Kamis, 26 Mei 2011
Comte vs Spencer vs Durkheim vs Weber vs Marx
Sosiologi merupakan ilmu yang paling dinamis, yang disebabkan beragamnya paradigma yang dianut masing-masing ahlinya. Ini masih berlangsung sampai sekarang. Akarnya adalah karena bervariasinya paradigma para Bapak Sosiologi sejak zaman dulunya, sebagai pendiri ilmu ini. Berikut dipaparkan perbandingan lima pemikiran Bapaknya sosiologi:
Rabu, 25 Mei 2011
Pilar regulatif vs normatif vs kultural-kognitif dalam KELEMBAGAAN
Menurut Richard Scott (2008: 48), kelembagaan baru adalah: “.... comprised of regulative, normative and cultural-cognitive elements that, together with associated activities and resources, provide stability and meaning to social life”
Ada 3 pilar dalam institution, yaitu:
1. Regulative pillar
2. Normative pillar
3. Cultural-cognitive pillar
Perbandingannya adalah demikian:
Ada 3 pilar dalam institution, yaitu:
1. Regulative pillar
2. Normative pillar
3. Cultural-cognitive pillar
Perbandingannya adalah demikian:
Human Capital vs Social Capital: Mana yang Lebih Diperlukan?
Oleh: Syahyuti (Puslitbang Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian, Bogor).
Konsep “sumberdaya manusia” (SDM) di Indonesia sudah sangat populer. Konsep ini menjadi landasan dalam merancang berbagai strategi pengembangan manusia. Banyak nama proyek dan program menggunakan frasa “pengembangan sumberdaya manusia”, bahkan di Deptan juga ada Badan Sumberdaya Manusia. Dalam konsep SDM ini, diasumsikan bahwa manusia dapat dikembangkan sebagai individu demi indvidu. Jika individu-individu dalam masyarakat berpendidikan baik, sehat, dan memiliki motivasi tinggi; maka diyakini akan mampu mendorong perubahan.
Dalam tulisan ini, saya ingin menyampaikan bahwa konsep “sumberdaya manusia” (human resources) tersebut masih mengandung kelemahan, atau lebih tepatnya “ketidaklengkapan”. Ia tidak lengkap karena hanya bertolak dari konsep human capital, human labour, dan intelectual capital, yang cenderung melihat manusia secara sempit. Disini manusia lebih dipandang sebagai objek ekonomi, atau sebagai kapital agar ekonomi suatu perusahaan (maupun sebuah wilayah) berkembang.
Agar kita bisa melihat manusia secara lebih utuh, maka satu lagi alat yang dibutuhkan adalah menambahkan konsep “social capital” (modal sosial). Hanya dengan memadukan konsep human capital dan social capital, maka analisis kita kepada manusia menjadi lengkap, karena keduanya sesungguhnya saling melengkapi. Jika konsep human capital merupakan hasil dari pemikiran para ahli ekonomi, maka social capital merupakan sumbangan dari ahli-ahli ilmu sosial. Social capital melengkapi pendekatan individual otonom yang merupakan karakter utama ilmu ekonomi dalam melihat manusia. Perbedaan secara diametris antara human capital (dan sekaligus tercakup human labour dan intelectual capital) dan social capital dapat dilihat pada Tabel berikut.
Dalam konsep human capital, manusia dilihat sebagai objek individual, merupakan kapital ekonomi, dan pengembangannya adalah dengan peningkatan kapasitas individual misalnya berupa peningkatan pengetahuan dan keterampilan. Sebaliknya, social capital melihat manusia sebagai makhluk sosial, yaitu bentuk relasi apa yang terjadi ketika manusia berinteraksi dengan manusia lain. Jika sebuah komunitas digambarkan dalam suatu rangkaian berupa titik (nodes) dan garis (lines), maka human capital menunjuk kepada “titik” sedangkan social capital menunjuk kepada “garis”.
Secara umum, sumberdaya manusia dimaknai sebagai “the persons employed in a business or organization”, dimana manusia adalah sumberdaya untuk bisnis. Manusia adalah kapital. Dalam pengertian tradisional, SDM adalah manusia yang ada dalam perusahaan dan bidang bisnis lain, yang menunjuk kepada individu-individu dalam perusahaan, berkaitan dengan rekruitmen, penggajian, pelatihan, dan lain-lain. Dalam pengertian ini, biasanya digunakan istilah “labor”. Ini merupakan pemaknaan yang sempit, yang hanya melihat pada aspek keterampilan dan kemampuan manusia dalam konteks “employment”. Dalam pengertian yang sederhana ini, manusia hanyalah faktor produksi dan sekaligus komoditas yang cenderung homogen dan dapat dengan mudah dipindahkan dan dipertukarkan dari satu tempat ke tempat lain, dari satu perusahaan ke perusahaan lain. SDM sama dengan "physical means of production", sebagaimana mesin dalam sebuah pabrik.
Dalam pandangan yang lebih modern, manusia (human beings) tidak hanya dipandang semata-mata sebagai sumber daya yang pasif dan bekerja sesuai kontrak belaka, namun dipandang sebagai makhluk sosial (social beings) yang dicirikan oleh daya kreatifitasnya yang tak dapat dikalahkan oleh makhluk lain di bumi ini. Manusia dihargai karena memiliki intellectual capital.
Kenapa penting mempelajari dan mengembangkan social capital dalam masyarakat? Karena dengan individu-indvidu berkualifikasi baik belum jaminan akan terciptanya sebuah kemajuan. Gampangnya begini, jika lima orang doktor ditugaskan merencanakan dan mengimplementasi satu program ke desa, maka belum jaminan akan berhasil jika di antara mereka tidak ada modal sosial yang berkembang.
Konsep social capital merupakan pelengkap dari banyak kapital yang sudah berkembang sebelumnya, yaitu natural capital, financial capital, physical capital, human capital, human made capital, dan intelectual capital. Social capital merupakan syarat penting untuk menggerakkan sebuah organisasi, bahkan untuk pembangunan. Untuk itu, social capital harus dikenali dan dikembangkan pula.
Konsep social capital dapat diterapkan untuk upaya pemberdayaan masyarakat. World Bank memberi perhatian yang tinggi dengan mengkaji peranan dan implementasi social capital khususnya untuk pengentasan kemiskinan di negara-negara berkembang. Menurut definisi World Bank, social capital adalah “…a society includes the institutions, the relationships, the attitudes and values that govern interactions among people and contribute to economic and social development”. Social capital menjadi semacam perekat yang mengikat semua orang dalam masyarakat. Di dalamnya berjalan “nilai saling berbagi” (shared values) serta pengorganisasian peran-peran (rules) yang diekspresikan dalam hubungan-hubungan personal (personal relationships), kepercayaan (trust), dan common sense tentang tanggung jawab bersama.
Jadi, elemen utama dalam social capital mencakup norms, reciprocity, trust, dan network. Social capital tercipta dari ratusan sampai ribuan interaksi antar orang setiap hari. Ia tidak berlokasi di diri pribadi atau dalam struktur sosial, tapi pada space between people. Ia menjadi pelengkap institusi. Social capital merupakan fenomena yang tumbuh dari bawah, yang berasal dari orang-orang yang membentuk koneksi sosial dan network yang didasarkan atas prinsip kepercayaan dalam hubungan yang saling menguntungkan (mutual reciprocity). Ia tidak dapat diciptakan oleh seorang individual, namun sangat tergantung kepada kapasitas masyarakat.
Bagaimana mengukur social capital? Meskipun belum ada kesepakatan, namun ada dua pendekatan untuk mengukurnya. Kita dapat melakukan sensus dengan menghitung jumlah grup atau kelompok sosial yang ada dan keanggotaan grup dalam suatu masyarakat. Dan kedua, dapat juga dengan pendekatan survey, dengan mengukur derajat kepercayaan dan daya kohesi dalam masyarakat (level of trust and civic engagement). Pada level mikro, social capital memfungsikan keteraturan sosial (social order) bersama-sama dengan perasaan bersama dan sikap berbagi (sense of belonging and shared behavioral norms). Sebagian ahli menganalogkan social capital sebagai “sinergi” yang dimiliki masyarakat tersebut. Masyarakat yang bersinergi tinggi adalah masyarakat yang bekerjasama dengan kuat, sementara masyarakat bersinergi rendah cenderung individualistis.
Kembali kepada judul di atas, maka konsep SDM kita selama ini perlu diperbaharui dengan menggabungkan berbagai konsep sebelumnya yang telah mencakup konsep human capital, human labour, dan intelectual capital; dan menambahi dengan konsep social capital. Jadi, konsep SDM baru mencakup keempatnya sekaligus, dimana pengembangan SDM mesti dilakukan secara individual dan relasi yang terbentuk antar individual. Atau dapat dikatakan, pengembangan SDM dapat menggunakan pendekatan individual ditambah pendekatan komunitas. Beberapa pendekatan pembangunan yang telah menggunakan konsep social capital misalnya adalah pendekatan Community Development dan Communiy Based Management. ********
Konsep “sumberdaya manusia” (SDM) di Indonesia sudah sangat populer. Konsep ini menjadi landasan dalam merancang berbagai strategi pengembangan manusia. Banyak nama proyek dan program menggunakan frasa “pengembangan sumberdaya manusia”, bahkan di Deptan juga ada Badan Sumberdaya Manusia. Dalam konsep SDM ini, diasumsikan bahwa manusia dapat dikembangkan sebagai individu demi indvidu. Jika individu-individu dalam masyarakat berpendidikan baik, sehat, dan memiliki motivasi tinggi; maka diyakini akan mampu mendorong perubahan.
Dalam tulisan ini, saya ingin menyampaikan bahwa konsep “sumberdaya manusia” (human resources) tersebut masih mengandung kelemahan, atau lebih tepatnya “ketidaklengkapan”. Ia tidak lengkap karena hanya bertolak dari konsep human capital, human labour, dan intelectual capital, yang cenderung melihat manusia secara sempit. Disini manusia lebih dipandang sebagai objek ekonomi, atau sebagai kapital agar ekonomi suatu perusahaan (maupun sebuah wilayah) berkembang.
Agar kita bisa melihat manusia secara lebih utuh, maka satu lagi alat yang dibutuhkan adalah menambahkan konsep “social capital” (modal sosial). Hanya dengan memadukan konsep human capital dan social capital, maka analisis kita kepada manusia menjadi lengkap, karena keduanya sesungguhnya saling melengkapi. Jika konsep human capital merupakan hasil dari pemikiran para ahli ekonomi, maka social capital merupakan sumbangan dari ahli-ahli ilmu sosial. Social capital melengkapi pendekatan individual otonom yang merupakan karakter utama ilmu ekonomi dalam melihat manusia. Perbedaan secara diametris antara human capital (dan sekaligus tercakup human labour dan intelectual capital) dan social capital dapat dilihat pada Tabel berikut.
Dalam konsep human capital, manusia dilihat sebagai objek individual, merupakan kapital ekonomi, dan pengembangannya adalah dengan peningkatan kapasitas individual misalnya berupa peningkatan pengetahuan dan keterampilan. Sebaliknya, social capital melihat manusia sebagai makhluk sosial, yaitu bentuk relasi apa yang terjadi ketika manusia berinteraksi dengan manusia lain. Jika sebuah komunitas digambarkan dalam suatu rangkaian berupa titik (nodes) dan garis (lines), maka human capital menunjuk kepada “titik” sedangkan social capital menunjuk kepada “garis”.
Secara umum, sumberdaya manusia dimaknai sebagai “the persons employed in a business or organization”, dimana manusia adalah sumberdaya untuk bisnis. Manusia adalah kapital. Dalam pengertian tradisional, SDM adalah manusia yang ada dalam perusahaan dan bidang bisnis lain, yang menunjuk kepada individu-individu dalam perusahaan, berkaitan dengan rekruitmen, penggajian, pelatihan, dan lain-lain. Dalam pengertian ini, biasanya digunakan istilah “labor”. Ini merupakan pemaknaan yang sempit, yang hanya melihat pada aspek keterampilan dan kemampuan manusia dalam konteks “employment”. Dalam pengertian yang sederhana ini, manusia hanyalah faktor produksi dan sekaligus komoditas yang cenderung homogen dan dapat dengan mudah dipindahkan dan dipertukarkan dari satu tempat ke tempat lain, dari satu perusahaan ke perusahaan lain. SDM sama dengan "physical means of production", sebagaimana mesin dalam sebuah pabrik.
Dalam pandangan yang lebih modern, manusia (human beings) tidak hanya dipandang semata-mata sebagai sumber daya yang pasif dan bekerja sesuai kontrak belaka, namun dipandang sebagai makhluk sosial (social beings) yang dicirikan oleh daya kreatifitasnya yang tak dapat dikalahkan oleh makhluk lain di bumi ini. Manusia dihargai karena memiliki intellectual capital.
Kenapa penting mempelajari dan mengembangkan social capital dalam masyarakat? Karena dengan individu-indvidu berkualifikasi baik belum jaminan akan terciptanya sebuah kemajuan. Gampangnya begini, jika lima orang doktor ditugaskan merencanakan dan mengimplementasi satu program ke desa, maka belum jaminan akan berhasil jika di antara mereka tidak ada modal sosial yang berkembang.
Konsep social capital merupakan pelengkap dari banyak kapital yang sudah berkembang sebelumnya, yaitu natural capital, financial capital, physical capital, human capital, human made capital, dan intelectual capital. Social capital merupakan syarat penting untuk menggerakkan sebuah organisasi, bahkan untuk pembangunan. Untuk itu, social capital harus dikenali dan dikembangkan pula.
Konsep social capital dapat diterapkan untuk upaya pemberdayaan masyarakat. World Bank memberi perhatian yang tinggi dengan mengkaji peranan dan implementasi social capital khususnya untuk pengentasan kemiskinan di negara-negara berkembang. Menurut definisi World Bank, social capital adalah “…a society includes the institutions, the relationships, the attitudes and values that govern interactions among people and contribute to economic and social development”. Social capital menjadi semacam perekat yang mengikat semua orang dalam masyarakat. Di dalamnya berjalan “nilai saling berbagi” (shared values) serta pengorganisasian peran-peran (rules) yang diekspresikan dalam hubungan-hubungan personal (personal relationships), kepercayaan (trust), dan common sense tentang tanggung jawab bersama.
Jadi, elemen utama dalam social capital mencakup norms, reciprocity, trust, dan network. Social capital tercipta dari ratusan sampai ribuan interaksi antar orang setiap hari. Ia tidak berlokasi di diri pribadi atau dalam struktur sosial, tapi pada space between people. Ia menjadi pelengkap institusi. Social capital merupakan fenomena yang tumbuh dari bawah, yang berasal dari orang-orang yang membentuk koneksi sosial dan network yang didasarkan atas prinsip kepercayaan dalam hubungan yang saling menguntungkan (mutual reciprocity). Ia tidak dapat diciptakan oleh seorang individual, namun sangat tergantung kepada kapasitas masyarakat.
Bagaimana mengukur social capital? Meskipun belum ada kesepakatan, namun ada dua pendekatan untuk mengukurnya. Kita dapat melakukan sensus dengan menghitung jumlah grup atau kelompok sosial yang ada dan keanggotaan grup dalam suatu masyarakat. Dan kedua, dapat juga dengan pendekatan survey, dengan mengukur derajat kepercayaan dan daya kohesi dalam masyarakat (level of trust and civic engagement). Pada level mikro, social capital memfungsikan keteraturan sosial (social order) bersama-sama dengan perasaan bersama dan sikap berbagi (sense of belonging and shared behavioral norms). Sebagian ahli menganalogkan social capital sebagai “sinergi” yang dimiliki masyarakat tersebut. Masyarakat yang bersinergi tinggi adalah masyarakat yang bekerjasama dengan kuat, sementara masyarakat bersinergi rendah cenderung individualistis.
