TyroCity: Sociology Notes

Victor of Aveyron

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Victor ‘the Wild Boy of Aveyron’ is another name on the list that you may sound familiar. Some say that he could be the first documented cause of autism, but he is definitely a well known case of a child that was left alone in the wild. At the end of the 18th century, several people saw Victor wandering in the Saint Sernin sur Rance woods, which is located in southern France. Victor was captured a first time and somehow escaped. It wasn’t until January 8, 1800 that he was caught again after coming out of the woods on his own, though he was spotted several times in 1798 and 1799. At this time he was said to be about 12 years old. His body was covered in scars and he was unable to speak a word. He was taken back to town where he was generally accepted, though once the news spread, many came forward wanting to examine him.

A biology professor, Pierre Joseph Bonnaterre, decided to examine Victor, taking off his clothes and putting him outside in the snow. Victor began to run around in the snow, showing no ill-effects of the cold temperature on his bare skin. It is said that he lived in the wild for about 7 years, so it is no surprise that his body was able to take such extreme weather. Roch-Ambroise Cucurron Sicard then took over and decided to try to teach the boy, though he soon became frustrated at his lack of progress. Though he was probably born with the ability to talk and hear, he never did so properly after being left in the wild. He was eventually taken to the Paris Institution des Sourds-Muets where he lived with Mme Guérin and died at the age of 40.

Sub-divisions of Sociology

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Sub-division of Sociology is also known as branch of Sociology.

Some of the branches of Sociology are given below:-

Historical Sociology
- It is study of cultural- historical facts of Society.
- Sociology usually accepts 50 year's old facts as historical facts. e.g.; Muluki Ain, 1910 B.S – punishment based on caste. New Muluki Ain, 2020 B.S – Abolition of Caste Discrimination.
Sociology of Knowledge
- It is study of knowledge as social product.
- It believes an idea that human society and its very structure can influence knowledge.

e.g.; National Anthem generates love for country in the heart of people.

Maoist's people's song had encouraged Nepalese youth to take part in People's War.

Sociology of Law
- It recognizes law as part of society.
- It studies impact of law in society e.g.; Impact of Muluki Ain, 1910 B.S. in past Nepalese Society.

Impact of Muluki Ain,2020 B.S. in existing Society.

Social or Human Ecology
- It Studies impact of environment upon social life. e.g.; variation of culture, language, dress up, food habit Mountain, Hill & Tarai of Nepal effect of climate change.

Sociology of Education

- It studies education as and agent of transmission of culture.
- It stress upon the social importance of education and meritocracy i.e., rule by the educated and talented persons. Job placement on the basis of shill & educational qualification not by Nepotism or favoritism.
Political Sociology
- It studies relationship between social structures and political institutions, such as government and other organ of state.
- eg; People's aspiration towards freedom determines the government of state as democratic or autocratic.
Economic Sociology
- It is concerned with economic activities.
- Social Structures determines economic activities e.g.; Rural economy, urban economic, etc.
Sociology of Religion
- It analysis the religious behavior of human beings from a sociological point of view.
- Religious belief determines people's dress up, food habit, etc.
Industrial Sociology
- It studies impact of industrialization is Social life.
- The main cause of urbanization is industrialization.
- Rural economy converted over nightly to urban economy because of industrialization.
- It studies industrial relation, i.e. relationship between employer, capital and labor. (industrialist)

Vanya Yudin

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

One of the more recent cases of a feral child is Vanya Yudin (referred to by news agencies as ‘the Russian Bird Boy’). It is said that when he was found by Russian caseworkers in 2008, he was 7 years old and unable to speak. He did nothing but chirp and flap his arms as if he had wings, and exhibited a lot of the behavior that you would expect from a bird. He was kept in a two-room apartment with bird cages filled with dozens of birds that were owned by his mother. Galina Volskaya, one of the social workers taking part in the case stated that even though the boy lived with his mother, she never spoke to him and she simply treated him like another one of her pets. When Volskaya attempted to talk to the boy, he didn’t speak, just chirped.

