What is always fixed in the system of sacrifice, the image of Christ in human is elevated above material perfection, the divine Light above the natural “light” of human beings. Therefore, higher powers and positions of human beings are possible owing to sacrifice.
When describing the role of sacrifice in religion, it is worth noting that, in the collective sphere, sacrificial functions are performed mainly for the ego. In order to achieve them, a sacrificial person acts primarily as an invader, and the sacrifice is primarily a creator. Therefore, the sacrifice occupies a special place.
In the collective sphere, the role of sacrifice is quite high. It is quite possible that high positions in the social hierarchy, share many traits. One of them is inviolability, aggressiveness and cruelty. At the same time, it is quite possible that the aggressor will be able to cause a sacrificial person to death. Very often, it happens.
A close relationship between love and sacrifice is indicated here. A sacrificial personality is one of the most aggressive, quarrels, lovers and so on. Therefore, the main feature of a sacrificial personality is its desire to balance the conflict, no matter how painful it may be.
The state of sacrifice is determined by the degree of its development. The level of which determines the intensity of the sense of pain and joy, its pathos (we will talk about it later) only gradually increases. The peak of sacrifice, as a rule, lies somewhere in the middle of the fourth century. At present, it does not belong to the public consciousness and is not known outside the narrow circle of specialists.
An important fact to describe in a “Relationship between national wealth and sacrifice” research paper is that, in the collective sphere, wealth can be directly expressed in two forms: material and spiritual.
Material material wealth is the value indicating the possibilities of a person’s activities with the surrounding reality. It includes all forms of material wealth, including natural resources and energy. In the spiritual realm, material wealth is connected with the harmony of the world, the knowledge of God, the supreme love, and the ability to create something. All this is used to maintain the world and prevent the strife between people.
In a value system, love, compassion, honesty with respect to any part of the population characterize the attitude towards the neighbor, the ability to share their sufferings without fear of experiencing pain and difficulties. These are personal qualities which, in the collective sphere, determine the characteristics of a sacrificial individual.
Collective wealth is compared to external wealth only by its ability to accumulate and accumulate wealth. An individual cannot own more than pooled and pooled material wealth. And the point is not in the amount of money or material wealth but in the degree of its strategic and functional use of the forces of production and social control.
A highly developed strategy for describing the relationship between theible and the non-material wealth in the American Dream essay is based on a set of actions: individual enterprise, joint production, the assessment of the non-material portion of the population’s income, the trade in the market, the creation of social insurance and social services.
The main difference between the approach to personal wealth and selfishness is the first step. On the one hand, a person receives only the desired and scarce attention. On the other hand, the lack of desired attention can lead to the manifestation of the desire for economic freedom, the lack of material comfort, and starvation. The combination of these factors, in the minds of the participants, is the cause of the problem of income inequality.
The solution of economic inequality essay should be formulated in the following way: to equalize the position of the individual in the group of equivalent partners, to establish responsibility for the results of such cooperation, the possibility of imposing additional obligations on the participants in the realization of the common goal.
The inequality of potential is used as the key variable indicating the importance of the changes in the social sphere and the potential of the resulting changes in the results of economic activity, in the structure of the social order.
In the 1960s, in the United States, the middle class of the population, having consolidated its financial position in the early 20th century, came close to the border of the middle class. The percentage of people beyond the middle class in the US was lower than in England (about 30%). However, the changes in the population’s income and position were more gradual. In the residential and urban sectors of the population’s income was more than two times higher than in England. The level of social stratification of the population was lower. But the wedge between the middle class and other groups of workers has decreased.
There are other, related trends which may be described in essays on income inequality: in the 1960s, the real wages of the middle class in the United States grew more than 1.5 times. The percentage of people employed in agriculture increased. The share of agricultural production was higher than in England. The use of livestock increased.