The basic assumption(s) with the use of behavioral observation techniques to access personality _____

Why has the humanistic approach to the study of personality been criticized?

Zola has definitive ideas about who she wants to be, but she feels far from this person. Rogers would say that she is experiencing a lack of _____.

Allport’s cardinal traits and Cattell’s source traits are similar in that _____.

This is an exam and may only be entered once. This exam is designed to evaluate the reading, writing, and thinking skills you have acquired. In order to maintain academic integrity, outside sources or notes should NOT be consulted while completing this exam. NOTE: Your essay will be graded using the 0-6 point scoring guide that is used for all AP Language and Composition Exam essays. With this in mind, your essay should be fully developed and of considerable length as it would be for the actual exam. American author and humorist Mark Twain (1835-1910) wrote the following essay near the end of his life, around 1900, although the passage was not published until 1923, thirteen years after his death. Read the passage carefully. Then, in a well-organized essay, analyze the rhetorical strategies Twain uses to establish his position on the nature of patriotism. It is agreed, in this country, that if a man can arrange his religion so that it perfectly satisfies his conscience, it is not incumbent upon him to care whether the arrangement is satisfactory to any one else or not. In Austria and some other countries this is not the case. There the State arranges a man’s religion for him, he has no voice in it himself. Patriotism is merely a religion — love of country, worship of country, devotion to the country’s flag and honor and welfare. In absolute monarchies it is furnished from the Throne, cut and dried, to the subject; in England and America it is furnished, cut and dried, to the citizen by the politician and the newspaper. The newspaper-and-politician-manufactured Patriot often gags in private over his dose; but he takes it, and keeps it on his stomach the best he can. Blessed are the meek. Sometimes, in the beginning of an insane and shabby political upheaval, he is strongly moved to revolt, but he doesn’t do it — he knows better. He knows that his maker would find it out — the maker of his Patriotism, the windy and incoherent six-dollar sub-editor of his village newspaper — and would bray out in print and call him a Traitor. And how dreadful that would be. It makes him tuck his tail between his legs and shiver. We all know — the reader knows it quite well — that two or three years ago nine-tenths of the human tails in England and America performed just that act. Which is to say, nine-tenths of the Patriots in England and America turned Traitor to keep from being called Traitor. Isn’t it true? You know it to be true. Isn’t it curious? Yet it was not a thing to be very seriously ashamed of. A man can seldom — very, very seldom — fight a winning fight against his training; the odds are too heavy. For many a year — perhaps always — the training of the two nations had been dead against independence in political thought, persistently inhospitable toward Patriotism manufactured on a man’s own premises, Patriotism reasoned out in the man’s own head and fire-assayed and tested and proved in his own conscience. The resulting Patriotism was a shop-worn product procured at second hand. The Patriot did not know just how or when or where he got his opinions, neither did he care, so long as he was with what seemed the majority — which was the main thing, the safe thing, the comfortable thing. Does the reader believe he knows three men who have actual reasons for their pattern of Patriotism — and can furnish them? Let him not examine, unless he wants to be disappointed. He will be likely to find that his men got their Patriotism at the public trough, and had no hand in their preparation themselves. Training does wonderful things. It moved the people of this country to oppose the Mexican war; then moved them to fall in with what they supposed was the opinion of the majority — majority-Patriotism is the customary Patriotism — and go down there and fight. Before the Civil War it made the North indifferent to slavery and friendly to the slave interest; in that interest it made Massachusetts hostile to the American flag, and she would not allow it to be hoisted on her State House — in her eyes it was the flag of a faction. Then by and by, training swung Massachusetts the other way, and she went raging South to fight under that very flag and against that foretime protected-interest of hers. Training made us nobly anxious to free Cuba; training made us give her a noble promise; training has enabled us to take it back. Long training made us revolt at the idea of wantonly taking any weak nation’s country and liberties away from it, a short training has made us glad to do it, and proud of having done it. Training made us loathe Weyler’s1 cruel concentration camps, training has persuaded us to prefer them to any other device for winning the love of our “wards.” There is nothing that training cannot do. Nothing is above its reach or below it. It can turn bad morals to good, good morals to bad; it can destroy principles, it can re-create them; it can debase angels to men and lift men to angelship. And it can do any one of these miracles in a year — even in six months. Then men can be trained to manufacture their own Patriotism. They can be trained to labor it out in their own heads and hearts, and in the privacy and independence of their own premises. It can train them to stop taking it by command, as the Austrian takes his religion. (100 points) 1Valeriano Weyler y Nicolau was the Spanish military governor of Cuba in 1896 and 1897 who was referred to as “The Butcher” because of his extreme way of dealing with rebels. He was recalled from the post in October as a result of American protest against his ruthless administration.

Which of the following statements would Hobbes agree with? Mark all that apply.

Explain devolution and give an example of it.

Who wrote the following?  “If man in the state of Nature be so free as has been said, if he be absolute lord of his own person and possessions, equal to the greatest and subject to nobody, why will he part with his freedom, and subject himself to the dominion and control of any other power? To which it is obvious to answer, that though in the state of Nature he has such a right, yet the enjoyment of it is very uncertain and constantly exposed to the invasion of others; for all being kings as much as he, every man his equal, the enjoyment of the property he has in this state is very unsafe, very insecure. This makes him willing to quit this condition which, however free, is full of fears and continual dangers; and he is willing to join in society with others who are already united, or have a mind to unite for the mutual preservation of their lives, liberties, and estates, which I call by the general name — property.” 

Explain the difference between a direct democracy and an indirect democracy.

Who wrote the following? “I have heard it asserted by some, that as America has flourished under her former connection with Great Britain, the same connection is necessary towards her future happiness, and will always have the same effect. Nothing can be more fallacious than this kind of argument. We may as well assert that because a child has thrived upon milk, that it is never to have meat, or that the first twenty years of our lives is to become a precedent for the next twenty. But even this is admitting more than is true; for I answer roundly that America would have flourished as much, and probably much more, had no European power taken any notice of her. The commerce by which she hath enriched herself are the necessaries of life, and will always have a market while eating is the custom of Europe.”