The given example suggests that natural concepts have fuzzy boundaries, and cats and dogs are prototypes of the category.
<h3><u>Explanation: </u></h3>
That although normal animals have no concrete boundaries on their definitions of mammals, cats and dogs are the basic examples and hence easy to remember. As seen through this example, mammals are really difficult to identify on the basis of external features. Not only mammals, but most natural concepts are a little fuzzy when it comes to defining concrete boundaries. There is no single feature that is easy to identify by looking at the animal that serves as a final and binding decision on the type of mammal, whereas the concepts are something more complex.
Cats and dogs though, are taught us to be mammals from whenever we started leaning about mammals. Thus, this explains how prototypes are easy to identify whereas basing on the natural concepts, it might be difficult to identify an animal.
A personality disorder is defined as a disorder characterized by impairments in identity, in personality traits, and in: <span>the establishment of empathy or intimacy
People with personality disorder tend to have unique personal perception upon the situation that happened around them.
The problem is, these perceptions are completely subjective and often does not match the reality.</span>
Answer:
The correct answer is: adolescent egocentrism.
Explanation:
Adolescent egocentrism is an adolescent's behavior in which they cannot make a difference between their perception and the real perception of what other people think about them.
The term was introduced by a child psychologist David Elkind.
The teenagers who suffer from this type of behavior are strongly convinced that they are the most important person in the world and that the negative beliefs of other people are wrong. According to these teenagers, their point of view is the only possible and correct view, and all other opinions and ideas are false or irrelevant.
Answer:
The correct answer to the following question will be "False".
Explanation:
- A common law doctrine that if an individual became hospitalized or injured in part because of their fault (her/his "contributed" negligence to the incident), that party would not be able to receive any insurance (funds) from some other party that had been causing the incident.
- Contributive responsibility or negligence shall apply in which case the defendant shall not be eligible for any compensation.
Therefore, the given statement is false.
