The answer is "conflict perspective".
The functionalist perspective sees society as made out of various parts cooperating. Interestingly, the conflict perspective sees society as made out of various gatherings and enthusiasm seeking power and assets. The conflict perspective clarifies different parts of our social world by taking a gander at which bunches have power and advantage from a specific social game plan.
Decreased :)
pls mark as brainliest!
The correct answer is a) a class or category of objects, events, or activities.
The concepts are ideas that represent a class or category of objects, events, or activities.
In general terms, we can define a concept as an idea or a form of though. It is the general idea that comes to your mind before identifying with words. Concepts can be a class or category of objects, events, or activities that are formed in your brain to understand things. The abstract idea that is formed in your mind can be understood and apply to many different to understand reality.
Answer:
D) avoidance-avoidance
Explanation:
Avoidance-avoidance approach: The term "avoidance-avoidance approach" is described as an approach to conflict that generally occurs when there is a specific event or goal that can either consist of negative and positive characteristics or effects that makes event or goal unappealing and appealing at the same time.
In the question above, the given statement represents the avoidance-avoidance approach to conflict.
Answer: Stanley Milgram
Explanation: As Stanley Milgram himself stated, the essence of obedience to authority is when a person begins to perceive himself as a tool to fulfil the wishes of the authority, not his own wishes, so he sees all his actions and consequences of these actions as a result of the action of authority, not as a result of his will and responsibility. Milgram based his experiment on the conflict that arises between the state of obedience and the conscience of a person who subordinated to authority. The essence of the experiment concerned the responsibility of those who committed genocide during WWII, who claimed to have been merely obedient, i.e executing the orders of superiors, and based their defense on this claim.
This begs the question of whether or not they were complicit in the genocide.
The experiment was performed with pairs of participants where one was a "student" and the other was a "teacher", and where the student was connected to an electroshock electrode. Each time a student would give a wrong answer, the teacher would activate electricity through the electrodes and the student would experience an electric shock. With each wrong answer, the teacher would increase the level of electric shock. There are also some moderation in the experiment, such as a student would make a mistake on purpose, etc.
The conclusion is that ordinary people are generally willing to kill people, even if they are innocent in order to execute the orders of superiors, recognised as authority. It is considered that when it comes to authority, all its orders are justified and legal. So it is moral and proper to follow the orders of authority, whatever it may be.