Kembali kepada judul di atas, maka konsep SDM kita selama ini perlu diperbaharui dengan menggabungkan berbagai konsep sebelumnya yang telah mencakup konsep human capital, human labour, dan intelectual capital; dan menambahi dengan konsep social capital. Jadi, konsep SDM baru mencakup keempatnya sekaligus, dimana pengembangan SDM mesti dilakukan secara individual dan relasi yang terbentuk antar individual. Atau dapat dikatakan, pengembangan SDM dapat menggunakan pendekatan individual ditambah pendekatan komunitas. Beberapa pendekatan pembangunan yang telah menggunakan konsep social capital misalnya adalah pendekatan Community Development dan Communiy Based Management. ********
Selasa, 24 Mei 2011
Perbedaan rata-rata vs rata-rata
Average vs Mean
Average or mean? Are there any differences?
The term ‘average’ is used to express that something is statistically the norm. It would mean that a value is expected, middle, usual or common. The ‘average’ represents a value that would best represent a sample.
In mathematics, we normally consider average as the sum of all values divided by the number of values added. Strictly speaking, it is the ‘arithmetic mean’, or simply referred to as the ‘mean’. The mean is almost considered synonymous with average, but statisticians will definitely disagree, because, in essence, mean is only a form of describing an average.
An average can be described in many ways. Aside from expressing it as the mean of the sample, it can also be given as the median or the mode.
Median is the central point of the set. In statistics, it is usually the number that occurs in the middle of a set of numbers. A description of the average can be in the median, some of the time, if it is considered as the most suitable way to describe the central tendency of a particular sample.
The mode is the value that occurs most frequently in a data set. It is also considered a form of average. It will state, that the most frequently occurring data, is the average of the sample. It is also one of the most common ways to express an average, next to mean.
Having said all of that, the term ‘average’ encompasses several ways to measure what value best characterizes a particular sample. The terms and measurements that are used will really depend on the situation. It will greatly be based on how you want describe a certain data set or sample.
Additionally, mean can be in many types as well, e.g. quadratic mean, harmonic mean, geometric mean, etc. Apparently, arithmetic mean is the only one that distinguishes itself as a form of average.
In language, people will normally use the term ‘average’ in casual conversations. Mean is usually used by mathematicians and statisticians.
Summary:
1. Average can be in mean (arithmetic mean), median, or mode. Mean is basically a form of describing an average of the sample.
2. Mean can be in many various types too, but only the arithmetic mean is considered as a form of average.
3. ‘Average’ is usually used in casual English conversation, while ‘mean’ is usually used in technical language.
Read more: Difference Between Average and Mean Difference Between Average vs Mean http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-average-and-mean/#ixzz1NGBXMmWq
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-average-and-mean/
Average or mean? Are there any differences?
The term ‘average’ is used to express that something is statistically the norm. It would mean that a value is expected, middle, usual or common. The ‘average’ represents a value that would best represent a sample.
In mathematics, we normally consider average as the sum of all values divided by the number of values added. Strictly speaking, it is the ‘arithmetic mean’, or simply referred to as the ‘mean’. The mean is almost considered synonymous with average, but statisticians will definitely disagree, because, in essence, mean is only a form of describing an average.
An average can be described in many ways. Aside from expressing it as the mean of the sample, it can also be given as the median or the mode.
Median is the central point of the set. In statistics, it is usually the number that occurs in the middle of a set of numbers. A description of the average can be in the median, some of the time, if it is considered as the most suitable way to describe the central tendency of a particular sample.
The mode is the value that occurs most frequently in a data set. It is also considered a form of average. It will state, that the most frequently occurring data, is the average of the sample. It is also one of the most common ways to express an average, next to mean.
Having said all of that, the term ‘average’ encompasses several ways to measure what value best characterizes a particular sample. The terms and measurements that are used will really depend on the situation. It will greatly be based on how you want describe a certain data set or sample.
Additionally, mean can be in many types as well, e.g. quadratic mean, harmonic mean, geometric mean, etc. Apparently, arithmetic mean is the only one that distinguishes itself as a form of average.
In language, people will normally use the term ‘average’ in casual conversations. Mean is usually used by mathematicians and statisticians.
Summary:
1. Average can be in mean (arithmetic mean), median, or mode. Mean is basically a form of describing an average of the sample.
2. Mean can be in many various types too, but only the arithmetic mean is considered as a form of average.
3. ‘Average’ is usually used in casual English conversation, while ‘mean’ is usually used in technical language.
Read more: Difference Between Average and Mean Difference Between Average vs Mean http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-average-and-mean/#ixzz1NGBXMmWq
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-average-and-mean/
Perbedaan modern vs pos-modern
Modern vs Post-Modern
“Modern” and “post-modern” were terms that were developed in the 20th century. “Modern” is the term that describes the period from the 1890s to 1945, and “post-modern” refers to the period after the Second World War, mainly after 1968.
Modern is related to logical and rational thinking whereas post-modern has denied this logical thinking. While the modern approach was theoretical, objective and analytical, the post-modern approach was subjective.
The modernist was in search of an abstract truth of life whereas the post-modernist did not believe in abstract truth or in universal truth. In modernism, there was an attempt to develop a coherent worldview. But in post-modernism, there is an attempt to remove the differences between the high and the low.
A modern thinker believes in learning from the experiences of the past and also has much trust in the text that tells about the past. On the contrary, a post-modern thinker does not have such beliefs. The post-modernist thinks that the text that tells about the past is of no use in the present times.
When a modern thinker analyses a subject by going deep into it, the post-modern thinker does not believe in in-depth analysis. A post-modern thinker bases his views on hyper-reality whereas the modern thinker only considered original works as genuine. A post-modern thinker considers morality as relative.
When considering the arts, modern and post-modern art have many differences. While modern art is based on elegance and simplicity, post-modern art is considered elaborate and decorative.
When modern philosophy is based on effect and cause, post-modern philosophy is based on chance only. When modern thinkers consider truth as objective, the post-modern thinkers consider truth as relative and socially based. It can also be seen that post-modernists involve politics in everything whereas modernists are not that political.
Summary:
1.“Modern” is the term that describes the period from the 1890s to 1945, and “post-modern” refers to the period after the Second World War, mainly after 1968.
2.While the modern approach was theoretical, objective and analytical, the post-modern approach was subjective. (pendekatan modernisme adalah teoritis, objektif, dan analitis; sedangkan post modern adalah subjektif)
3.A modern thinker believes in learning from experiences of the past and also has much trust in the text that tells about the past. On the contrary, a post-modern thinker does not have such beliefs. (menurut kalangan modernisme manusia berfikir dari apa-apa yang sudah terjadi di masa lalu, sebaliknya menurut kalangan pos-modernisme, manusia tak mempercayai yang lalu-lalu itu)
4.While modern art is based on elegance and simplicity, post-modern art is considered elaborate and decorative.
Read more: Difference Between Modern and Post-Modern Difference Between Modern vs Post-Modern http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/culture-miscellaneous/difference-between-modern-and-post-modern/#ixzz1NG9BckhV
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/culture-miscellaneous/difference-between-modern-and-post-modern/
“Modern” and “post-modern” were terms that were developed in the 20th century. “Modern” is the term that describes the period from the 1890s to 1945, and “post-modern” refers to the period after the Second World War, mainly after 1968.
Modern is related to logical and rational thinking whereas post-modern has denied this logical thinking. While the modern approach was theoretical, objective and analytical, the post-modern approach was subjective.
The modernist was in search of an abstract truth of life whereas the post-modernist did not believe in abstract truth or in universal truth. In modernism, there was an attempt to develop a coherent worldview. But in post-modernism, there is an attempt to remove the differences between the high and the low.
A modern thinker believes in learning from the experiences of the past and also has much trust in the text that tells about the past. On the contrary, a post-modern thinker does not have such beliefs. The post-modernist thinks that the text that tells about the past is of no use in the present times.
When a modern thinker analyses a subject by going deep into it, the post-modern thinker does not believe in in-depth analysis. A post-modern thinker bases his views on hyper-reality whereas the modern thinker only considered original works as genuine. A post-modern thinker considers morality as relative.
When considering the arts, modern and post-modern art have many differences. While modern art is based on elegance and simplicity, post-modern art is considered elaborate and decorative.
When modern philosophy is based on effect and cause, post-modern philosophy is based on chance only. When modern thinkers consider truth as objective, the post-modern thinkers consider truth as relative and socially based. It can also be seen that post-modernists involve politics in everything whereas modernists are not that political.
Summary:
1.“Modern” is the term that describes the period from the 1890s to 1945, and “post-modern” refers to the period after the Second World War, mainly after 1968.
2.While the modern approach was theoretical, objective and analytical, the post-modern approach was subjective. (pendekatan modernisme adalah teoritis, objektif, dan analitis; sedangkan post modern adalah subjektif)
3.A modern thinker believes in learning from experiences of the past and also has much trust in the text that tells about the past. On the contrary, a post-modern thinker does not have such beliefs. (menurut kalangan modernisme manusia berfikir dari apa-apa yang sudah terjadi di masa lalu, sebaliknya menurut kalangan pos-modernisme, manusia tak mempercayai yang lalu-lalu itu)
4.While modern art is based on elegance and simplicity, post-modern art is considered elaborate and decorative.
Read more: Difference Between Modern and Post-Modern Difference Between Modern vs Post-Modern http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/culture-miscellaneous/difference-between-modern-and-post-modern/#ixzz1NG9BckhV
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/culture-miscellaneous/difference-between-modern-and-post-modern/
Perbedaan fikiran vs jiwa
Mind vs Soul
Mind and soul are two concepts that are closely related yet very distinct from one another. They both come from the inner part of a human being, particularly his brain and maybe his heart.
The soul is the spiritual nature of humankind. It is the incorporeal essence of humankind, and it is thought to be separable from the body at death. In life, it is credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotion.
The mind is man’s faculty of thinking, reasoning, and applying knowledge. It is human consciousness that starts in the brain and is manifested through man’s thoughts, actions, emotion, will, memory, and imagination.
Emotions like desire stem from our souls. Desires are aimed at things that are transient, those things that go away and die but at the same time will give us pleasure. Our minds are where we decide how to take pleasure, what we should do to achieve it, and how it should be fulfilled.
Most religions consider the soul to be man’s divine or God-given essence. While some religions believe that the soul will exit the body after death others believe that souls exist in all living things as well as in non living things.
The soul as the essence of the person decides how man behaves and this essence is an eternal part of our being. It is comprised of: the mind, our emotions, and our desires. The idea of the existence of souls is more closely connected to spirituality and religion.
For scientists, the soul is synonymous with the mind due to the fact that one can learn about the soul by studying the human brain where our minds are located. Still others believe that the soul is closely related to being alive and that when man is active, his soul is asleep; when man is asleep it is active through his dreams.
The mind on the other hand is used to refer to the individual’s thought process of reason and consciousness. It is synonymous with thought which is an individual’s private conversion with himself that is done inside his head.
Some psychologists believe that emotions like love, hate, fear, and joy are separate from the mind because only higher intellectual processes like memory and reason can be part of the mind.
For them, here are what makes up the mind:
1. Thought, which allows an individual to shape the world and deal with it to achieve his goals, plans, and desires.
2. Memory, which is a living organism’s ability to retain, store, and recall information.
3. Imagination, which is man’s ability to create ideas about certain things and experiences.
4. Consciousness, which is man’s ability to perceive his relationship to his environment.
Summary
1. Soul is the spiritual nature of man while mind is man’s faculty of thinking and reasoning.
2. The soul is considered as the essence of man while the mind is in charge of man’s consciousness and thoughts.
3. Our desires stem from our souls while our minds decide what actions to take in order to achieve our desires. (keinginan kita dari dari jiwa, sedangkan fikiran memutuskan apa tindakan yang akan kita ambil)
Read more: Difference Between Mind and Soul Difference Between Mind vs Soul http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-mind-and-soul/#ixzz1NG52Mtr6
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-mind-and-soul/
Mind and soul are two concepts that are closely related yet very distinct from one another. They both come from the inner part of a human being, particularly his brain and maybe his heart.
The soul is the spiritual nature of humankind. It is the incorporeal essence of humankind, and it is thought to be separable from the body at death. In life, it is credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotion.
The mind is man’s faculty of thinking, reasoning, and applying knowledge. It is human consciousness that starts in the brain and is manifested through man’s thoughts, actions, emotion, will, memory, and imagination.
Emotions like desire stem from our souls. Desires are aimed at things that are transient, those things that go away and die but at the same time will give us pleasure. Our minds are where we decide how to take pleasure, what we should do to achieve it, and how it should be fulfilled.
Most religions consider the soul to be man’s divine or God-given essence. While some religions believe that the soul will exit the body after death others believe that souls exist in all living things as well as in non living things.
The soul as the essence of the person decides how man behaves and this essence is an eternal part of our being. It is comprised of: the mind, our emotions, and our desires. The idea of the existence of souls is more closely connected to spirituality and religion.
For scientists, the soul is synonymous with the mind due to the fact that one can learn about the soul by studying the human brain where our minds are located. Still others believe that the soul is closely related to being alive and that when man is active, his soul is asleep; when man is asleep it is active through his dreams.
The mind on the other hand is used to refer to the individual’s thought process of reason and consciousness. It is synonymous with thought which is an individual’s private conversion with himself that is done inside his head.
Some psychologists believe that emotions like love, hate, fear, and joy are separate from the mind because only higher intellectual processes like memory and reason can be part of the mind.
For them, here are what makes up the mind:
1. Thought, which allows an individual to shape the world and deal with it to achieve his goals, plans, and desires.
2. Memory, which is a living organism’s ability to retain, store, and recall information.
3. Imagination, which is man’s ability to create ideas about certain things and experiences.
4. Consciousness, which is man’s ability to perceive his relationship to his environment.
Summary
1. Soul is the spiritual nature of man while mind is man’s faculty of thinking and reasoning.
2. The soul is considered as the essence of man while the mind is in charge of man’s consciousness and thoughts.
3. Our desires stem from our souls while our minds decide what actions to take in order to achieve our desires. (keinginan kita dari dari jiwa, sedangkan fikiran memutuskan apa tindakan yang akan kita ambil)
Read more: Difference Between Mind and Soul Difference Between Mind vs Soul http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-mind-and-soul/#ixzz1NG52Mtr6
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-mind-and-soul/
Perbedaan keinginan vs kebutuhan
Want vs Need
When it comes to owning or acquiring certain things, people would often use the terms ‘want’ and ‘need’ interchangeably. In many cases, the manner in which people would use these two terms can lead one to perceive that these two have similar meanings, if not mean absolutely just the same thing. But actually, these two economic terminologies are very different from each other.
A need is generally referred to, in economics, as something that is extremely necessary for a person to survive. If a need is not met, it would lead to the onset of disease, the inability to function effectively and efficiently in society, and even death. Needs are categorized into two groups. There are the objective or physical needs, and the subjective needs. Objective needs are those that are met through tangible things, or things that could be measured. Examples of these include food, water, shelter and even air. On the other hand, subjective needs are those that are often seen to ensure our mental health. Examples of these are self-esteem, a sense of security and approval. A political professor, named Ian Gough, enumerated eleven distinct needs that must be met by each and every human being in order to function well in society, and to survive. The inability of meeting these needs can lead to a person suffering from illness (either physically or mentally), or even death.
