the man referred to as social beings

Do you know why the man referred to as social beings. Huyaa ... you certainly know yourself as a human being donk on it all. Humans are very closely kaitanya with other humans, humans interact with another human being, no living human being alone or solitary. That is why man is referred to as social creatures, and therefore also human beings as individuals there are things that are needed or required a push for survival. Okay comrades below some descriptions of kaitanya For Being Human Social Interaction.



Understanding

Social interaction is a relationship between one individual with another individual. Individuals can influence one another and vice versa "in the definition of social psychology". In reality the interaction is actually not as simple as it seems but a very complex process. The interaction occurred because it is determined by many factors including other human beings that are around that have specific behavior as well.

As a Social Being Human Characteristics

It has been for centuries the concept of man as a social being that there is a focus on the powerful influence of society to individuals. Where has the elements of a biological imperative, which consists of:

The urge to eat
The urge to defend itself
The drive to establish a kind
From the above describes how the individual stages in its development as a social being in which one component among individuals is a mutual dependency and need. So that communication between the communities is determined by the role of humans as social beings. In human development also has a social tendency to imitate in the sense of forming themselves by looking at the lives of people who consist of:

Acceptance of cultural forms, in which people receive the renewal forms from the outside so that the human self is formed of a knowledge.
Saving energy is an action where this is not to replicate too use a lot of human labor in society so that the performance mnausia can run effectively and efficiently.
In general desire to imitate that we see most clearly in the bond occurs within the group but also society at large. From the above description is unclear how the man himself requires an interaction or communication to establish himself malalui mimic the process. So it is clear that the man himself had a concept as social beings. That characterize human beings can be regarded as social beings is the existence of a form of social interaction in hubugannya with other social beings in question is a human one with another human being. Broadly speaking, the personal factors that affect human interaction consists of three areas:

Emotional stress. This greatly affects how people interact with each other.
Low self-esteem, ethical condition of a person is in the human condition that was taken down it will have a high desire to connect with other people because of the condition in which people are humiliated need more loving care of others or moral support to form a condition as before. Social isolation, an isolated people should interact with like-minded or like-minded people in order to form a harmonious interaction.

Read more »

The words of President Obama's speech last night were moving, honey-soaked and dream-laden. "Born, as we are, out of a revolution by those who longed to be free," the president declared, "we welcome the fact that history is on the move in the Middle East and North Africa, and that young people are leading the way. Because wherever people long to be free, they will find a friend in the United States." More than at any point in the last ten days, the president's words gave both a clear explanation and a full range of assurances in support of our current military intervention in Libya.

I only wish that his words were true.

This is the moment of all moments for Arab democracy, when a people so long silent are finally rising up to overthrow regimes we all know need to go. Having lived in and loved this region, I wish I could believe that my president is leading us toward a brighter future. I wish I could think that there is a bridge between my two homes right now, built of human aspirations and outstanding courage. Instead, I feel that we are desperately trying to shake a role in which we have been typecast, that Libya is the pretext for the US to rehabilitate a tarnished reputation.

In many aspects, Obama is channeling the character of John F Kennedy. President Kennedy expressed in 1960 his belief in "human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, and the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas." Unfortunately, by the time Kennedy made this speech, it was already far too late for the United States to be defined in this way. There had been a moment, over a century before, when our foreign policy could have been a watchdog, a defender from the world's bullies. The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 told the European powers, who were starting to lose their grip on South American colonies, that the US would not tolerate their unwanted intervention in our hemisphere. Many, including Simón Bolívar, saw this as a benevolent move of solidarity and sought to build ties with us in support of a free hemisphere.

At that particular, delicate moment in history, the United States could have grown up to be many things. It's impossible not to meditate on this historical watershed, trying to imagine what approaches we could have taken to be the "beacon for all mankind" that Kennedy was envisioning in the 1960s, and that Obama wants us to be right now. We had the workers, the wild places, the ideas. Had we grown our industries with workers' rights at the forefront, never allowing unions to stifle productivity, but modelling for the world the principle that people matter more than profit; if our education had continued to draw on the best emerging in science globally; if government at all levels had distributed tax revenues always to maximise the quality of life gained per dollar … if we had done those things, then we might have become that beacon. And had human rights abuses, corporate trust activities and popular destitution been combatted with the zealotry of Joseph McCarthy or Pat Robertson, I imagine we might have had a great deal to teach the courageous dreamers of North Africa.

Unfortunately, the spirit of 1823 was gone by the time the Monroe Doctrine was applied to the annexation of Hawaii in 1842, and forgotten by 1898, when we took possession of Puerto Rico and the Philippines and occupied Cuba. Our actions from then on remain fresh in many international memories. I found in Jordan and Lebanon that, from killing Native Americans for land to sending out CIA assassins, a tally of our true intentions has been carefully kept. Beyond our overt acts of intrusion and domination, we are a constant presence behind the curtains of repression and state-sponsored violence.

And yet, those who long to be free should be able to "find a friend in the United States", because, as President Obama rightly declared, "we know that our own future is safer, our own future is brighter, if more of mankind can live with the bright light of freedom and dignity." They should be able to look to us for training, for models of options for the government they will build, for civil society consultants, for educational scholarships for their youth leaders. There are so many pro-active and non-violent ways in which the US could foster freedom fighters. To reference Jon Stewart's 21 March sketch, these are the "packages" we should be "selling" to countries where government is not representative.

Instead, we have offered our help only in certain forms and only to certain degrees, and these are predictably based on our geo-strategic interests in each situation. As Stewart remarks slyly, "offer not valid in West Bank and Gaza". No wonder Arabs call our pleas for "restraint", whether to Israel or the government of Bahrain, "hollow talk".

Had we chosen to be an honest example to the global community, this moment could have seen our beacon shine on the Arab world. Lovers of human dignity could have proudly thrown open our arms to these lionhearted youth, who should have come to us not warily, not as a last resort, but with the confidence that we could help. We could have been a teaching nation, an empowering nation, a resource for the humblest peoples with the noblest ambitions.

The point of revolution, after all, is not to be the next Chile under Pinochet, the next Indonesia under Suharto, the next Afghanistan, the next Iraq. People know better than to involve us if they can avoid it, for even a glance of approval can sully the purity of their cause with the taint of imperialism. Rather than a beacon, we have become a bludgeon, a bully, a robber baron.

I suspect President Obama truly loves freedom and human dignity, and wants nothing more than to lead the country that would champion these movements. But the world has come to a resounding "thanks, but no thanks" position on our involvement in their struggles. As such, they have to fight for democracy and freedom in spite of us, not inspired by us or accompanied by us. To watch the US stand back and offer only guided weaponry from 30,000ft as encouragement is a tragedy, not only for the global salience of these movements, but also for the national compassion of ordinary Americans. artikel here

Read more »