define tertiary sector . describe about the different kinds of people
Answers
Explanation:
The tertiary industry is the segment of the economy that provides services to its consumers, including a wide range of businesses such as financial institutions, schools and restaurants. It is also known as the tertiary sector or service industry/sector
Actually… that’s a reasonable/wise question… It is and has been pondered for centuries a subject explored - “Personality Types” - in any cultural and societal paradigm of interaction. The science of Psychology of Behavioral Analysis is (Profiling) and has occupied the thoughts of Philosophers, marketing and advertising… financial investment markets, political and military strategists, sociologists and just about everything else to consider… including Human Resources when trying to select job applicant qualifications. While, it is difficult to be specific such to neatly file each and every person into a singular file folder, it is valid, and has proven so, to make general groupings of persons that share similar and common shared elements of operational behavior. It is very silly to suggest that every living or past individual persons constitutes a singular, wholly unique type of presence different than all others and then speak to the nature of the Human Species and discount its common connections. So, its fair to suggest we are alike in many ways and share common perspectives; although, we may vary in how we might elect to perceive things relative to our given circumstance.
I’ll toss out this for consideration, from the point of view, of one philosopher’s general observation: It was suggested there are three general types of people in a given societal matrix: (I paraphrase) - Humbly so.
At one end of the spectrum of populace are classified (titled) The “normal”: Being that group of individuals that sustain a status-quo of interaction to perpetuate the societal culture and it’s prescription for orderly presence (Laws, codes, morals, - What is its “patriot” in profile of want to perpetuate its bodily constitution and actively and aggressively participate to preserve it)? How do we identify our self in context to the whole… being greater than the part?
At the other end of the spectrum… (In general meaning) The “Artist”: suggested to be those in the populace that are primarily “Observers and reporters” giving feedback by conveying in many formats the nature of behavioral types from an objective point-of-view to reflect but not necessarily participate to perpetuate and preserve the status-quo, but have us ponder its premise of validity in the face of arising consequence - To question the nature of our behavior to affirm and acknowledge its connective tissue we all share. What constitutes and why do we formulate and migrate to a given behavioral profile of perspective and choose what to perceive of a given cultural and societal environment… or cosmos of all experience? What influences how we identify our self in context not just to the whole, but a given part or might one think it possible to evade a connection?
The third (in the middle of book ends) are the majority populace profile trait (Kinda-funny) in a general sense, titled type as the “neurotic ” (from the Greek word, neuron - nerve…): Not necessarily to suggest mentally unstable - “Crazy” - {So, let’s exclude the cause and effect of the presence of psychopathic and any sociopath behavioral profiling} Rather: the following…
Those that are often the majority in any given populace liken to fence-hangers was suggested - passive/aggressive of sorts to be fixed to the “Normal” profile (Have not been indoctrinated to submit to normalization) and are not all that necessarily active in interest to participant to perpetuate a status-quo, nor not that all inclined toward the “Artist” (To be an active objective observer/reporter that questions the validity of or not of what our active or inactive presence of any experience signifies, if anything).
Can one simply be happily content with a comfortable presence of the choice of disengagement or indifference or unhappy with that state - The fear of inclusion or exclusion is or is not a haunt. Consider, when pondering the often ambiguous and obscure faith in the fate of prescribing and subscribing to a particular stance of a political forum... The stress between our sense of acceptations and desired expectations may not align to the reality between what is the propaganda of promise and what is actually then be delivered - How do you feel?
What ideology truly serves to serve our identity and our sense of a meaningful, personal sense of presence in context to a connection to the whole or given part while at the same time we can preserve our posturing as a separate individual? How does one profile their self in any context if a party of one - what can we, without comparative (not competitive) association, make of our self to be? It’s silly to suggest we are perfectly different