“Crime” is not a phenomenon that can be defined according to any objective set of criteria. Instead, what a particular state, legal regime, ruling class or collection of dominant social forces defines as “crime” in any specific society or historical period will reflect the political, economic and cultural interests of such forces. By extension, the interests of competing political, economic or cultural forces will be relegated to the status of “crime” and subject to repression,persecution and attempted subjugation. Those activities of an economic, cultural or martial nature that are categorized as “crime” by a particular system of power and subjugation will be those which advance the interests of the subjugated and undermine the interests of dominant forces. Conventional theories of criminology typically regard crime as the product of either “moral” failing on the part of persons labeled as “criminal,” genetic or biological predispositions towards criminality possessed by such persons, “social injustice” or“abuse” to which the criminal has previously been subjected, or some combination of these. (Agnew and Cullen, 2006) All of these theories for the most part regard the “criminal as deviant” perspective offered by established interests as inherently legitimate, though they may differ in their assessments concerning the matter of how such “deviants” should be handled. The principal weakness of such theories is their failure to differentiate the problem of anti-social or predatory individual behavior<span> per se</span><span> from the matter of “crime” as a political, legal, economic and cultural construct. All human groups, from organized religions to outlaw motorcycle clubs, typically maintain norms that disallow random or unprovoked aggression by individuals against other individuals within the group, and a system of penalties for violating group norms. Even states that have practiced genocide or aggressive war have simultaneously maintained legal prohibitions against “common” crimes. Clearly, this discredits the common view of the state’s apparatus of repression and control (so-called “criminal justice systems”) as having the protection of the lives, safety and property of innocents as its primary purpose.</span>
<span>I think jonas' society chose to institute â€sameness as a response to fear. Some societies value the collective so much that they develop a fear for anything individual or out of the ordinary. Some of the consequences of sameness on peoples' lives in this community are aggression towards those expressing individualism… even dullness, lack of creativity or newness, depression and despair etc.</span>
Wide-awake and Unromantic are opposite.
Till then. -ayeitswesley
Answer:
Our Moon doesn't have an atmosphere because it is too small and doesn't have a strong magnetic field. Any atmosphere it might have had would be stripped away by the solar wind that barrages the small world. In contrast, our planet has more mass to hold its atmosphere close, and a strong magnetic field to protect it.
Answer:
The processes by which we use social stimuli to form impressions of others
Explanation:
Person perception is a social psychological term that describes how individual gather information to form an impression and attribution of others or people they meet. It is basically a part of social cognition, which assess how people reason and act, and how individual processes information from social world.
Person perception can occur both directly and indirectly. In direct manner: this is when the person involved is meeting the person or individual he s forming impression about, while indirect manner often based on second hand information or observation from afar.
