Answer:
Di ko na maalala sorry pooooo
The macrosociological viewpoint is more beneficial since it describes how massive social institutions affect people on a personal level.
When comparing the two, the main distinction is that while macro sociology focuses on larger social systems and structures, micro sociology deals with smaller-scale human interactions.
<h3>What is a macrosociological perspective?</h3>
Macro sociologists concentrate on the overall situation, which often includes social structure, social institutions, and social, political, and economic change. They examine the expansive social dynamics that impact people's lives and the development of human society.
For more details about macrosociological to refer link
brainly.com/question/3189558
#SPJ4
Should the leader that he was and promoted his campaign
Answer:
I will give you a blunt answer. Because no one felt significant by making a friend.
Explanation:
The truth as to why being in a clique is different than a developmental friendship is due to what we as people desire. we desire a place in life, meaning, and to feel that we are part of something that is bigger than ourselves. We feel small and insignificant, and while making a good solid friend helps, it doesn't give the naturally desired feeling of purpose.
Think of all of the worst groups of people in history. When one thinks a while the best example of the difference between developments friendship and a clique can be found in the NSDAP (Nazi Party). People threw friends into the clutches of the Gestapo in order to feel part of the "clique" that was the Nazi party. These people felt that it was more meaningful to have a common purpose, place, and important role in the future of this clique instead of risking death for a friendship.
Cliques occurr predominately during adolescent stages of life and tend to fade away once young men and women find what they actually value in life. Even then as adults, people get sucked into cliques to feel included and a part of something that makes them feel less alone in this giant place we call the universe.
That statement is true.
A challenge of cause could be applicated if any parties have an acceptable basis to assume that the juror wouldn't be able to fairly judge based on the evidence.
Having the experience to work with the litigant may cause the potential juror to form a close personal relationship and most likely become bias.
