Answer:
<h3>The comparison and contrast of Davis and Moore’s functionalist perspective of social stratification with Mosca’s conflict perspective of social stratification lies on the concept of social position and power.</h3>
Explanation:
Davis and Moore's functionalist perspective of social stratification and Mosca’s conflict perspective of social stratification all emphasize on the presence of a power structure in a society which directly corresponds to the position of an individual. They all believed that society operates according to the social needs and that every individual performs their tasks accordingly.
The line of distinction between Davis and Moore's functionalist perspective and Mosca’s conflict perspective lies in the nature of men. Mosca believes that man is evil and dominating by nature and that compels him/her to misuse his position. He brings out the authority and power of the ruling class as an example to this argument. He argues that people in good position will eventually become more powerful as men are ambitious and selfish. They will gradually exploit people from lower position and use their power for their own personal gains.
While on the other hand, Davis and Moore argue that the greater the role of an individual is, the greater should be the reward. They illustrate the idea that people with bigger and greater roles should be given more importance because of their greater contributions to the society. Their perspective of social stratification emphasize that not everyone can perform the exclusive task of the doctors, therefore those who could perform such complicated tasks should be paid and rewarded more. Davis and Moore do not consider misuse of position and power by people of great influence.
In my opinion, Davis and Moore’s functionalist perspective of social stratification is more applicable and realistic. The fact that those who worked hard deserves a reward is a universal doctrine. These people spent a lot of effort and time before acquiring the position they are in today. Their effort and hard work should be rewarded greatly as they will contribute significantly to the society. Though, this perspective does not bring into account the chances of misuse of power and position, such elements can be controlled through efficient law and state control.
<span>It refers to the "idea that each new generation forgets what the previous generation learned about drugs".
<span>A consistent cycle of new medications and drugs creeps onto the scene while others make a rebound, similar to neon hues or thin pants. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) calls this as "generational forgetting," a societal condition where the learning of specific medications' antagonistic results blurs among youth as generational substitution takes place.</span>
</span>
Answer:
idk idk idk idk kidkidkidkidkidkidkidkidkidkid
Explanation:
idk idk idk idk idk kidkidkidkidkidkidkidkidkidkidkidkdid
Answer:
The correct response is Option B: grow a surplus of food.
Explanation:
One of the most important social and technological advances for the emergence of larger human settlements like cities is the ability to grow a surplus of food. This is because in order to take up other trades and means of livelihood that characterize a city, there needs to exist the capacity to store food and to distribute it to city residents who are not dedicated to agriculture themselves. Humans started to establish what archaeologists and anthropologists call agricultural villages by about 10,000 BCE where we find early evidence of large systems of storing and managing and distributing surplus. The surplus food that these residents generated allowed for the establishment of more permanent villages that increased in population. Societies of increasing complexity emerged in valleys around the Nile, Indus, and Tigris-Euphrates rivers.
Answer:
People born of a Spanish father and an Indian mother were mestizos.
Explanation:
In the Spanish colonial societies in Latin America, mestizos occupied a middle position in the social ladder. On the top were the peninsulares, or the Spaniards born in Spain, top crown officials, landlords, military commanders; the criollos, born to families of Spanish origin in the colonies, were also members of the economic elite - rich landowners, rich merchants -but didn´t have political power; then the mestizos, who were usually free, but not very rich. Mestizos were lower than criollos, but above Indians and blacks who were slaves.
