Answer:
Option C: FILIBUSTERING
Explanation:
filibustering is simply an a formal and public act or way of preventing a bill to be voted on in the senate debate. It usually entails an active serving senator taking the floor for debate and talks as long as he can, for, as long as a senator has the floor, the bill in question cannot be voted on.
It is only used in the senate due to the fact that the senate does not share a time limit on how long the bill can be debated on.
Answer:
The correct answer to the following question will be "Argument Ad Populum".
Explanation:
- An argumentum ad populum seems to be a specious argument which argues that perhaps a concept would have to be valid because it will be believed by so many or by several people, sometimes accurately embedded as: "If many think so, it's so".
- The typical implicit fallacy of argumentum ad populum is generally defined as the mistake perpetrated by aiming an emotional argument to either the "gallery" or "citizens" emotions or enthusiasm to gain approval to such an argument not properly backed by adequate evidence.
Therefore, it's the right answer.
Answer:
C - The situation / not susceptible.
Explanation:
The fundamental attribution error occurs when an individual is judged by how she/he acts. It's a tendency to believe that behavior reflects the personality of a person.
Now, in the example, we have a young woman who has been instructed to act in a very unfriendly way. If she had been asked to act in such a way, probably means that it's not natural for her to do so. Therefore, we can assume that she isn't unfriendly and that she is only acting given that she is involved in an experiment.
If the students knew this was an experiment, as they had been told that the young woman had been instructed to act in such a way, they couldn't have been susceptible to the fundamental attribution error because they knew it was an act. And, as it was acting, it's impossible that it could reflect her personality.
Answer:
D. They wanted to give more power to the state governments.
Explanation:
Federalists were people who supported the constitution as is where as people who were against the constitution came to be known as the anti-federalists.
The anti-federalists wanted a bill of rights included in the constitution because they did not trust the government. They were against the the federal government to be stronger than the state government. They wanted the state government to be the strongest and therefore, to protect their rights and safeguarding themselves, they asked for the inclusion of bill of rights.