1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Bond [772]
3 years ago
7

Who got the right to vote first?

History
1 answer:
Vladimir79 [104]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

Men.

Explanation:

Men always get the right to do everything first. Women have to fight for equality.

You might be interested in
Which practice was more likely to be accepted after the scientific revolution than before
natita [175]

The question is incomplete but I have the entire one:

Which practice was more likely to be accepted after the scientific revolution than before?

A. Scientists deriving much of their knowledge from the Bible

B. Scientists claiming that the Earth was at the center of the solar

system

C. Scientists challenging traditional beliefs about the way the

universe works

D. Scientists attending universities controlled by the Catholic Church

Answer:

B). Scientists claiming that the Earth was at the center of the solar system.

What was revolutionary about the Scientific Revolution? How did the study of nature in the 16th century differ from the study of nature in the Middle Ages?

Disclaimer: I can only write with confidence about paradigm shifts between medieval and Renaissance alchemy.

Here's what Robert Boyle wrote in The Sceptical Chymist (1661):

And, to prevent mistakes, I must advertize you, that I now mean by elements, as those chymists that speak plainest do by their principles, certain primitive or simple, or perfectly unmingled bodies; which not being made of any other bodies, or of one another, are the ingredients of which all those called perfectly mixt bodies are immediately compounded, and into which they are ultimately resolved: now whether there be any such body to be constantly met with in all, and each, of those that are said to be elemented bodies, is the thing I now question.

[Note: I realize this is not from the 16th Century, but the 16th Century is just too soon if you want solid answers about the differences you are inquiring about.]

Bear with me here because this might get a bit out of hand.

In The Birth of the Clinic, Michel Foucault explains in great detail what he refers to as the "medical gaze" of the 19th Century. According to Foucault, the "medical gaze" was a state of mind in which physicians at the time were able to "gaze" upon any number of patients and read and interpret the various signs in order to determine the symptoms.

For example, let's say two patients have pneumonia, but one patient coughs violently whereas the other patient simply wheezes. Both possess the symptom of fluid in the lungs, but the signs are completely different.

For Foucault, the "medical gaze" represents a newfound perception of nature anticipating the advent of what we now call structural linguistics. In structural linguistics, language consists of two elements--the sign and the signified, where the sign is the symbol or word on the page and the signified is the meaning. According to Ferdinand de Saussure, the founder of structural linguistics, the sign is completely arbitrary: we agree to call red "red", but we could just as easily agree to call red "farfignuggen" and none would be the wiser.

So the signified is static, but the sign can be dynamic. This is the crux of the "medical gaze": regardless of how many different signs there are (coughing, wheezing, heaving breathing), the physician can still read and interpret those signs in order to determine the symptom (fluid in the lungs). The signs are dynamic, the symptom is static.

Now let's answer your question.

Up until Robert Boyle wrote The Sceptical Chymist, alchemists approached nature the same way physicians approached symptoms in the 19th Century.

During the Middle Ages, every aspect of nature--from wood to metal to the planets themselves--consisted of two opposing elements, Mercury and Sulphur. The problem is that the signs alchemists used to signify those elements changed as if based on the time of day. For one alchemist, Mercury was a woman bearing buckets of water from a well. For another, Mercury was a green lion. For others, Mercury was simply Quicksilver. The element remained the same (for the most part) all the way into the Renaissance, but the signs (woman with water, green lion, quicksilver, etc) changed constantly.

While the signs of symptoms changed based on patients' immune systems, the signs of Mercury changed based on which alchemist was writing about Mercury.

And while Foucault called attention to the "medical gaze" of the 19th Century, one could just as easily call attention to an "alchemist's gaze" of the Middle Ages and the Early Renaissance.

Robert Boyle changed all of that. He came out and he said, "Forget this fickleness! We need one sign and one sign only. And we need to agree! No more calling this element by ten different names. No more correspondence systems. We need to agree and we need to do it now."

Of course, I am paraphrasing in a rather silly way, but that's the gist of what he meant when he wrote the passage I quoted at the beginning. What eventually became a rising trend in medicine was an old trend in alchemy that needed to be quashed for completely different reasons.

So it's not a matter of how the 16th Century differed from the Middle Ages, but how the Late Renaissance called an end to the fickleness of the Natural Philosophy that preceded it.

4 0
2 years ago
What is a trust? a large company that consists of two merged businesses multiple businesses that combine and operate in one stat
Gala2k [10]

____________________________________________________

Answer:

D). A large company or combined businesses that control a specific market

____________________________________________________

A trust is D). a large company or combined businesses that control a specific market.

____________________________________________________

Explanation:

The reason why this would be your answer is because a trust is a company or a group of companies that control a specific business in the market place, and the different companies cooperate with each other to be successful in the market. Answer choice D clearly describes companies that are cooperating in a specific market. The words "large company," "combined businesses," or "specific market" gives you a hint to your answer. Companies that are in a trust control a specific market together. Companies that trust with each other if they're part of a different market. For example, Samsung can't trust with Food4Less because they're not in the same market, Samsung markets in electronics, while Food4Less markets in food or produce. It doesn't say any necessary details that don't apply to a trust between businesses.

____________________________________________________

Why the other answer choices are wrong:

A). a large company that consists of two merged businesses is INCORRECT because a trust could have more than 2 businesses that are cooperating together. There is no maximum amount of businesses to trust.

B). multiple businesses that combine and operate in one state is INCORRECT because different businesses don't need to be in the same state in order to be a trust. There are businesses in the world that are cooperating together internationally. Businesses could be thousands of miles apart, but still could trust.

C). a business that buys another business is INCORRECT because if a business buys another business, that is not being a trust. There is no form of cooperation in buying a business, the business that bought the other business is technically in control of that business.

____________________________________________________

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
how did the 13th amendment affect the relationship between the states & the national government and/or the relationship betw
MariettaO [177]

Answer:

the all new 3th is not affecting the relationship between all states because the national government is her/or any rason to believe love

Explanation:

sana po ay makatulong

5 0
3 years ago
Can someone tell the definition of civil rights please
vichka [17]

Answer:

Civil rights are basic rights that every citizen has under the laws of the government.

Explanation:

Civil rights for every person means that regardless of gender, skin color, religion, nationality, age, disability, or religion, a person should not be discriminated against.

5 0
2 years ago
What did president thomos jefferson’s foreign policy to deal with this problem
Over [174]

What kind of problem?

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • How did many writers in the 1920s react to the changing American culture?
    13·1 answer
  • Which of these best describes the blockade of southern ports during the civil war?
    15·1 answer
  • How did Christopher Columbus interact with the natives when arriving in the "new world"?
    13·1 answer
  • In what ways were the american colonies involved in the mother country's struggle with france?
    11·1 answer
  • STEPPING STONES TO GLORY
    13·1 answer
  • During the Renaissance, along with the importance of God, who else did people believe had value?
    7·1 answer
  • How does migration affect cultures and society
    9·1 answer
  • ASAP PLEASE
    15·1 answer
  • Question 1 of 10
    8·2 answers
  • According to national supremacy, if a state constitutional amendment is in conflict with the U.S. Constitution, then the amendme
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!