Answer:
Personal achievements
Explanation:
While class systems are based in part on a person's birth, or class of their parents, an important difference between caste and class systems is that class systems also incorporate the concept of personal <u>achievements</u> in determining one's social position.
In caste system, an individuals social class is already determined at birth, whether poor or rich. However, in class systems, an individuals achievement is important in determining his/her social class. For example, a janitor can be hardworking, gets educated and become successful and thus changing his/her social class, while a child born into affluence may be wasteful and end up poor thus experiencing a downward social mobility.
According to the history of psychology reading, a behaviorist psychologist and a cognitive psychologist would most likely argue about whether: the capacity of a dog to learn tricks is related to its comprehension of human language.
All actions are learned by conditioning, and conditioning takes place through contact with the environment, according to the behaviourist theory of learning. Behaviorists contend that environmental cues influence our behaviour.
Cognitive psychologists study the internal workings of the mind, including memory, perception, learning, and language. They are interested in how individuals comprehend, identify, and solve issues as well as how they make judgments. These psychologists concentrate on how individuals acquire, process, and remember information.
Dogs can understand human body language and tone. Our dogs are more intelligent than merely "Sit," "Stay," and "Walk." Many words may be taught to them, and when we speak them in the right tone, they can understand the meaning even better.
To learn more about Cognitive psychologists, refer
brainly.com/question/20630642
#SPJ4
Bolivar stood apart from his class in ideas, values and vision. Who else would be found in the midst of a campaign swinging in a hammock, reading the French philosophers? His liberal education, wide reading, and travels in Europe had broadened his horizons and opened his mind to the political thinkers of France and Britain. He read deeply in the works of Hobbes and Spinoza, Holbach and Hume; and the thought of Montesquieu and Rousseau left its imprint firmly on him and gave him a life-long devotion to reason, freedom and progress. But he was not a slave of the Enlightenment. British political virtues also attracted him. In his Angostura Address (1819) he recommended the British constitution as 'the most worthy to serve as a model for those who desire to enjoy the rights of man and all political happiness compatible with our fragile nature'. But he also affirmed his conviction that American constitutions must conform to American traditions, beliefs and conditions.
His basic aim was liberty, which he described as "the only object worth the sacrifice of man's life'. For Bolivar liberty did not simply mean freedom from the absolutist state of the eighteenth century, as it did for the Enlightenment, but freedom from a colonial power, to be followed by true independence under a liberal constitution. And with liberty he wanted equality – that is, legal equality – for all men, whatever their class, creed or colour. In principle he was a democrat and he believed that governments should be responsible to the people. 'Only the majority is sovereign', he wrote; 'he who takes the place of the people is a tyrant and his power is usurpation'. But Bolivar was not so idealistic as to imagine that South America was ready for pure democracy, or that the law could annul the inequalities imposed by nature and society. He spent his whole political life developing and modifying his principles, seeking the elusive mean between democracy and authority. In Bolivar the realist and idealist dwelt in uneasy rivalry.
Politics, technology, consumerism, religion, & economy are all big parts of modern day culture.
