answersLogoWhite

0

🌎

Society and Civilization

A society is a group of people who interact with each other via a shared role or network. It may also refer to a social group that shares the same geographical location and is part of the same culture.

27,138 Questions

Is media spoiling your young generation or not?

"Media" is a term that covers a vast array of information storage and delivery. It includes newspapers, magazines, books, radio, television, computer based storage and retrieval.

Do newspapers spoil our young generation? Probably not. And on line news services are also not considered to be harmful to young people. No doubt, content is available that delivers poor moral messages to people, young and old. Content on social media sites is often of such a poor quality that it is barely understandable and of no value at all.

It is far too general to arrive at an answer to the question. Some media are very good for children and teenagers, others are just the opposite. However, to blame a medium for harming a generation is simplistic and probably incorrect. Look to content carried by the medium to judge it, not the medium itself.

Why do people fight?

Fighting is defined as a conflict between two parties with different views. One of the greatest gifts of humanity is the ability for us to be different. However, this is also one of our greatest flaws.

The human psyche is programmed to be different. This is why teachers, parents, and other adult figures often tell children to "be different". Yet, this causes problems. For years, psychologists and sociologists have been asking "why is this true?" This is also evident in animals. Even if they may be of the same type of animal (i.e. birds), different species will still fight with each other.

In our minds, we are born to think that we are correct in whatever we say or do. This is also colloquially known as "pride". Of course, no one can always be right about everything. Therefore, there will always be another contender. Naturally, our pride prevents us from admitting we are wrong, if indeed we are. As a result, conflicts arise as two people who believe or think differently about a subject cannot both be correct.

This leads us into an argument. The human mind is only capable of withstanding insults and attacks at our pride to a limit. When we are no longer able to hold it in, we lash out, believing wholeheartedly that we were wronged. In contrast, the "offender" would obviously think that they did nothing wrong, and that we lashed out for no reason. This again correlates to how the human mind is programmed to believe that we are always right and everyone else is wrong.

Heated arguments can sometimes lead into a fight. Similarly, heated fights can sometime evolve into a full-scale war.

In most cases, there is a right answer. Because there are over six billion people on Earth, and already nearing seven billion, there is bound to be at least one person who has the answer. It is up to them to resolve the conflict. In a perfect scenario, once this person presents their case, the conflict will be resolved. In reality, this would only be the case if the person with the answer is able to prove their case. Only with overbearing proof will the mind bow to a superior answer. This again correlates to the concept of "pride".

Now, how do pride and being different come together? Imagine a scenario in which there is no provable answer. A scenario in which people will believe in different things and think that what they believe is true and correct. Religion is one of the most perfect examples of this.

In contrast to what most people think, science and religion are actually completely unrelated. They do not always "battle" it out as most envision. Science is the study of facts and information. Religion is the study of the unknown or the unexplainable. Science rarely, if ever, dwells into things that cannot be proven, while religion does. This is why religion is such a large factor in the equation that relates why people have conflicts.

Think about what religion deals with. Gods and other deities. Creation and destruction. Heaven and Hell. What do these things all have in common? None of them can be proven. This is the part of religion that is untouchable by science: God (or gods), creation, and the afterlife cannot be proven nor disproven.

Think back to what pride is about: never being able to admit that oneself is wrong. Even if you verbally admit it, there will always be a thought in the back of your mind that says otherwise. This is the first factor in the equation.

Now think about being different. Greatest feat of humanity? Maybe. Substantial cause of conflicts? Undoubtedly. Now put religion and different in the same context. Is it possible for every single human to be of the same belief system? No. Everyone is born an atheist. That much is true. As a result, religion is a taught belief, particularly from parents. A hidden factor? Children. Children are all about changing. No matter how much a parent wishes their child to be just like them, it will most likely be impossible. The child will eventually grow to become more resistant to the parent's teachings, and as a result, the parent will continue to pressure the child into believing the same things.

Now this leads to another question. Why would this be? Why are children destined to be resistant from their parents? An indirect factor of conflict is the though of being free. Freedom is the most cherished value in the human mind. At the back of the child's mind is the need to be free. The need to not be told what to do. As a result, the parent's teachings are repelled and labeled as "bad". Now, the child will most likely not conform to the same belief after having unconsciously pushed itself away, essentially making the child different. Leading back to the original idea, we now have two essential factors: prideand being different. However, we are still missing one last factor.

