Question: What continent saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy?

Answer: Europe

From the end of World War II until 1971, when John Rawls published A Theory of Justice, political philosophy declined in the Anglo-American academic world, as analytic philosophers expressed skepticism about the possibility that normative judgments had cognitive content, and political science turned toward statistical methods and behavioralism. <hl> In continental Europe , on the other hand, the postwar decades saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy, with Marxism dominating the field. <hl> This was the time of Jean-Paul Sartre and Louis Althusser, and the victories of Mao Zedong in China and Fidel Castro in Cuba, as well as the events of May 1968 led to increased interest in revolutionary ideology, especially by the New Left. A number of continental European émigrés to Britain and the United States—including Karl Popper, Friedrich Hayek, Leo Strauss, Isaiah Berlin, Eric Voegelin and Judith Shklar—encouraged continued study in political philosophy in the Anglo-American world, but in the 1950s and 1960s they and their students remained at odds with the analytic establishment.

From the end of World War II until 1971, when John Rawls published A Theory of Justice, political philosophy declined in the Anglo-American academic world, as analytic philosophers expressed skepticism about the possibility that normative judgments had cognitive content, and political science turned toward statistical methods and behavioralism. In continental <hl> Europe <hl>, on the other hand, the postwar decades saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy, with Marxism dominating the field. This was the time of Jean-Paul Sartre and Louis Althusser, and the victories of Mao Zedong in China and Fidel Castro in Cuba, as well as the events of May 1968 led to increased interest in revolutionary ideology, especially by the New Left. A number of continental European émigrés to Britain and the United States—including Karl Popper, Friedrich Hayek, Leo Strauss, Isaiah Berlin, Eric Voegelin and Judith Shklar—encouraged continued study in political philosophy in the Anglo-American world, but in the 1950s and 1960s they and their students remained at odds with the analytic establishment.

In continental <hl> Europe <hl> , on the other hand, the postwar decades saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy, with Marxism dominating the field.

question: What continent saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy?, context: From the end of World War II until 1971, when John Rawls published A Theory of Justice, political philosophy declined in the Anglo-American academic world, as analytic philosophers expressed skepticism about the possibility that normative judgments had cognitive content, and political science turned toward statistical methods and behavioralism. In continental Europe, on the other hand, the postwar decades saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy, with Marxism dominating the field. This was the time of Jean-Paul Sartre and Louis Althusser, and the victories of Mao Zedong in China and Fidel Castro in Cuba, as well as the events of May 1968 led to increased interest in revolutionary ideology, especially by the New Left. A number of continental European émigrés to Britain and the United States—including Karl Popper, Friedrich Hayek, Leo Strauss, Isaiah Berlin, Eric Voegelin and Judith Shklar—encouraged continued study in political philosophy in the Anglo-American world, but in the 1950s and 1960s they and their students remained at odds with the analytic establishment.


Question: The events of May 1968 led to an increased interest in what?

Answer: revolutionary ideology

From the end of World War II until 1971, when John Rawls published A Theory of Justice, political philosophy declined in the Anglo-American academic world, as analytic philosophers expressed skepticism about the possibility that normative judgments had cognitive content, and political science turned toward statistical methods and behavioralism. In continental Europe, on the other hand, the postwar decades saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy, with Marxism dominating the field. <hl> This was the time of Jean-Paul Sartre and Louis Althusser, and the victories of Mao Zedong in China and Fidel Castro in Cuba, as well as the events of May 1968 led to increased interest in revolutionary ideology , especially by the New Left. <hl> A number of continental European émigrés to Britain and the United States—including Karl Popper, Friedrich Hayek, Leo Strauss, Isaiah Berlin, Eric Voegelin and Judith Shklar—encouraged continued study in political philosophy in the Anglo-American world, but in the 1950s and 1960s they and their students remained at odds with the analytic establishment.

From the end of World War II until 1971, when John Rawls published A Theory of Justice, political philosophy declined in the Anglo-American academic world, as analytic philosophers expressed skepticism about the possibility that normative judgments had cognitive content, and political science turned toward statistical methods and behavioralism. In continental Europe, on the other hand, the postwar decades saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy, with Marxism dominating the field. This was the time of Jean-Paul Sartre and Louis Althusser, and the victories of Mao Zedong in China and Fidel Castro in Cuba, as well as the events of May 1968 led to increased interest in <hl> revolutionary ideology <hl>, especially by the New Left. A number of continental European émigrés to Britain and the United States—including Karl Popper, Friedrich Hayek, Leo Strauss, Isaiah Berlin, Eric Voegelin and Judith Shklar—encouraged continued study in political philosophy in the Anglo-American world, but in the 1950s and 1960s they and their students remained at odds with the analytic establishment.

