Atlantic Ocean | jingle-bells.info
This is the Gulf of Alaska where 2 oceans meet but do not mix. Tell me there is No God and I'll ask you" Who commanded the mighty waves and told them they. 6 As quoted in Hess and Weiner The Handbook of Forensic Psychology (2 ed) ( ). .. admitted that if you do not receive effective treatment, you will become a . as having a mixed personality disorder which, according to Teggin. 2 oceans meet but don't jingle-bells.info but jingle-bells.info shows 2 different ocean water bodies meeting in middle of Alaskan Gulf, where a foam is formed at the.
And, finally, insects traveled across the Atlantic, none more destructive than diseasebearers such as the Aedes aegypti or the Anopheles mosquitoes, both of which flourished in the transformed arable lands of the tropics and among populations of newly arrived Europeans. The most precious commodities were minerals: The Spanish fleet system, which saw all the riches of America travel to Spain in a convoy of ships, flaunted this wealth for all to see.
The discovery of gold in Brazil at Minas Gerais in the s similarly tantalized people with the promise of quick riches. Other commodities, especially food crops such as sugar, rice, and grains; luxury consumables such as tobacco and chocolate; dye goods such as indigo, madder, and cochineal; naval stores ; and pelts, while less immediately lucrative, were in the long run of considerable economic and cultural value.
These commodities transformed European tastes, diets, and economies; reoriented indigenous economies; depleted environmental and human resources; and generated enormous labor demands. The vital trades that emerged contributed to new cities in America: In Europe cities grew as a direct result of the wealth and activity of Atlantic trade, as was true for Seville, Glasgow an important tobacco trading centerBristol, Liverpool, and Nantes.
Some commodities, such as sugar, created new worlds of their own. Sugar did not require the Atlantic Ocean for familiarity among Europeans, who encountered it as a luxury commodity used as a spice from their first forays to the eastern Mediterranean.
But sugar's migration out of the Mediterranean and into areas of the south Atlantic well suited for its cultivation and modified to enhance the environment for production—particularly Brazil and the Caribbean—meant that the crop moved from a luxury to a staple.
Sugar, moreover, demanded laborers who could be forced to work around the clock to satisfy sugar's cycle: For other commodities, such as pelts or dyewood, Europeans initially tried to trade with indigenous people.
Trait theory (video) | Behavior | Khan Academy
It is easy to overestimate the power of European traders and the appeal of their commodities. While much that Europeans offered was useful, in semisedentary societies there was a natural limit to the number of goods people wanted to transport with them from one home to another. Moreover, recipients of trade goods altered their function: Indigenous people did not trade unthinkingly.
European weaponry, for example, had limited utility in some conditions of indigenous conflict. A musket would not fire in the rain; at night, a musket flash would reveal the location of a hidden attacker. And weapons required constant maintenance. Thus indigenous people adapted European commodities for their own use. When the barter economy no longer enabled Europeans to extract the commodities and, later, the plantation labor they required, they resorted to slavery, as was the case in Brazil.
The range of commodities identified in the Americas was great, and the extraction of some commodities prompted profound environmental and social transformations.
In Peru, Indians were compelled to toil in the silver mines, a debilitating and deadly labor. In North America, the French quest for pelts altered indigenous cultures and economies. Among the Montagnais of North America, for example, women produced 65 percent of daily calories through their farming activities, and held a significant position in society because of the value of the food they produced. The Montagnais, moreover, were matrilocal.
But as hunters, men controlled access to furs, and thus controlled trade with Europeans.
Notice of Interruption - Anchorage Daily News
Through trade, they acquired goods—such as alcohol and metal tools—that conferred social prestige. Christianity, with its insistence on patriarchal family arrangements, likewise elevated the authority of men. Thus European trade and culture could alter indigenous gender conventions and cultural practices.
Hunters also pushed farther inland in search of animals, not only encroaching on territory claimed by others—leading to overt conflicts, made more deadly with new European weapons—but also depleting the supply of animals. While the impact of European trade demands in the Americas could be enormous, historians continue to debate the impact of European trade with Africa.
African rulers were able to dictate the terms of trade. Goods were produced specifically for export to European markets. Disease vectors inhibited European incursions inland, and only in Angola and at the Cape were Europeans able to claim any real political control. And he actually came up with a list of 4, different descriptive words to describe traits. And that wasn't the original list.
