Answer:
The conflict theorist would argue from the point of view of the society being in perpetual competition as a result of inequality of distribution of resources and power. The rich would not pave the way for cheaper technology as a result of them purchasing early version of expensive technologies but rather, everyone would aspire to be the first to buy such early version of technology due to prestige associated with it.
On the long run, the conflict theorists makes more sense due to the fact that, as more people aspire to buy the early version of technologies, it creates extraordinary demand for the goods. this would force the manufacturers to employ more workers inorder to meet up with the demand thereby leading to fall in the prices of such goods. An example is the Toyota brand cars that is popular in some countries.
Explanation:
Answer:
Explanation:
<u>One of the examples of behavior that would be considered deviant in one society and not in the other is the eating of certain animals. The examples are:</u>
- Some societies in India consider the cow a sacred animal and never would consume beef.
- Muslim societies do not eat pork meat.
- Insects are considered a tasty snack in many countries, including Thailand, while it would be considered gross by many people from the west.
- While some of the western European countries (like France and Belgium) have specialized butcher shops and restaurants for horse meat, eating it would most likely be considered taboo in the US or UK.
- The most radical example is the eating of dogs, which occurs in some Asian countries, most notably China. There is even a whole festival for dog meat consumption in Yulin, and every year there are protests across the globe because of this event. Slaughtering dogs for meat consumption is prohibited in the US and plenty of other countries.
<u>With all of this, we can conclude that some food consumption can be seen as deviant in some parts of the world, while in others it is a normal occurrence and part of the every-day diet.</u>
Despite various taboos and laws, what we have to understand is that our connection to the animals is culturally constructed. The fact that people of the US feel closer to dogs, cats, and horses, but not to sheep and pigs, is not the fact supported by nature. There is nothing in nature itself and the nutrition of horses, insects, and various other species that prevents us to eat them. These deviances surrounding different meats are all culturally constructed. <u>This does not mean they are less real or that we should eat all the animals, just that we have to realize that our ways are no naturally more or less right than someone else’s.</u>
Mira's action as experienced by Abram is best described as an <u>"Illegitimate Demands".</u>
Illegitimate demands brings our desires or expectations about relationships into the equation, we have desires for what loved ones improve the situation one another and these don't generally line up with every other person's in our social gatherings. At the point when our desires are damaged, we feel manhandled (those connections all go to short articles that clarify that more). It may be that your flat mate told their companion they could remain for two months and brings it up as they don't have to ask you. Or on the other hand possibly your family all of a sudden begins requesting that you pay back all the everyday costs it cost to raise you. In the event that the interest doesn't appear to be reasonable for you, it's likely going to start an issue.