In the context of the article “Urbanism as a Lifestyle,” Chicago School urban social scientist Louis Wirth proposes an academic standard for city life as a sociological construct. By failing to offer an adequate set of speculations, researchers could profit from a broader portfolio of urban aspects, ultimately moving the field towards hypothetically educated thinking about urbanism. Combining sociological recommendations on the study of urban planning, Wirth lists three exact territories of the center: population estimate, density and demographic heterogeneity. Regarding the former, Wirth calls for urban occupants, rather than rural ones, to rely on multiple individuals for regular communications, managing "impersonal, superficial, transitory, and segmental" and provoking "reservation, indifference, and a nonchalant look." that individuals use to "immunize" themselves against the desires of others. Therefore interpersonal contact is determined solely by infantile utility. As regards thickness, Wirth paints a socially separate specialization (Darwin's nature hypothesis), which fragments exercises and confuses social biology. "Visual recognition", in which individuals are distinguished by their reason but cannot be recognized to claim their particular characteristics, stimulates a cognitive partition on the part of the eyewitness, for whom the urban situations discover differences in wealth, modernity and conviction. Everyday communication – practically close but socially distant – around individuals with no common ties encourages “exploitation”, despite the fact that such different qualities, Wirth claims, enable the rise to a “relativistic perspective” which accelerates tolerance. Thick and self-satisfied masses seeking rare resources in a nature...... middle of paper ...... their path in sociological treatises on the city could consequently be filtered and consolidated into a reasonable group of knowledge. By chance, precisely through one of these hypotheses, the humanist will be able to free himself from the vain practice of expressing in the name of sociological science a mixture of often unsustainable judgments on issues such as poverty, housing, urban planning, sanitation -health, metropolitan organization, police, promotion, transportation and other specialized issues. Although the sociologist cannot deal with any of these practical problems, but not independently of anyone else, he may, assuming he identifies his own adequate abilities, have the imperative commitment to assume their appreciation and outcome. The prospects for doing so are brightest through a general, hypothetical methodology. Works Cited http://www.jstor.org/stable/2768119 .