While he was never abused physically, the boy was still treated with similar methods to others on the list due to the lack of human interaction. He was put into an asylum where he received treatment to allow him to become more human-like. After, he was sent to a center for psychological care to further his journey to becoming more socially aware and accepted.

Meaning of Sociology

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Sociology is the youngest of the social science. Its major concern is society, and hence to is popularly known as the “Science of Society”.

Etymological, the term sociological is the combination of two words. One Latine words- ‘Societus’ and other Greek words-logos’, in which ‘Societus’ means society and logos’ means study or Science. In this way etymological meaning of Sociology is the Study of the Society or Science of the Society.

Definition

Different Scholars have defined Sociology in different ways. Though the content of definition is the same, definitions very from person to person.

“Sociology is a science of Society.” –L.F Ward
“Sociology is about Social relationship, the net of relationship, we call Society”-MacIver and Page
“Sociology is the Study of human interaction and interrelation, their conditions and consequence”-M.Ginsberg
“Sociology is the scientific study of the structure of social life”-Young and Mack

Sociology is the study of human behavior in groups.
Sociology is the study of social action.
Sociology is the study of social groups or social system
Sociology is the study of forms of social relationship.

Sociologist tries to find out the evolution of society while studying Society. Similarly, to find out and discover nature and interdependence of Social structure, development of social institution, their functions, customs, value of mobilizing of social relation, human made groups and history of community, family, caste, government, economic, group, religious group etc and phenomena of social change are the functions of sociologists.

Ralph Dahrendorf & Karl Marx: conflict theory

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

What is Conflict Theory?

Conflict theory generally surrounds the idea that most struggles in society happen because of conflicts between different social classes or groups
Each group struggles to attain more resources and because resources are scarce, they must struggle with other groups
Groups try to protect their own interests, therefore blocking the progress of other groups
From conflict comes social change

Ralf Dahrendorf’s (1929-present) Conflict Theory

Society is always in tension between :

consensus and coercion
function and conflict

The central questioned of all social thought

How do societies stay togather? Two well established positions:

The Utopians (Functional Theory)
- Represented by the Functional Theory
The Rationalists (Conflict Theory)
- Represented by Conflict Theory

Conflict between the two positions is old.

Hobbes vs. Rousseau
Kant vs. Hegel

Utopians are represented by the Functional theory of society
Rationalists are represented by the Conflict theory of society
The two positions are mutually exclusive in most fields and people, but not is sociology.
Good Sociology uses one in A, another in B and both in C. but does not exclude any.
Every Society is at every point subject to the processes of change. Change is everywhere.
Conflict is everywhere
Every Element in a society contributes to its disintegration and change
Every Society is based on coercion of some members by others.
In society there is division of labor but in a division of labor, not every occupation based status is equal.

Dahrendorf’s key concepts : the authority conflict

Different people have different occupation
The different occupation have different status
People’s status increases or decreases according to the link it has with authority.
In society there are many organizations.
Each organization contains two groups
- super-ordinates (order-givers) with authority
- sub-ordinates (order-takers) without authority
In authority relations there is a fundamental conflict between:
- those who have power
- and those who do not have power

Dahrendorf’s key concepts Conflict of interest

The conflict is fundamentally based on two type of interest
- Those With Authority: Their INTEREST is to maintain status quo
- Those Without Authority: Their INTEREST is to change status quo

Dahrendorf’s key concepts : difference between power and authority

Power is essentially tied to the personality of individuals
Authority is always associated with social positions or roles
Dahrendorf was most interested in studying authority
When someone has authority in one setting, that authority does not extend to other social arenas: a boss holds legitimate authority at work but outside of the work setting they cannot legitimately tell people what to do.
Dahrendorf is only concerned in his presentation with authority

Dahrendorf’s key concepts: The Three Types groups

Quasi groups
Groups that are not well organized because they have latent or natural interest but are well conscious of their group interest.

