Answer: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks goes to God, the unconditional love and support of my wife, parents and extended family, my dissertation committee, Alex, the institutions of the United States of America, the State of South Carolina, the University of South Carolina, the Department of Political Science faculty and staff, the Walker Institute of International and Area Studies faculty and staff, the Center for Teaching Excellence, undergraduate political science majors at South Carolina who helped along the way, and the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict. This work was partially supported by a SPARC Graduate Research Grant from the Office of the Vice President for Research at the University of South Carolina and the Sueng Yeun Kim dissertation grant from the Center for Asian Studies at the Walker Institute. I would especially like to acknowledge approximately half of Earth’s population currently living under some form of non-democracy. This work is not intended to disparage you or your country or your culture in any way shape or form. This work is designed to 1) help foster understanding and cooperation between people that reside in democracies and those that live in dictatorships, 2) highlight nonviolent approaches to governance that can hopefully prevent some of the atrocities that tend to occur more often in dictatorships, and 3) move us further along in the quest for a universal understanding of good governance. Henry, remember that knowledge is one thing that no person and no government can ever take away from you. Acquire as much of it as you possibly can.
Explanation:
<span>According to erving goffman, one of the reasons it is important to study subtle day-to-day interactions is because: </span><span>we can learn a great deal about ourselves as human beings
From examining every day-to-day interaction, we will understand how people have different opinions and response about certain things and how to learn from those difference to improve ourselves.</span>
Answer:
C) would people still conform to the group if the group opinion was clearly wrong?
Explanation:
Solomon Asch research was designed to answer a straightforward question, namely: <em>would people still conform to the group if the group opinion was clearly wrong? </em>This research was made by Asch to test conformity in ambiguous situations. Two important conclusions of the research are that people tend to conform to the majority of the group of opinion even if they know their answer is wrong, and that the size of the group is important when deciding.