The last part involved would be a subject that cannot be proven. As stated before, religion is a great example of this. However, opinion is as well. Who would want to settle for an answer from one person's point of view if they knew the question could never have a truly correct answer anyway? Now the equation is complete:

  • pride + different + subject that is unprovable = CONFLICT

Can this be prevented? Of course. Will it be prevented? Probably not. Psychologists have proven that only when presented with a common enemy, will people begin to unite and oppose the common enemy. Thus evolved the quote, "he who is the enemy of my enemy, is my friend." This can be shown with a variety of modern examples:

Take the United States for example, a country that is the symbol of unity and freedom. Is that what it truly is? At the time of the American Revolution, yes. The colonists disliked what the British government had imposed on them. They took matters into their own hands when they decided to present a universal front and rebel against the British.

Now, what used to be the British Empire and its colonies has now decreased to just the United States. Are there conflicts between the Americans? Yes. An example would be the American Civil War in which two parties with completely different views fought over their pride in what they did and a subject that cannot be proven: slavery. Slavery exists, that is as far as science can prove. Is slavery moral and should it be allowed? That is the question that remains unprovable, as the answer is a matter of personal opinion.

Either way, the South presented a universal front and opposed the North, which also presented a universal front. The physical conflict was resolved when the South surrendered. The North believed that the fight was over. But in the back of Southerners' mind, this may not be the case. Again, as in the American Revolution, the American Civil War divided a large entity into smaller portions, namely splitting the United States into the North and the South, just as the British Empire had been split into the British Empire and the rebelling colonies.

This can be divided even deeper. There is even conflict between states. As an example, Texas and California are major contenders at being the international port hub capital. Although it does not involve actual bloodshed, it is still considered to be a conflict.

Dividing it even smaller would be the rivalry between the two major cities of Texas: Houston and Dallas, which both aim to be the most important of the state. Dwelling even deeper could result in the discovery of conflicts between schools and neighborhoods.

In effect, yes, people can stop fighting if they were given a reason to unite together and present a universal front against a common enemy. The only way humankind could even come close to ceasing their own conflicts, is if an overwhelming force came out of nowhere and only targeted humans, for example: an extraterrestrial invasion. This is where pride will become a good thing. The pride instilled within us would urge everyone to unite and present a universal front that opposes the overwhelming force.

"Be proud of who you are. Don't blend with the crowd. Be different," parents and teachers say. This is very nice and all, but the question is: "to what extent?"

There is one other explanation.

People fight as a means of protecting themself from another person. They fight because they fear that if they love this other person, they will open themselves up to being attacked.

This brings up a question. Will the enemy attack an individual that tries to communicate a peaceful resolution? Three quotes come to mind.

"Someone who gives fear, feels fear himself."

"You can discover what your enemy fear most by observing the means he uses to frighten you."

"The things which we fear the most in life have already happened to us."

I say,

Love your enemy and he/she will love you.

In just the right way. ;)

Who is the kindest person in history?

This question can never be answered do to personal intuition there may be people that would die helping the world but never can because of money, time, or courage if we as people band together as one we can change this question to who isn't the kindest person in history lol thanks yall just sharing thoughts - lamar spinks (fb me)

Why tropical countries are so poor?

It is because they are not as well developed.

(2) many tropical countries are poor because they have been encouraged by earlier imperial rulers to base their economies primarily around crops that have no food value but only create an income by being exported to the affluent first world western countries: examples are tea, coffee, cocoa, sugar, cotton, tobacco, opium.

How have women's roles changed since 1900?

Women's Roles
  • Women can vote in the U.S., have jobs, own property.
More Changes

Birth control has made enormous changes in women's lives. Prior to 1900, most women were pregnant or nursing an infant for most of their adult lives. Economically, woman almost had to be married, and being married often meant a pregnancy every 12-24 months or so. Childbirth was more hazardous than war, so up to 25% of women died when they were quite young. Infant mortality was high, so many of the children died before the age of 3 years.

In 1900 in Western countries there were very few occupations open to women, apart from agriculture, some service industries and some industrial jobs. Many poorer women had to do factory work (between pregnancies), or worse still, take poorly paid jobs in service industries (catering, cleaning and so on). In 1900 in many countries a large number of women were employed in domestic service.