Interest groups
When the latent interest becomes manifest interest then the group becomes conscious about their group interest. Due to this they are organized and can put pressure on the rival groups.

Conflict group
When interest group evolved into an organized group to overthrow the rival group then it is a conflict group.

Dahrendorf’s key argument

Higher the group interest consciousness among quasi groups the more possibility of intergroup conflict between super ordinate and subordinate groups.
More there is a link between organizational authority and the distribution of rewards the more possibility for conflict.
If the movement of subordinate group to higher position is made more difficult the more there is conflict.
If the economic, political or social goals of the organizations are less met then more there is conflict.
More intense the conflict the more possibility of change.

Karl Marx
Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a socialist theoretician and activist, a major figure in the history of economic , sociological and philosophical thought, and a great social prophet.

“There must be something rotten in the very core of a social system which increases in wealth without diminishing its misery, and increases in crime even more than its numbers.” -Marx, K. (1859). Population, crime and pauperism.Collected Works, (16).

The main argument of Karl Marx can be summarized as follows:

The purpose of philosophy is to reconstruct the world and not to explain the origin of the universe.
That the force which shapes the course of history are primarily economic.
That society is divided into two classes: owners and workers.
That there is always a class conflict going on between the two classes.
That the workers are exploited by the owners who misappropriate the surplus value, which is the result of the workers’ labour.
That this exploitation can be put an end to by nationalisation of the instruments of production i.e. abolition of private property.
That this exploitation is leading to greater and greater impoverishment of the workers.
That this growing impoverishment of the workers is resulting in a revolutionary spirit among the workers and the conversion of the class conflict into a class struggle.
That as the workers outnumber the owners, the workers are bound to capture the State and establish their rule, which he called the dictatorship of the proletariat.
These factors are irresistible and therefore socialism is inevitable.

Detailed Study of Karl Marx

Fundamental Concepts (derived from Marx):

1. The “Mode of Production”: Basic system of production ? Impacts all other social relations

“Mode of production” describes the economic base of politics.
Societies are assumed to have developed through a series of “modes” of production.
Marx was particularly interested in explaining the transition from the feudal mode of production to Capitalism and, eventually to Socialism.

2. The “Relations of Production”:

On top of the economic base of society, or mode of production, Marxists assume that there is a political and social superstructure, or “relations of production” which is deeply influenced by the mode of production.
The “social superstructure” is society’s laws, politics, culture and ideology
Determined by mode of production (?) Contentious issue:
Relations of production were actually determined by political struggle between different groups in society over the control of the mode of production.
- E.g. For example, despite the fact that feudalism was based on aristocratic control over land and agricultural labour, this did not simply determine that there would always be a feudal set of relations of production. Rather, capitalists, emerging industrial entrepreneurs, were able, through political struggle to alter the relations of production in way that eventually led to the emergence of a dominant capitalist mode of production.
- Best way to say it . . . : Marx and history – the dominant group in the dominant mode of production . . . But people make their own history, just . . . .
Marx also argued that societies could simultaneously have multiple modes of production and in particular that during times of transition, such as from feudalism to capitalism, that competing modes of production could coexist for quite some time; thus, Marxists argue for the importance of examining the Social Formation.

3. The importance of history: Specific historical & geographical settings have different modes/relations of production

Each society may have a different balance, or mix, of modes of production and thus the actual social formation of the society must be closely examined before we make assumptions about the relations of production in that society.
The reason studying the historical social formation of a society is so important to Marxists is that underling all modes and relations of production is a basic set of social classes.
- Class, and class analysis is the single most important concept in socialist analysis.
- Where liberalism focuses on individuals as the basic unit of analysis, socialist political economy lumps individuals into broad social groupings and attempts to understand those groups, or classes, as the basic unit of analysis.

4. Class:

Each mode of production organizes individuals into classes:
- Those who own and control the means of production; and
- Those who sell their labour

Key points:
Classes are social collections of individuals that have shared interests in the distribution of benefits emerging from the mode of production.