This was the time of Jean-Paul Sartre and Louis Althusser, and the victories of Mao Zedong in China and Fidel Castro in Cuba, as well as the events of May 1968 led to increased interest in <hl> revolutionary ideology <hl> , especially by the New Left.

question: The events of May 1968 led to an increased interest in what?, context: From the end of World War II until 1971, when John Rawls published A Theory of Justice, political philosophy declined in the Anglo-American academic world, as analytic philosophers expressed skepticism about the possibility that normative judgments had cognitive content, and political science turned toward statistical methods and behavioralism. In continental Europe, on the other hand, the postwar decades saw a huge blossoming of political philosophy, with Marxism dominating the field. This was the time of Jean-Paul Sartre and Louis Althusser, and the victories of Mao Zedong in China and Fidel Castro in Cuba, as well as the events of May 1968 led to increased interest in revolutionary ideology, especially by the New Left. A number of continental European émigrés to Britain and the United States—including Karl Popper, Friedrich Hayek, Leo Strauss, Isaiah Berlin, Eric Voegelin and Judith Shklar—encouraged continued study in political philosophy in the Anglo-American world, but in the 1950s and 1960s they and their students remained at odds with the analytic establishment.


Question: What remained an important focus during the 1950s and 1960s?

Answer: Communism

<hl> Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. <hl> Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.

<hl> Communism <hl> remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.

question: What remained an important focus during the 1950s and 1960s?, context: Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.


Question: There was a marked trend towards what type of approach to political issues?

Answer: pragmatic approach

Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. <hl> In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. <hl> Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.

Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a <hl> pragmatic approach <hl> to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.

question: There was a marked trend towards what type of approach to political issues?, context: Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.


Question: Who wrote The Racial Contract?

Answer: Charles W. Mills

Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. <hl> This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively. <hl>

Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers <hl> Charles W. Mills <hl> in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.

question: Who wrote The Racial Contract?, context: Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.


Question: Who wrote The Sexual Contract?

Answer: Carole Patemen

Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. <hl> This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively. <hl>

Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and <hl> Carole Patemen <hl> in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.

question: Who wrote The Sexual Contract?, context: Communism remained an important focus especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Colonialism and racism were important issues that arose. In general, there was a marked trend towards a pragmatic approach to political issues, rather than a philosophical one. Much academic debate regarded one or both of two pragmatic topics: how (or whether) to apply utilitarianism to problems of political policy, or how (or whether) to apply economic models (such as rational choice theory) to political issues. The rise of feminism, LGBT social movements and the end of colonial rule and of the political exclusion of such minorities as African Americans and sexual minorities in the developed world has led to feminist, postcolonial, and multicultural thought becoming significant. This led to a challenge to the social contract by philosophers Charles W. Mills in his book The Racial Contract and Carole Patemen in her book The Sexual Contract that the social contract excluded persons of colour and women respectively.


Question: What did John Rawsl publish?

Answer: A Theory of Justice

<hl> In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. <hl> Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.

In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's <hl> A Theory of Justice <hl> in 1971 is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.

question: What did John Rawsl publish?, context: In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.


Question: Who Published A Theory of Justice?

Answer: John Rawls

<hl> In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls 's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. <hl> Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.

In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of <hl> John Rawls <hl>'s A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.

In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of <hl> John Rawls <hl> 's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone.

question: Who Published A Theory of Justice?, context: In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.


Question: When was A Theory of Justice published?

Answer: 1971

<hl> In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. <hl> Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.

In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in <hl> 1971 <hl> is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.

question: When was A Theory of Justice published?, context: In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.


Question: Who wrote Anarchy, State, and Utopia?

Answer: Robert Nozick

In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. <hl> Robert Nozick 's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints. <hl>

In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. <hl> Robert Nozick <hl>'s 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.

<hl> Robert Nozick <hl> 's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.

question: Who wrote Anarchy, State, and Utopia?, context: In Anglo-American academic political philosophy, the publication of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice in 1971 is considered a milestone. Rawls used a thought experiment, the original position, in which representative parties choose principles of justice for the basic structure of society from behind a veil of ignorance. Rawls also offered a criticism of utilitarian approaches to questions of political justice. Robert Nozick's 1974 book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which won a National Book Award, responded to Rawls from a libertarian perspective and gained academic respectability for libertarian viewpoints.


