Answer:
This is law of effect.
Explanation:
The "law of effect" is a principle developed by "Edward Thorndike". It is the principle on behavioral conditioning, which means that if a response has a pleasing effect are likely to occur again. And if a reaction doesn’t produce satisfying effect would have less frequency in future. For example, if an employee is praised by the boss for starting his work early, it is likely that the employee’s behavior will repeat in future.
Thus, the given statement is law of effect.
I would have taken the same approach as the Nuremberg prosecutors because the Nazi leaders committed a crime against humanity through the Holocaust.
<h3>What was the Holocaust?</h3>
The Nazi Party in Germany decided on the Final Solution to the Jewish question by committing genocide.
During the Holocaust, more than 6 million European Jews were massacred in concentration camps and through gas chambers.
The crime of systematically cleansing an ethnic group is a crime against humanity.
Thus, I would have taken the same approach as the Nuremberg prosecutors because the Nazi leaders committed a crime against humanity through the Holocaust.
Learn more about the Holocaust at brainly.com/question/12962
#SPJ1
<em>I think it might be D.concurrent Because two concurrent courts of law.</em>
<em>accordant or agreeing: concurrent testimony by three witnesses.</em>
Answer:
The crusades meant so much for Europe because it furthers trade land and knowledge in their society.
