Answer:Conventional moral reasoning
Explanation:
What does conventional moral reasoning mean?
This reasoning comes second to the three reasoning by Kohlberg in his Structural Theory of Moral Development .
This is a moral development stage where one has taken all the learnt rules and kept them inside or to heart and knows what is expected of them and as a result they make moral decisions based on the standards and expectations of their families or teachers.
This third grade child has been probably told that it is wrong to take more that what you are given and because she knows what is expected of her by her teacher she remembers that and follow that and live up to that expectation.
Answer:
brasil se encuentra en south América
Answer:
I say its true but i have no clue and if i get it wrong you can report me :)
Explanation:
<span>D) The consequences of people’s actions eventually catch up with them. E)Compassion has its limits and can vanish as a result of abuse.
Option D is true because of the snake Sykes brings home to try and run Delia out of the house. The snake gets out and ends up biting him and killing him. His actions with the snake eventually catch him and kill him.
Option E is true as well. Delia once had compassion for Sykes. However, after years of his abuse Sykes has worn it out. The men sitting outside the store comment on how Sykes' abuse has changed Delia as she was once the most beautiful girl in town. Her compassion for Sykes at the end of the story is completely gone and she does not help him when he's dying.
</span>
The RR technique or the Randomized Response can be used to help ensure that individuals answer sensitive or self-incriminating questions honestly. It is developed by Warner (1965), which aims to eliminate or at least minimize non-response and dishonest answering by survey respondents. This is accomplished by separating the response from the respondent by introducing a controlled measure of chance or uncertainty, which amounts to randomization of the answering process. This protects the identity of the respondents, at the cost of introducing a degree of uncertainty into the responses.
