To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities is an argument which brings forward a range of issues to be explained in this writing. A society consists of its people, soil and time. Since the society at present has been segregated by national borders, we have to really focus on internal mechanism of a society.
As I said the society consists of people, soil and time, we cannot by any means ignore any part of it; for example if we just study the major cities, we in a sense taking a bits of pieces from a society as a whole. Now-a-days, major cities have been dramatically changed to follow up the pattern of any developed society, so they lack the originality of that particular society to a great extent. To find the characteristics of a society through the study of the major cities, one has to visit the museum, the old dilapidated buildings remnants and so on. Rather one can get a better view of a society through the study of the sub-urban and rural traits along with major cities to perceive a comprehensive characteristic of a society.
In contrast to the present situation, the past especially before the industrial renaissance could have given someone a full view of a society through studying major cities, for the civilization at that very time particularly built up the major cities incorporating their own cultural and societal norms and values.
For example, if we take any capital from any of the LDC (least developed countries), we will find most of its societal formation is based on western pattern. But if we get into deeper I mean in the remote region of that particular country, we will find how that particular society evolved from those particular geographical, economic, and demographic regions. However, the study of the major cities alone cannot bring forward the holistic characteristic; similarly the study of its sub-urban and remote area cannot produce a complete view either.
So to know the characteristics of a society one has to study major cities along with sub-urban and remote areas as well; that is to say, one cannot ignore any of its people, soil, and time to know the society in particular. If one is removed, the society as whole becomes impaired
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities is an argument which brings forward a range of issues to be explained in this writing. A society consists of its people, soil and time. Since the society at present has been segregated by national borders, we have to really focus on internal mechanism of a society.
As I said the society consists of people, soil and time, we cannot by any means ignore any part of it; for example if we just study the major cities, we in a sense taking a bits of pieces from a society as a whole. Now-a-days, major cities have been dramatically changed to follow up the pattern of any developed society, so they lack the originality of that particular society to a great extent. To find the characteristics of a society through the study of the major cities, one has to visit the museum, the old dilapidated buildings remnants and so on. Rather one can get a better view of a society through the study of the sub-urban and rural traits along with major cities to perceive a comprehensive characteristic of a society.
In contrast to the present situation, the past especially before the industrial renaissance could have given someone a full view of a society through studying major cities, for the civilization at that very time particularly built up the major cities incorporating their own cultural and societal norms and values.
For example, if we take any capital from any of the LDC (least developed countries), we will find most of its societal formation is based on western pattern. But if we get into deeper I mean in the remote region of that particular country, we will find how that particular society evolved from those particular geographical, economic, and demographic regions. However, the study of the major cities alone cannot bring forward the holistic characteristic; similarly the study of its sub-urban and remote area cannot produce a complete view either.
So to know the characteristics of a society one has to study major cities along with sub-urban and remote areas as well; that is to say, one cannot ignore any of its people, soil, and time to know the society in particular. If one is removed, the society as whole becomes impaired