A _________________ is a close -up focus on social interaction in specific situations. 

One example of the Sociological Perspective 

Which of the following did not contribute to the origins of sociology? 

A theory ________________________________________________. 

The tube of cartilage rings that carries air both into and out of the lungs. It is located inferior to the larynx.

The inverted funnel-like organ just posterior to the oral and nasal cavities is the

MORE TALK LESS WORK IN COFFEE SHOPS               At HotBlack Coffee, a cafe in downtown Toronto, you can get walnut butter squares, lemon poppy seed muffins, biscotti and, of course, coffee. But one thing you can’t get there: Wi-Fi.             Jimson Bienenstock, the president of HotBlack, said the shop opened last year without Wi-Fi with the express intent of getting customers to — gasp! — talk to one another instead of burying their faces in laptops. “It’s about creating a social vibe,” he said. “We’re a vehicle for human interaction, otherwise it’s just a commodity.”             At many coffee outlets, workers set up makeshift offices and rely on the stores’ Wi-Fi, which has come to be considered a given — if not a right.             While HotBlack is not the first cafe to withhold Wi-Fi from the public, industry experts said such shops are in the minority and risk alienating customers. Mr. Bienenstock said he has traveled extensively, including 15 years of living in Europe, and found that the practice of setting up a temporary workplace in a cafe was largely confined to North America. He said he did not see his approach as revolutionary but as a response to society’s deep immersion into all things digital that leads people to seldom communicate face to face.             Customers initially were aghast at the decision. “What do you mean you don’t have Wi-Fi?” was a common refrain, he said, adding that the camps are divided between those who love it and those who loathe it. (Only four of 28 reviews on Yelp noted the shop’s lack of Wi-Fi.)             While the business does rely on volume, Mr. Bienenstock said the lack of Wi-Fi was not meant to get customers to linger less. He said he measured success by the din of his shop. “You’d have a hell of a time concentrating in our place because there’s so much noise,” he said. “There’s so many people talking to each other.”             To promote conviviality, other shops have adopted a no-Wi-Fi policy and gone a step further: doing away with some comfy furniture and narrowing counters to make them less accommodating for laptops. Caroline Bell, co-owner of Café Grumpy, said it offers Wi-Fi only at its Brooklyn location, which has a larger space for customers who want to work. The cafe does not offer Wi-Fi at its seven other New York City locations.             Alex M. Susskind, an associate professor of food and beverage management at the School of Hotel Administration at Cornell University, said he saw the lack of Wi-Fi as a detriment. Customers develop a “habituated expectation” and would be surprised not to have it. “That bucks the trend of what most people go to coffeehouses for,” he said.             A 2024 thesis by Rose K. Pozos about the “urban sociability” of coffee shops posited that sitting alone with a laptop in a cafe was not necessarily antisocial. “People still chose to go there instead of being alone at home or work,” wrote Ms. Pozos, who was a student at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania at the time of her thesis. “This indicates that there is a social reason for people to go to coffee shops that does not involve direct interaction with others.” She noted that other businesses are known for lacking Wi-Fi, but that does not stop people from coming with laptops. To really get people to stop, some coffee shops enforce laptop-free zones, she wrote.             Jordan Michelman, a founder of Sprudge Media Network, which writes about coffee news and culture, said that some customers simply rely on unlimited data plans for their electronic devices. Cutting off Wi-Fi has not been a trend among chain-operated coffee outlets, such as Starbucks, he wrote, adding that HotBlack was “certainly in the minority.”             “I think a lot of shops think of offering Wi-Fi as being somewhere between offering nice soap in the restroom or offering a kid’s play place,” he wrote. “It’s not quite an essential amenity or legally required to open, but it’s nice, it makes customers happy, and makes your space feel more like their space.”

Lisa and Richard wish to acquire Acacia Corp., a C corporation. As part of their discussions with Tobias, the sole shareholder of Acacia, they examined the business’ tax accounting balance sheet. The relevant information is summarized as follows:     Fair value Adjusted basis Assets:     Cash $30,000 $30,000 Equipment $70,000 $10,000 Building1 $260,000 $140,000 Land1 $410,000 $180,000 Total $770,000 $360,000       Liabilities:     Payables $20,000 $20,000 Mortgage1 $150,000 $150,000 Total $170,000 $170,000   1 Mortgage is attached to the building and the land.   Tobias’ basis in the Acacia stock is $400,000. Lisa and Richard offer to pay Tobias $900,000 for his company.   [question 4 of 4] How much gain or loss must Tobias recognize if the transaction is structured as a direct asset sale and Acacia distributes all its after-tax proceeds to Tobias in liquidation of his stock? (assume a 21 percent corporate tax rate)

