Who made such classification: People can be Sheep, Shephards, Wolves and Dogs? Plzz, help(linadio12@yahoo.com)
970424
Not sure.  Pink Floyd said they were sheep, pigs, and dogs.  That's from the Animals album.  But I think you are probably thinking of someone else.
518492
u cant categorize people into one thing.  every single person is different and we all have our own preferences.  some do some dont
516711
The church has been misrepresented at times there will always be wolves in sheep's clothing as well. The Lord says my sheep will hear my voice and not another will they follow. The Lord has sheep and everyone who says Lord Lord will not enter into the kingdom of God always keep that in mind. But I understand where you are coming from.
978245
What? No no, wolves are pack animals headed by a matriarch.  If another female wolf in the pack has a pup, the pups may be killed by the matriarch because only the matriarch is "allowed" to have pups.  Sometimes/often the case is that the matriarch adopts the pups into the pack.  \n\nThe nature of racism really isn't understood in humans, but we do know that the brain likes to simplify things to expedite decision making.  You can see a general description of this in Gladwell's "Blink."  We also know that all living things that operate in cooperative networks will tend to support family over outsiders, and family is recognized by their physical traits.  This is why we have nepotism. \n\nSee "Natural Selection and Social Theory" by Trivers.
319967
Carl Linnaeus was classifying species... categorizing.  He is quoted speaking to this point in the article on him in Wikipedia.
996066
No Dr Phil. This category is their way of toying with us. I was the first person to post here. They kept deleting and undeleting my question. Then they perma deleted all our questions and  removed the bull fighting category just to replace it a few days later. Do you think they snicker every time someone posts here?
868224
Its the bird group, your daughter is correct. I know it is confusing, because  it seems so simple. But they group animals by bird, mamal, reptile, amphibian, insect in 2nd grade, so Bird is correct.
265371
I'm an individual learner under this method of categorization.\n\nBased on your question, you might be interested in reading about multiple intelligences theory if you haven't already done so.  It's quite interesting.  I've attached a couple of links in case you're interested.
1099392
Domain.\n\nThe classification system goes Domain (Eukaryote, Bacteria or Archaea), Kingdom (Examples: Animals, Fungi), Phylum (Example: Arthopoda), Class (Example: Insecta), Order (Example: Carnivora), Family (Example: Felidae [cats]), Genus (Example: Homo), species (Example: Homo sapiens), sub-species (Example: Bison bison bison)
476408
classifying human beings in races is stupid and not scientific. the three main groups of negro, caucasian and mongoloids were used by anthropologists anciently but have no longer any scientific value. some countries adopt them as a form of description of their citizens but its not correct to talk about "races". in fact a central european, looking "caucasian", might have a greater genetic affinity (similar DNA) with a black african that, say, with another central european of celtic origin. this even if the looks would suggest the opposite. \nanyways, following the classification u suggest, australian aborigenes, together with melanesians, would be classified as "negro", maoris as "mongoloid", and polynesians as "caucasian"...this shows how bad  and wrong the classification is.
454001
you got zebrinny(offspring of male horse and female zebra),zebrule(hybrid offspring of male zebra and female horse)zebu(ox with hump and dewlap)zemni(blind mole rat)zho(cross between yak and a cow),zizel(chipmunk)zonure(small south african lizard)zosterops(a small tropical bird)zumbador(south african humming bird).it was real learning for me too...answering this question..after listing all this i began thinking if getting all this was a kind of zoosophy or zoomania!!
498349
Try Yahooligans Animals:\n\nhttp://yahooligans.yahoo.com/content/animals/
987920
categorization\n\nrecord
81943
I beg to differ with andyman_69. Other animals use tools. Other animals have languages. What is interesting is that so far, humans have not had much luck at deciphering their languages and have had more success at teaching them ours, either sign language or recently, to even use typewritten words displayed on a computer screen to communicate. \n\nOn top of this, there are many other behaviors that we share in common with our closest animal relatives. More than we would care to admit, I suspect. Then there is the remarkable genetic evidence that is slowly becoming more and more impressive. \n\nIt is all extremely interesting. What interests me more, is, what is consciousness? Do only humans have it? Or only a small number of other species?\n\nAnd if that is so, why? \n\nIf God did it, how? \n\nAnd I am not just referring to biblical references, but hard data and evidence that we can test in the laboratory.
747387
You are correct, humans would fall only into the animals, of all those taxonomic groupings you have listed.
354067
You totally picked the wrong category. You might want to try and post it again.  Good luck on finding the answers to this one here, I haven't got a clue.
899084
Organisms are classified into large groups first...but those organisms must have similar characteristics(taxonomy), so if we are classifying a butterfly...all have wings and go through a similar life cycle. From that large group, we can see that certain butterflies have specialized body shapes(morphology), and we continue to reduce the groups into those sharing the most characteristics. Those groups are further divided until we reach the Genus level where all of the ones put together have the same general anatomy, then we divide it further into the species level where every one of those organisms are the same (exceptions of both color and size may occur). It is easy if you think of some basics:\n1. Kingdoms (There are four kingdoms)\n2.Phylla (There are more than 20 phyla)\n3.Class (i.e. all mammals belong to the class Mammalia)\n4.Order (i.e. all meat-eating animals belong to Carnivora)\n5.Family (i.e. dogs, foxes, wolves belong to Canidae)\n6.Genus (i.e. Foxes belong to the genus Vulpes)\n7.Species (this identifies one of the genus specifically, i.e.\n    Vulpes zerda is the fennec fox of North Africa)