On the other hand, a want is something that a person desires, either immediately or in the future. Unlike needs, wants are those that differ from one person to another. For example, one person may want to own a car, while another may want to travel to an exotic country. Each person has his or her own list of wants, each with a varying level of importance. Furthermore, wants can change over a period of time. This is in contrast to needs, which remain constant throughout the lifetime of the person.
The grey area between these two, is when the desire to obtain a particular thing is so extremely great, that a person may misinterpret a want, and see it more as a need. In order to know whether what you desire for is a want or a need, is to basically ask one fundamental question: “Have you been able to survive without this?” If your answer is ‘yes’, then what you desire for is a want, no matter how much you crave for it right now.
Summary:
1. Wants and needs are economic terminologies. (Keduanya merupakan konsep dalam bidang ilmu ekonomi).
2. A need is something that is necessary for a person to survive. On the other hand, a want refers to something that a person desires, either right now or in the future. (Kebutuhan merupakan hal yang penting untuk kehidupan, sedangkan keinginan hanyalah sesuatu yang diinginkan, padahal gak penting-penting amat).
3. Wants are desires that are optional, meaning that you will still be able to go on living, even if the want is not met. On the other hand, if a particular need is not met, it could lead to a person suffering from illness, or even death. (Keinginan hanyalah satu yang opsional, boleh ada boleh ga. Tapi, kalo kebutuhan kudu, harus ada, kalo ga ente bisa menderita).
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-a-want-and-a-need/
When it comes to owning or acquiring certain things, people would often use the terms ‘want’ and ‘need’ interchangeably. In many cases, the manner in which people would use these two terms can lead one to perceive that these two have similar meanings, if not mean absolutely just the same thing. But actually, these two economic terminologies are very different from each other.
A need is generally referred to, in economics, as something that is extremely necessary for a person to survive. If a need is not met, it would lead to the onset of disease, the inability to function effectively and efficiently in society, and even death. Needs are categorized into two groups. There are the objective or physical needs, and the subjective needs. Objective needs are those that are met through tangible things, or things that could be measured. Examples of these include food, water, shelter and even air. On the other hand, subjective needs are those that are often seen to ensure our mental health. Examples of these are self-esteem, a sense of security and approval. A political professor, named Ian Gough, enumerated eleven distinct needs that must be met by each and every human being in order to function well in society, and to survive. The inability of meeting these needs can lead to a person suffering from illness (either physically or mentally), or even death.
On the other hand, a want is something that a person desires, either immediately or in the future. Unlike needs, wants are those that differ from one person to another. For example, one person may want to own a car, while another may want to travel to an exotic country. Each person has his or her own list of wants, each with a varying level of importance. Furthermore, wants can change over a period of time. This is in contrast to needs, which remain constant throughout the lifetime of the person.
The grey area between these two, is when the desire to obtain a particular thing is so extremely great, that a person may misinterpret a want, and see it more as a need. In order to know whether what you desire for is a want or a need, is to basically ask one fundamental question: “Have you been able to survive without this?” If your answer is ‘yes’, then what you desire for is a want, no matter how much you crave for it right now.
Summary:
1. Wants and needs are economic terminologies. (Keduanya merupakan konsep dalam bidang ilmu ekonomi).
2. A need is something that is necessary for a person to survive. On the other hand, a want refers to something that a person desires, either right now or in the future. (Kebutuhan merupakan hal yang penting untuk kehidupan, sedangkan keinginan hanyalah sesuatu yang diinginkan, padahal gak penting-penting amat).
3. Wants are desires that are optional, meaning that you will still be able to go on living, even if the want is not met. On the other hand, if a particular need is not met, it could lead to a person suffering from illness, or even death. (Keinginan hanyalah satu yang opsional, boleh ada boleh ga. Tapi, kalo kebutuhan kudu, harus ada, kalo ga ente bisa menderita).
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-a-want-and-a-need/
Perbedaan fakta vs pendapat vs yang dipercayai
Fact vs opinion.
Fact and Opinion are really different in the sense that Fact is something that is true and Opinion is only a belief. Fact is supported by evidence and Opinion has no backing of any evidence.
A person who makes a factual statement knows that his opinion comes from Fact. Where as a person who just makes some Opinion does not have any facts to substantiate. While Facts are true statements Opinions are not. Opinion is only a subjective statement and Fact is objective reality. Opinion can only be an emotional outburst of an individual or merely an interpretation.
Facts can be proved to be true but an Opinion can be either true or not. Opinion cannot be proved to be true. Fact is not some perception but Opinion is just a perception of the thoughts. The fact is what all believe to be true, while the opinion is believed to be true only by those who state it.
The fact is what exists and opinion is just only an opinion and nothing else. People only endorse facts as they are true. Although people may have different opinions on any subjects, they can be either endorsed or disregarded. Opinion is only a choice while fact is the worthy. Even if people think that their opinion is true and worthy, it might not be regarded by others who have different opinion on their own. Meanwhile everyone agrees when someone tells a fact.
According to the Webster’s Dictionary, the fact is “anything that is done or happened; anything actually existent; any statement strictly true; truth; reality” and opinion is something that “indicates a belief, view, sentiment, or conception.”
Opinion is only just a thought or speculation and it can lead to controversies. It may tend to dispel the truth whereas a fact is only truth and truth itself.
Facts are strong statements and opinions can be biased statements. Facts always stay back in history whereas opinions are only views that may not get into history.
When people say a fact, they can easily influence others. But an opinion may not have the force to make an influence.
People sometimes find it hard to make a distinction between a fact and an opinion. The right understanding of the difference between fact and opinion is needed to evaluate things and to make judgments
Fact vs Truth
What is the clear difference between a fact and a truth? Well, if you look into most dictionaries, you will be amazed to find that the two words are actually very close in terms of their definitions. This is because the two terms are very much related. That’s why you really can’t blame people for recognizing both as similar terms.
Fact is basically something that exists, or is present in reality. Hence, these are things that can be seen visually, and these are the things that can actually be verified. Facts are objective matters rather than subjective ones. It is not just something that you believe, but rather these are more or less the things that can be observed empirically, or by the senses. So, facts can be seen and heard, as well as proven by the other senses.
Truth can be described as the true state of a certain matter, may it be a person, a place, a thing or an event. It is what a person has come to believe. If he believes that something is true, then it is true. It also answers the questions of what’s really happening. In the technical sense, facts can answer certain ‘why’ questions, like ‘where’ or ‘when’, and even ‘how’, while truth answers the question ‘why’. The question of ‘how’, and even ‘what’, are said to be answerable by either of the two.
In terms of permanence, a fact happens to be more permanent, and almost always seems to have no changes. It is more constant than truths. For example, when you say that the sun will always rise from the east and set in the west, you are telling a fact, but when you say that you are in Los Angeles, then that is a truth, at least for that exact moment. Several hours from that time you may have gone somewhere else, making your previous statement a fallacy. Thus, a truth is something that is not universal, it is more subjective, and depends on the current situation. That’s why the truth’s existence is said to be more temporary than that of facts.
1. Facts are more objective when compared to the more subjective truths.
2. Facts are more permanent when compared to the more temporary truths.
3. Facts exist in reality, whereas truths are usually the things that one believes to be true, or the things that are true in the current situation.
4. Facts can also answer the ‘where,’ ‘when’ and ‘how’ questions, whereas truths answer the ‘why’ question.
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-fact-and-truth/
Fact and Opinion are really different in the sense that Fact is something that is true and Opinion is only a belief. Fact is supported by evidence and Opinion has no backing of any evidence.
A person who makes a factual statement knows that his opinion comes from Fact. Where as a person who just makes some Opinion does not have any facts to substantiate. While Facts are true statements Opinions are not. Opinion is only a subjective statement and Fact is objective reality. Opinion can only be an emotional outburst of an individual or merely an interpretation.
Facts can be proved to be true but an Opinion can be either true or not. Opinion cannot be proved to be true. Fact is not some perception but Opinion is just a perception of the thoughts. The fact is what all believe to be true, while the opinion is believed to be true only by those who state it.
The fact is what exists and opinion is just only an opinion and nothing else. People only endorse facts as they are true. Although people may have different opinions on any subjects, they can be either endorsed or disregarded. Opinion is only a choice while fact is the worthy. Even if people think that their opinion is true and worthy, it might not be regarded by others who have different opinion on their own. Meanwhile everyone agrees when someone tells a fact.
According to the Webster’s Dictionary, the fact is “anything that is done or happened; anything actually existent; any statement strictly true; truth; reality” and opinion is something that “indicates a belief, view, sentiment, or conception.”
Opinion is only just a thought or speculation and it can lead to controversies. It may tend to dispel the truth whereas a fact is only truth and truth itself.
Facts are strong statements and opinions can be biased statements. Facts always stay back in history whereas opinions are only views that may not get into history.
When people say a fact, they can easily influence others. But an opinion may not have the force to make an influence.
People sometimes find it hard to make a distinction between a fact and an opinion. The right understanding of the difference between fact and opinion is needed to evaluate things and to make judgments
Fact vs Truth
What is the clear difference between a fact and a truth? Well, if you look into most dictionaries, you will be amazed to find that the two words are actually very close in terms of their definitions. This is because the two terms are very much related. That’s why you really can’t blame people for recognizing both as similar terms.
Fact is basically something that exists, or is present in reality. Hence, these are things that can be seen visually, and these are the things that can actually be verified. Facts are objective matters rather than subjective ones. It is not just something that you believe, but rather these are more or less the things that can be observed empirically, or by the senses. So, facts can be seen and heard, as well as proven by the other senses.
Truth can be described as the true state of a certain matter, may it be a person, a place, a thing or an event. It is what a person has come to believe. If he believes that something is true, then it is true. It also answers the questions of what’s really happening. In the technical sense, facts can answer certain ‘why’ questions, like ‘where’ or ‘when’, and even ‘how’, while truth answers the question ‘why’. The question of ‘how’, and even ‘what’, are said to be answerable by either of the two.
In terms of permanence, a fact happens to be more permanent, and almost always seems to have no changes. It is more constant than truths. For example, when you say that the sun will always rise from the east and set in the west, you are telling a fact, but when you say that you are in Los Angeles, then that is a truth, at least for that exact moment. Several hours from that time you may have gone somewhere else, making your previous statement a fallacy. Thus, a truth is something that is not universal, it is more subjective, and depends on the current situation. That’s why the truth’s existence is said to be more temporary than that of facts.
1. Facts are more objective when compared to the more subjective truths.
2. Facts are more permanent when compared to the more temporary truths.
3. Facts exist in reality, whereas truths are usually the things that one believes to be true, or the things that are true in the current situation.
4. Facts can also answer the ‘where,’ ‘when’ and ‘how’ questions, whereas truths answer the ‘why’ question.
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-fact-and-truth/
Perbedaan subjektif vs objektif
Subjective vs Objective
In stories, newspapers, and the spoken word, people all over the world are trying to convince you to think as they do. They are bombarding you with facts and figures, opinions and projections. It is up to you to create order within this chaos and find the patterns that will help you to understand what is true, what could be true, and what is outright false. In order to do all this, you need to have a firm grip on what is objective and what is subjective.
Definition of Objective and Subjective
Objective is a statement that is completely unbiased. It is not touched by the speaker’s previous experiences or tastes. It is verifiable by looking up facts or performing mathematical calculations.
Subjective is a statement that has been colored by the character of the speaker or writer. It often has a basis in reality, but reflects the perspective through with the speaker views reality. It cannot be verified using concrete facts and figures.
When to Be Objective and Subjective
Objective : it is important to be objective when you are making any kind of a rational decision. It might involve purchasing something or deciding which job offer to take. You should also be objective when you are reading, especially news sources. Being objective when you are meeting and having discussions with new people helps you to keep your concentration focused on your goal, rather than on any emotions your meeting might trigger.
Subjective : can be used when nothing tangible is at stake. When you are watching a movie or reading a book for pleasure, being subjective and getting caught up in the world of the characters makes your experience more enjoyable. If you are discussing any type of art, you have to keep in mind that everyone’s opinions on a particular piece are subjective.
Easy Ways to Remember Objective and Subjective
Objective : sounds like the word object. You should be objective whenever you are discussing an object, something concrete that you can hold or touch. The facts that make up your objective statement should also be concrete, solid objects.
Subjective : is just the opposite. You can’t point to subjective subjects. They are all in your head and your past experiences. Subjective opinions are ephemeral and subject to any number of factors that can range from facts to emotions.
Examples of Objective and Subjective
Objective : scientific facts are objective as are mathematical proofs; essentially anything that can be backed up with solid data.
Subjective : opinions, interpretations, and any type of marketing presentation are all subjective.
Summary:
1.Objective and subjective statements are used by speakers to get their points across.
2.Objective statements are facts that can be verified by third parties while subjective statements may or may not be entirely true as they are colored by the opinions of the speaker.
3.Objective statements are most commonly found in the hard sciences, whereas subjective statements are generally used to describe the arts.
Read more: Difference Between Objective and Subjective Difference Between Objective vs Subjective http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-objective-and-subjective/#ixzz1NG25Yy73
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-objective-and-subjective/
In stories, newspapers, and the spoken word, people all over the world are trying to convince you to think as they do. They are bombarding you with facts and figures, opinions and projections. It is up to you to create order within this chaos and find the patterns that will help you to understand what is true, what could be true, and what is outright false. In order to do all this, you need to have a firm grip on what is objective and what is subjective.
Definition of Objective and Subjective
Objective is a statement that is completely unbiased. It is not touched by the speaker’s previous experiences or tastes. It is verifiable by looking up facts or performing mathematical calculations.
Subjective is a statement that has been colored by the character of the speaker or writer. It often has a basis in reality, but reflects the perspective through with the speaker views reality. It cannot be verified using concrete facts and figures.
When to Be Objective and Subjective
Objective : it is important to be objective when you are making any kind of a rational decision. It might involve purchasing something or deciding which job offer to take. You should also be objective when you are reading, especially news sources. Being objective when you are meeting and having discussions with new people helps you to keep your concentration focused on your goal, rather than on any emotions your meeting might trigger.
Subjective : can be used when nothing tangible is at stake. When you are watching a movie or reading a book for pleasure, being subjective and getting caught up in the world of the characters makes your experience more enjoyable. If you are discussing any type of art, you have to keep in mind that everyone’s opinions on a particular piece are subjective.
Easy Ways to Remember Objective and Subjective
Objective : sounds like the word object. You should be objective whenever you are discussing an object, something concrete that you can hold or touch. The facts that make up your objective statement should also be concrete, solid objects.
Subjective : is just the opposite. You can’t point to subjective subjects. They are all in your head and your past experiences. Subjective opinions are ephemeral and subject to any number of factors that can range from facts to emotions.
Examples of Objective and Subjective
Objective : scientific facts are objective as are mathematical proofs; essentially anything that can be backed up with solid data.
Subjective : opinions, interpretations, and any type of marketing presentation are all subjective.
Summary:
1.Objective and subjective statements are used by speakers to get their points across.
2.Objective statements are facts that can be verified by third parties while subjective statements may or may not be entirely true as they are colored by the opinions of the speaker.
3.Objective statements are most commonly found in the hard sciences, whereas subjective statements are generally used to describe the arts.
Read more: Difference Between Objective and Subjective Difference Between Objective vs Subjective http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-objective-and-subjective/#ixzz1NG25Yy73
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-objective-and-subjective/
Perbedaan Nilai-Nilai vs Kepercayaan
Values vs Beliefs
Knowing the difference between your beliefs and values can be a little confusing. People use both to guide their actions and behavior and to form their attitudes towards different things, but they are essentially different.
