sin to change the perfect “word of God”. In most Islamic countries, Islam is considered by their constitution to be the sole and/or major source of legislation for all spheres of society and since Islam is the perfect, immutable, infallible and final revelation of God to humanity it is <em>haram </em>to question it. Now, there is Sharia law which has four different sources:
- The Koran.
- The <em>Sunnah </em>(those <em>hadiths </em>who are considered authentic).
- The <em>Qiyas </em>(analytical reasoning of the former two).
- The <em>Jima </em>(the juridical consensus of the previous analysis).
In a nutshell, there is the direct word of God, then there are the actions, words and deeds of its prophet Muhammad (the hadith) and then there is the traditional examination of such precepts by Islamic Scholars and the consensus achieved after such examination. Officially, according to Fundamentalist Islamic traditionalists, no interpretation can be made of that but since there are several schools of thought in Islam, there are <em>de facto</em> different interpretations and also there is the fact that in the modern world Islamic countries have combined Islamic jurisprudence with Western jurisprudence which is not considered to be divine therefor the answer would be a yes, but a yes that contemplates such caveats. Furthermore, the extreme schism between fundamentalist Islamic traditionalists and more moderate law makers leaves the question unanswered until one of these groups prevail.
I think the answer would be the 2nd one because the last two options are just assumptions and it's not using the graph. Also for the first answer, Japan had invested more in education China so that statement doesn't make sense.
I could be wrong but that would be what I would choose
Answer:
They wore heavy suit of armor.
Explanation:
They wore heavy suits of armor. They rode black horses. Their tunics had a large, red cross on the front.
The Crusades were organized by western European Christians after centuries of Muslim wars of expansion. Their primary objectives were to stop the expansion of Muslim states, to reclaim for Christianity the Holy Land in the Middle East, and to recapture territories that had formerly been Christian.
here were eight major official crusades between 1095 CE and 1270 CE and many more unofficial ones, none would be as successful as the first, and by 1291 CE the Crusader-created states in the Middle East were absorbed into the Mamluk Sultanate.
Answer:
generative
Explanation:
Human language: The term "human language" is described as "generative" in nature i.e, it can significantly communicate with an infinite number of different ideas arising from a finite number of different parts. Along with this, human language is also "recursive" in nature that is it can significantly build upon itself in the absence of any limits. Henceforth, human language utilizes "displacement" i.e, it can significantly refer to different things that are not being present directly.
In the question above, the given statement signifies that "human language is generative".
