2006-08-08 10:07:38 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
I feel it's by necessity. Initially, everyone needed to work together and share their specific skills to form a community. Some gathered food, some hunted, some nurtured children, etc.
There's no longer a direct need to be social. With our society being so large and technologically advanced, you can exist while never leaving your home. With this said, I believe there is now a necessity to be social on an interpersonal level. We don't grow on spiritual and emotional levels as well if we don't interact with each other. Plus, it can be quite enjoyable. :)
2006-08-09 04:12:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mankind is social by nature.
2006-08-09 03:53:02 · answer #2 · answered by dorotheasosial 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Nature and necessity aren't really separable.
2006-08-08 17:19:37 · answer #3 · answered by seak 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure you can really separate nature from necessity here.
Why would you need to? What question are you trying to answer by separating them?
2006-08-08 20:06:13 · answer #4 · answered by Alan Turing 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe the answer is By nature, however, given that, A single human would find it hard to survive alone.
2006-08-08 17:12:56 · answer #5 · answered by Robert E. Lee 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is social by necesity
we were first hunter gathers which required a community of about 10 people to sustain
2006-08-08 17:12:06 · answer #6 · answered by emokid3113 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A bit of both and in varying degrees by person.
2006-08-08 17:51:25 · answer #7 · answered by bikerchickjill 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i believe by nature... we thrive to be around other people... just a habit i guess... the mind craves the attention...
2006-08-08 17:12:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