Beliefs are the convictions that we generally hold to be true, usually without actual proof or evidence. They are often, but not always connected to religion. Religious beliefs could include a belief that God created the earth in seven days, or that Jesus was the son of God. Religions other than Christianity also have their own set of beliefs. Non religious beliefs could include: that all people are created equal, which would guide us to treat everyone regardless of sex, race, religion, age, education, status etc with equal respect. Conversely someone might believe that all people are not created equal, which results in racist and sexist values and attitudes.
Beliefs are basically assumptions that we make about the world and our values stem from those beliefs. Our values are things that we deem important and can include concepts like ‘“ equality, honesty, education, effort, perseverance, loyalty, faithfulness, conservation of the environment and many, many other concepts.
Our beliefs grow from what we see, hear, experience, read and think about. From these things we develop an opinion that we hold to be true and unmovable at that time. From our beliefs we derive our values, which can either be correct or incorrect when compared with evidence, but nonetheless hold true for us.
It is possible for our beliefs and values to differ over time as we encounter evidence or have experiences that challenge our previously held views. Conversely our beliefs and values can also be strengthened by experience or evidence. For example, someone who believes in God might have that belief confirmed when they see a loved one recover from cancer and see it as a miracle delivered from God. However, a person might have their belief in the essential goodness of human beings shaken and changed if they have a truly terrible experience.
Everyone has an internalized system of beliefs and values that they have developed throughout their lives. These may stem from religion or may develop separately to religion.
Summary
1.Beliefs are concepts that we hold to be true.
2.Beliefs may come religion, but not always
3.Values are ideas that we hold to be important.
4.Values govern the way we behave, communicate and interact with others
5.Beliefs and values determine our attitudes and opinions
Read more: Difference Between Values and Beliefs Difference Between Values vs Beliefs http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-values-and-beliefs/#ixzz1NG1g7Mvx
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-values-and-beliefs/
Knowing the difference between your beliefs and values can be a little confusing. People use both to guide their actions and behavior and to form their attitudes towards different things, but they are essentially different.
Beliefs are the convictions that we generally hold to be true, usually without actual proof or evidence. They are often, but not always connected to religion. Religious beliefs could include a belief that God created the earth in seven days, or that Jesus was the son of God. Religions other than Christianity also have their own set of beliefs. Non religious beliefs could include: that all people are created equal, which would guide us to treat everyone regardless of sex, race, religion, age, education, status etc with equal respect. Conversely someone might believe that all people are not created equal, which results in racist and sexist values and attitudes.
Beliefs are basically assumptions that we make about the world and our values stem from those beliefs. Our values are things that we deem important and can include concepts like ‘“ equality, honesty, education, effort, perseverance, loyalty, faithfulness, conservation of the environment and many, many other concepts.
Our beliefs grow from what we see, hear, experience, read and think about. From these things we develop an opinion that we hold to be true and unmovable at that time. From our beliefs we derive our values, which can either be correct or incorrect when compared with evidence, but nonetheless hold true for us.
It is possible for our beliefs and values to differ over time as we encounter evidence or have experiences that challenge our previously held views. Conversely our beliefs and values can also be strengthened by experience or evidence. For example, someone who believes in God might have that belief confirmed when they see a loved one recover from cancer and see it as a miracle delivered from God. However, a person might have their belief in the essential goodness of human beings shaken and changed if they have a truly terrible experience.
Everyone has an internalized system of beliefs and values that they have developed throughout their lives. These may stem from religion or may develop separately to religion.
Summary
1.Beliefs are concepts that we hold to be true.
2.Beliefs may come religion, but not always
3.Values are ideas that we hold to be important.
4.Values govern the way we behave, communicate and interact with others
5.Beliefs and values determine our attitudes and opinions
Read more: Difference Between Values and Beliefs Difference Between Values vs Beliefs http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-values-and-beliefs/#ixzz1NG1g7Mvx
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-values-and-beliefs/
Perbedaan Fakta vs Teori
Fact vs Theory
The terms fact and theory are words with different meanings. Although both are used in many different fields of studies, they still manage to have their own distinct definitions that separate one from the other. One particular field, wherein both terms are commonly used is in Science.
In the scientific world, facts (or scientific facts) are what one can readily observe. It can pertain to any objective and real phenomenon may it be the falling of the ball after being thrown upwards or other simple observable occurrences. In this regard, the fact is that the ball will fall. More so, if this test is being done repeatedly under a controlled environment that cancels all unnecessary variables the phenomenon would have become a very obvious and undeniable fact. It is considered a fact because it will remain as true even after several centuries unless there is a more rigid and precise way of measuring a certain phenomenon.
On the contrary, theories in science are likened to the explanations to what has been observed. It is relatively greater in weight to what a hypothesis is. If a hypothesis (an intelligent guess) is the first base of formulating a scientific law then theories are placed at the second base. These are the statements that are assumed to be true (because they seem so) even if there are no hundred percent concrete evidences. Nevertheless, theories are always presented to be true even if the claims in the said theories are mere speculations or a general agreement between a significant numbers of experts. Moreover, theories are the statements that often undergo a series of tests to nullify the claims maid by those who propose them.
To display the difference between fact and theory, a good example is when a report will state that a certain hurricane killed thousands in a particular state in America yesterday because of the reckless mass evacuation spearheaded by the local officials. In this aspect, the fact is that many were killed by the hurricane while the theory is the reason behind the death of these people. Was it only because of the haphazard evacuation plan or was it also because of the intensity of the hurricane among many other reasons? Hence, facts are really the real deal while theories are still unclear although presumed to be true.
1. Facts are observations whereas theories are the explanations to those observations.
2. Theories are vague truths or unclear facts whereas facts are really facts.
Read more: Difference Between Fact and Theory Difference Between Fact vs Theory http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-fact-and-theory/#ixzz1NG1IkGAZ
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-fact-and-theory/
The terms fact and theory are words with different meanings. Although both are used in many different fields of studies, they still manage to have their own distinct definitions that separate one from the other. One particular field, wherein both terms are commonly used is in Science.
In the scientific world, facts (or scientific facts) are what one can readily observe. It can pertain to any objective and real phenomenon may it be the falling of the ball after being thrown upwards or other simple observable occurrences. In this regard, the fact is that the ball will fall. More so, if this test is being done repeatedly under a controlled environment that cancels all unnecessary variables the phenomenon would have become a very obvious and undeniable fact. It is considered a fact because it will remain as true even after several centuries unless there is a more rigid and precise way of measuring a certain phenomenon.
On the contrary, theories in science are likened to the explanations to what has been observed. It is relatively greater in weight to what a hypothesis is. If a hypothesis (an intelligent guess) is the first base of formulating a scientific law then theories are placed at the second base. These are the statements that are assumed to be true (because they seem so) even if there are no hundred percent concrete evidences. Nevertheless, theories are always presented to be true even if the claims in the said theories are mere speculations or a general agreement between a significant numbers of experts. Moreover, theories are the statements that often undergo a series of tests to nullify the claims maid by those who propose them.
To display the difference between fact and theory, a good example is when a report will state that a certain hurricane killed thousands in a particular state in America yesterday because of the reckless mass evacuation spearheaded by the local officials. In this aspect, the fact is that many were killed by the hurricane while the theory is the reason behind the death of these people. Was it only because of the haphazard evacuation plan or was it also because of the intensity of the hurricane among many other reasons? Hence, facts are really the real deal while theories are still unclear although presumed to be true.
1. Facts are observations whereas theories are the explanations to those observations.
2. Theories are vague truths or unclear facts whereas facts are really facts.
Read more: Difference Between Fact and Theory Difference Between Fact vs Theory http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-fact-and-theory/#ixzz1NG1IkGAZ
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-fact-and-theory/
Perbedaan Perilaku vs Sikap
Behavior vs Attitude
Each person is distinct from one another, not only in our physical aspects but especially so in our behaviors and attitudes.
‘Behavior’ is an inherent trait of an organism, including man, towards its environment and other organisms. It is controlled by our endocrine and nervous systems and the complexity of our behavioral patterns are set by the complexity of our nervous system.
Our behaviors are either innate or acquired and learned from our environment. It is our response to the different stimuli and other internal or external inputs whether voluntary or not.
‘Attitude’ is how we react to these stimuli or input. We either have a positive or negative reaction towards an object, a person, place, thing, or event. It is how we judge these things and the way that they affect us that sets our behavior towards them. We develop our attitudes through experience and observation.
Attitudes change according to our experiences although hereditary factors may also affect our attitudes. Our attitudes can be influenced by these factors:
1. Intelligence. Intelligent people process input more thoroughly and are less influenced by one-sided input.
2. Self-esteem. People with moderate self esteem are more easily persuaded than those with a higher or much lower self-esteem.
3. Credibility. The credibility of the source of the input, its expertise about the subject, and overall trustworthiness can affect our attitude towards the input.
4. Presentation. How the input is presented is very important in the formation of our attitude towards it.
We may also have conscious and unconscious attitudes, rational, or irrational attitudes that involve our thoughts, feelings, and intuition. Extroversion and introversion are two types of attitude.
Extroversion is an attitude that is relaxed and confident. People with this attitude get their motivation from other people and tend to act first before thinking. Introversion is an attitude that is less dependent on external motivation. Introverts usually think before they act and are reserved, subtle, and prefer to work alone.
‘Behavior’ on the other hand can be common, acceptable, or unacceptable. We judge behavior’s acceptability by our social norms, and we naturally abide by these norms. It is considered a basic human action, and our behavior is dependent upon the behavior of others.
These factors can affect our behavior:
1. Genetics. Biological factors can affect the way we behave towards certain things.
2. Attitude. How we react to things can affect our behavior.
3. Social norms. Whether we respond with a certain behavior or not depends on our beliefs.
4. Control. Our belief on the ease or difficulty of a certain situation affects our behavior.
5. Core faith. This includes motivation by our family, peers, the media, and society.
Summary:
1. ‘Behavior’ is an inherent trait of an organism while ‘attitude’ is a human trait.
2. Our behavior is controlled by our endocrine system while our attitude can be influenced by factors that can be internal or external.
3. Our behaviors are set by our social norms while our attitudes are set by how we perceive things.
4. Organisms may have similar behavioral patterns while humans have attitudes that are distinct and different from each other.
Read more: Difference Between Behavior and Attitude Difference Between Behavior vs Attitude http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-behavior-and-attitude/#ixzz1NFzwELmc
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-behavior-and-attitude/
Each person is distinct from one another, not only in our physical aspects but especially so in our behaviors and attitudes.
‘Behavior’ is an inherent trait of an organism, including man, towards its environment and other organisms. It is controlled by our endocrine and nervous systems and the complexity of our behavioral patterns are set by the complexity of our nervous system.
Our behaviors are either innate or acquired and learned from our environment. It is our response to the different stimuli and other internal or external inputs whether voluntary or not.
‘Attitude’ is how we react to these stimuli or input. We either have a positive or negative reaction towards an object, a person, place, thing, or event. It is how we judge these things and the way that they affect us that sets our behavior towards them. We develop our attitudes through experience and observation.
Attitudes change according to our experiences although hereditary factors may also affect our attitudes. Our attitudes can be influenced by these factors:
1. Intelligence. Intelligent people process input more thoroughly and are less influenced by one-sided input.
2. Self-esteem. People with moderate self esteem are more easily persuaded than those with a higher or much lower self-esteem.
3. Credibility. The credibility of the source of the input, its expertise about the subject, and overall trustworthiness can affect our attitude towards the input.
4. Presentation. How the input is presented is very important in the formation of our attitude towards it.
We may also have conscious and unconscious attitudes, rational, or irrational attitudes that involve our thoughts, feelings, and intuition. Extroversion and introversion are two types of attitude.
Extroversion is an attitude that is relaxed and confident. People with this attitude get their motivation from other people and tend to act first before thinking. Introversion is an attitude that is less dependent on external motivation. Introverts usually think before they act and are reserved, subtle, and prefer to work alone.
‘Behavior’ on the other hand can be common, acceptable, or unacceptable. We judge behavior’s acceptability by our social norms, and we naturally abide by these norms. It is considered a basic human action, and our behavior is dependent upon the behavior of others.
These factors can affect our behavior:
1. Genetics. Biological factors can affect the way we behave towards certain things.
2. Attitude. How we react to things can affect our behavior.
3. Social norms. Whether we respond with a certain behavior or not depends on our beliefs.
4. Control. Our belief on the ease or difficulty of a certain situation affects our behavior.
5. Core faith. This includes motivation by our family, peers, the media, and society.
Summary:
1. ‘Behavior’ is an inherent trait of an organism while ‘attitude’ is a human trait.
2. Our behavior is controlled by our endocrine system while our attitude can be influenced by factors that can be internal or external.
3. Our behaviors are set by our social norms while our attitudes are set by how we perceive things.
4. Organisms may have similar behavioral patterns while humans have attitudes that are distinct and different from each other.
Read more: Difference Between Behavior and Attitude Difference Between Behavior vs Attitude http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-behavior-and-attitude/#ixzz1NFzwELmc
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-behavior-and-attitude/
Etika vs Nilai-Nilai
Ethics vs Values
Every person has certain set values and a certain code of ethics which are very much valued. Some people who do not know the exact difference between ‘values’ and ‘ethics’ often use the two words interchangeably. Though these two are different, these two together form the basis for making decisions.
What are values? They are the basic beliefs that an individual thinks to be true. Every individual has a set of values through which he looks at all things and also at the world. It can be said that most of the people will never deviate from their values. The values can be said to be the guiding principles in one’s life. ‘Value’ can be defined as a bridge by which an individual makes a decision regarding good and bad, right or wrong, and most important or less important.
Ethics is guidelines or rules that are set for a society or an organization rather than for an individual. Ethics can be defined as a set of rules formulated by a country or a company or some institutions. Ethics is mainly based on moral values. Ethics is not that it is set for any particular society, but it is mainly based on virtues, rights, and obligations. For example, the obligation to refrain from crimes, killings, and rape is an ethical aspect. Ethics has also been built on loyalty, honesty, and compassion.
Values are very much personal while ethics is very much societal. One can also see that values and ethics sometimes can be in conflict. Even if one has certain values, he will not be able to entertain certain decisions based on the ethical codes. Though abortion is considered to be legal, most people do not approve of it morally.
Summary:
1. Values are the basic beliefs that an individual thinks to be true. Every individual has a set of values through which he looks at all things and also at the world.
2. Ethics is guidelines or rules that are set for a society or an organization rather than for an individual.
3. Values can be said to be the guiding principles in one’s life. ‘Value’ can be defined as a bridge by which an individual makes a decision regarding good and bad, right or wrong, and most important or less important.
4. Ethics can be defined as set of rules formulated by a country or a company or some institutions. Ethics is mainly based on the moral values.
Read more: Difference Between Ethics and Values Difference Between Ethics vs Values http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-ethics-and-values/#ixzz1NFzKcw30
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-ethics-and-values/
Every person has certain set values and a certain code of ethics which are very much valued. Some people who do not know the exact difference between ‘values’ and ‘ethics’ often use the two words interchangeably. Though these two are different, these two together form the basis for making decisions.
What are values? They are the basic beliefs that an individual thinks to be true. Every individual has a set of values through which he looks at all things and also at the world. It can be said that most of the people will never deviate from their values. The values can be said to be the guiding principles in one’s life. ‘Value’ can be defined as a bridge by which an individual makes a decision regarding good and bad, right or wrong, and most important or less important.
Ethics is guidelines or rules that are set for a society or an organization rather than for an individual. Ethics can be defined as a set of rules formulated by a country or a company or some institutions. Ethics is mainly based on moral values. Ethics is not that it is set for any particular society, but it is mainly based on virtues, rights, and obligations. For example, the obligation to refrain from crimes, killings, and rape is an ethical aspect. Ethics has also been built on loyalty, honesty, and compassion.
