EXPLAIN WHY THE CHIEFDOMS OF THE PRE-COLOMBIAN CARRIBEAN ARE MORE Essay

EXPLAIN WHY THE CHIEFDOMS OF THE PRE-COLOMBIAN CARRIBEAN ARE MORE CLOSELY RELATED TO THOSE IN NORTHERN SOUTH AMERICA THAN TEH CHIEFDOMS AND STATES IN MESOAMERICA - Essay Example The chiefdoms of the Pre-Colombian Caribbean were closely related to those of the Northern South America. They were different from the Mesoamerican state because of the societal classification that existed. Before the arrival of the European communities, Costa Rica was inhabited by diverse groups of people who had diverse cultures. It was principally divided into the intermediate are (isthmo-Colombian area) and the Mesoamerican area. The isthmo-Colombian area included the Caribbean and the South America. On the other hand, the Mesoamerican area extended from Chiapas and the Yucatan Peninsula to the Nicoya Peninsula (Diehls 17). The intermediate area was made up of different societies that were ruled by different chiefdoms. However, these communities would form alliances, vassalages and community ties despite lacking a sole authority. This enhanced the exchange of culture and rules of community organization these different societies. On the other hand, the Mesoamerican area was governed by a sole chiefdom (Adams 12). There was no specific interaction between the Intermediate and the Mesoamerican area. Pre-Colombian society also shared key characteristics with the northern South America society. Unlike Mesoamerica, the society was organized based on hereditary chiefdoms. The boundaries of the chiefdoms in pre-Colombia and Northern South America were demarcated by prominent geographical features or rivers. Most of the settlements were demarcated by forests. The eldest son was accorded the inheritance of chieftainship. This tradition was embraced by all of the non Mesoamerican chiefdoms (Adams 34). Another similarity of Pre-Colombian society with northern South American chiefdoms was in the housing structure. Grandchildren, children and parents lived under the same roof. This implied that clan houses harbored as many as 100 inhabitants (Bruhns 83).

Amelie Rorty on The Historicity of Psychological Attitudes Assignment

Amelie Rorty on The Historicity of Psychological Attitudes - Assignment Example Dynamically permeable love is precarious because once it changes the character of a person; their affair may terminate prematurely (Grau, Para. 22). According to Rorty, dynamically permeable love is distinct from constant rigid love in a number of different ways. Constant rigid love is a kind of love that is consistent and does not change due to circumstances two parties. Amidst difficult times, constant rigid love has the potential to prevail and stand the test of time. Although the character of friends may change due many factors such as growing wealthy or one becoming successful, their friendship will always remain unchanged. Even though the attributes that brought the two friends together initially changes, the love for the two parties remains unshaken. Other contributors of the topic such as Nozick and Kraut also came up with similar description for this kind of love. However, Rorty contends that this particular kind of love does not can grow to higher levels and flourish unlike dynamically permeable that has a high potential. Dynamically permeable love seems to enjoy the support of some groups because it considers changes as a means of guaranteeing consistency whereas constant love fails to do so. It accommodates changes in a partner’s traits for the sake of securing the friendship unlike constant love that is very rigid and protects the status quo (Grau, Para 23). In some instances, Rorty comes out supporting constancy of love as the best kind of love which creates confusion about her actual position on these two kinds of love. However, she fails to point out precisely on what entails constant love. Two definitions of constant love by Kraut leave her confused about the composition of constant love. The first views entail constant love, and the undying love that two friends may have despite character changes. The second one describes it as a love that does not undergo via dynamism given that the