The main better ('middle class') jobs available were school teaching and nursing, followed increasingly by secretarial jobs of various kinds and also work as telephonists. (Telephone exchanges were manual in 1900). There were also a handful of women university teachers in 1900, but really only a handful, as very few women went to college then.

In the case of school teaching, women were often only allowed to keep their jobs as long as they remained single, and any sort of extra-marital sexlife for a woman would have been just too shocking for words! (If they married they had to resign).

Areas of employment closed to women in 1900 included the legal profession and financial services. The number of female physicians in 1900 was extremely small.

Obviously, this is a general answer, and the details varied considerably from country to country. It's interesting that many changes had already begun by 1900, especially in the U.S., Britain, the Scandinavian countries, Australia and New Zealand. One of the more conservative countries was France, where women didn't get the vote till 1945.

Has society become more rude and unpolished?

"The world is passing through troublous times. The young people of

today think of nothing but themselves. They have no reverence for

parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint. They talk as

if they knew everything, and what passes for wisdom with us is

foolishness with them. As for the girls, they are forward, immodest

and unladylike in speech, behavior and dress."

- Peter the Hermit, A.D. 1274

"The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for

authority, they show disrespect to their elders.... They no longer

rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents,

chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their

legs, and are tyrants over their teachers."

-Attributed to Socrates, by Plato 380 BC

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on

frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond

words... When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and

respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise

[disrespectful] and impatient of restraint"

-Hesiod, 8th century BC

Why is language important in civilization?

Its important because if we couldn't speak with our own language then we couldn't talk to each other. Talking is very useful when interacting with other humans. For example, if we are hurt or need help, we can call a friend and ask them to help. Language is vital for learning and to pass information and knowledge from one person in a society to the next, until everybody has learnt it. This gives large numbers of humans the skills needed for progress.

Language also is a way of controlling human emotions. If you see something which scares you, calling it a pleasant name such as 'Coo-coo' or 'fluffy bunny' helps to make it seem far less scary. A person can be calmed down when angry or upset and whole countries can do various important actions, such as in World

War Two when communities were asked to grow their own food due to shortages and lack of imports.

Language has played a crucial part in developing civilisations. Even in prehistoric times, humans used language to prepare hunting strategies which allowed them to kill huge animals such as mammoths. Language eventually lead to the creation of written languages which further increased the spread of information.

Is there more happiness or sadness in the world?

Happiness and sadness are both emotional responses to a person's current state, or situation. Each person has, at times, more of one than the other. Seldom does anyone have only complete happiness, or complete sadness.

---

Thoughtfulness is a sea of which happiness and sadness are the waves. All waves of happiness and sadness recede finally into thoughtfulness. It is so because happiness and sadness are reliefs and relapses provided to man by nature so that the concentration, gravity and longevity of thoughtfulness shall not become a black hole unto himself and consume him. John Milton while studying for his M.A., as part of his vivo vaci, had to write poems describing two things that are in perfect contrast to each other. This was how the famous poems Allegro and Il Penseroso were born. Allegro means The Cheerful Man and Il Penseroso means The Thoughtful Man. He aptly termed it The Thoughtful Man, not The Sad Man. When we are not happy we are thoughtful, not sad. When we are not happy, it is to thoughtfulness that we are falling, not to sadness.

---

Of course there is more sadness in the world. The poor and the rich, civilized and uncivilized, black and white, and most of them are sad. Mainly because everyone is running after happiness. Unhappy people are trying to overcome sadness while happier people are struggling to maintain their happiness. This ultimately leads to sadness. Therefore most of the people are sad. The main reason for sadness is greediness or craving. Except for the few people who have overcome this craving, all are sad. This means there is more sadness in the world.

---

Let's review: there is dying, attacks, bombing, and who knows what else. This world has been overrun by sadness and despair.

---

In spite of the ceaseless yearning for happiness, many people do experience true happiness, and sometimes it comes during the bleakest of circumstances. Many people define happiness incorrectly, when what they really mean is *joy* (not entirely the same thing). One can be happy by being content, or satisfied, or find happiness in the joy of others.

---

Social class and love?