Values are very much personal while ethics is very much societal. One can also see that values and ethics sometimes can be in conflict. Even if one has certain values, he will not be able to entertain certain decisions based on the ethical codes. Though abortion is considered to be legal, most people do not approve of it morally.
Summary:
1. Values are the basic beliefs that an individual thinks to be true. Every individual has a set of values through which he looks at all things and also at the world.
2. Ethics is guidelines or rules that are set for a society or an organization rather than for an individual.
3. Values can be said to be the guiding principles in one’s life. ‘Value’ can be defined as a bridge by which an individual makes a decision regarding good and bad, right or wrong, and most important or less important.
4. Ethics can be defined as set of rules formulated by a country or a company or some institutions. Ethics is mainly based on the moral values.
Read more: Difference Between Ethics and Values Difference Between Ethics vs Values http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-ethics-and-values/#ixzz1NFzKcw30
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-ethics-and-values/
Kebudayaan vs Peradaban
Culture Vs Civilization
Firstly, civilization in theory is bigger than culture in which an entire civilization can encompass one single unit of culture. Civilization is a bigger unit than culture because it is a complex aggregate of the society that dwells within a certain area, along with its forms of government, norms, and even culture. Thus, culture is just a spec or a portion of an entire civilization. For example, the Egyptian civilization has an Egyptian culture in the same way as the Greek civilization has their Greek culture.
A culture ordinarily exists within a civilization. In this regard, each civilization can contain not only one but several cultures. Comparing culture and civilization is like showing the difference between language and the country to which it is being used.
Culture can exist in itself whereas civilization cannot be called a civilization if it does not possess a certain culture. It’s just like asking how a nation can exist on its own without the use of a medium of communication. Hence, a civilization will become empty if it does not have its culture, no matter how little it is.
Culture can be something that is tangible and it can also be something that isn’t. Culture can become a physical material if it is a product of the beliefs, customs and practices of a certain people with a definite culture. But a civilization is something that can be seen as a whole and it is more or less tangible although its basic components, like culture, can be immaterial.
Culture can be learned and in the same manner it can also be transmitted from one generation to the next. Using a medium of speech and communication, it is possible for a certain type of culture to evolve and even be inherited by another group of people. On the other hand, civilization cannot be transferred by mere language alone. Because of its complexity and magnitude, you need to transfer all of the raw aggregates of a civilization for it to be entirely passed on. It just grows, degrades and may eventually end if all its subunits will fail.
Summary :
1.Culture is by definition smaller than a civilization.
2.Culture can grow and exist without residing in a formal civilization whereas a civilization will never grow and exist without the element of culture.
3.Culture can be tangible or intangible whereas civilization is something that is more tangible because it is what you see as a whole
4.Culture can be transmitted through symbols in the form of language whereas an entire civilization cannot be transmitted by mere language alone.
Read more: Difference Between Culture and Civilization Difference Between Culture vs Civilization http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-culture-and-civilization/#ixzz1NFvJ6Q4p
sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-culture-and-civilization/
Firstly, civilization in theory is bigger than culture in which an entire civilization can encompass one single unit of culture. Civilization is a bigger unit than culture because it is a complex aggregate of the society that dwells within a certain area, along with its forms of government, norms, and even culture. Thus, culture is just a spec or a portion of an entire civilization. For example, the Egyptian civilization has an Egyptian culture in the same way as the Greek civilization has their Greek culture.
A culture ordinarily exists within a civilization. In this regard, each civilization can contain not only one but several cultures. Comparing culture and civilization is like showing the difference between language and the country to which it is being used.
Culture can exist in itself whereas civilization cannot be called a civilization if it does not possess a certain culture. It’s just like asking how a nation can exist on its own without the use of a medium of communication. Hence, a civilization will become empty if it does not have its culture, no matter how little it is.
Culture can be something that is tangible and it can also be something that isn’t. Culture can become a physical material if it is a product of the beliefs, customs and practices of a certain people with a definite culture. But a civilization is something that can be seen as a whole and it is more or less tangible although its basic components, like culture, can be immaterial.
Culture can be learned and in the same manner it can also be transmitted from one generation to the next. Using a medium of speech and communication, it is possible for a certain type of culture to evolve and even be inherited by another group of people. On the other hand, civilization cannot be transferred by mere language alone. Because of its complexity and magnitude, you need to transfer all of the raw aggregates of a civilization for it to be entirely passed on. It just grows, degrades and may eventually end if all its subunits will fail.
Summary :
1.Culture is by definition smaller than a civilization.
2.Culture can grow and exist without residing in a formal civilization whereas a civilization will never grow and exist without the element of culture.
3.Culture can be tangible or intangible whereas civilization is something that is more tangible because it is what you see as a whole
4.Culture can be transmitted through symbols in the form of language whereas an entire civilization cannot be transmitted by mere language alone.
Read more: Difference Between Culture and Civilization Difference Between Culture vs Civilization http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-culture-and-civilization/#ixzz1NFvJ6Q4p
sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-culture-and-civilization/
Efisiensi vs Keefektifan
Efficiency vs effectiveness
Efficiency and effectiveness are both commonly used management terms. Yet, while they sound similar and start with the same letters, they both mean different things.
Efficiency refers to doing things in a right manner. Scientifically, it is defined as the output to input ratio and focuses on getting the maximum output with minimum resources. Effectiveness, on the other hand, refers to doing the right things. It constantly measures if the actual output meets the desired output.
Since efficiency is all about focusing on the process, importance is given to the ‘means’ of doing things whereas effectiveness focuses on achieving the ‘end’ goal.
Efficiency is concerned with the present state or the ‘status quo’. Thinking about the future and adding or eliminating any resources might disturb the current state of efficiency. Effectiveness, on the other hand, believes in meeting the end goal and therefore takes into consideration any variables that may change in the future.
In order to be efficient time and again, discipline and rigor is required. This can build inflexibility into the system. Effectiveness, on the other hand, keeps the long term strategy in mind and is thus more adaptable to the changing environment.
Since efficiency is about doing things right, it demands documentation and repetition of the same steps. Doing the same thing again and again in the same manner will certainly discourage innovation. On the other hand, effectiveness encourages innovation as it demands people to think, the different ways they can meet the desired goal.
Efficiency will look at avoiding mistakes or errors whereas effectiveness is about gaining success.
In the earlier days of mass production, efficiency was the most important performance indicator for any organization. However, with consumers facing an increasing number of choices, effectiveness of an organization is always questioned. In order to be a successful organization, there needs to be a balance between effectiveness and efficiency. Only being efficient and not meeting the requirements of the stakeholders of the organization is of little use to anybody. And effectiveness may result in success but at what cost?
Summary:
1.Efficiency means doing the things right whereas Effectiveness is about doing the right things.
2.Efficiency focuses on the process or ‘means’ whereas Effectiveness focuses on the end.
3.Efficiency is restricted to the present state whereas effectiveness involves thinking long term.
4.Organizations have to be both effective and efficient in order to be successful.
Read more: Difference Between Efficiency and Effectiveness Difference Between Efficiency vs Effectiveness http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-efficiency-and-effectiveness/#ixzz1NFuk0GM2
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-efficiency-and-effectiveness/
Efficiency and effectiveness are both commonly used management terms. Yet, while they sound similar and start with the same letters, they both mean different things.
Efficiency refers to doing things in a right manner. Scientifically, it is defined as the output to input ratio and focuses on getting the maximum output with minimum resources. Effectiveness, on the other hand, refers to doing the right things. It constantly measures if the actual output meets the desired output.
Since efficiency is all about focusing on the process, importance is given to the ‘means’ of doing things whereas effectiveness focuses on achieving the ‘end’ goal.
Efficiency is concerned with the present state or the ‘status quo’. Thinking about the future and adding or eliminating any resources might disturb the current state of efficiency. Effectiveness, on the other hand, believes in meeting the end goal and therefore takes into consideration any variables that may change in the future.
In order to be efficient time and again, discipline and rigor is required. This can build inflexibility into the system. Effectiveness, on the other hand, keeps the long term strategy in mind and is thus more adaptable to the changing environment.
Since efficiency is about doing things right, it demands documentation and repetition of the same steps. Doing the same thing again and again in the same manner will certainly discourage innovation. On the other hand, effectiveness encourages innovation as it demands people to think, the different ways they can meet the desired goal.
Efficiency will look at avoiding mistakes or errors whereas effectiveness is about gaining success.
In the earlier days of mass production, efficiency was the most important performance indicator for any organization. However, with consumers facing an increasing number of choices, effectiveness of an organization is always questioned. In order to be a successful organization, there needs to be a balance between effectiveness and efficiency. Only being efficient and not meeting the requirements of the stakeholders of the organization is of little use to anybody. And effectiveness may result in success but at what cost?
Summary:
1.Efficiency means doing the things right whereas Effectiveness is about doing the right things.
2.Efficiency focuses on the process or ‘means’ whereas Effectiveness focuses on the end.
3.Efficiency is restricted to the present state whereas effectiveness involves thinking long term.
4.Organizations have to be both effective and efficient in order to be successful.
Read more: Difference Between Efficiency and Effectiveness Difference Between Efficiency vs Effectiveness http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-efficiency-and-effectiveness/#ixzz1NFuk0GM2
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-efficiency-and-effectiveness/
Kultur (Kebudayaan) vs Masyarakat
Culture vs Society
Culture is changing constantly. Certain products of culture are governments, languages, buildings and man made things. It is a powerful tool for the survival of mankind. Cultural patterns of ancient people are reflected in their artifacts and are studied by archaeologists to understand their way of life. Culture is an important part of a society for the very existence of society. Culture also plays an important role to establish discipline in a society. According to the behavior patterns and perceptions, there are three levels of culture.
First one is the body of cultural traditions that makes you to differentiate a society from others. When people speak German, Japanese or Italian, then they are referred as the language, beliefs and traditions shared by each set of people that is different from others. Second one is the subculture in which different societies from different parts of the world preserve their original culture. Such people are the part of a subculture in the new society. For example, subcultures in United States consist of ethnic groups like Mexican Americans, African Americans and Vietnamese Americans. The members of each subculture share a common language, identity, food tradition and other traits through a common ancestral upbringing. The third level is the cultural universals that consist of behavior patterns shared by the humanity as a whole. Some examples of such behavior patterns are communicating with a verbal language, use of age and gender to classify people, differentiation based on marriage and relationships.
Society is referred to as a group of people who share common area, culture and behavior patterns. Society is united and referred as a distinct entity. Society consists of a government, health care, education system and several occupations of people. In a society each and every individual is important because each individual can contribute something to the society. Also you can find smaller groups of people with a certain goal which include groups of students, government agencies or groups that raise money for a specific cause in a society. Many different cultures can be found within a society. You can find several differences within a country or town.
In a broad sense, the society is made of varied multitude of individuals with social, economic or industrial infrastructure. One of the major benefits of a society is that it serves the individuals in the time of crisis. Societies are also organized depending up on their political structure such as State, bands, chiefdoms and tribes. The degrees of political power vary according to the cultural, historical and geographical environments. Certain societies give certain status to an individual or group of people when an individual or group performs a favorable action for the society.
Read more: Difference Between Culture and Society Difference Between Culture vs Society http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-culture-and-society/#ixzz1NFsPSpkj
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-culture-and-society/
Culture is changing constantly. Certain products of culture are governments, languages, buildings and man made things. It is a powerful tool for the survival of mankind. Cultural patterns of ancient people are reflected in their artifacts and are studied by archaeologists to understand their way of life. Culture is an important part of a society for the very existence of society. Culture also plays an important role to establish discipline in a society. According to the behavior patterns and perceptions, there are three levels of culture.
First one is the body of cultural traditions that makes you to differentiate a society from others. When people speak German, Japanese or Italian, then they are referred as the language, beliefs and traditions shared by each set of people that is different from others. Second one is the subculture in which different societies from different parts of the world preserve their original culture. Such people are the part of a subculture in the new society. For example, subcultures in United States consist of ethnic groups like Mexican Americans, African Americans and Vietnamese Americans. The members of each subculture share a common language, identity, food tradition and other traits through a common ancestral upbringing. The third level is the cultural universals that consist of behavior patterns shared by the humanity as a whole. Some examples of such behavior patterns are communicating with a verbal language, use of age and gender to classify people, differentiation based on marriage and relationships.
Society is referred to as a group of people who share common area, culture and behavior patterns. Society is united and referred as a distinct entity. Society consists of a government, health care, education system and several occupations of people. In a society each and every individual is important because each individual can contribute something to the society. Also you can find smaller groups of people with a certain goal which include groups of students, government agencies or groups that raise money for a specific cause in a society. Many different cultures can be found within a society. You can find several differences within a country or town.
In a broad sense, the society is made of varied multitude of individuals with social, economic or industrial infrastructure. One of the major benefits of a society is that it serves the individuals in the time of crisis. Societies are also organized depending up on their political structure such as State, bands, chiefdoms and tribes. The degrees of political power vary according to the cultural, historical and geographical environments. Certain societies give certain status to an individual or group of people when an individual or group performs a favorable action for the society.
Read more: Difference Between Culture and Society Difference Between Culture vs Society http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-culture-and-society/#ixzz1NFsPSpkj
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-culture-and-society/
Sosiologi vs Psikologi
Sociology vs Psychology
There’s been a common conception that sociology and psychology are one and the same. Unfortunately, this shouldn’t be the case. The reason for this confusion is probably because of the fact that both sciences include human beings in their studies, but only looking from differing perspectives.
First, psychology delves into understanding how the human mind works. It seeks to understand why a person behaves, acts, or thinks like he does. Sociology is different as it targets the society or groups of persons, as an entire nation for example. It deals with man’s social behavior and the functioning of organizations, institutions or societies. By doing so, sociology can look into population changes and the relative effect of certain events to a group of people. With this, you can see that psychology is of a smaller scale investigation compared to sociology that focuses on groups.
Psychology aims at helping an individual regain normal psychological functioning so that he or she can live independently in the community and establish healthy interpersonal relationships. Hence, the study deals with innate conflicts that exist within the individual. Sociology, however, focuses on giving support to a group of individuals like the family so that they can live through certain stages of crises.
Being concerned more about groups and how they can be affected by external factors, sociology may be helpful for some professions. It will not come as a surprise if someone who studies sociology also gets to study a little about crimes like crime statistics and patterns among certain groups of people, as this field is an important prerequisite to the field of criminology. For example, sociology may seek to understand where and what crimes are common to a specific demographic group.
Studying psychology gives you the edge of understanding an individual better. As such, this field is more linked to the practice of law since it helps lawyers detect signs, if a witness or an asset is lying. One even learns how to make others follow him or her through the art of persuasion.
1. Sociology is more on the group level like how a person behaves or acts within his society. Psychology is more on the individual level like how a person’s thinking affects his behavior.
2. Psychology is aimed at helping an individual regain his normal psychological functioning so he can live independently, while sociology is more on giving support to groups of people experiencing disruptive external factors.
3. Sociology is helpful for professions (like criminology) that involve the society at large, while psychology is beneficial to people (lawyers as such) who are dealing with individuals
Read more: Difference Between Sociology and Psychology Difference Between Sociology vs Psychology http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-sociology-and-psychology/#ixzz1NFryZkHQ
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-sociology-and-psychology/
There’s been a common conception that sociology and psychology are one and the same. Unfortunately, this shouldn’t be the case. The reason for this confusion is probably because of the fact that both sciences include human beings in their studies, but only looking from differing perspectives.