5. They often share a similar ideology and values

E.g. in the capitalist mode of production: Capitalists (the bourgeoisie – in traditional Marxist terminology) have a shared set of interests in promoting liberal political economy, a liberal ideology that supports their ability to generate profits and a legal system that ensures their continued private ownership of the means of production. Workers (the proletariat) have an interest in collectively advancing their own claims to a greater share of the profits emerging from production – whether that be through the collective seizure of capitalist private property, progressive/redistributive tax laws or through unionization and collective bargaining to increase wages.
These opposed interests are the basis of the “class struggle”

Class Struggle

While Marx argued that modes of production play a role in determining the superstructure of politics (what laws there will be, or, what the state will do), ultimately all Marxists agree that the real driving force in this process, is class struggle and indeed Marxists see “politics” as a struggle between productive classes for the control of production.
- This “Drives” history
Since several modes of production may exist simultaneously, often political struggles in each society are very complex. Different factions struggle for political dominance; however, the basic divergence in interests produced by the process of production creates a tension which plays a determining role in political struggles.

Marxist Economics:

The starting point for all Socialist analyses is Karl Marx’s Capital which offers an alternative “Marxist economics” of capitalism to that provided by liberal economics. Marx developed a number of important points in his analyses of capitalism. Firstly, much like the classical political economists, (Smith and Ricardo) . . . .

1. Labor the basis of all value

Total direct & indirect labor in production determines “true price” of product. Marx argued that the value or “true price” of any good, over the long run was determined by how much labour went into producing that good.

[What is indirect and direct labour?] The total direct and indirect labour used to produce a good determines the value of a good.

Secondly, much like the classical political economists, Marx argued that profits were the engine of growth in capitalist economies, but he argued that profits were based on surplus value.

2. Profits based on “surplus value” Occurred when capitalists kept the difference between how much the labor cost them in producing a good, and how much they could sell that good for

Even though capitalists and workers need each other in the process of production, Marx argued that because workers had no choice but to sell their labour (or otherwise starve) while capitalists could choose not to invest their savings (without facing the prospect of immediate starvation) that capitalists had a kind of advantage over workers to artificially reduce their wages.

= This artificial reduction of wages created surplus value.

Furthermore since the extraction of this surplus value is the basis of profit, and since profit is the engine of growth in capitalism,
- Capitalism always exploitative Workers had to be exploited or the system would not work.

3. Increases in profit only achieved by increasing extraction of surplus value Marx argued that the employment of capital (or investment) itself produced no surplus value. Over the long term, the only way that investors could make profits was by employing people. The only way profit levels could be increased was by increasing the extraction of surplus value from workers. This could be done either by increasing:

Relative surplus value (which would mean increasing the productivity of workers by forcing workers to work harder or more efficiently), Or by increasing the:
Absolute surplus value (by forcing workers to work longer hours for less money).

Marx argued that once created,

4. Capitalism was dynamic – would spread. Efficiency in organizing production and extracting surplus value made it superior

It is important to understand this – Marx and those influenced by Marx assumed that capitalism was extremely efficient – it was much better than any mode of production that had come before; however, unlike liberals, they were deeply concerned about the levels of inequality that capitalism produced. Capitalism based on fundamental “tensions”:

Once Marx developed this understanding of how Capitalism “worked” he went on to argue that the inherent logic of Capitalism created basic tensions that would lead to crises and even, eventually a complete collapse of the system. Marx argued that the economic competition between capitalists, at the core of the system, created three main problems:

1. Economic concentration: Competitive markets produced “concentration”

E.g. monopolies Eroded market efficiency assumed by neoclassical liberal economics

2. “Falling rate of profit” Competition forced firms to continually expand their investments in new technology and machinery to remain competitive. Because profits came only from exploiting workers, these investments on their own did not create higher rates of profit.

