Answer:
Music helps teens explore ideas and emotions in a safe way and express themselves without words. Exposure to positive influences through music can help teens learn coping mechanisms and appropriate responses to stressful situations. Music also helps teens connect to social groups and gain a feeling of belonging.
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.
Edward T. Hall developed the Iceberg Model of Culture in
1976. He hypothesized that culture was
like an iceberg in that there were two kinds: internal and external. External is
the outer manners of a society while internal are the principles, standards,
and thought patterns underlying those behaviors.
Answer:
The statement which is the best argument against Social Darwinism is:
B. A good work ethic can eliminate a lot of the disadvantages of poverty.
Explanation:
Social Darwinism is a philosophy that incorporates notions taken from Darwinism, applying them to sciences such as sociology and economics. As we know, <u>Darwinism is based on the idea of "survival of the fittest". Therefore, Social Darwinism explains differences in status, wealth, and success by stating that those who have those things are better than those who do not. In other words, if someone is poor or unsuccessful, that means that person is not "evolved" enough.</u>
The problem with Social Darwinism is that is justifies discrimination and imperialism. It places the blame on those who are actually suffering the consequences of a broken and unfair system. With that in mind, we can easily eliminate options A and C, since they agree with Social Darwinism. Option D can also be eliminated because it merely states a fact that is true, but does not refute Social Darwinism.<u> Letter B is the best option. It argues that there is a way to eliminate many of the disadvantages, that is, it shows the problem with the system, refuting Social Darwinism.</u>
Answer: reactive thinking that relies heavily on situational cues, salient memories, and heuristic shortcuts to arrive quickly and confidently at judments.
Explanation: In "Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman, the author states that there are two modes of thinking System-1 which is instantaneous and is driven by instinct and System-2 which is slower and driven by logic. The definition of System-1 thinking is <u><em>reactive thinking that relies heavily on situational cues, salient memories, and heuristic shortcuts to arrive quickly and confidently at judgments</em></u>.