First, psychology delves into understanding how the human mind works. It seeks to understand why a person behaves, acts, or thinks like he does. Sociology is different as it targets the society or groups of persons, as an entire nation for example. It deals with man’s social behavior and the functioning of organizations, institutions or societies. By doing so, sociology can look into population changes and the relative effect of certain events to a group of people. With this, you can see that psychology is of a smaller scale investigation compared to sociology that focuses on groups.
Psychology aims at helping an individual regain normal psychological functioning so that he or she can live independently in the community and establish healthy interpersonal relationships. Hence, the study deals with innate conflicts that exist within the individual. Sociology, however, focuses on giving support to a group of individuals like the family so that they can live through certain stages of crises.
Being concerned more about groups and how they can be affected by external factors, sociology may be helpful for some professions. It will not come as a surprise if someone who studies sociology also gets to study a little about crimes like crime statistics and patterns among certain groups of people, as this field is an important prerequisite to the field of criminology. For example, sociology may seek to understand where and what crimes are common to a specific demographic group.
Studying psychology gives you the edge of understanding an individual better. As such, this field is more linked to the practice of law since it helps lawyers detect signs, if a witness or an asset is lying. One even learns how to make others follow him or her through the art of persuasion.
1. Sociology is more on the group level like how a person behaves or acts within his society. Psychology is more on the individual level like how a person’s thinking affects his behavior.
2. Psychology is aimed at helping an individual regain his normal psychological functioning so he can live independently, while sociology is more on giving support to groups of people experiencing disruptive external factors.
3. Sociology is helpful for professions (like criminology) that involve the society at large, while psychology is beneficial to people (lawyers as such) who are dealing with individuals
Read more: Difference Between Sociology and Psychology Difference Between Sociology vs Psychology http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-sociology-and-psychology/#ixzz1NFryZkHQ
Sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-sociology-and-psychology/
Antropologi vs sosiologi
Anthropology vs Sociology
The study of human beings can be the study of a lifetime. Trying to understand human behavior has been a task that has occupied some of the greatest thinkers of our race for thousands of years. Disciplined study of the human race has been taking place since the Renaissance. Today there are many fields and sub-fields of study. While humankind is the subject matter of all these fields the philosophical approach to study varies from discipline to discipline. It may not be apparent at first, but there are some differences between anthropology and sociology.
Definition of Anthropology and Sociology
•Anthropology ‘“ is a social science that is concerned with human culture as well as the physical and social characteristics that create that culture. Often it will compare one group of humans to another or even compare humans with animals.
•Sociology ‘“ is a social science that studies the functionality of human society including origins, development, and organization. It will also look at these attributes inside institutions and organizations.
History of Anthropology and Sociology
•Anthropology ‘“ human beings have been observing and recording the behavior of others since the dawn of civilization. Some credit Herodotus and Tacitus with being the first anthropologists. However, it wasn’t until the late eighteenth century that a codified study of other cultures began. Traditionally, anthropology has been about Westerners studying the culture of less technologically advanced peoples. In some instances the study of anthropology led to racist theories about the overall advancement of difference groups.
•Sociology ‘“ has also been practiced since the Greek period as a study of one’s surrounding society. However, it wasn’t until the late nineteenth century that sociology was recognized as an academic discipline and became part of university curriculum.
Focus of Anthropology and Sociology
•Anthropology ‘“ is interested in the overall culture of a group of people. This includes social institutions, art, history, mythology, and common mores, among other traits. Anthropologies now study societies all over the world, but look for overarching themes that are reinforced through case studies. It also includes archeology, and due to a great amount of substantive speculation is thought to be a softer science than sociology.
•Sociology ‘“ is a quantitative social science. Most theories are based on polls, statistical analysis, sampling, and large collections of life histories. Sociologists strive to be as impartial and scientific as possible as they gather data. The data analyzed by sociologists is often used by government officials and market researchers alike.
Summary:
1. Anthropology and sociology are both fields of social science that study the behavior of humans within their societies.
2. Traditionally anthropology dealt with the study of cultures different from one’s own, especially those less advanced while sociology was used to understand one’s own society.
3. Today anthropology tends to look at the big picture of human culture while sociology spends more time analyzing data from a specific study.
4. Anthropology is considered to be a softer science than sociology as it bases more of its conclusions on case studies than hard data.
Read more: Difference Between Anthropology and Sociology Difference Between Anthropology vs Sociology http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-anthropology-and-sociology/#ixzz1NFrRv2Ll
The study of human beings can be the study of a lifetime. Trying to understand human behavior has been a task that has occupied some of the greatest thinkers of our race for thousands of years. Disciplined study of the human race has been taking place since the Renaissance. Today there are many fields and sub-fields of study. While humankind is the subject matter of all these fields the philosophical approach to study varies from discipline to discipline. It may not be apparent at first, but there are some differences between anthropology and sociology.
Definition of Anthropology and Sociology
•Anthropology ‘“ is a social science that is concerned with human culture as well as the physical and social characteristics that create that culture. Often it will compare one group of humans to another or even compare humans with animals.
•Sociology ‘“ is a social science that studies the functionality of human society including origins, development, and organization. It will also look at these attributes inside institutions and organizations.
History of Anthropology and Sociology
•Anthropology ‘“ human beings have been observing and recording the behavior of others since the dawn of civilization. Some credit Herodotus and Tacitus with being the first anthropologists. However, it wasn’t until the late eighteenth century that a codified study of other cultures began. Traditionally, anthropology has been about Westerners studying the culture of less technologically advanced peoples. In some instances the study of anthropology led to racist theories about the overall advancement of difference groups.
•Sociology ‘“ has also been practiced since the Greek period as a study of one’s surrounding society. However, it wasn’t until the late nineteenth century that sociology was recognized as an academic discipline and became part of university curriculum.
Focus of Anthropology and Sociology
•Anthropology ‘“ is interested in the overall culture of a group of people. This includes social institutions, art, history, mythology, and common mores, among other traits. Anthropologies now study societies all over the world, but look for overarching themes that are reinforced through case studies. It also includes archeology, and due to a great amount of substantive speculation is thought to be a softer science than sociology.
•Sociology ‘“ is a quantitative social science. Most theories are based on polls, statistical analysis, sampling, and large collections of life histories. Sociologists strive to be as impartial and scientific as possible as they gather data. The data analyzed by sociologists is often used by government officials and market researchers alike.
Summary:
1. Anthropology and sociology are both fields of social science that study the behavior of humans within their societies.
2. Traditionally anthropology dealt with the study of cultures different from one’s own, especially those less advanced while sociology was used to understand one’s own society.
3. Today anthropology tends to look at the big picture of human culture while sociology spends more time analyzing data from a specific study.
4. Anthropology is considered to be a softer science than sociology as it bases more of its conclusions on case studies than hard data.
Read more: Difference Between Anthropology and Sociology Difference Between Anthropology vs Sociology http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-anthropology-and-sociology/#ixzz1NFrRv2Ll
Senin, 23 Mei 2011
Output vs outcomes vs impact
Outputs:
What the organisation generates directly through its activities on the short-term – the processes, goods and services that it produces.
For example: Workshops, training manuals, research and assessment reports, guidelines and action plans, strategies, and technical assistance packages, amongst others.
The organisation controls activities and outputs.
Outcomes:
Observable changes in boundary partners – individuals, groups, organisations, institutions – that potentially contribute to the long-term, sustainable improvement in people’s lives or the state of the environment envisioned in the mission of the organisation.
The organisation influences outcomes.
Impact:
Long-term, sustainable changes in the conditions of people and the state of the environment that structurally reduce poverty, improve human well-being and protect and conserve natural resources.
The organisation contributes indirectly to impact.
*****
What the organisation generates directly through its activities on the short-term – the processes, goods and services that it produces.
For example: Workshops, training manuals, research and assessment reports, guidelines and action plans, strategies, and technical assistance packages, amongst others.
The organisation controls activities and outputs.
Outcomes:
Observable changes in boundary partners – individuals, groups, organisations, institutions – that potentially contribute to the long-term, sustainable improvement in people’s lives or the state of the environment envisioned in the mission of the organisation.
The organisation influences outcomes.
Impact:
Long-term, sustainable changes in the conditions of people and the state of the environment that structurally reduce poverty, improve human well-being and protect and conserve natural resources.
The organisation contributes indirectly to impact.
*****
Outcome vs Output
Outcomes vs Outputs: Why it's important to understand the difference?
For the more pedantic among us, the difference between Outputs and Outcomes is significant and important. At Ad Esse, we spend much of our time helping clients to focus on the outcomes they are trying to achieve. We also help them to identify their business processes, which inevitably means clarifying both inputs and outputs.
If you think you know the difference, or just want to remind yourself about why it might be important, read on…
Let’s start with some definitions.
Processes deliver OUTPUTS. In other words, what pops out of the end of a process is an output.
As you can see, Outputs can usually be seen, felt, or moved about. If you can get your hands on it, it’s probably an output from some process. If you were running a Project, you’d probably call it a Deliverable.
Now, the important thing is, Outputs are only produced (or should only be produced) because there is a customer of the process who wants them. In our example processes above, the three customers are: the Line Manager who has a vacancy to fill, the person who wants a new mortgage and the person who wants the meal.
Customers usually have expectations about both the process and the output (how they get what they want, and what they actually get). That’s where Outcomes fit in.
An OUTCOME is a level of performance, or achievement. It may be associated with the process, or the output. Outcomes imply quantification of performance.
Our newly appointed people may be:
- too late for the line manager (Timeliness)
- capable, or incapable of performing their role (Competence vs. Requirements)
- too many, or too few (Quantity)
Our Mortgage Offer Letter may be:
- correct, or full of errors (Accuracy)
- easy to understand by the customer, or full of jargon ( Customer Perception of Clarity)
- what the customer wanted to see, or not (Customer Satisfaction)
Our Meal might be:
- too hot, or too cold (Temperature)
- too much to eat (Quantity)
- tasty, or disgusting (Customer Perception)
Because it’s about performance levels, you can’t get your hands on an Outcome! But, you can draw it on a graph.
You can express Outcomes, quantitatively, on a Line Graph, showing how performance changes, over time. And, if you’re really serious about continuous improvement, you’ll also be showing target performance levels and relevant benchmark comparators on your trend graphs.
Is it that simple?
At one level, it is that simple. Unfortunately, the relationship between processes, outputs and outcomes can be difficult to untangle. Often, there will be a many-to-one relationship between processes and any particular outcome.
Take Staff Satisfaction. A desired organisational objective might be to achieve an improved level of Staff Satisfaction (outcome). There is no single process that causes Staff Satisfaction. It is the result of multiple processes and their associated outputs. These processes would include staff development, appraisal, reward and recognition etc. So their is no single process that delivers an Output called a Satisfied Employee.
Another example. Many Local Authorities have the (very laudable) objective to develop a thriving local economy (Outcome). Again, there are many processes, with their outputs that impact on that outcome and the level of achievement. The processes might include those to attract inward investment, or providing start-up funds to entrepreneurs. A thriving local economy is an Outcome, not an Output. Incidentally, it may not be an easy to measure outcome once you get the economists and statisticians involved!
So What?
Why do you need to know the difference?
Well, if you are trying to improve your organisation’s performance, you need to be able to describe the Outcomes you want to achieve (or have to achieve if a Stakeholder such as the Government is driving you). You need to be able to express these quantitatively, so you can track progress over time. Then, you can decide which of your organisation’s processes will impact on each Outcome. At that point, you will know what the Outputs are, that also impact on the Outcome.
Say, one an organisation makes Widgets. And, one of their desired Outcomes is happy Customers (measured by their Customer Satisfaction Index). They also want to make a profit on the widgets that they sell. Three of their key processes are widget-making, widget-distribution and customer billing. In order to achieve the two Outcomes these processes must:
- produce widgets that are right first time (cost efficiency contributes to profitability)
- produce widgets that meet the customer’s specification (quality contributes to customer satisfaction)
- deliver widgets undamaged and on-time (both contribute to customer satisfaction)
- issue accurate invoices (contributes to customer satisfaction)
- collect cash from customers by the due date (contributes to profitability)
So, by starting with desired organisational outcomes, you can make clear linkages to key processes. For each of those processes, you can then decide what its contribution must be towards the organisational outcomes. Hey presto, high-level business objectives deployed down into real processes, operated by real people.
It works the other way round, too. For those organisations who know that they want to work on improving their processes; the question to ask is what are the Outcomes that the process is trying to achieve. Then, improve the performance of the process and its outputs accordingly.
Ian Seath
Director, Improvement Skills Consulting Ltd.
www.improvement-skills.co.uk
For the more pedantic among us, the difference between Outputs and Outcomes is significant and important. At Ad Esse, we spend much of our time helping clients to focus on the outcomes they are trying to achieve. We also help them to identify their business processes, which inevitably means clarifying both inputs and outputs.
If you think you know the difference, or just want to remind yourself about why it might be important, read on…
Let’s start with some definitions.
Processes deliver OUTPUTS. In other words, what pops out of the end of a process is an output.
As you can see, Outputs can usually be seen, felt, or moved about. If you can get your hands on it, it’s probably an output from some process. If you were running a Project, you’d probably call it a Deliverable.
Now, the important thing is, Outputs are only produced (or should only be produced) because there is a customer of the process who wants them. In our example processes above, the three customers are: the Line Manager who has a vacancy to fill, the person who wants a new mortgage and the person who wants the meal.
Customers usually have expectations about both the process and the output (how they get what they want, and what they actually get). That’s where Outcomes fit in.
An OUTCOME is a level of performance, or achievement. It may be associated with the process, or the output. Outcomes imply quantification of performance.
Our newly appointed people may be:
- too late for the line manager (Timeliness)
- capable, or incapable of performing their role (Competence vs. Requirements)
- too many, or too few (Quantity)
Our Mortgage Offer Letter may be:
- correct, or full of errors (Accuracy)
- easy to understand by the customer, or full of jargon ( Customer Perception of Clarity)
- what the customer wanted to see, or not (Customer Satisfaction)
Our Meal might be:
- too hot, or too cold (Temperature)
- too much to eat (Quantity)
- tasty, or disgusting (Customer Perception)
Because it’s about performance levels, you can’t get your hands on an Outcome! But, you can draw it on a graph.
You can express Outcomes, quantitatively, on a Line Graph, showing how performance changes, over time. And, if you’re really serious about continuous improvement, you’ll also be showing target performance levels and relevant benchmark comparators on your trend graphs.
Is it that simple?
At one level, it is that simple. Unfortunately, the relationship between processes, outputs and outcomes can be difficult to untangle. Often, there will be a many-to-one relationship between processes and any particular outcome.
Take Staff Satisfaction. A desired organisational objective might be to achieve an improved level of Staff Satisfaction (outcome). There is no single process that causes Staff Satisfaction. It is the result of multiple processes and their associated outputs. These processes would include staff development, appraisal, reward and recognition etc. So their is no single process that delivers an Output called a Satisfied Employee.
Another example. Many Local Authorities have the (very laudable) objective to develop a thriving local economy (Outcome). Again, there are many processes, with their outputs that impact on that outcome and the level of achievement. The processes might include those to attract inward investment, or providing start-up funds to entrepreneurs. A thriving local economy is an Outcome, not an Output. Incidentally, it may not be an easy to measure outcome once you get the economists and statisticians involved!
So What?
Why do you need to know the difference?
Well, if you are trying to improve your organisation’s performance, you need to be able to describe the Outcomes you want to achieve (or have to achieve if a Stakeholder such as the Government is driving you). You need to be able to express these quantitatively, so you can track progress over time. Then, you can decide which of your organisation’s processes will impact on each Outcome. At that point, you will know what the Outputs are, that also impact on the Outcome.
