In the United States, there is a focus on leisure, self-fulfillment, physical fitness, feeling young, and concern for the environment. This emerging value cluster is a response to fundamental changes in ________.

Answers

Answer 1
Answer:

The emphasis in the United States is on leisure, self-fulfillment, physical fitness, feeling youthful, and environmental awareness. The emerging value cluster is a response to fundamental changes in society.

The emergence of a value cluster in the US is a reaction to societal shifts including the move to a service-based economy and increasing environmental consciousness.

  • It emphasizes the value of one's own health, freedom of expression, and commitment to environmental preservation.
  • The transition from an economy that was predominantly industrial to one that is increasingly service-based is one fundamental development that has impacted this value cluster.
  • People are looking for fulfillment outside of work, therefore as manufacturing employment has diminished, leisure and self-fulfillment have become more important.

Therefore, The emerging value cluster is a response to fundamental changes in society. Thus, the correct answer is Society.

Learn more about value clusters here,

brainly.com/question/15043878

#SPJ4

Answer 2
Answer:

Answer:Es la vida

saludos


Related Questions

What is the author's purpose for writing the poem moon goddess?using ace.​
What is the major difference between corporations and other kinds of businesses?
Please help me understand
Osama bin Laden would be considered a a. Pashtun leader. b. Tajik prince. c. militant fundamentalist. d. moderate fundamentalist.
The primary difference between a boundary crossing and a boundary violation is:a. everyone agrees when a boundary has been violated, whereas it is hard to reach agreement as to whether a boundary has been crossed.b. a violation involves a sexual relationship.c. a crossing occurs in almost every counseling session, while violations are less frequent.d. in a crossing, a boundary is shifted to meet the needs of the counselor, making sure the client is not harmed in the process.e. a violation involves a serious breach of the code of ethics that results in a client being harmed.

Where are the rain forests located in Africa? How
do they affect trade?

Answers

Answer:

Most rainforests are found in the Congo river basin on the Atlantic Ocean side. They affect trade because the rainforest trees are being cutted down for wood and animals are being poached.

Explanation:

Ted has antisocial personality disorder. it is likely that ted shows abnormal functioning in which part of his brain?

Answers

The abnormal functioning would be due to chemical imbalances in the prefrontal cortex (PC), since PC is the responsible for behavior including appropriate social behavior, judgment and impulse control.

Answer: Prefrontal cortex (PFC)

Explanation:

Prefrontal cortex is sector of the brain which is present in frontal lobe's front section. It is considered as the  part of cerebral cortex. This part is responsible for controlling the expression, emotions, behavior, decisions etc in a human.They also carry out the function of cognition or executive function.

Functions of cognition like selection of better option, disputed thoughts , result prediction , social control , good or bad effect are induced due to this sector .

According to the question, antisocial disorder or personality in Ted can be due to the action performed by the prefrontal cortex of the brain which is affecting the behavior and personality to become antisocial

The prefrontal cortex (PFC) is the cerebral cortex covering the front part of the frontal lobe. This brain region has been implicated in planning complex cognitive behavior, personality expression, decision making, and moderating social behaviour.Ja

"A person who believes that critical thinking skills offer the greatest promise for reaching good judgments is likely to agree that"

Answers

Answer:

it is better to make important or risky decisions after carefully thinking them through

HOPE IT HELPS :)

PLEASE MARK IT THE BRAINLIEST!

The leader of that student organization argues that we must have more student participation in the administration's decision-making process. But such arguments must be rejected. We can't just let the students run the school. If such proposals are implemented, chaos will ensue. Teachers and administrators will have no authority, and the school will no longer be a place of learning. This passage (does/does not) commit a fallacy; specifically, it (does/does not) commit an appeal to fear fallacy.

Answers

Answer: This passage does commit a fallacy; specifically, it does commit an appeal to fear fallacy.

Explanation:

Appeal to fear is a type of informal fallacy that seeks to convince supporters to back an idea by creating fear towards the opposite option. It´s a fallacy that evokes the fear of something terribly wrong happening in the present or in the future in order to convince people of accepting a specific idea to be right.

In this case, the student´s participation in the administration's decision-making process is presented as an option that can only lead to chaos.

