Answer and Explanation:
Kant's principle of universalizability suggests that we do what we feel should be generalised or in his words universalised. I'm there words for something to be considered morally valid it should be generally satisfactory and not just apply to one person
On the other hand his principle of humanity suggests that we do those things that treat each human being as though he is the end not the means. In other words, we do not consider another human being to be something that could be used to achieve another thing but the sole purpose or end for which anything is done
The above do have contradictory applications since by generalizing a thing we could still be using a human being and not making him the end in this respect. I believe the best of the two principles however is the humanity principle since by holding this principle dear every human being would treat each other better and the universalizability principle would still apply.
Answer:
Bronze age
Explanation:
This may or may not be the answer but I do know the bronze age was somewhat renowned for technology advancments
Mainstreaming occurs in this particular
circumstance. What mainstreaming means is, according to Stanley Baran and Dennis Davis
authors of the book “Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and
Future”, that television symbols make the main source of information and influence
the most the person's view of the outside world. It makes person align more with
what TV says than maybe what is actually, objectively true. This can be
explained with the question similar to this one: Are economic austerity
measures failing? We may think they are because someone on the TV is forcing
that they are even if they are actually succeeding. That is why it is important
to critically think and look at real, objective data and for television to be
unbiased and objective as much as it can.
the confederacy lacked soldiers compared to the union and lacked factories to produce weapons, etc
