1. The idea behind the concept of multiple intelligences is that human intelligence can take different "modalities," as opposed to being dominated by a single general ability. I think this is a valid construct, as it approaches the concept of "intelligence" from various different angles, not always considered when discussing intelligence in other contexts.
2. As we do not have access to this text, we are not able to answer this section of the question.
3. One way in which the developers of a test of multiple intelligences could demonstrate the validity of the test using evidence would be by also researching the behaviour of the people who took the test out in the real world. They could compare these results to the results of the test. In this way, they would be more likely to find out whether the intelligences mentioned in the test are indeed exercised in real life.
4. A passage from the Bible that could support this idea would be the following:
<em>1 Corinthians 12:12-14 – "Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. For we were all baptised by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many."</em>
In this passage, the idea of many parts within a single body is presented. However, it is also stated that the many parts of the body in fact end up forming a single entity. This is similar to the multiple intelligences that combine to give a single personality capable of certain things.
D. Transcendentalism (boy what a tongue twister) was a movement in the early 1800's to avoid the mechanized urban society and seek nature. Waldo Emerson and Thoreau both were members.
Answer:
If the outcomes of other procedure that were used are similar to the omitted procedure by giving relevant evidence.
Explanation:
Generally, it is common practice to use the same procedure for a given set of actions to obtain the desired result. This serves as a routine work and the outcome is always the same if the same procedure is followed each time. However, if there exists an alternative method or procedure that will give a similar outcome to the omitted procedure, there is no need to perform the omitted method/procedure.
The correct answer would be A and D, I believe.
Answer:
When a state could constitutionally limit someone's free speech rights under the First Amendment.