Say, one an organisation makes Widgets. And, one of their desired Outcomes is happy Customers (measured by their Customer Satisfaction Index). They also want to make a profit on the widgets that they sell. Three of their key processes are widget-making, widget-distribution and customer billing. In order to achieve the two Outcomes these processes must:
- produce widgets that are right first time (cost efficiency contributes to profitability)
- produce widgets that meet the customer’s specification (quality contributes to customer satisfaction)
- deliver widgets undamaged and on-time (both contribute to customer satisfaction)
- issue accurate invoices (contributes to customer satisfaction)
- collect cash from customers by the due date (contributes to profitability)
So, by starting with desired organisational outcomes, you can make clear linkages to key processes. For each of those processes, you can then decide what its contribution must be towards the organisational outcomes. Hey presto, high-level business objectives deployed down into real processes, operated by real people.
It works the other way round, too. For those organisations who know that they want to work on improving their processes; the question to ask is what are the Outcomes that the process is trying to achieve. Then, improve the performance of the process and its outputs accordingly.
Ian Seath
Director, Improvement Skills Consulting Ltd.
www.improvement-skills.co.uk
Laporan vs Essay
Report vs Essay
Report and Essay are two words used by the common man with almost the same sense. Strictly speaking the sense differs when it comes to the understanding of the purport of the two words.
A report is a summary of an event to be precise. On the other hand an essay is a description of a historical event or a character of a person. Mass communication forms the basis of report writing. On the other hand essay literature forms the basis of essay. In other words it can be said that journalism is the source for writing a report. Literature is the source for writing an essay.
You can write an essay on the use of the figure of speech of metaphor by Shakespeare based on the literature available to you. You will take the help of the available literature to prepare or write the essay. On the other hand you will write a report of an event that took place based on the first hand information available to you. You would have witnessed the event yourself to write the report.
You might not have witnessed what you write in an essay. Hence an essay is said to have been derived from literature whereas report is said to have been derived from journalism or mass communication. Direct experience is involved in report whereas direct experience may not be involved in essay. Poetical expressions are needed in the writing of an essay whereas imagery is not needed in the writing of a report.
In other words it can be said that you will have to be creative while writing an essay. You will have to be descriptive while writing a report. An essay is a literary form whereas a report is a form of journalism. Essays form part of literature whereas reports do not form part of literature.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-report-and-vs-essay/#ixzz1NEoECzHd
Report and Essay are two words used by the common man with almost the same sense. Strictly speaking the sense differs when it comes to the understanding of the purport of the two words.
A report is a summary of an event to be precise. On the other hand an essay is a description of a historical event or a character of a person. Mass communication forms the basis of report writing. On the other hand essay literature forms the basis of essay. In other words it can be said that journalism is the source for writing a report. Literature is the source for writing an essay.
You can write an essay on the use of the figure of speech of metaphor by Shakespeare based on the literature available to you. You will take the help of the available literature to prepare or write the essay. On the other hand you will write a report of an event that took place based on the first hand information available to you. You would have witnessed the event yourself to write the report.
You might not have witnessed what you write in an essay. Hence an essay is said to have been derived from literature whereas report is said to have been derived from journalism or mass communication. Direct experience is involved in report whereas direct experience may not be involved in essay. Poetical expressions are needed in the writing of an essay whereas imagery is not needed in the writing of a report.
In other words it can be said that you will have to be creative while writing an essay. You will have to be descriptive while writing a report. An essay is a literary form whereas a report is a form of journalism. Essays form part of literature whereas reports do not form part of literature.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-report-and-vs-essay/#ixzz1NEoECzHd
Kesuksesan vs Kegagalan
Success vs Failure
Success and Failure are two words in the English language that differ in their meanings by a great degree. In fact they are treated as opposites. Success consists in the achievement or the realization of one’s goal.
Failure on the other hand consists in the non-achievement or the non-realization of one’s goal. Success brings happiness whereas failure brings about sorrow.
It is generally said that failures are the stepping stones for success. Success is normally the result of hard work. On the other hand failure is the result of lack of hard work and perseverance.
Success will make one active and charged. On the other hand failure would make one dull and struck with remorse. Success results from concentration whereas failure results from lack of concentration.
Success results in honor whereas failure results in insult. This only shows the fact that success and honor are associated with each other. On the other hand failure and insult are associated with each other.
Philosophers give a solution to the handling of the two states success and failure. They would say that a man of resolute would take both success and failure alike. He is neither overwhelmed by success nor bothered to a great extent by failure. He would do well to have a philosophical perspective while understanding the two terms success and failure.
It is easy to take success in your stride whereas it is very difficult to take failure in your stride. This is because of the element of disappointment associated with failure. A successful man gets confidence whereas a man characterized by failures lacks confidence.
Success and failure are in fact two aspects of life that are not permanent. On the other hand they are two transitory states of mind that should be dealt with accordingly. They are two psychological states.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-success-and-failure/#ixzz1NEnRX5Su
Success and Failure are two words in the English language that differ in their meanings by a great degree. In fact they are treated as opposites. Success consists in the achievement or the realization of one’s goal.
Failure on the other hand consists in the non-achievement or the non-realization of one’s goal. Success brings happiness whereas failure brings about sorrow.
It is generally said that failures are the stepping stones for success. Success is normally the result of hard work. On the other hand failure is the result of lack of hard work and perseverance.
Success will make one active and charged. On the other hand failure would make one dull and struck with remorse. Success results from concentration whereas failure results from lack of concentration.
Success results in honor whereas failure results in insult. This only shows the fact that success and honor are associated with each other. On the other hand failure and insult are associated with each other.
Philosophers give a solution to the handling of the two states success and failure. They would say that a man of resolute would take both success and failure alike. He is neither overwhelmed by success nor bothered to a great extent by failure. He would do well to have a philosophical perspective while understanding the two terms success and failure.
It is easy to take success in your stride whereas it is very difficult to take failure in your stride. This is because of the element of disappointment associated with failure. A successful man gets confidence whereas a man characterized by failures lacks confidence.
Success and failure are in fact two aspects of life that are not permanent. On the other hand they are two transitory states of mind that should be dealt with accordingly. They are two psychological states.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-success-and-failure/#ixzz1NEnRX5Su
Kesuksesan vs Pencapaian
Success vs Achievement
Success and Achievement are two words that appear alike in their meanings, but strictly speaking they show some differences between them. The word ‘achievement’ is used in connection with the realization of one’s goals.
On the other hand the word success is used in the sense of fulfilling certain conditions necessary to reach the goal.
In other words it can be said that success leads to achievement. It can also be said that achievement is arrived at by string of successes. You achieve a goal by attaining success all the way. You don’t achieve a goal when you do not attain success. Thus it is said that success and achievement are related.
Success consists in succeeding in the attempt. Achievement consists in reaching a milestone. Scaling Mt. Everest is an achievement since it consists in reaching a milestone. In the same way setting foot on the moon is an achievement since it consists in reaching a milestone too.
Scoring distinction in the examination is an achievement. On the other hand clearing the examination paper in the first attempt can be called in terms of success. Finding a combination in the chemistry laboratory can be called in terms of success. It is not an achievement.
Success makes one happy whereas achievement makes one proud. In other words success is a matter of happiness whereas achievement is a matter of pride. If a country wins the football title in the world football championship, then the country is pride of its achievement. Winning every match is explained in terms of success. This is the basic difference between the two words success and achievement.
It is very important to note that success paves the way for achievement. Strings of successes would lead to achievement. This is the secret of achievement. Sometimes both these words are interchanged.
Achievement is used in connection with the realization of one’s goals.
Success is used in the sense of fulfilling certain conditions necessary to reach the goal.
Achievement is arrived at by string of successes
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-success-and-achievement/#ixzz1NEn6CzKj
Success and Achievement are two words that appear alike in their meanings, but strictly speaking they show some differences between them. The word ‘achievement’ is used in connection with the realization of one’s goals.
On the other hand the word success is used in the sense of fulfilling certain conditions necessary to reach the goal.
In other words it can be said that success leads to achievement. It can also be said that achievement is arrived at by string of successes. You achieve a goal by attaining success all the way. You don’t achieve a goal when you do not attain success. Thus it is said that success and achievement are related.
Success consists in succeeding in the attempt. Achievement consists in reaching a milestone. Scaling Mt. Everest is an achievement since it consists in reaching a milestone. In the same way setting foot on the moon is an achievement since it consists in reaching a milestone too.
Scoring distinction in the examination is an achievement. On the other hand clearing the examination paper in the first attempt can be called in terms of success. Finding a combination in the chemistry laboratory can be called in terms of success. It is not an achievement.
Success makes one happy whereas achievement makes one proud. In other words success is a matter of happiness whereas achievement is a matter of pride. If a country wins the football title in the world football championship, then the country is pride of its achievement. Winning every match is explained in terms of success. This is the basic difference between the two words success and achievement.
It is very important to note that success paves the way for achievement. Strings of successes would lead to achievement. This is the secret of achievement. Sometimes both these words are interchanged.
Achievement is used in connection with the realization of one’s goals.
Success is used in the sense of fulfilling certain conditions necessary to reach the goal.
Achievement is arrived at by string of successes
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-success-and-achievement/#ixzz1NEn6CzKj
Ilmu vs teknologi
Science vs Technology
Science can be called a systematic knowledge base developed through observation and experiment of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world; Technology is the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes.
Science and Technology might appear same when it comes to their meaning and purpose, but there is certainly some difference between the two. Science is normally spoken in connection with technology in the educational institutions. There is a difference in the definitions of the two.
Science is about the systematic arrival of conclusion or findings. It involves steps that establish the outcome of the findings. In short science can be called a systematic knowledge base. Technology on the contrary is applied science. Technology involves the use of tools as well as knowledge for the study of a particular science. Hence the term applied science is used to refer technology.
Science is a study of aspects under the various branches such as physics, chemistry and biology. In the case of technology, the science of radiation can be applied in the technology related to the development of the tools and advanced study of the application of radiation. As a result a radiation technician works with the technology of radiation have studied the science of radiation.
In the same way, the advancement in the study of energy led to the development of technology of solar panels that are used to generate energy and power. Thus the application of a particular branch of science is helpful in the development of technology of the particular branch. Thus technology can be called applied science.
Science is more concerned about analysis. Technology has everything to do with synthesis of design. Science deals with theories and their findings, whereas technology is much concerned about processes. Technology has to get its processes right to make an advancement in the field of applied science.
Another importance difference between science and technology is the fact that science involves observation and experimentation while technology is all about invention and production. The invention of tools and their production are the facets of technology.
Recap:
The difference between science and technology:
Science is more or less a study of a particular branch namely, physics, chemistry or biology. Technology deals with what is called applied science.
Science involves observation and experimentation whereas technology involves invention and production.
Science is all about analysis whereas technology is more concerned about the synthesis of design
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-science-and-technology/#ixzz1NEmox5KI
Science can be called a systematic knowledge base developed through observation and experiment of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world; Technology is the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes.
Science and Technology might appear same when it comes to their meaning and purpose, but there is certainly some difference between the two. Science is normally spoken in connection with technology in the educational institutions. There is a difference in the definitions of the two.
Science is about the systematic arrival of conclusion or findings. It involves steps that establish the outcome of the findings. In short science can be called a systematic knowledge base. Technology on the contrary is applied science. Technology involves the use of tools as well as knowledge for the study of a particular science. Hence the term applied science is used to refer technology.
Science is a study of aspects under the various branches such as physics, chemistry and biology. In the case of technology, the science of radiation can be applied in the technology related to the development of the tools and advanced study of the application of radiation. As a result a radiation technician works with the technology of radiation have studied the science of radiation.
In the same way, the advancement in the study of energy led to the development of technology of solar panels that are used to generate energy and power. Thus the application of a particular branch of science is helpful in the development of technology of the particular branch. Thus technology can be called applied science.
Science is more concerned about analysis. Technology has everything to do with synthesis of design. Science deals with theories and their findings, whereas technology is much concerned about processes. Technology has to get its processes right to make an advancement in the field of applied science.
Another importance difference between science and technology is the fact that science involves observation and experimentation while technology is all about invention and production. The invention of tools and their production are the facets of technology.
Recap:
The difference between science and technology:
Science is more or less a study of a particular branch namely, physics, chemistry or biology. Technology deals with what is called applied science.
Science involves observation and experimentation whereas technology involves invention and production.
Science is all about analysis whereas technology is more concerned about the synthesis of design
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-science-and-technology/#ixzz1NEmox5KI
Organisasi vs perusahaan
Organization vs Firm
Organization and Firm are two words that are often confused in terms of their connotations. They appear to have similar functions, but strictly speaking they differ in their connotation and functions.
The manner in which an organization and a firm are structured is the basis of difference between them. A firm is said to have more than one partner that go in agreement between them. On the other hand an organization is a social arrangement characterized by collective goals and it looks upon its own performance.
There are varieties of firms such as law firm and business firm. On the other hand there are several types of organizations as well including non-governmental organizations, international organizations, not-for-profit corporations, cooperatives, partnerships, corporations and the like.
The basic difference between organization and firm is that organization focuses on the achievement of the goals of a company. Organization lies in creating value for stockholders, customers, employees, suppliers and community.
Partners work together bound by some kind of agreement between them in a firm. They work together characterized by organizational behavior in order to bring about results and goals of their company.
Firm and organization differ in terms of their leadership too. The leader in a firm is different from the leader in an organization in the sense that a leader in an organization is appointed to a managerial position and has the right to command, enforce obedience and behavior by force of the authority of his position.
On the other hand a leader in a firm is the sole partner or the partners singly. If the number of partners is more than one then it is true that they all share the position in enforcing obedience and behavior. This is one of the main differences between a firm and an organization.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-organization-and-vs-firm/#ixzz1NEmVwJHB
Organization and Firm are two words that are often confused in terms of their connotations. They appear to have similar functions, but strictly speaking they differ in their connotation and functions.
The manner in which an organization and a firm are structured is the basis of difference between them. A firm is said to have more than one partner that go in agreement between them. On the other hand an organization is a social arrangement characterized by collective goals and it looks upon its own performance.
There are varieties of firms such as law firm and business firm. On the other hand there are several types of organizations as well including non-governmental organizations, international organizations, not-for-profit corporations, cooperatives, partnerships, corporations and the like.
The basic difference between organization and firm is that organization focuses on the achievement of the goals of a company. Organization lies in creating value for stockholders, customers, employees, suppliers and community.
Partners work together bound by some kind of agreement between them in a firm. They work together characterized by organizational behavior in order to bring about results and goals of their company.
Firm and organization differ in terms of their leadership too. The leader in a firm is different from the leader in an organization in the sense that a leader in an organization is appointed to a managerial position and has the right to command, enforce obedience and behavior by force of the authority of his position.
On the other hand a leader in a firm is the sole partner or the partners singly. If the number of partners is more than one then it is true that they all share the position in enforcing obedience and behavior. This is one of the main differences between a firm and an organization.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-organization-and-vs-firm/#ixzz1NEmVwJHB
Feasibilitas vs Viabilitas
Feasibility vs Viability
Feasibility and viability are tools used in the investment appraisal of a project and its sustainability. Viability is the ability of a thing to maintain itself or get back its potentialities. Viability of a business is measured by means of the length of its survival. It is interesting to note that the sustainable profits the business had made over a period of time determine the viability of a business for that matter.
Feasibility consists in the evaluation of the aim of finding out the workability and the profitability of a business. It is quite normal that partners look into the feasibility of the business before investing money into the venture.
It is true that feasibility paves the way for viability as well. It all depends upon the profitability of a business to survive for lengthy periods of time amidst the tough competition. Feasibility is characterized by factors such as calculation, analysis and estimated projections among several other factors.
