When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, "No." Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, "Yes"?
(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist's suggestion that they are deaf?
(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?

dont tell me what to do

    i got this from a website called shmoop. i will give you a link and i will show you half of it. hope it : )

explanation:

mrs. mallard has a heart condition, which means that if she's startled she could die. so, when news comes that her husband's been killed in an accident, the people who tell her have to cushion the blow.

mrs. mallard's sister josephine sits down with her and dances around the truth until mrs. mallard finally understands what happened. the deceased mr. mallard's friend, richards, hangs out with them for moral support.

richards originally found out because he had been in the newspaper headquarters when a report of the accident that killed mr. mallard, which happened on a train, came through. richards waited for proof from a second source before going to the mallards' to share the news.

when mrs. mallard finds out what happened she acts differently from most women in the same position, who might disbelieve it. she cries passionately before deciding to go to her room to be by herself.

in her room, mrs. mallard sits down on a comfy chair and feels completely depleted. she looks out the window and looks out at a world that seems alive and fresh. she can see the sky coming between the rain clouds.

mrs. mallard sits still, occasionally crying briefly like a kid might.

the narrator describes her as youthful and pretty, but because of this news she looks preoccupied and absent.

she seems to be holding out for some kind of unknown news or knowledge, which she can tell is approaching.

mrs. mallard breathes heavily and tries to resist before succumbing to this unknown thing, which is a feeling of freedom.

acknowledging freedom makes her revive, and she doesn't consider whether she should feel bad about it.

mrs. mallard thinks to herself about how she'll cry when she sees her husband's dead body and how much he loved her. even so, she's kind of excited about the chance to make her own decisions and not feel accountable to anyone.

mrs. mallard feels even more swept up by the idea of freedom than the fact that she had felt love for her husband.

here is the link:

well, number 1, the 1920s was not economically prosperous until the start of the lend-lease act, which employed large amounts of people in producing equipment for the allies.

b. world war ii is your answer, because wwi had already ended at 1918, and the cold war was after 1945.

~

very good choice i love it hope i made your day better my love