Please ask your question in a COMPLETE sentence so it can be understood and answered.

I am going to guess that you are asking about love and inter-class relationships. In answer to that, I will say this; Love knows no class, religious, race or caste distinction. It is only parental, community, racial, peer group, gender group and societal expectations and taboos, along with the guilt associated with violating those expectations and taboos, that keep people from not only having relationships with others deemed "not of their kind", but from many times, even having the ability to meet others outside their group or "social class" that they may fall in love with, incurring their parents' and societal displeasure. Keeping a group of people separate from another group is many times passed down unwittingly from one generation to the next. Old wives tales and phrases, depicting a particular group as lazy, shifty, "dumb", untrustworthy, greedy, or not worthy, are passed on to children without parents even realizing what they are doing. This is a system of segregation that has probably been effective since the beginning of man and the creation of groups of those who "have" versus those who "have not" in society. Like exclusive clubs who exclude others from them, at some early point, groups of early humans who thought alike, or looked alike, or had more food or material things than other groups, rationalized why they were somehow "special" and needed to exclude people. And those rationalizations went beyond presumed material wealth. They grew to include anyone who was "different" from the norm or average. Like being left handed. Being left handed, in a predominantly right handed world, is difficult. Being right handed, I attempted to use left handed scissors and failed miserably. I teach dining skills in my business. There are a few dining utensils that were made specifically for left handed people, but they are rare. 80% of the world population is said to be right handed. Though I am unsure as to whether that statistic is accurate. Many left handed people may claim to be right handed. Why would someone do that? A variety of reasons, not the least of which is the need to please others and "fit in" to society. Example: I was working with a Middle Eastern client a few years ago. She had 2 young boys. When we were discussing Middle Eastern dining and the practice of one not eating with his or her left hand, as it was the "unclean" hand, she said this; "We were not taught that, but as children we do learn that people who are right handed are very smart, very good, trustworthy and beautiful. They get along very well with others, are artistic and are kind to everyone. People who are left handed are crafty, cunning, they are not beautiful. They are sly. Do you know what I mean? So no one really wants to be left handed." I explained that those stereotypes were passed down to children to make them use their right hands, as the left hand was used for hygienic purposes, among other things. Thus, the left hand was the "unclean" hand. The right hand was the "clean" hand. It was a system someone came up with, at some point. The dialogue passed on to children of every generation was to keep the system in place and to have everyone in that group or society, doing things uniformly. Like eating with the right hand, while doing things deemed unhygienic, with the left. It worked for that group and moved throughout other societies. One of the kindest women I ever knew was left handed. She was my grandmother. My brother is also one of the kindest and giving people I know, and is extremely philanthropic. He is left handed. We are not Middle Eastern, yet several family members did try to "correct" my brother's "left handedness" in the late 1950s and early 1960s, when we were young. One last thought... I do hope you are not of the impression that having money, equals having "class". One can have class, but no money. One can have a lot of money, and no class. Not really knowing what your question was to begin with, I hope this either enlightens you in some way, or gives you something to think about.

When was plant detergent first used?

It has been used for AGES! That's what they started out with.

Thank you!

What does the welfare state provide in the UK?

The illusion of a minimum standard of living for all. There are still people who have to rely on charities and food banks.

Why is cultural clothes important?

  1. they are important to the comunity and also to have simple life. and to show respect.

_________________________________________________________________

Cultural clothes are important to show off the culture of ones nation. It also helps to identify the nation acc to culture. Cultural clothes are our identity which includes our caste, history, race, tradition, status, festivals, languages etc. Thus, cultural clothes play a very imp role.

Are robots better than human teachers?

Robots may be able to answer more questions, but it takes human teachers to connect with the students. If the sudent is having a bad day, the robot wont recognize that, nor will it know to go out of its way to help the student sort out fixing grades or life situations. I for one love the kids that I work with and appreciate them for the individuals that they are. A robot wont identify with them nor know to give positive reinforcement.

What is the difference between racism and classism?

The difference is racism deals with someone being judgemental and discriminatory because of someone elses race/ethnicity. Classism deals with someone being discriminatory because of someone elses social/economic class. Though it should be noted, the two can sometimes overlap.

What are Dan Daly and Smedley Butler known for?

