Answer:
C. The appropriate balance between observing social injustice and seeking social justice.
Explanation:
This issue is strongly debated by modern-day sociologists, because our social order seems to be innately unjust. There are people who start from worse premises than others, there are people who earn less than others and people who will earn more and there is no society without inequality.
<em>This inequality is considered "social injustice" by modern-day sociologists and philosophers, whereas other voices claim that this kind of "injustice" is not something which can be corrected. </em>
<em>The main idea is that there will always be inequalities in any given society. </em>However, <u>the big question is how big these inequalities should be and how much state interference should there be to diminish these inequalities? </u>Moreover, even with state interference, could inequalities ever be wiped out?
This is what modern-day sociologists are trying to answer, in order to build better societies without imposing too many things on individuals who are faring better than others just by birth.
Well, this could be interpreted in a general view. A good way I've found to understand history especially is to almost interprete right now. I know this is not the answer but it is helpful. How can different view cause conflict? Simple you want to fight for your views because you believe they are right.
Answer:
i don't know but i know this :
the public blamed politicians in general for the teapot Doe Scandal.
The correct answer of the given statement above would be TRUE. It is true that the <span>e-government act promotes the use of electronic government services by the public and improves the use of information technology in the government. Hope this answers your question. </span>
<h3>A) They wanted to eliminate the French threat and the possibility of a two front war.</h3>
