Relations among Muslims, Jews, and Christians have been shaped not only by the theologies and beliefs of the three religions, but also, and often more strongly, by the historical circumstances in which they are found. As a result, history has become a foundation for religious understanding. In each historical phase, the definition of who was regarded as Muslim, Jewish, or Christian shifted, sometimes indicating only a religious identification, but more often indicating a particular social, economic, or political group.
While the tendency to place linguistic behaviour, religious identity, and cultural heritage under one, pure definition has existed for a very long time, our modern age with its ideology of nationalism is particularly prone to such a conflation. Ethnic identities have sometimes been conflated with religious identities by both outsiders and insiders, complicating the task of analyzing intergroup and intercommunal relations. For example, Muslims have often been equated with Arabs, effacing the existence of Christian and Jewish Arabs (i.e., members of those religions whose language is Arabic and who participate primarily in Arab culture), ignoring non-Arab Muslims who constitute the majority of Muslims in the world. In some instances, relations between Arabs and Israelis have been understood as Muslim-Jewish relations, ascribing aspects of Arab culture to the religion of Islam and Israeli culture to Judaism. This is similar to what happened during the Crusades, during which Christian Arabs were often charged with being identical to Muslims by the invading Europeans. While the cultures in which Islam predominates do not necessarily make sharp distinctions between the religious and secular aspects of the culture, such distinctions make the task of understanding the nature of relations among Muslims, Jews, and Christians easier, and therefore will be used as an analytic tool in this chapter.
Since Ross is a retired stockbroker and tutoring children, the psychological stage demonstrated by him is generativity versus stagnation.
Erik Erikson's theory of psychosocial development includes the seventh of eight stages: generativity versus stagnation. This stage occurs in the middle of adulthood (ages 40 to 65 yrs). Generativity is a psychological term that refers to "making your mark" on the world by creating or nurturing things that will outlast an individual.
Individuals in their forties and fifties have a strong desire for creating or nurturing things that will outlast them, such as mentoring or making positive changes that will benefit others. We contribute to society by raising our children, being productive at work, and participating in community activities and organizations. We gain a sense of belonging to the larger picture through generativity.
Learn more about generativity versus stagnation here:
brainly.com/question/28206068
#SPJ4
C because Russia would have taken over the eat side and they are Communist
As an effective intercultural communicator, your best immediate response would be to accept the difference in standards for the time being even though you’re the top personnel on the team because you must understand that everything needs adjustment, especially in a Muslim country’s culture wherein they usually believe men rather than women.