Question: Herbert Marcuse was from what school?

Answer: Frankfurt School,

Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. <hl> Out of the Frankfurt School, thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and Freudian perspectives. <hl> Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; Guy Debord, in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.

Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. Out of the <hl> Frankfurt School, <hl> thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and Freudian perspectives. Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; Guy Debord, in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.

question: Herbert Marcuse was from what school?, context: Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. Out of the Frankfurt School, thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and Freudian perspectives. Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; Guy Debord, in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.


Question: Thinkers out of the Frankfurt School combined Marxian and what other perspective?

Answer: Freudian

Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. <hl> Out of the Frankfurt School, thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and Freudian perspectives. <hl> Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; Guy Debord, in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.

Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. Out of the Frankfurt School, thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and <hl> Freudian <hl> perspectives. Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; Guy Debord, in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.

question: Thinkers out of the Frankfurt School combined Marxian and what other perspective?, context: Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. Out of the Frankfurt School, thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and Freudian perspectives. Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; Guy Debord, in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.


Question: Who in particular moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption?

Answer: Guy Debord

Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. Out of the Frankfurt School, thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and Freudian perspectives. Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. <hl> The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; Guy Debord , in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation. <hl>

Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. Out of the Frankfurt School, thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and Freudian perspectives. Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; <hl> Guy Debord <hl>, in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.

The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; <hl> Guy Debord <hl> , in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.

question: Who in particular moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption?, context: Contemporaneously with the rise of analytic ethics in Anglo-American thought, in Europe several new lines of philosophy directed at critique of existing societies arose between the 1950s and 1980s. Most of these took elements of Marxist economic analysis, but combined them with a more cultural or ideological emphasis. Out of the Frankfurt School, thinkers like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Jürgen Habermas combined Marxian and Freudian perspectives. Along somewhat different lines, a number of other continental thinkers—still largely influenced by Marxism—put new emphases on structuralism and on a "return to Hegel". Within the (post-) structuralist line (though mostly not taking that label) are thinkers such as Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Claude Lefort, and Jean Baudrillard. The Situationists were more influenced by Hegel; Guy Debord, in particular, moved a Marxist analysis of commodity fetishism to the realm of consumption, and looked at the relation between consumerism and dominant ideology formation.


Question: What is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems?

Answer: The liberal-communitarian debate

Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. <hl> The liberal-communitarian debate is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective. <hl> These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social policies which encourage the growth of social capital.

Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. <hl> The liberal-communitarian debate <hl> is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective.These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social policies which encourage the growth of social capital.

question: What is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems?, context: Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. The liberal-communitarian debate is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective.These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social policies which encourage the growth of social capital.


Question: What type of control do communitarians tend to support?

Answer: greater local control

Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. The liberal-communitarian debate is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective. These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. <hl> Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social policies which encourage the growth of social capital. <hl>

Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. The liberal-communitarian debate is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective.These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. Communitarians tend to support <hl> greater local control <hl> as well as economic and social policies which encourage the growth of social capital.

question: What type of control do communitarians tend to support?, context: Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. The liberal-communitarian debate is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective.These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social policies which encourage the growth of social capital.


Question: What type of economic and social policies do Communitarians tend to support?

Answer: policies which encourage the growth of social capital

Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. The liberal-communitarian debate is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective. These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. <hl> Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social policies which encourage the growth of social capital . <hl>

Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. The liberal-communitarian debate is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective.These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social <hl> policies which encourage the growth of social capital <hl>.

Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social <hl> policies which encourage the growth of social capital <hl> .

question: What type of economic and social policies do Communitarians tend to support?, context: Another debate developed around the (distinct) criticisms of liberal political theory made by Michael Walzer, Michael Sandel and Charles Taylor. The liberal-communitarian debate is often considered valuable for generating a new set of philosophical problems, rather than a profound and illuminating clash of perspective.These and other communitarians (such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Daniel A. Bell) argue that, contra liberalism, communities are prior to individuals and therefore should be the center of political focus. Communitarians tend to support greater local control as well as economic and social policies which encourage the growth of social capital.


Question: When did republicanism and the capability approach arise?

Answer: the end of the 20th century

<hl> A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward the end of the 20th century are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. <hl> The resurgent republican movement aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. The capability approach, pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.

A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward <hl> the end of the 20th century <hl> are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. The resurgent republican movement aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. The capability approach, pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.

question: When did republicanism and the capability approach arise?, context: A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward the end of the 20th century are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. The resurgent republican movement aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. The capability approach, pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.


Question: What aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty?