As the ratio of indirect labour (machinery) grew in relation to direct labour, there would be a steady decline in the rate of profit. The only way to reverse this trend was by increasing the exploitation of workers – making them work longer or harder, or for less money.

3. Growing exploitation of workers: Falling rate of profit required greater exploitation of workers Gradually, workers would earn less money with which they could buy goods. Falling rate of profit led to greater exploitation

Produced “crisis of under-consumption” = Recessions and unemployment

Marx thought that this trend towards under-consumption would ultimately undermine Capitalism – that capitalism would have to be replaced by some sort of socialism in which consumption was ensured, possibly by abandoning Capitalism’s competitive markets for direct state ownership of the means of production.

Bottom Line: Capitalism prone towards crises and collapse

Capitalism, although volatile, has proven to be extremely flexible and dynamic, and has somehow avoided the complete crises predicted by Marx.

Scopes of Sociology

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Every science has its own areas of study of fields of inquiry. It becomes difficult for any one to study a science systematically unless its boundaries are demarcated and scope determined precisely. Unfortunately, there is no consensus on the part of sociologists with regard to scope of sociology. V.F. Calberton writes, ‘since sociology is so elastic a science, it is difficult to determine just where its boundaries begins and ends, where sociology becomes social psychology and where social psychology becomes, sociology, or where economic theory becomes sociological doctrine or biological theory becomes sociological theory something, which is impossible to decide”. It is maintained by some that Sociology studies everything and anything under the sun. This is rather too vague a view about the scope of Sociology.

The scope of sociology is very wide. It is a general science but it is also a special science. As a matter of fact, the subject matter of all social sciences is society. What distinguishes them from one another is their viewpoint. Thus economics studies society from an economic view point; political science studies it from political viewpoint while history is a study of society from a historical point of view. Sociology alone studies social relationships and society itself. MacIver correctly remarks; ‘what distinguishes each from each is the selective interest’. Green also remarks, ‘ the focus of attention upon relationships makes sociology a distinctive field, however closely allied to certain others it may be.

The scope of sociology is, indeed, very vast. It studies all the social aspects of society such as social processes, social control, social change, stratification, social system, social groups, social pathology etc. Actually, it is neither possible nor essential to delimit the scope of sociology, because, it would be, as Sprott puts it, : “A brave attempt to confine an enormous mass of slippery material into a relatively simple system of pigeonholes”. It is actually neither possible nor essential to delimit the scope of sociology.

However, there are two main schools of thought regarding the scope of sociology:

The specialistic / formalistic school and
The synthetic school

The specialistic School

The school of thought is led by the German sociologist George Simmel. The other main advocates of this school are Vierkandt, Max Weber, Small, Von Weise and Tonnies.

Simmel and other are of the opinion that sociology is a pure and an independent science. As a pure science it has a limited scope. Sociology should confine itself to the study of certain aspects of human relationship only. Further, it should study only the ‘forms’ of social relationship but not their contents. Social relationship such as competition, sub-ordination, division of labour etc., are expressed in different fields of social life such as economic, political, religious, moral, artistic etc. Sociology should disentangle the forms of social relationships and study them in abstraction. Sociology as a specific social science describes, classifies and analyses the forms of social relationships.

Vierkandt says that sociology concern itself with the ultimate form of mental or psychic relationship which line one man with other men. According to him, the actual historical societiees, for example, the French society of the eighteenth century, or the Chinese family are of interest to sociologists only as a illustration of particular types of relationships. He further maintains that similarly in dealing with culture, sociology should not concern itself with the actual contents of cultural evolution but is should confine itself to only the discovery of the fundamental forces of change and persistence. It should abstain from a historical study of concrete societies.

Max Weber opines that the aim of sociology is to interpret or understand social behaviour. But social behaviour does not cover the whole field of human relations. He further says that sociology should make an analysis and classification of types of social relationships. Indeed not all human inter-actions are social. For instance, a collision between two cyclists is in itself merely a natural phenomenon, but their efforts to avoid each other or the language they use after the event constitute true social behaviour. Sociology is thus, according to him, concerned with the analysis and classification of types of social relationships.

