<span>Henry David Thoreau was the author of the essay «Philosophy of Civil Disobedience» His essay on civil disobedience is based on his own life, Henry David Thoreau did not want to pay his taxes since he was opposed to them radically used to finance the war. The eternal religion, Hinduism, inspires a spiritual leader of Christian civilization, Thoreau. Although Thoreau was transcendental, we have included him in this study on Christianity, not because of his religion, but because of his belonging to Christian civilization and for being a true spiritual leader based on nonviolence.</span>
The following is missing for the question to be complete:
One group is able to stop the shock by pressing a bar, while the other group can do nothing to stop the shock. What would you expect to happen to their stress response?
Answer: The rats that have control will have a smaller stress response
Explanation: Stress response is actually an organism's response to a situation that causes stress in the body and this response can therefore be a tendency to fight stress or a tendency to escape from a stressful situation. The body, during a stressful situation, that is, during a stress, secretes certain substances as adrenaline for example, which is a reaction to some situations that seem to threaten us or are challenging for us. Either way, stress response or "fight or flight" as it is called, determines our immediate response to some threatening situation. The longer the stress lasts, the higher the secretion of certain substances in the body, the greater the level of stress response. As in this case, rats that responded to stress and were able to stop and prevent the effects of shock, will have a lower level of stress and less stress response in terms of bodily emergency response to the challenge or danger because with the cessation of shock stops the body's response to situations, i.e the stress response ceases, the shorter the duration.
Answer:
Brianna told him not to take the grant.
Explanation:
Because it was probably a pop-up
Answer:
By a vote of 5-4, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Massachusetts and against the EPA. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the majority opinion. First, the court argued that Massachusetts and the environmental advocacy groups had standing to challenge the EPA in court.
Explanation:
ok