Answer this question…
Share
In sociology which term is used to refer to people who have shared experiences and interests and possibly loyalties?
A. Society B. Social group C. Gathering D. Community
for apex its social group
Social group
It's where the blame is placed on the whole "system" rather than on a possibly guilty individual or small faction of the "system" Ex. Blaming school shootings on video games rather on the perpatrators
From my standpoint - conflicts within society have caused wars - History is the one thing that if we dont learn from it we are doomed to repeat it. Teaching sociology MIGHT help students understand the society they live in rather than to fight it, and possibly we can avoid even one conflict because of this.
Possibly 'tolerance' or 'open mindedness'
It really depends on maturity of a person to be possibly influenced :-)
It depends on what you mean by 'science'. I am a sociologist, yet I do not consider myself a scientist. Some of my colleagues, however, do consider themselves scientists.If by scientist you mean someone who looks at the world that you claim is objectively 'out there' and then infers causal relationships about that world, then sociologists are not scientists, because humans are infinitely more complex and difficult to comprehend than the things the 'hard scientists' study, such as rocks. If, however, you simply mean someone who goes out into the world, collects some information about that world (data), analyzes it and looks for patterns in it, then yes, perhaps sociologists are scientists.The sticking point comes when sociologists and other social scientists want to claim that they have definitively figured something out or even can figure that thing out. Sociologists can't and never will be able to know why people get divorced, for example, and anyone who claims otherwise is either naive, crazy or ignorant (often they're a combination of all three of those things).For me, the primary difference between the hard (physics, chemistry, etc.) and soft (sociology, political science, geography, etc.) sciences is that, for a soft scientist, his or her data can never speak for themselves, whereas sometimes, though certainly not always, that claim can be made with reasonable accuracy in the hard sciences. Personally, I'd like to see sociology get away from the idea that we are a science, because we're headed in the wrong direction at that point.
possibly, but it would be a little difficult.
Quite possibly.
A true nihilist would be described as someone who believes in nothing in this world, has no loyalties, and has no purpose in life other than possibly to destroy.
it's being concious that there is sociology and everything you can see around you, the interaction of every group of people and the effects that can possibly cause because of certain action.
possibly going to war and spying(not sure bout this)
it's being concious that there is sociology and everything you can see around you, the interaction of every group of people and the effects that can possibly cause because of certain action.
Hard to tell the question could be any number of things... A political party possibly?
(I THINK about 80% on this one) National loyalties became more important then the concerns of the people. but possibly competition for resources became more intense among some European nations. both of these are true.
possibly a pinched nerve in her neck or upper back.
(I THINK about 80% on this one) National loyalties became more important then the concerns of the people. but possibly competition for resources became more intense among some European nations. both of these are true.
(I THINK about 80% on this one) National loyalties became more important then the concerns of the people. but possibly competition for resources became more intense among some European nations. both of these are true.
(I THINK about 80% on this one) National loyalties became more important then the concerns of the people. but possibly competition for resources became more intense among some European nations. both of these are true.