Answer: The resurgent republican movement

A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward the end of the 20th century are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. <hl> The resurgent republican movement aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." <hl> Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. The capability approach, pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.

A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward the end of the 20th century are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. <hl> The resurgent republican movement <hl> aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. The capability approach, pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.

question: What aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty?, context: A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward the end of the 20th century are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. The resurgent republican movement aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. The capability approach, pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.


Question: Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen pioneered what approach?

Answer: The capability approach

A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward the end of the 20th century are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. The resurgent republican movement aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. <hl> The capability approach , pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. <hl> Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.

A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward the end of the 20th century are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. The resurgent republican movement aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. <hl> The capability approach <hl>, pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.

<hl> The capability approach <hl> , pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act.

question: Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen pioneered what approach?, context: A pair of overlapping political perspectives arising toward the end of the 20th century are republicanism (or neo- or civic-republicanism) and the capability approach. The resurgent republican movement aims to provide an alternate definition of liberty from Isaiah Berlin's positive and negative forms of liberty, namely "liberty as non-domination." Unlike liberals who understand liberty as "non-interference," "non-domination" entails individuals not being subject to the arbitrary will of anyother person. To a liberal, a slave who is not interfered with may be free, yet to a republican the mere status as a slave, regardless of how that slave is treated, is objectionable. Prominent republicans include historian Quentin Skinner, jurist Cass Sunstein, and political philosopher Philip Pettit. The capability approach, pioneered by economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen and further developed by legal scholar Martha Nussbaum, understands freedom under allied lines: the real-world ability to act. Both the capability approach and republicanism treat choice as something which must be resourced. In other words, it is not enough to be legally able to do something, but to have the real option of doing it.


Question: What is an alloy?

Answer: a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element

<hl> An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element . <hl> Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).

An alloy is <hl> a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element <hl>. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).

An alloy is <hl> a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element <hl> .

question: What is an alloy?, context: An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).


Question: What are alloys defined by?

Answer: metallic bonding character

An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. <hl> Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character . <hl> An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).

An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by <hl> metallic bonding character <hl>. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).

Alloys are defined by <hl> metallic bonding character <hl> .

question: What are alloys defined by?, context: An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).


Question: When are Zintl considered alloys?

Answer: depending on bond types

An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. <hl> Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds). <hl>

An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys <hl> depending on bond types <hl> (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).

question: When are Zintl considered alloys?, context: An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).


Question: What is solid solution metal elements classified as?

Answer: a single phase

An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. <hl> An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements ( a single phase ) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). <hl> Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).

An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (<hl> a single phase <hl>) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).

An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements ( <hl> a single phase <hl> ) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions).

question: What is solid solution metal elements classified as?, context: An alloy is a mixture of metals or a mixture of a metal and another element. Alloys are defined by metallic bonding character. An alloy may be a solid solution of metal elements (a single phase) or a mixture of metallic phases (two or more solutions). Intermetallic compounds are alloys with a defined stoichiometry and crystal structure. Zintl phases are also sometimes considered alloys depending on bond types (see also: Van Arkel-Ketelaar triangle for information on classifying bonding in binary compounds).


Question: What kind of substance is an alloy?

Answer: impure

<hl> An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. <hl> An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.

An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an <hl> impure <hl> substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.

question: What kind of substance is an alloy?, context: An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.


Question: What happens when an alloy is mixed with a molten base?

Answer: they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture

An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. <hl> The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture . <hl>

An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, <hl> they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture <hl>.

The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, <hl> they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture <hl> .

question: What happens when an alloy is mixed with a molten base?, context: An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.


Question: What is an alloy composed of?

Answer: two or more elements

An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. <hl> Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements ; at least one of which being a metal. <hl> This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.

An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing <hl> two or more elements <hl>; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.

Alloys are made by mixing <hl> two or more elements <hl> ; at least one of which being a metal.

question: What is an alloy composed of?, context: An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.


Question: What other metal is impure like alloy?

Answer: wrought iron

An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. <hl> An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron , in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. <hl> Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.

An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as <hl> wrought iron <hl>, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.

An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as <hl> wrought iron <hl> , in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit.

question: What other metal is impure like alloy?, context: An alloy is a mixture of either pure or fairly pure chemical elements, which forms an impure substance (admixture) that retains the characteristics of a metal. An alloy is distinct from an impure metal, such as wrought iron, in that, with an alloy, the added impurities are usually desirable and will typically have some useful benefit. Alloys are made by mixing two or more elements; at least one of which being a metal. This is usually called the primary metal or the base metal, and the name of this metal may also be the name of the alloy. The other constituents may or may not be metals but, when mixed with the molten base, they will be soluble, dissolving into the mixture.


