TyroCity: Sociology BA LLB

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.

Nature of Sociology

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

Sociology, as a branch of knowledge, has its own unique characteristics. It is different from other science in certain respects. An analysis of its internal logical characteristics helps one to understand what kind of science it is. The following are the main characteristics of sociology as enlisted by Robert Bierstedt in his book, " The social order". An always of its internal logical characteristics helps one to understand what kind of science it is.

Sociology is an Independent Science.
Sociology is a Social Science and not a physical Science.
Sociology is a categorical and not a Normative Discipline.
Sociology is relatively and Abstract Science and not a concrete Science.
Sociology is pure science and not an Applied Science.
Sociology is a General Science not a special Science.
Sociology is a Generalizing and not a particularizing or Individualizing science.
Sociology is Both a Rational and Empirical Science.

Sociology is an independent science:

Sociology has now emerged into an independent science. It is not treated and studied as a branch of any other science like philosophy or political philosophy or history. As an independent science it has its own field of study, boundary and method.

Sociology is a social science and not a physical science.

Sociology belongs to the family of social sciences and not to the family of physical sciences. As a social science, it concentrates its attention on man, his social behaviour, social activities and social life. As a member of the family of social science it is intimately related to other social sciences like history, political sciences, economics, psychology, anthropology etc. The fact that sociology deals with the social universe distinguishes it from astronomy, physics, chemistry, geology, mathematics and other physical sciences.

Sociology is a categorical and not a normative discipline:

Sociology 'confines itself to statements about what is, not what should be or ought to be'. As a science, sociology is necessarily silent about questions of value. It does not make any kind of value-judgements. Its approach is neither moral nor immoral but amoral. It is ethically neutral. It cannot decide the directions in which sociology ought to go. It makes no recommendations on matters of social policy or legislation or programme. But it does not mean that sociological knowledge is useless and serves no purpose. It only means that sociology as a discipline cannot deal with problems of good and evil, right and wrong, and moral or immoral.

Sociology is a Pure Science and not an Applied Science:

A distinction is often made between Pure Sciences and applied sciences. The main aim of pure sciences is the acquisition of knowledge and it is not bothered whether the acquired knowledge is useful or can be put to use. On the other hand, the aim of applied science is to apply the acquired knowledge into life and to put to use. Each pure science may have its own applied field. For example, Physics is a pure science and engineering is its applied fields. Similarly the pure sciences such as economics, political science, history, etc., have their applied fields like business, politics, and journalism respectively. Sociology as a pure science has its applied fields such as administration, diplomacy, social work etc. Each pure science may have more than one application.

Sociology is a pure science, because the immediate aim of sociology is the acquisition of knowledge about human society, not the utilization of knowledge. Sociologists never determine questions of public policy and do not recommend legislators what laws should be passed or repealed. But the knowledge acquired by a sociologist is of great help to the administrator, the legislator, the diplomat, the teacher, the foreman, the supervisor, the social worker and the citizen. But sociologists themselves do not apply the knowledge to life and use, as a matter of their duty and profession.

Sociology is relatively an abstract science and not a concrete science:

This does not mean sociology is an art and not a science. Nor does it mean, it is unnecessarily complicated and unduly difficult. It only means that sociology is not interested in concrete manifestations of human events. It is more concerned with the form of human events and their patterns. For example, sociology is not concerned with particular wars and evolutions but with war and revolutions in general, as social phenomena, as types of social conflict. Similarly, sociology does confine itself to the study of this society or that particular society or social organization, or marriage, or religion, or group and so on. It is in this simple sense that sociology is an abstract not a concrete science.

Sociology is a Generalizing and not a particularizing or Individualizing science:

Sociology tried to find out the general laws or principles about human interaction and association, about the nature, form, content and structure of human groups and societies. It does not study each and every event that takes place in a society. It is not possible also. It tries to make generalizations on the basis of the study of some selected events. For example, a sociologist makes generalizations about the nature of secondary groups. He may conclude that secondary groups are comparatively bigger in size, less stable, not necessarily spatially limited, more specialized, and so on. This, he does, not by examining all the secondary groups but by observing and studying a few.