Dan Daly and Smedley Bulter were known for their campaigns and earning the Medal of Honor.....Daly's were for Peking (1900) and Haiti (1915), Smedley's were Vera Cruz (1914) and Haiti (1915).....Also Daly's famous for his quote "come on you sons of bitches, do you want to live forever!"

What is the Fragata EspaΓ±ola?

The Spanish term Fragata Española means, in English, Spanish Frigate.

In the Armada Española - the Spanish Navy - at present are ten clase fragata , or frigate class ships, four F-100 and six F-80.

Why do people in India live in rural areas?

India is basically an agriculturist country where 70 % of its population are farmers.

With industialisation indeed farmers are moving to the towns and the cities but still, farming is the biggest industry of India

Why is drafting important to your society?

Drafting is when you put your ideas into sentences and write a story with them. Drafting is a copy to correct and make better for the good copy.Drafting is important because you can correct it and add things to it.

by a grade ......................................................................................................

Why do Americans seem to know so little about world history and world geography and foreign societies and languages?

It's always foolish to generalize. Wait- was that a generalization? In any case, having taught American and International college students for many years, I must admit that most of the American students I've encountered fit the description. It seems to me that most really don't care about other cultures, geography, etc. When they do care, they usually become informed. Students I have encountered from other parts of the world tend to be better informed, but many are also extremely misinformed, believing that the frequently idiotic things they were taught about history and politics 'back home' are true.

There are plenty of reasons for the lack of interest many Americans have in things foreign. An incredibly pervasive and dense popular culture; information systems, electronic and otherwise, totally controlled by commercial interests, and educational systems that are so overburdened with non-academic or semi-academic programs that frequently things like languages and world history are sacrificed to make room for courses based on cheap pop psychology or political mandates. An example is the requirement that 'holocaust studies' be taught to all students. This 'teaching' is done in a total vacuum, without reference to world history. The results are frequently bizarre. Most students have no idea regarding the issues or consequences of the world wars. Some will read WWII as "world war eleven".

In general, most American students are extremely well informed about pop music groups, celebrities, TV, etc., because they are surronded by this stuff, it is fed to them from every possible source, and basic American youth culture is anti-intellectual. It is very difficult to separate cause and effect in this connection, perhaps because it is a circular self-reinforcing phenomenon.

AnswerYou are right about the public school answer. I am Canadian and I have had people from Michigan ask me where they can go ski. This is south western Ontario and in August. Also some history is changed to suit what the Americans choose to believe. I have a good friend from Colorado and she was taught that the U.S. won the war of 1812 against Canada. This is even when it was acknowledged that the Canadians burned the US capitol. Regardless that is what her history book indicated. AnswerIf your impression is that Americans seem to know little about world history, geography, societies and languages, you may be speaking with the wrong Americans. Some are quite well educated and do have cosmopolitan interests. AnswerI can't speak for all Americans, of course. But, personally, I blame the public school system.

When I was in high school we didn't even learn much American history. We were required to take only one year of History. I recall wondering many times why it took so long to cover so little material. I'm certain that by the end of the school year, we never even got to the end of the American Civil War. Forget about the World Wars, Vietnam and all the rest.

The curriculum probably should be changed. World History classes should be mandatory as well as American History. However, a lot of important events have occurred in America in a relatively short time. After all, America is very young. And, in all honesty, when I was in high school, I could not possibly have cared less about World History.

AnswerWhy would they know about world history? They don't even learn about American history. We have college graduates who can't tell you WHEN we fought the War of 1812, let alone who we were fighting. Many would have difficulty naming five presidents. America is a relatively YOUNG country in comparison with most others.

It is a sad fact though that so few do know about World History or American History. It is through knowledge of the past that we can try to prevent making the same mistakes in the future. It also could give one a much stronger connection with their country and government. It is hard to listen to people opine about the condition of America today when they would be unable to answer even ONE basic question in regards to American History or government. As shown on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno in his 'Jaywalking' skits...very few American's can answer simple questions regarding the very country they live in. Sad.

