According to powerthesaurus.org a factory worker is also commonly known as a "blue-collar" worker. There are several minor fields of work under the construction field but all are known most commonly as "hard-hats" because they all where some sort of hard hat.
Answer:
The Industrial Revolution led to poor worker conditions. Because there was no regulations, many workers were harmed causing them to revolt and demand more rights. This meets the essay’s requirements for contextualization because it further identifies historical events and connects each of the events as well as listing points on how the revolution sparked movements.
Explanation:
I am Indian. He did non- violence action for the freedom of India. To find out more about Mahatma Gandhi or Mohandas Gandhi, read his autobiography " My Experiments with truth". I hope this will help you.
you can justify your answer by giving backup evidence, imagine a factory opened, and you have to write about it, and nobody else beleives you that it opened. you find a newspaer with the factory opening and thats how you justify
Explanation:
In 1651, Thomas Hobbes famously wrote that life in the state of nature – that is, our natural condition outside the authority of a political state – is ‘solitary, poore, nasty brutish, and short.’ Just over a century later, Jean-Jacques Rousseau countered that human nature is essentially good, and that we could have lived peaceful and happy lives well before the development of anything like the modern state. At first glance, then, Hobbes and Rousseau represent opposing poles in answer to one of the age-old questions of human nature: are we naturally good or evil? In fact, their actual positions are both more complicated and interesting than this stark dichotomy suggests. But why, if at all, should we even think about human nature in these terms, and what can returning to this philosophical debate tell us about how to evaluate the political world we inhabit today?
The question of whether humans are inherently good or evil might seem like a throwback to theological controversies about Original Sin, perhaps one that serious philosophers should leave aside. After all, humans are complex creatures capable of both good and evil. To come down unequivocally on one side of this debate might seem rather naïve, the mark of someone who has failed to grasp the messy reality of the human condition. Maybe so. But what Hobbes and Rousseau saw very clearly is that our judgements about the societies in which we live are greatly shaped by underlying visions of human nature and the political possibilities that these visions entail.
