Answer:
Nepal needs a new Constitution today because it is no longer a monarchy. The older Constitution vested power in the King, but when the country is now a democracy, a new Constitution is needed to reflect the “democratic” ideals of Nepal that the peoples' movement desired and fought for.
Answer:
The person is using the B. Yale attitude change approach.
Explanation:
The Yale attitude change approach suggests that an individual is most likely to <em>change his/her attitudes</em> due to persuasive messages.
There are many factors which should be taken into account , such as the <em>attractiveness</em> of the individual giving the message, the <em>attention and quality </em>of the message, amongst others.
In this case, we can see that the individual is saying that actors make effective spoke people for potato chips based on their attractiveness, meaning that an individual is most likely to change his/her attitude about the chips based on this factor.
Peer pressure and want to fit in with others
Answer:
Imperialism can operate in more subtle forms that are cultural as well as economic.
Explanation:
In general terms, imperialism is the extension of one country's influence into another. Sometimes this can be a conscious process like through diplomacy or military actions as the United States is said to be exercising imperialism in the Middle East in recent decades, but it can also occur in more subtle ways. Like the way that economies around the world are becoming more and more focused in consumerism like the Western model of a free market. Migrating to find work in this sense is not just economic imperialism, it is the product of cultural forces as well where the definition of a higher standard of living is tied to purchasing power and becoming a urban consumer.
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.