AnswerMost American high school students could care less about anything that has to do with "history". In my country I was required to memorize all the continents and countries with their capital cities. I even learned the old name of a country if there was any and knew all the basics such as weather, economic state, and popular politicians in each country. AnswerSpeak for yourselves. I've learned plenty about history, and then some in my high school. I guess that's what happens with you inner-city schools. To those that answered this stupid question, I guess you're not that good at finding a joke when it's right in front of you. The author was mocking American intelligence of World History. AnswerI have a theory about this. History is definite and deals with absolutes. Teachers today believe there are no absolutes. Most live in a theoretical dreamworld of socialist idealism and other off the wall ideas. They do not want to be confronted with the cause and effect of history since it would involve the admission of good and evil which has become more and more unfathomable to them. Students then get an overview of history that is revisionist, watered down and mostly misunderstood by the teacher themselves. AnswerI went to a public school but it was hardly 'inner-city.' In fact, for a public school, in was rather elite.

I recall quite clearly that only one year of American History was required. In fact, I believe that was the only history class even available!

It was a joke. We never even got through the Civil War, let alone other countries' histories. It is really a sad thing. I've learned far more about US history, as well as quite a bit of world history on my own when I took up genealogy as a hobby.

AnswerI don't think you can blame the education system. It needs to be put on the student. I took two History classes in High School, several in college; I've read dozens of books (maybe even a hundred). I love history. I know a lot. World and American. My education came from my interest in the subject.

I don't know much about Asian literature or Himalayan climbing techniques, but I wouldn't blame the school system for that. Those subjects have about as much real world applicability as World History. (Seriously, does knowing the causes of the Barbary Wars really help you get to work in the morning? Of course not)

Schools only expose you to subjects, it up to the individual to decide what they want to learn, bases o the there individual interest or needs.

A more accurate question would be "Why don't more Americans care about world history?"

AnswerIt is a great mystery that while American is a great country with a strong economy, people always inventing new things and new ways of doing things, many Americans appear to Europeans to be not well educated or informed about things outside their own nation. Now I am not saying that Americans are alone in this, because I know a lot of people in Britain who don't pay attention to things going on in their own country never mind the rest of the world. But sometimes Americans don't seem to know that they are part of the whole world.

I think that the American media is a lot to blame. American news programs concentrate on local and exciting items and not non visual things like famines or political changes. I am a history buff so often watch the History Channel and the American programs on this channel are designed to bring out the American angle of every possible story. When a novel is made into a film it has to be set in America even if it was originally written about Britain or France or wherever. I meet lots of Americans in my job, I work in public transport, and it always gets me when they ask for McDonald's and Hertz and American banks. If I go abroad I have to accept that I have to experience new things, which is why I go abroad anyway.

Even American students, who are some of the most high scoring students in the world, come across as being disinterested in things or even ignorant. We understand that America is a big place with different time zones and no national newspapers, and with terrible TV news, so people learn about what happens locally and really big stuff but not much about the outside world.

To get back to history, it is assumed by Hollywood and people who make TV programs and publish books that Americans will not be interested in things which do not only have Americans in them (eg, "SAVING PRIVATE RYAN", U 531 and so on). I am not an American I am Scottish/British/European so hopefully a better answer will come from our American friends. And I do think they are our friends.

AnswerThe problem of historical ignorance doesn't lie in the school system, it teaches what the state dictates.

The problem isn't about the teachers being Marxists or what-have-you, there is no left-wing conspiracy. They teach what the schools tell them to.

The problem isn't students, I myself am a student at a high school in small town Nebraska, three years of social science required (one year world history, one year American history, one in government). Students learn what they choose to certainly, but sometimes the opportunity isn't there.

The problem may well be in our culture. Our country is based on English culture, which has most of its roots in the Romans and Christianity. Christianity teaches to a great degree the forgiving of past transgressions, which may involve just not learning about the past.

Our country was isolationist for a great deal of its time, this could have caused American society to lose interest in world history.

History and social science in general are declining as classes because in modern politics, the government is not the everyday man's friend. Reagan lied about Watergate, Bush Sr. lied about his economic success, Clinton lied about his affairs, and let's not get started with the Vietnam War and Bush's grand failures. If Americans applied law more then morals these wouldn't have been problems, but your average person doesn't live by logic. Logic can be ugly and inhuman.