HUMOR OR HUMILIATION               What should a parent do when a 2-year-old shrieks inconsolably because her string cheese wrapper tore “the wrong way”? Increasingly, the answer is “snap a photo, add a snarky caption and upload it to Instagram.”             Publicly laughing at your toddler’s distress has somehow become not only acceptable but encouraged. Websites offer “best of” compilations, or canned quips readers can use when posting tantrum photos and videos. As psychologists and parents ourselves, we understand the urge to laugh when a child howls because he’s forbidden to eat the packing peanuts from the Amazon box, and we also understand the impulse to make these moments public. The problem is the mockery.             When a child cries, parents are biologically programmed to spring into action; blood pressure increases, for example, even if it’s not your kid. Because you know there’s no real danger during a typical tantrum, you joke in an attempt to silence the false alarm your ancient brain is sounding. In addition, joking about difficulties with those who share your situation creates an in-group, a feeling of solidarity. In a classic experiment, a researcher observed that patients in a hospital ward were quick to joke with one another about their greatest discomforts: helplessness in the face of hospital routine or fear of the unknown.             The benefits of humor do come at a cost — someone must be the butt of the joke. Another hospital study noted that humor usually has an undercurrent of hostility, which is why jokesters felt compelled to respect social hierarchies. Doctors could poke fun at residents, and residents at nurses, but jokes directed up the hierarchy were not acceptable.  More formal experiments confirm the role of aggression in humor. In one, an experimenter interacted with subjects either rudely or neutrally. Later, the experimenter “accidentally” spilled hot tea on herself, and subjects to whom she was rude were much more likely to smile or laugh.             This perspective — that there’s a whiff of meanness in the tantrum-posting craze — may strike you as melodramatic. After all, he’s not crying because his dog died; he’s crying because the water in his sippy cup is too wet. It’s funny because there’s nothing wrong. But in his 2-year-old brain, those two events may be equally tragic. The prefrontal cortex has not fully developed, making it difficult to appreciate that water can only be wet or that his dog will not return, or to regulate the ensuing emotion in either case. That his agitation is illogical makes it no less real.             Another person’s distress should not be a signal to pull out your phone, craving “likes.” That’s bad enough when it’s a stranger on a plane, but how much the more so when it’s your child, who needs your respect and compassion? Yes, children should learn to laugh at themselves, and that type of learning should first occur in the safety of the family. But those early lessons should concern some harmless folly the child can understand, and a tantrum signals that it’s the wrong moment.             Parents have needs too, but you can satisfy them without mocking your child. When a tantrum jangles your nerves, instead of laughing, try this empirically proven method of interrupting the “panic cycle.” Notice your body’s response — the racing heart, the shallow breathing — and remember that your reaction is biological, not cause for alarm. Further calm yourself with a deep breath or a quick 5-4-3-2-1 grounding exercise.             Solidarity with other parents comes from sharing your experiences in raising kids, so sure, continue posting stories and pictures of your children — just don’t mock them. If you must tell someone about your kid falling apart because you are “very bad at making lassos,” tell a family member or close friend. Teasing entails trust and love; strangers on the internet don’t love your child.             Raising children is complicated, and few rules can be applied without exception. Humor offers one, though: Always laugh with your children, never at them.

STAY HOME, VOLUNTOURISTS!               Several years ago, when I was working as a reporter in Haiti, I came upon a group of Americans, struggling with heavy shovels to stir a pile of cement. They were there to build a school alongside a church. Muscular Haitians stood by watching, perplexed and a bit amused at the sight of men and women who had come all the way from the United States to do a mundane construction job.             The Americans were a familiar sight: They were voluntourists. They would come for a week or two for a “project” — a temporary medical clinic, an orphanage visit or a school construction. A 2008 survey of 300 organizations estimated that 1.6 million people volunteer on vacation. Celebrities drop in to meet locals and witness a project that bears their name. Other people come to teach English during school vacations or during a gap year. And some sun-seeking vacationers stay at beachside resorts but also want to see “the real (name your country).”             Volunteering seems an admirable way to spend a vacation. We donate money to foreign charities to make the world a better place, so why not also use our skills? However, I wonder if these good intentions are misplaced. The people I watched knew nothing about construction. They had spent thousands of dollars to fly there to do a job that Haitian bricklayers could have done much faster. Imagine how many classrooms could have been built if the volunteers had donated that money instead of flying to Haiti. Those Haitian masons could have found weeks of employment with a decent wage instead of being out of a job — at least for several days.             Moreover, constructing a school is relatively easy. Improving education, especially in a place like Haiti, is not. Do volunteer groups have long-term plans to train and recruit qualified teachers to staff the school? Do they have a budget to pay those teachers? Other school-builders I met in Haiti admitted they weren’t involved in any long-term planning.             Sometimes, volunteering causes real harm. Research in South Africa has found that “orphan tourism” — where visitors volunteer as caregivers for children whose parents died or can’t support them — has become so popular that some orphanages operate more like businesses than charities, intentionally subjecting children to poor conditions in order to entice unsuspecting volunteers to donate more money. Many “orphans,” it turns out, have living parents who, with a little support, could probably do a better job of raising their children than some volunteer can. Importantly, the constant arrivals and departures of volunteers have been linked to attachment disorders in children.             Some volunteers possess specialized skills. In Haiti I met an ophthalmologist from Milwaukee who had just spent a week performing laser eye surgery. He recounted the joy he felt at helping people who were going blind from cataracts to see. But not all voluntourists come with an expertise like ophthalmology. When I asked one volunteer why she moved to Haiti, she said, “I felt called to be here, and came not knowing what I was going to do.” In many ways, this woman is typical; many believe that being a good neighbor in a globalized world means that simply experiencing a foreign culture is not enough. They must change that place for the better.             Perhaps we are fooling ourselves. Unsatisfying as it may be, we ought to acknowledge the truth that we, as amateurs, often don’t have much to offer. Perhaps we ought to abandon the assumption that we, simply by being privileged enough to travel the world, are somehow qualified to help.             I believe that the first step toward making the world a better place is to simply experience that place. Unless you’re willing to devote your career to studying international affairs and public policy, researching the mistakes that foreign charities have made while acting upon good intentions, and identifying approaches to development that have data and hard evidence behind them — stay home, because voluntourism is not for you.