Emily plays the piano well, _? ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Emily plays the piano well, _?

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->We have a friend........... plays the piano ....

QA->Syngular or Plural of word Piano....

QA->Who is the author of the book " The Piano Teacher " ?....

QA->Mark stands well with his boss. Stands well closely me....

QA->Guttation occurs in well watered herbaceous plants of well drained soils during .?....

MCQ-> Read the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questionsThere is an essential and irreducible ‘duality’ in the normative conceptualization of an individual person. We can see the person in terms of his or her ‘agency’, recognizing and respecting his or her ability to form goals, commitments, values, etc., and we can also see the person in terms of his or her ‘well-being’. This dichotomy is lost in a model of exclusively self- interested motivation, in which a person’s agency must be entirely geared to his or her own well-being. But once that straitjacket of self-interested motivation is removed, it becomes possible to recognize the indisputable fact that the person’s agency can well be geared to considerations not covered - or at least not fully covered - by his or her own well-being. Agency may be seen as important (not just instrumentally for the pursuit of well-being, but also intrinsically), but that still leaves open the question as to how that agency is to be evaluated and appraised. Even though the use of one’s agency is a matter for oneself to judge, the need for careful assessment of aims, objective, allegiances, etc., and the conception of the good, may be important and exacting. To recognize the distinction between the ‘agency aspect’ and the ‘well-being aspect’ of a person does not require us to take the view that the person’s success as an agent must be independent, or completely separable from, his or her success in terms of well-being. A person may well feel happier and better off as a result of achieving what he or she wanted to achieve - perhaps for his or her family, or community, or class, or party, or some other cause. Also it is quite possible that a person’s well-being will go down as a result of frustration if there is some failure to achieve what he or she wanted to achieve as an agent, even though those achievements are not directly concerned with his or her well-being. There is really no sound basis for demanding that the agency aspect and the well-being aspect of a person should be independent of each other, and it is, I suppose, even possible that every change in one will affect the other as well. However, the point at issue is not the plausibility of their independence, but the sustainability and relevance of the distinction. The fact that two variables may be so related that one cannot change without the other, does not imply that they are the same variable, or that they will have the same values, or that the value of one can be obtained from the other on basis of some simple transformation. The importance of an agency achievement does not rest entirely on the enhancement of well-being that it may indirectly cause. The agency achievement and well-being achievement, both of which have some distinct importance, may be casually linked with each other, but this fact does not compromise the specific importance of either. In so far as utility - based welfare calculations concentrate only on the well- being of the person, ignoring the agency aspect, or actually fails to distinguish between the agency aspect and well-being aspect altogether, something of real importance is lost.According to the ideas in the passage, the following are not true expect:
....

MCQ->One day, two other traders. Dane and Emily joined Abdul, Bikram and Chetan for trading in the shares of XYZ Ltd. Dane followed a strategy of buying equal numbers of shares at 10 am. 11 am and 12 noon, and selling the same numbers at 1 pm, 2 pm and 3 pm Emily, on the other hand, followed the strategy of buying shares using all her money at 10 am and selling all of them at 12 noon and again buying the shares for all the money at 1 pm and again selling all of them at the close of the day at 3 pm. At the close of the day the following was observed.i. Abdul lost money in the transactions.ii. Both Dane and Emily made profits.iii. There was an increase in share price during the closing hour compared to the price at 2 pm.iv. Share price at 12 noon was lower than the opening priceShare price was at its highest at....

MCQ->Anita, Biplove, Cheryl, Danish, Emily and Feroze compared their marks among themselves. Anita scored the highest marks, Biplove scored more than Danish. Cheryl scored more than at least two others and Emily had not scored the lowest. Statement I: Exactly two members scored less than Cheryl. Statement II: Emily and Feroze scored the same marks. Which of the following statements would be sufficient to identify the one with the lowest marks?....

MCQ-> Study the following information carefully and answer the questions given below :A. B, C. D, F, G and H are seven football players each playing for a different team. viz. Green.- Red and Blue, with at least two of them in each of these teams. Each of them likes a fruit, viz. Apple. Guava. Banana. Orange, Mango. Papaya and Watermelon, not necessarily in the same order. B plays with F in team Blue and he likes Mango. None of those who play for either team Red or team Green likes either Guava or Banana. D plays with only the one who likes Watermelon. G likes Papaya and he plays in team Red. The one who likes Orange does not play in team Red. 1-1 likes Watermelon and he plays for team Green. A likes Apple and he plays for team Red. C does not like Guava.Which of the following players play for team Red ?
....

MCQ->Emily plays the piano well, _?....