Question: How is steel produced?

Answer: Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron

When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. <hl> Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. <hl> Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. <hl> Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron <hl> produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

question: How is steel produced?, context: When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.


Question: What kind of metal is soft like copper?

Answer: aluminium

When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. <hl> A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium , can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. <hl> Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as <hl> aluminium <hl>, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as <hl> aluminium <hl> , can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper.

question: What kind of metal is soft like copper?, context: When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.


Question: What can be added to steel to enhance is corrosion resistance?

Answer: chromium

When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. <hl> By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel. <hl>

When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding <hl> chromium <hl> to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

question: What can be added to steel to enhance is corrosion resistance?, context: When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.


Question: What is superior to pure iron?

Answer: steel

When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. <hl> Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel . <hl> Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called <hl> steel <hl>. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called <hl> steel <hl> .

question: What is superior to pure iron?, context: When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.


Question: What is another word for when alloys solidify?

Answer: crystallizes

<hl> When the alloy cools and solidifies ( crystallizes ), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. <hl> A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

When the alloy cools and solidifies (<hl> crystallizes <hl>), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.

When the alloy cools and solidifies ( <hl> crystallizes <hl> ), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents.

question: What is another word for when alloys solidify?, context: When the alloy cools and solidifies (crystallizes), its mechanical properties will often be quite different from those of its individual constituents. A metal that is normally very soft and malleable, such as aluminium, can be altered by alloying it with another soft metal, like copper. Although both metals are very soft and ductile, the resulting aluminium alloy will be much harder and stronger. Adding a small amount of non-metallic carbon to iron produces an alloy called steel. Due to its very-high strength and toughness (which is much higher than pure iron), and its ability to be greatly altered by heat treatment, steel is one of the most common alloys in modern use. By adding chromium to steel, its resistance to corrosion can be enhanced, creating stainless steel, while adding silicon will alter its electrical characteristics, producing silicon steel.


Question: What causes an alloy to form a solid solution?

Answer: If the metals remain soluble when solid

Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. <hl> If the metals remain soluble when solid , the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. <hl> If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. These alloys are called intermetallic alloys because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve to reinforce the crystals internally.

Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. <hl> If the metals remain soluble when solid <hl>, the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. These alloys are called intermetallic alloys because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve to reinforce the crystals internally.

<hl> If the metals remain soluble when solid <hl> , the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase.

question: What causes an alloy to form a solid solution?, context: Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. If the metals remain soluble when solid, the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. These alloys are called intermetallic alloys because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve to reinforce the crystals internally.


Question: What is the purpose of intermetallic phases?

Answer: to reinforce the crystals internally

Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. If the metals remain soluble when solid, the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. These alloys are called intermetallic alloys because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. <hl> As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve to reinforce the crystals internally . <hl>

Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. If the metals remain soluble when solid, the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. These alloys are called intermetallic alloys because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve <hl> to reinforce the crystals internally <hl>.

As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve <hl> to reinforce the crystals internally <hl> .

question: What is the purpose of intermetallic phases?, context: Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. If the metals remain soluble when solid, the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. These alloys are called intermetallic alloys because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve to reinforce the crystals internally.


Question: What are alloys called when the insoluble elements don't separate until after crystallization occurs?

Answer: intermetallic alloys

Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. If the metals remain soluble when solid, the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. <hl> These alloys are called intermetallic alloys because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but <hl> they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve to reinforce the crystals internally.

Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. If the metals remain soluble when solid, the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. These alloys are called <hl> intermetallic alloys <hl> because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve to reinforce the crystals internally.

question: What are alloys called when the insoluble elements don't separate until after crystallization occurs?, context: Although the elements usually must be soluble in the liquid state, they may not always be soluble in the solid state. If the metals remain soluble when solid, the alloy forms a solid solution, becoming a homogeneous structure consisting of identical crystals, called a phase. If the mixture cools and the constituents become insoluble, they may separate to form two or more different types of crystals, creating a heterogeneous microstructure of different phases. However, in other alloys, the insoluble elements may not separate until after crystallization occurs. These alloys are called intermetallic alloys because, if cooled very quickly, they first crystallize as a homogeneous phase, but they are supersaturated with the secondary constituents. As time passes, the atoms of these supersaturated alloys separate within the crystals, forming intermetallic phases that serve to reinforce the crystals internally.