Final answer:

The passage commits an appeal to fear fallacy by using fear to discourage student participation in decision-making.

Explanation:

The passage commits an appeal to fear fallacy. This fallacy occurs when someone tries to persuade others to adopt a certain viewpoint or take a specific course of action by using fear, often by exaggerating or presenting unlikely negative outcomes. In the given passage, the leader of the student organization argues for more student participation in decision-making, but the writer argues against it by invoking chaos and the loss of authority for teachers and administrators. This is an attempt to instill fear and discourage the idea of student involvement.

Learn more about Appeal to Fear Fallacy here:

brainly.com/question/38223213

#SPJ12

How does Nathanson argue that killing in self defense is compatible with respect for the dignity of human life?

Answers

Answer: Nathanson says that there is no way to respect the dignity of both people’s right

Explanation:

Killing is not an easy thing to do, but there is a great difference between self-defense and outright killing, but either ways, someone will definitely die. Nathanson says that there is no way to respect the dignity of both people’s right.

Final answer:

Nathanson argues that killing in self-defense is compatible with the respect for the dignity of human life by upholding the right to bodily autonomy and moral considerations. Killing in such circumstances is seen as a response to an immediate threat to one's life and not as an act of aggression.

Explanation:

The explanation of how Nathanson argues that killing in self defense is compatible with respect for the dignity of human life lies in the concept of the sanctity of human life, the right to bodily autonomy, and moral and rational considerations. According to Nathanson, killing in self-defense is morally justified when one's life is in immediate threat or danger. In such cases, the dignity of human life is respected as the act of self-defense is carried out in preservation of one's own life.

Nathanson suggests that every individual has a right to bodily autonomy – the right of individuals to determine what happens to their bodies. When the life of an individual is threatened, they have the right to defend themselves, which may at times involve killing as a last resort. This act of killing is seen as a response to an immediate danger and not as an act of aggression.

Moreover, Nathanson's argument can also be connected to moral reasoning. He doesn't argue that killing is generally acceptable, but rather, only under very specific circumstances such as self-defense where it's seen as the lesser of two evils. Thus, recognizing the sanctity and dignity of human life while also acknowledging situations where self-defense is necessary involves a complex interplay of moral, ethical and personal considerations according to Nathanson.

Learn more about Nathanson's Argument here:

brainly.com/question/37686850

#SPJ11

U.S. laws requiring that drivers wear seat belts have resulted in a. a reduction in both driver deaths and pedestrian deaths. b. fewer accidents and fewer deaths per accident. c. fewer driver deaths, fewer accidents and fewer pedestrian deaths. d. little change in the number of driver deaths, but more accidents and more pedestrian deaths.

Answers

Answer:option d. little change in the number of driver deaths, but more accidents and more pedestrian deaths

Explanation: the use of seatbelt does not really reduce accident rate but it's use was enforced by the government to reduce death rate and magnitude of injury to the person using the car.

Injuries as a result of road traffic incidents are the main reason of problem in public health and also a major cause of death and injury in the world at large. A large number of pedestrians have being killed on roads in American.seat-belt likely the one most effective part in a car that helps to limit or reduce the magnitude and severity of injury to occupants of a car or vehiclethat is as a result of road accident.not using seat-belt is

high risk factor for road traffic deaths and injuries among people in a car crash.vehicle occupants who don't like using seat-belts and have a crash especially in the front of the car, are usually likely to have a head damage or injury

Final answer:

U.S. laws requiring seat belts have resulted in a reduction in both driver deaths and pedestrian deaths

Explanation:

U.S. laws requiring seat belts

U.S. laws requiring drivers to wear seat belts have resulted in a reduction in both driver deaths and pedestrian deaths. The use of seat belts has been proven to save lives in the event of a car accident. When drivers wear seat belts, they are more protected and less likely to be seriously injured or killed in a crash. In addition, seat belt usage also reduces the likelihood of being ejected from the vehicle, which can further reduce fatalities.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), seat belts are estimated to save more than 15,000 lives each year in the United States. This is because seat belts help prevent occupants from being thrown around inside the vehicle during a collision or sudden stop. As a result, both the number of driver deaths and pedestrian deaths have decreased as a result of these laws.

Learn more about seat belt laws here:

brainly.com/question/32853913

#SPJ3