Von Weise says that the scope of sociology is the study of forms of social relationships. He has divided these social relationships into many kinds.

Tonnie also supported the view of formalistic school. He has differentiated between society and community on the basis of forms of relationships. He interpreted social processes quantitatively and gave a mathematical formula. He says:

P = A x S
Where, P = Social processes, A = Attitude, S = Situation and attitude is made up of;

A = NxE (N = Basic social nature & E = Previous experiences)

S = BxA (B=Geographical conditions & A = Attitude of the participants)

Thus, according to the formalistic school, sociology studies one specific aspect of social relationships, i.e. their forms in their abstract nature, and not in any concrete situation. A comparison is drawn between the forms of social relationships and a bottle. A bottle may be either of plastic or any other material. It may contain milk, water etc. But the contents of the bottle do not change the form of bottle. Similarly, the forms of social relationships do not change with the change in the content of social relationships. For example, the study of competition – a form of social relationship will not make any difference whether we study it in the political field or economic field. Sociology has been compared with Geometry. Just as Geometry studies about the forms of physical things triangular, rectangular, square or circular etc., similarly sociology studies about the forms of social relationships. The relation of sociology to other social sciences is similar to the relation of Geometry with other natural sciences. The formalistic school has limited the scope of sociology to the abstract study of the forms of social relationship.

Criticism of formalistic school

The views of the formalistic school are widely criticized. Some critics remarks may be cited here;

The formalistic school has unreasonably narrowed the field of sociology. Sociology should not only study the general forms of social relationships but also their concrete contents.

Secondly, the distinction between forms of social relationship and their contents is not workable. Social forms can not be abstracted from the content at all, since social forms keep on changing when the contents change. Sorokin writes, ‘We may fill a glass with wine, water or sugar without changing its form, but I cannot conceive of a social institution whose form would not change when its members change’.

Thirdly, sociology is not the only science that studies the forms of social relationships. Other social sciences also do that. The study of international law, for example, includes social relations like conflict, war, opposition, agreement, contract etc. Political science, Economics also study social relationships.

Finally, the establishment of pure sociology is impractical. No sociology has been able to develop a pure sociology so far. No science can be studied in complete isolation from the other sciences. In fact, today more emphasis is laid on inter-disciplinary approach.

The synthetic School

The synthetic school of thought conceives of sociology as a synthesis of the social sciences. It wants to make sociology as general social science and not a pure or special social science. In fact, this school has made sociology synoptic or encyclopedic in character. Durkheim, Hob House, Ginsberg and Sorokin have been the chief exponents of this school.

The main argument of this school is that all parts of social life are intimately inter-related. Hence the study of one aspect is not sufficient to understand the entire phenomenon. Hence sociology should study social life as a whole. This opinion has contributed to the creation of a general and systematic sociology.

The views of Emile Durkheim:

He is one of chief proponent of this school of thought. He says that sociology has three main divisions or fields of inquiry. They are as follows: Social Morphology, Social Physiology and General Sociology.

1. Social Morphology: Social morphology studies the territorial basis of the life of people and also the problem of population such as volume and density, local distribution etc.

2. Social Physiology: Social physiology has different branches such a sociology of religion, or morals, of law, of economic life and of language etc.

3. General Sociology: General sociology can be regarded as the philosophical part of sociology. It deals with the general character of the social facts. Its function is the formulation of general social laws.

The views of Morris Ginsberg:

He says the main task of sociology can be categorized into four branches: social morphology, social control, social processes and social pathology.

1. Social Morphology: ‘Social Morphology’ deals with the quantity and quality of population. It studies the social structure, social groups, and institutions.

2. Social control: ‘social control’ studies formal as well as informal – means of social control such as custom, tradition, morals, religion, convention, and also law, court, legislation etc. It deals with the regulating agencies of society.