History tells subjective stories about things that can't really be objective. Even the facts of a historical event are subjective, because intentions can't be objectified. Only interests. In modern American culture (60's onward) there was/is an amount of civil strife regarding equality, and everyone's voice being heard. History can be controversial, the same applies to science. Where the ugliness of logic and science meet the morals of some people, in some places Darwin's Theories/Laws can't be taught because it allegedly conflicts with the Bible.

Also, and conclusively, American culture has not, nor has ever, shown to be a backward-looking society. All cultures can be said to have stressed and achieved things in particular areas, and America has shown an aptitude in only one thing-- business. We handle our diplomacy like we're dealing with business partners, our military is built by non-government organizations, and our government is oftentimes run by people with large business experience. To a businessman, the past is irrelevant, only the present and future.

AnswerFirst I can say unless an American wants to learn more about history on their own our school systems won't teach them! It's not the teachers or the students, honestly, it's the system. Schools only teach what is on the test and who makes the test? Well I'd really like to know. In fact as an American graduating from a "very good small wealthy school" I feel that I was cheated. I know there is no left wing conspiracy! In fact we're only taught about things they want us to know like we covered WWII I'd say 60 percent of our history class. Which by the way, I graduated in '98 and only have American history 1/2 year government 1/2 and world history as a sophomore full year. Yup that is it! You'd think that such a powerful country would teach more about its government right? No they don't want people to be interested or even knowledgeable of how it works because they only want the elite rich in charge! That's right I said it! Don't blame the Americans for their lack of knowledge; understand that they learn what is taught and that's very little! Schools lack fundings! Can't buy new books too large of classes and they drop arts and music but oh yeah they get new football fields (not all) yet the police department has brand new top of the line cars with spoilers and ground effects? See what the American kids are taught...gotta be cool and it's not cool to be smart. As Americans, we need to demand real educations it's time for REAL REFORM not religious reform. AnswerWith all eyes on the USA, it's safe to say that the world knows more about Americans than Americans know about the world. This is why it may SEEM that we're very deficient in world studies. Keep in mind that if you meet an American outside the USA they're probably a student so cut them a break. AnswerI would say it's more of our society than anything. Students on an individual level more or less do want to learn; there's just a sense of anti-intellectualism among young people, in that learning new things or trying to improve your knowledge of the world isn't just isn't the cool thing to do. They devote their time to more fun things like video games, or going out to parties, and what-not. Not really much we can do about it, it's just the way we are unfortunately. AnswerWell for me I really didn't learn that much about it in school and on top of that we didn't really have to in order to graduate. But all states are different here. AnswerIn much of the U.S. one can travel for hundreds, even thousands of miles without ever crossing an international frontier. There is little perceived need to know much about other countries, and until quite recently only a minority of Americans had passports.

Psychologically, other countries are remote. For example, travel to Europe or Asia is - quite understandably, seen by many as a major and rather expensive expedition. The situation is very different from in Europe, where you usually cross an international frontier every few hundred miles. I've noticed that many Americans I have spoken to think a flight to Europe (round trip) costs $2,000 +. It seems that those advertisements by the airlines are usually only noticed by people who are already interested in making the trip.

In addition, the status of English as a world language is isolating. This of course applies to all the English-speaking countries. In fact, many of the criticisms made about Americans also apply to these countries, too. Despite all these comments I have encountered a fair number of Americans who are well informed about world affairs.

What is the impact of youth unproductive occupation on development?

The development is seriously effected by youth unproductive occupations. As a researcher to present Axiomatic Educational Strategy for 21st Century at IEEEP silver jublie celebration at Lahore , I had conducted detailed survey and research. Technical and professional base for youth is lacking. The youth with practical skills is limited having all most no concern with education and educated youth try to find easiest occupations that affects the development in any socety. I fail to find any logic of destructin of youth in easy going jobs like press & media, methology , continuous useless education having no role in development. The system of education in most the developing nations have to oriented towrds practical jobs related to development just like the systems being used in most of the developed nations. South Koreans , German U.K. and USA encourge the students to undertake jobs of even lowest level.

What do Muslims believe about homeless people?

As all human believe. They should offer help, support, and charity to relieve those people and to cover their needs.

How do Indian people share stories of their belief?

Indians by nature believe in faith and religion.

For worshipping faith is necessary. Thus any story of beliefs or faith they share in the places of worship; maybe a temple, gurdwara, a mandir or a mosque.