Viability on the other hand deals with business tactics and strategies to lengthen the life of the business. Strategies do not play a vital role in the concept of feasibility of a business whereas they do play a very important role in the concept of viability of business.
Business growth and sustainability are the two important aspects of viability. On the other hand feasibility is not concerned much about the aspects of business growth and sustainability. It is concerned only about the profitability and the workability of the business.
Feasibility of a business comes into play only after the particular business satisfies the conditions of profitability and workability. This means that viability follows feasibility. In other words feasibility paves the way for viability of a business.
Thus we come to know that men and material are required to achieve the goal of feasibility of a business. A feasible business is likely to last long and achieve viability too.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-feasibility-and-viability/#ixzz1NEm8lqKE
Feasibility and viability are tools used in the investment appraisal of a project and its sustainability. Viability is the ability of a thing to maintain itself or get back its potentialities. Viability of a business is measured by means of the length of its survival. It is interesting to note that the sustainable profits the business had made over a period of time determine the viability of a business for that matter.
Feasibility consists in the evaluation of the aim of finding out the workability and the profitability of a business. It is quite normal that partners look into the feasibility of the business before investing money into the venture.
It is true that feasibility paves the way for viability as well. It all depends upon the profitability of a business to survive for lengthy periods of time amidst the tough competition. Feasibility is characterized by factors such as calculation, analysis and estimated projections among several other factors.
Viability on the other hand deals with business tactics and strategies to lengthen the life of the business. Strategies do not play a vital role in the concept of feasibility of a business whereas they do play a very important role in the concept of viability of business.
Business growth and sustainability are the two important aspects of viability. On the other hand feasibility is not concerned much about the aspects of business growth and sustainability. It is concerned only about the profitability and the workability of the business.
Feasibility of a business comes into play only after the particular business satisfies the conditions of profitability and workability. This means that viability follows feasibility. In other words feasibility paves the way for viability of a business.
Thus we come to know that men and material are required to achieve the goal of feasibility of a business. A feasible business is likely to last long and achieve viability too.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-feasibility-and-viability/#ixzz1NEm8lqKE
Pembuatan keputusan vs pemecahan masalah
Decision Making vs Problem Solving
Decision Making and Problem Solving are two key management functions. It is customary to see the managers of companies to get involved in decision making and problem solving. Problem solving involves defining the problem. The problem is defined by asking a few questions such as ‘what causes you to think there is a problem?’ and ‘how is it happening?’
Consideration of the situation characterized by the absence of the problem is the crux of decision making. In other words if you begin to think about what will the situation look like when the problem is solved then you are into decision making. Hence decision making and problem solving are almost integrated.
Problem solving consists in looking at the potential causes of the problem. On the other hand decision making consists in the method of approaching to resolve the problem. You will have to involve in brainstorm to find out solutions to the problem in decision making. Lateral and creative thinking is important in good decision making.
Decision making in short can be called as the process of action plan. Action plan includes the calculation of the time needed to solve the problem. It also looks at the time needed for the implementation of the solution. It deals finally with the communication of the plan to all those involved in the implementation of the solution.
Problem solving consists in jotting down the description of the various causes of the problem in terms of question such as where, how, with whom and why. Decision making is all about finding solutions to all these questions such as how, where, with whom and why through the forming a plan that has to be implemented.
Problem solving itself is an experience to be undergone in every corporate establishment. Decision making on the other hand is the consideration of what have you learned from problem solving. Hence problem solving and decision making are integrated to a great extent.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-decision-making-and-problem-solving/#ixzz1NElnZo6d
Decision Making and Problem Solving are two key management functions. It is customary to see the managers of companies to get involved in decision making and problem solving. Problem solving involves defining the problem. The problem is defined by asking a few questions such as ‘what causes you to think there is a problem?’ and ‘how is it happening?’
Consideration of the situation characterized by the absence of the problem is the crux of decision making. In other words if you begin to think about what will the situation look like when the problem is solved then you are into decision making. Hence decision making and problem solving are almost integrated.
Problem solving consists in looking at the potential causes of the problem. On the other hand decision making consists in the method of approaching to resolve the problem. You will have to involve in brainstorm to find out solutions to the problem in decision making. Lateral and creative thinking is important in good decision making.
Decision making in short can be called as the process of action plan. Action plan includes the calculation of the time needed to solve the problem. It also looks at the time needed for the implementation of the solution. It deals finally with the communication of the plan to all those involved in the implementation of the solution.
Problem solving consists in jotting down the description of the various causes of the problem in terms of question such as where, how, with whom and why. Decision making is all about finding solutions to all these questions such as how, where, with whom and why through the forming a plan that has to be implemented.
Problem solving itself is an experience to be undergone in every corporate establishment. Decision making on the other hand is the consideration of what have you learned from problem solving. Hence problem solving and decision making are integrated to a great extent.
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-decision-making-and-problem-solving/#ixzz1NElnZo6d
Monitoring vs evaluasi
Monitoring vs Evaluation
Monitoring and Evaluation are two states of analysis in terms of the progress made in relation to the goals of an enterprise or a firm. These two states of analysis differ in their manner of approach. Monitoring is the systematic analysis made occasionally of information to identify changes over a period of time.
On the other hand evaluation is the analysis of the effectiveness of an activity that would finally prompt a judgment regarding the progress made in relation to the goals of a firm. This is the major difference between monitoring and evaluation. Monitoring keeps the track of the process of implementation. It consists in examining the progress made in a project against time by taking into account performance too. Evaluation on the other hand consists in estimating the value of something. It involves the process of finding the facts.
Evaluation can also be explained as the study of past experience when it comes to the performance and implementation of the project. Monitoring does not take into account the past experience involved in the performance of a project. In short it can be said that evaluation aims at the submission of the valid information on the conduct and impact of the project.
Evaluation consists in making a study about the effectiveness of the projects. On the other hand monitoring consists in periodical checking of progress made in the conduct of the projects against the targets and goals laid down. It has to be understood that monitoring is done with a view to ensure the completion of the project in time. This in fact is the very purpose of monitoring.
The purpose of monitoring also lies in providing constructive suggestions. These suggestions can be regarding the rescheduling of the project if required, allotment of separate budget to the project and even reassigning the staff for the conduct of a particular project.
On the other hand the purpose of evaluation lies in bringing about the process of accounting close to perfection. It also consists in making the best possible use of the available funds, methods to stop the probability of mistakes, testing the efficacy of the new techniques employed in the completion of the projects, verifying the real benefits of the projects and understanding the participation of the people in the project by means of surveys, interviews and the like. It is true that evaluation aims for the future
sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-monitoring-and-vs-evaluation/
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-monitoring-and-vs-evaluation/#ixzz1NEkZwMrs
Monitoring vs Evaluasi
Monitoring dan Evaluasi adalah dua bentuk analisis dalam hal kemajuan. Ini dibuat sehubungan dengan tujuan suatu perusahaan atau kegiatan. Kedua analisis ini berbeda dalam cara mereka mendekati objek atau masalah. Monitoring adalah analisis sistematis yang dijalankan secara reguler untuk mengidentifikasi perubahan selama jangka waktu tertentu.
Di sisi lain evaluasi adalah analisis efektivitas kegiatan yang akhirnya akan mendorong suatu penilaian tentang kemajuan yang dibuat sehubungan dengan tujuan dari suatu perusahaan. Ini adalah perbedaan utama antara monitoring dan evaluasi.
Monitoring memantau terus-menerus jalannya implementasi. Dalam kegiatan ini diperiksa kemajuan yang dibuat dalam proyek terhadap waktu dengan mempertimbangkan performa yang mudah diidentifikasi. Evaluasi di sisi lain mengestimasi nilai dari sesuatu. Ini melibatkan proses pencarian fakta.
Evaluasi juga dapat dijelaskan sebagai studi tentang pengalaman masa lalu ketika datang ke kinerja dan pelaksanaan proyek. Pemantauan tidak memperhitungkan pengalaman masa lalu yang terlibat dalam pelaksanaan proyek. Secara singkat dapat dikatakan bahwa evaluasi bertujuan penyampaian informasi yang berlaku pada pelaksanaan dan dampak dari proyek tersebut.
Evaluasi membuat sebuah studi tentang efektivitas proyek. Seementara, monitoring melakukan pemantauan atau pemeriksaan berkala kemajuan yang telah dicapai dalam pelaksanaan proyek terhadap sasaran dan tujuan yang ditetapkan. Jadi, pemantauan dilakukan dengan tujuan untuk memastikan penyelesaian proyek dalam waktu yang sudah ditetapkan. Ini sebenarnya adalah tujuan dari pemantauan.
Tujuan monitoring juga terletak dalam memberikan saran konstruktif. Saran-saran ini bisa mengenai penjadwalan proyek jika diperlukan, penjatahan anggaran yang terpisah untuk proyek dan bahkan pemindahan staf untuk melakukan suatu proyek tertentu.
Di sisi lain, tujuan evaluasi adalah membawa proses akuntansi yang dekat dengan sempurna. Hal ini juga berkaitan bagaimana membuat sebaik mungkin menggunakan dana yang tersedia, metode untuk menghentikan kemungkinan kesalahan, menguji efektivitas teknik-teknik baru yang digunakan dalam penyelesaian proyek, verifikasi manfaat nyata dari proyek-proyek dan pemahaman partisipasi orang dalam proyek dengan cara survei, wawancara dan sejenisnya. Memang benar, evaluasi bertujuan untuk masa depan. *****
Monitoring and Evaluation are two states of analysis in terms of the progress made in relation to the goals of an enterprise or a firm. These two states of analysis differ in their manner of approach. Monitoring is the systematic analysis made occasionally of information to identify changes over a period of time.
On the other hand evaluation is the analysis of the effectiveness of an activity that would finally prompt a judgment regarding the progress made in relation to the goals of a firm. This is the major difference between monitoring and evaluation. Monitoring keeps the track of the process of implementation. It consists in examining the progress made in a project against time by taking into account performance too. Evaluation on the other hand consists in estimating the value of something. It involves the process of finding the facts.
Evaluation can also be explained as the study of past experience when it comes to the performance and implementation of the project. Monitoring does not take into account the past experience involved in the performance of a project. In short it can be said that evaluation aims at the submission of the valid information on the conduct and impact of the project.
Evaluation consists in making a study about the effectiveness of the projects. On the other hand monitoring consists in periodical checking of progress made in the conduct of the projects against the targets and goals laid down. It has to be understood that monitoring is done with a view to ensure the completion of the project in time. This in fact is the very purpose of monitoring.
The purpose of monitoring also lies in providing constructive suggestions. These suggestions can be regarding the rescheduling of the project if required, allotment of separate budget to the project and even reassigning the staff for the conduct of a particular project.
On the other hand the purpose of evaluation lies in bringing about the process of accounting close to perfection. It also consists in making the best possible use of the available funds, methods to stop the probability of mistakes, testing the efficacy of the new techniques employed in the completion of the projects, verifying the real benefits of the projects and understanding the participation of the people in the project by means of surveys, interviews and the like. It is true that evaluation aims for the future
sumber:
http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-monitoring-and-vs-evaluation/
Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-monitoring-and-vs-evaluation/#ixzz1NEkZwMrs
Monitoring vs Evaluasi
Monitoring dan Evaluasi adalah dua bentuk analisis dalam hal kemajuan. Ini dibuat sehubungan dengan tujuan suatu perusahaan atau kegiatan. Kedua analisis ini berbeda dalam cara mereka mendekati objek atau masalah. Monitoring adalah analisis sistematis yang dijalankan secara reguler untuk mengidentifikasi perubahan selama jangka waktu tertentu.
Di sisi lain evaluasi adalah analisis efektivitas kegiatan yang akhirnya akan mendorong suatu penilaian tentang kemajuan yang dibuat sehubungan dengan tujuan dari suatu perusahaan. Ini adalah perbedaan utama antara monitoring dan evaluasi.
Monitoring memantau terus-menerus jalannya implementasi. Dalam kegiatan ini diperiksa kemajuan yang dibuat dalam proyek terhadap waktu dengan mempertimbangkan performa yang mudah diidentifikasi. Evaluasi di sisi lain mengestimasi nilai dari sesuatu. Ini melibatkan proses pencarian fakta.
Evaluasi juga dapat dijelaskan sebagai studi tentang pengalaman masa lalu ketika datang ke kinerja dan pelaksanaan proyek. Pemantauan tidak memperhitungkan pengalaman masa lalu yang terlibat dalam pelaksanaan proyek. Secara singkat dapat dikatakan bahwa evaluasi bertujuan penyampaian informasi yang berlaku pada pelaksanaan dan dampak dari proyek tersebut.
Evaluasi membuat sebuah studi tentang efektivitas proyek. Seementara, monitoring melakukan pemantauan atau pemeriksaan berkala kemajuan yang telah dicapai dalam pelaksanaan proyek terhadap sasaran dan tujuan yang ditetapkan. Jadi, pemantauan dilakukan dengan tujuan untuk memastikan penyelesaian proyek dalam waktu yang sudah ditetapkan. Ini sebenarnya adalah tujuan dari pemantauan.
Tujuan monitoring juga terletak dalam memberikan saran konstruktif. Saran-saran ini bisa mengenai penjadwalan proyek jika diperlukan, penjatahan anggaran yang terpisah untuk proyek dan bahkan pemindahan staf untuk melakukan suatu proyek tertentu.
Di sisi lain, tujuan evaluasi adalah membawa proses akuntansi yang dekat dengan sempurna. Hal ini juga berkaitan bagaimana membuat sebaik mungkin menggunakan dana yang tersedia, metode untuk menghentikan kemungkinan kesalahan, menguji efektivitas teknik-teknik baru yang digunakan dalam penyelesaian proyek, verifikasi manfaat nyata dari proyek-proyek dan pemahaman partisipasi orang dalam proyek dengan cara survei, wawancara dan sejenisnya. Memang benar, evaluasi bertujuan untuk masa depan. *****
Masyarakat komunitas vs masyarakat pasar
Berbagai perbedaan antara “masyarakat komunitas” yang dicirikan oleh kelembagaan komunitasnya yang kuat dengan “masyarakat pasar” yang ruhnya didominasi kelembagaan pasar, dinarasikan secara diametral pada tabel berikut:
Komunitas vs negara vs pasar
Antara komunitas, negara, pasar memiliki perbedaan yang hakiki. Perbedaan secara umum antara mereka dijabarkan pada tabel berikut.
Berbagai social form
Soekanto (1999. hal 132-3) mengindikasikan, bahwa sebuah social form tergolong sebagai sebuah organisasi formal bila adanya kesadaran akan jenisnya yang sama, adanya hubungan sosial di antara mereka, dan berorientasi pada tujuan yang ditentukan. Selengkapnya kriteria-kriteria tersebut adalah sebagai berikut:
Partisipasi rendah versus partisipasi tinggi
Ket.: Dimodifikasi dari Biggs (1989, hal. 3), Cornwall and Jewkes (1995, hal. 1669) dan Parkes and Panelli (2001, hal. 88). (Dalam: Emma Jakku, Peter Thorburn and Clare Gambley. “Decision Support Systems for Farm Management: a Theoretical Framework from the Sociology of Science and Technology”. Tropical Landscapes Program, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, 306 Carmody Road, St Lucia
QLD 4067. http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/poster/4/1/1/1219_jakkues.htm, 9 Agustus 2005)
Landreform versus Non-Landreform
Reforma agraria sering dibicarakan, tapi sering dibingungkan dengan landreform. Ada yang menyebut sama, ada yang menyebut sebagai bagiannya. Saya mendefinisikan reforma agraria = landreform + non landreform. Bedanya demikian:
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)