Apparently, the original had over 10, So anyways, from those 4, he was able to come up with three basic categories of traits. And the first one are our cardinal traits. The second one are our central traits. And the last are our secondary traits. Now of these three, the cardinal traits are the characteristics that direct most of a person's activities.
So these are the dominant traits, the ones that lie in the cardinal category. For example, one person may have a cardinal trait of selflessness, or power motivation, but Allport says that not all individuals have selflessness or power motivation.
So that's the key right there. Individuals have some subset of traits from a universal possibility of traits. But not all individuals have the same traits.
We mix and match. We all possess different ones. Now these cardinal traits influence all of our behaviors, including the central and the secondary traits, or dispositions, which influence behavior to a lesser degree.
So these are dominant, and these are expressed at a lesser degree. So an example of a essential trait is honesty or sociability or shyness, which are less dominant than these cardinal traits. And a secondary trait is something like a love for modern art or a reluctance to eat meat. And these are more preferences, or attitudes.
Let's go to the second theorist. And his name was Raymond Cattell. So now what Cattell did is that he proposed that we all have 16 essential personality traits. He said that they represent the basic dimensions of personality. And he turned this into the 16 personality factor questionnaire, or 16PF for short.
That was his contribution. So he categorized all of our traits into 16 personality traits that we all possess. The third theorist was Hans Eysenck. And these three major dimensions of personality encompass all traits that we all possess.Place Where Two Oceans Meet EXPLAINED
But the degree to which we individually express them are different. So this is different from Allport. Again, Allport said we have different unique subsets of traits. Eysenck is saying we all have these traits, but we express them at different degrees. So there's three major dimensions of his theory. The first is extroversion. So you know what that is. Extroversion versus introversion, and that is the degree of sociability. The second is neuroticism, and neuroticism is our emotional stability.
And the third is psychoticism. The free tests which are scientifically validated tend to be 'lite' introductory instruments which give a broad indication rather than a detailed analysis.
There are dozens of different personality testing systems to explore, beneath which sit rather fewer basic theories and models.
In this section are examples personality and style models, which are all relatively easy to understand and apply. Don't allow providers to baffle you with science - all of these theories are quite accessible at a basic level, which is immensely helpful to understanding a lot of what you need concerning motivation and personality in work and life beyond. Do seek appropriate training and accreditation if you wish to pursue and use psychometrics testing in a formal way, especially if testing or assessing people in organisations or in the provision of services.
Administering formal personality tests - whether in recruitment, assessment, training and development, counselling or for other purposes - is a sensitive and skilled area. People are vulnerable to inaccurate suggestion, misinterpretation, or poor and insensitive explanation, so approach personality testing with care, and be sure you are equipped and capable to deal with testing situations properly. For similar reasons you need to be properly trained to get involved in counselling or therapy for clinical or serious emotional situations.
People with clinical conditions, depression and serious emotional disturbance usually need qualified professional help, and if you aren't qualified yourself then the best you can do is to offer to help the other person get the right support.
Beware of using unlicensed 'pirated' or illegally copied psychometrics instruments. Always check to ensure that any tools that are 'apparently' free and in the public domain are actually so. If in doubt about the legitimacy of any psychometrics instrument avoid using it. If in doubt check. These systems and others like them are not likely to be in the public domain and not legitimately free, and so you should not use them without a licence or the officially purchased materials from the relevant providers.
Personality types, models and theories As a general introduction to all of these theories and models, it's important to realise that no-one fully knows the extent to which personality is determined by genetics and hereditary factors, compared to the effects of up-bringing, culture, environment and experience. Most studies seem to indicate that it's a bit of each, roughly half and half, although obviously it varies person-to-person. Given that perhaps half our personality is determined by influences acting upon us after we are conceived and born, it's interesting and significant also that no-one actually knows the extent to which personality changes over time.
Certainly childhood is highly influential in forming personality. Certainly major trauma at any stage of life can change a person's personality quite fundamentally. Certainly many people seem to mature emotionally with age and experience. But beyond these sort of generalisations, it's difficult to be precise about how and when - and if - personality actually changes.
So where do we draw the line and say a personality is fixed and firm? The answer in absolute terms is that we can't. We can however identify general personality styles, aptitudes, sensitivities, traits, etc. And this level of awareness is far better than having none at all. Which is is purpose of this information about personality and style 'types'.