What I refer to as, "Environmental, non-consideration" has been the basic theme of mankind excluding tribes like the Btsisi, San, American Indian for the past 200 or so years. In the times before industrialization, aboriginal tribes considered the environment, whereas we do not.
This is a form of anthropocentrism: anthropocentric ethical values lean to thinking humans are more important than the environment, nothing to do with anthropology. Or as more well known, environmental domination. Bacically the outcome of the anthropocentric viewpoint is to move environment out of the way for humankind.
(to answer your question) I refer to the times before the turn of the century as "Environmental non-consideration" because humans did not intentionally destroy the environment to get us where we are now. They just did not consider the environment. Whenever we do not consider a factor of an equation the result is a wrong answer. In this case our forefathers did not consider the environment, therefore we have reached a wrong (answer) relationship with it.
This is the case with any war. Humans take great care in their own survive-ability without consideration to the environment, as was the case with WW2.
They were inferior
They humped eachother
according to my world history book englands attitude towards slavery was really strict in fact some people even were punished depending on their crime
i think so , the criminal's sex attitudes changed also.
"Peasants" will take a pilgramage to become a pilgram. This means they they will have a good attitude towards and respect for those that have done this pilgramage but have next to none for people that have not.
The people of Paraguay are even tempered and have a positive attitude towards others.
They were inferior
What attitude did people have to the law
in America people had a negative attitude towards the war. They were still getting over WW1 and believed WW2 was Europe's problem and that we should not get involved.
They humped eachother
some people are fond of owls.
what attitudes did people have towards the mixed marriages law
Charles A. Lindbergh changed people's attitude towards travel in 1927.
Some people have a positive pleasant attitude toward work. Others have a pompous attitude.
I believe Hitlers attitude towards the handicapped was cruel, because he wanted people who can work and they weren't capable so most likely they were killed.
Um its because some people have certain points of view in things. What your point of view is affects your own attitude. If you have a bad perspective towards something, your attitude will be rude to that. If you have a good perspective in something, then your attitude will be respectful towards it.
His attitude towards his suffering was a strong attitude