Theorists try to find ways to explain human behavior in rational ways. It seems irrational to break rules, if we want to maintain social order. We are largely constrained by the rules and obliged to behave in a particular way or to avoid certain behaviors. What motivates people to break social rules? Do you think powerful and famous people tend to break more rules? Is it worth breaking these rules? No Response(s) Be the first to respond to the Discussion topic!

See explanation

Explanation:

According to Burgess (1996); 'We don't break rules because it 'doesn't feel right' to do so. Some elements of personality can determine whether we will break rules or not, particularly when the moral/social-conventional distinction is taken into consideration'.

If an individual has the urge to behave in a manner that transgresses social rules,  personality characteristics now come into play here. Personality traits determines whether the  individual  considers him/herself as bound by the rules. Some people will follow the rules absolutely while some only follow  rules that they consider important, a small proportion will not follow any rule that prevents them from achieving their set objectives.

Famous people become carried away with affluence and position and tend to break more rules since they believe that they will always get away with it because of whom they are.

Irrespective of the circumstances, it is never worth it to break a rule. We always have to see ourselves as bound by rules as part of our social responsibility.

when the volume of gas is   changed from   717.73 ml   to 852 ml   the temperature will   change   from 315   c to 452   c

    calculation

this is calculated using the charles law formula

that is,   v1/t1 = v2/t2

          v1=?

        t1 = 315 c   into   kelvin = 315 +273 = 588 k

        v2 = 852   ml

        t2 = 425c + 273 =698 k

make v1   the subject of the formula ( by   multiplying both side by t1)

  v1=( v2 xt1) / t2

v1= (852 ml   x 588 k)/ 698 k= 717.73 ml