3. Social processes: ‘Social process’ tries to make a study of different modes of interaction such as cooperation, competition, conflict, accommodation, assimilation, isolation, integration, differentiation, development, arrest and decay.

4. Social Pathology: ‘Social pathology’ studies social mal-adjustment and disturbances. It also include studies on various social problems like poverty, beggary, unemployment, over-population, prostitution, crime etc.

Sorokin’s View: He says that the subject matter of sociology includes:

The study of relationship between the different aspects of social phenomena;
The study of relationship between the social and non-social.
The study of general features of social phenomena

Karl Mahhheim’s view: He divides sociology into two main sections:

1. Systematic and general sociology: It describes one by one the main factors of living together as far as they may be found in every kind of society.

2. Historical sociology: It deals with the historical variety and actuality of the general forms of society. They are categorized into two sections: firstly comparative sociology and secondly social dynamics. Comparative sociology deals mainly with the historical variations of the same phenomenon and tries to find by comparison general features as separated from industrial features. Social dynamics deals with the interrelations between various social factors and institutions in a certain given society, or instance, in a primitive society.

Ginsberg has also summed up the chief functions of sociology as follows:

Sociology seeks to provide a classification of types and forms of social relationship.
It tries to determine the relation between different factors of social life. For example, the economic and political, the moral and the religious, the moral and legal, the intellectual and the social elements.
It tries to disentangle the fundamental conditions of social change and persistence and to discover sociological principal governing social life.

Recently, a Sociological Seminar was held in America which gave a general outline of scope of the sociology. Alex Inkeles has put it as follows: Social analysis, primary concepts of social life, basic social institutions, and processes.

J.B. McKee holds that social action, social structure, social processes and social institutions are included in the scope of sociology.

Meaning, characteristics and origin of stratification

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

ANTHONIO GIDDENS: ‘The existence of structured inequalities between groups in society in terms of their access to material or symbolic rewards. While all societies involve some forms of stratification, only with the development of state based systems do wide differences in wealth and power arise. The most distinctive form of stratification in modern societies involves class divisions’.

‘The term stratification in sociology is usually applied to studies of structured social inequality that is studies of any systematic inequalities between groups of people which arise as the unintended consequence of social processes and relationships. When we ask why there is poverty why Black people or women in United States are disadvantaged vis-à-vis (respectively) Whites and men or what chances someone born into the working class has of achieving a middle class position we are posing questions about social stratification. ’ Oxford Dictionary of Sociology

Meaning of social stratification

Social stratification refers to existing social inequality in a society
This inequality is caused by the way wealth, power, and prestige are distributed
Social stratification exists in all societies

Types of social stratification

1. Open stratification system:

The type of stratification system in which merit and not inheritance (ascribed characteristics) determines social rank of a person.
For example Mrs A is the manager of a company and not Mr B because Mrs A is good in management (achieved status) and not because of her caste or gender.
In this type of stratification achieved status is given importance.

2. Closed stratification system

Stratification system in which inheritance (ascribed status) and not merit determines social rank
A wife is considered as inferior to her husband because of the ascribed status.

Characteristics of social stratification

1. Power: Capacity to impose your will on others, regardless of any resistance
2. Material wellbeing: Involves access to economic resources required to pay for necessities of life and other possessions and advantages
3. Prestige: Average evaluation of occupational activities and positions arranged in a hierarchy

John Ssebunya

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

It is said that John Ssebunya, also known as ‘The Ugandan Monkey Boy,’ ran away from home when he was three years old after witnessing his father murder his mother. He fled to the Ugandan jungles where he was said to be taken care of by green African monkeys. In 1991 he was found hiding in a tree by a woman named Millie who was a local tribeswoman. After spotting him she went back to her village to alert the men who then went into the jungle to capture John. While they were eventually successful, John and the monkeys, which had become his protectors, fought back, throwing sticks to defend him. In the end he was captured and taken back the village.

