Answer:
d. stressor; stress reaction
Explanation:
In psychology, the term stressor refers to an stimulus, event or situation that cause a reaction of tension or stress in a person. Stressors usually create <u>physical reactions to them.</u>
In this example, r<u>ush hour traffic can create tension in a person (therefore it is considered a stressor) </u>and the <u>physical reaction it creates is an upset stomach. (which would be a stress reaction)</u>. Therefore, the correct answer is d. stressor; stress reaction
Answer:
1
The action of Pfizer is no way near an ethical act and was a clear violation of the ethical standards.This is true because
- As it is the company responsibility to act ethically to achieve the goals of the society by eradicating their problems and not by enhancing them hence the corporate social responsibility would not allow the company to behave inhumanly
- The duty based ethics would also empower the corporation to care and respect humanity
- Its is highly unethical on the part of Pfizer to conduct test on human life.if we consider the six basic guidelines to make ethical decisions then they have done it in a highly unethical manner.The six basic guidelines would never allow any company to behave i such a manner so as to risk the human life
Pfizer did not obey any of the above ethical standards and the conduct was clear violation of ethical standard.
2
Pfizer plc is not guilty of any ethical standard violation as it is a common practice for drug manufacturer to conduct tests on animals as well as human.And anyways the company conducted the tests on those human beings who will die with the epidermic which has already invaded the entire country of Nigeria.Hence in other to save/protect a large number of human being the test on the few persons is ethical as it is done to protect the society at large
So we cannot say that the company had violated any ethical standard
3
In order for Pfizer to avert the consequences of the violation then Pfizer should use the following five steps to create solution tom problem on ethical question these steps include
- Inquiry : It is very crucial to make initial inquiry about the entire subject matter
- Discussion: If there is a list of action generated after inquiry then discussion on every single action should be made
- Decision : It is highly crucial to take any decision with the consensus of all the participating candidates
- Justification : Each decision made must have a justification for the entire process
- Evaluation : it is highly crucial to evaluate the entire process
Explanation:
The Enlightenment, also known as the Age of Reason, was a philosophical movement that took place primarily in Europe and, later, in North America, during the late 17th and early 18th century. Its participants thought they were illuminating human intellect and culture after the "dark" Middle Ages.
That's what i found on Google when i copied and pasted your statement.
Lobbyists can provide valuable information, political intelligence, and reelection funding, making legislators with whom they agree more effective.
<h3>What are Lobbyists?</h3>
- Professional advocates who work to sway political outcomes on behalf of people and organizations are known as lobbyists.
- This campaigning may result in the introduction of new legislation or the revision of already-enacted rules and regulations.
- In politics, lobbying, persuasion, or interest representation refers to the practice of legally attempting to influence the decisions, actions, or policies of public servants, most frequently politicians or regulators.
- Many different sorts of persons, associations, and organized groups, including those in the private sector, corporations, other legislators or government officials, or advocacy groups, engage in lobbying, which typically entails direct, face-to-face interaction.
- A legislator's constituents can include lobbyists, which refers to a voter or group of voters in their electoral district, or they can lobby on behalf of a company.
To know more about Lobbying refer to:
brainly.com/question/11846833
#SPJ4
Answer: After world war II
Explanation:
Political science and comparitive politics changed after world war II, there was a better view to how politics was now seen instead of the descriptive and atheoretical knowledge that was held.