Once back in the village he was cleaned up but his entire body was covered in hair called hypertrichosis, a condition that brings about excessive amounts of hair in places that there usually isn’t hair. Also since he was living in the wild he had contracted a case of intestinal worms that were said to be over half a meter long once they exited his body. He was full of injuries- mainly his knees from imitating how a monkey walks. He was then given to Paul and Molly Wasswa who ran an orphanage, and the two taught him how to speak, though many believe he knew how to talk before running away. Today he sings with the Pearl of Africa children’s choir and exhibits little to no animalistic behavior.

Genie

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

If you ever take a Psychology class or get into a conversation about feral children, Genie’s name will probably come up. For 13 years she was locked inside a room and strapped to her potty chair, other times she was bound in a sleeping bag and put inside a crib. Her father, the one behind the abuse, would hit her with a stick if she ever spoke and he would bark and growl at her to keep her quiet. He also forbade his other children and even his wife from speaking. Because of this, Genie had a very small vocabulary, consisting of about 20 words. The phrases she did know included “stop it” and “no more.” She was discovered in 1970 and today she is considered to be one of the worst cases of social isolation known. She was often thought to be autistic until doctors found out she was really 13 and was a victim of abuse.

She was taken to Children’s Hospital Los Angeles where she was treated for years. After some treatment, she was able to answer questions in one-word answers and she learned how to dress herself. However, she still held onto her learned behavior, including a “bunny walk” where she held her hands up in front of her as if they were paws. She also scratched and even clawed at things. Though she was moved around a lot, she found home with her therapist David Rigler for 4 years, who worked with her daily. He and his family taught Genie sign language as well as ways to express herself without speaking; drawing was a method. Genie then went to live with her mother, and then abusive foster parents, which then caused her to become mute again and afraid to speak. Today she is living somewhere in Southern California.

Detail theory of John Locke

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Wrote Two Treatises on Government.
The first treatise is concerned almost exclusively with refuting the argument of Robert Filmer’s Patriarcha, that political authority was derived from religious authority, also known by the description of the Divine Right of Kings.
The second treatise contains Locke’s own constructive view of the aims and justification for civil government.
Believed that people entered into society to protect their “life, liberty, and property”.
Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, admired Locke.
The government’s main job is to protect the citizen’s property.
If they government is not providing you with protection for your property you have the right to revolt.
Justified the American Revolution

Hinduism

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Arjun Guneratne – 2002 wrote in her book Many Tongues, One People: The Making of Tharu Identity in Nepal:

‘The terms sanskritization, Hinduization, and Nepalization, when used in the Nepali context, are virtually interchangeable. They all describe much the same process, predicated on the adoption of the symbols of Hinduism, although Nepalization includes as well the use of a common language as the basis of integration. The concepts of sanskritization and Hinduization describe the process by which low-caste or tribal groups raise their status within, or become absorbed into, the social system of a dominant Hindu polity. When used in the Nepali context they all refer to the fact that the fostering of a common national identity based on Hindu symbols has been a preoccupation of the country’s elites since the political unification of Nepal in the eighteenth century. ’

Features of Hindization

Non Hindu (Buddhist and other non Hindus) leaving their traditional cultural practices and adopting the Hindu cultural practices.

Detail theory of Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Sociology BA LLB — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

“Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains.“
His most famous works are Discourse on the Origin and Foundations of Inequality Among Men (AKA The Second Discourse) & The Social Contract.
Believed that humans are born inherently good. He coined the term “Nobel Savage”.
However, once the idea of private property was introduced mankind experienced a “fall from grace”.
Individuals with many possessions saw that it would be in their best interest to create a government to protect their possessions.
How can we be free and live together? Or, put another way, how can we live together without succumbing to the force and coercion of others?
We can do so, Rousseau maintains, by submitting our individual wills to the collective or general will, created through agreement with other free and equal persons.
All men are made by nature to be equals, therefore no one has a natural right to govern others, and therefore the only justified authority is the authority that is generated out of agreements or covenants.
Rousseau advocates the strictest form of Direct Democracy.