Sociology is a General Science and not a special social science:

The area of inquiry of sociology is general and not specialized. It is concerned with human interaction and human life in general. Other social sciences like political science, history, economics, etc., also study man and human interaction, but not all about human interaction. They concentrate their attention on certain aspects of human interaction and activities and specialize themselves in those fields. Accordingly, economics specializes itself in the study of economic activities, political science concentrates on political activities and so on. Sociology, of course, does not investigate economic, religious, political, legal, moral or any other special kind of phenomenon in relation to human life and activities as such. It only studies human activities in a general way. This does not, however, mean that sociology is the basic science nor does it imply sociology is the general social science. Anthropology and social psychology often claim themselves to be general social sciences.

Finally, Sociology is both a Rational and an Empirical Science.

There are two broad ways of approach to scientific knowledge. One, known as empiricism, is, the approach that emphasizes experience and the facts that result from observation and experimentation. The other, known as rationalism, stresses reason and the theories that result from logical inference.

The empiricist collects facts; the rationalist co-ordinates and arranges them. Theories and facts are required in the construction of knowledge. In sociological inquiry both are significant. A theory unsubstantiated by hard, solid facts is nothing more than an opinion. Facts, by themselves, in their isolated character, are meaningless and useless. As Immanuel Kant said, " Theories without facts are empty and facts without theories are blind". All modern sciences, therefore, avail themselves of both empirical and rational resources. Sociology is not an exception.

it is clear from the above that sociology is an independent, a social, a categorical, a pure, an abstract, a generalizing, both a rational and an empirical and a general social science.

Scope of Sociology

What is the Scope of Sociology? What is the Subject matter that is Studies? There are two main Schools of thought among the Sociologist on this issue.

Specialist or Formalistic and 2) Synthetic

The Specialist or Formalistic School

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

Simmel and others are of the opinion that sociology is pure and 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 relationships but not their human relationship only. But not their contents. Social relationship such as competition, sub-ordination, division of labor etc, are expressed in different fields of social life such as economic, political, religious, moral, artistic, etc. Sociology should disentangle the from of social relationship and study them in abstraction, Sociology as specific social science describers, classifies and analyses the form of social relationships.

Vierkandt says that sociology concern itself with the ultimate form of mental or psychic relationship which links men to one another in society. He maintains that in dealing with culture, sociology should not concern itself with the actual contents of cultural evolution but it should confine itself to only the discovery of the fundamental forces of change and persistence. It should refrain itself form making an historical study of concrete societies.

Max Weber opines that the aim of sociology is to interpret or understand social behavior. But social behavior 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.

Small insisted that sociology has only a limited field. Von Wiese and Tonnies expressed more or less the same opinion.

Criticism

The views of the Formalistic school are widely criticized.

The formalistic school has unreasonably narrowed the fields of sociology. Sociology should study not only the general forms of social relationships but also their concrete contents.
The distinction between the forms of social relations and their contents is not workable. Social forms can not be abstracted form the content al all, since social forms keep on changing when the contents change.
Sociology is not the only science that studies the forms of social relationships. Other sciences also do that. The study of international law, for example, includes social relations like conflict, war, opposition, contract etc. Political science, Economics also study social relationships.

Synthetic School

The synthetic school of though conceives of sociology as a synthesis of the social sciences. It wants to make sociology a general social science and not a pure or special science.

The main argument of this school is that all parts of social life are intimately inter-related.

The views of Emile Durkheim: one of the stalwarts of this school of thought, sys that sociology has three main divisions or fields inquiry.

Social Morphology: social morphology studies the territorial basis of the life of people and also the problems of population such as volume and density, local distribution etc
Social physiology: social physiology has different branches such as sociology of religion, of morals, of law, of economic life and of language etc.
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.

Morris Ginsberg

Ginsberg, another advocate of the synthetic school, says that the main task of sociology can be categorized into four branches:

Social Morphology: Social Morphology deals with the quantity and quality of population. It studies the social structure, social groups and institutions.
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
Social Process: 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.
Social Pathology: Social Pathology studies social mal-adjustment and disturbances. It also includes studies on various social problems like poverty, beggary, unemployment, over-population, prostitution, crime etc.

Westernization

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

‘Cultural homogenization, Americanization, westernization, the global village even modernity itself are all variants of myth-a cultural narrative to use the terms of this study-whereby the West imagines its own being and becoming and that of the rest of the world.’ - BOOK Suitably Modern: Making Middle-class Culture in a New Consumer Society

By Mark Liechty

Historically Western civilization is European civilization. In the modern era, Western civilization is Euroamerican or North Atlantic civilization. Europe, America and the North Atlantic can be found on a map; the West cannot. The name “the West” has also given rise to the concept of Westernization and has promoted a misleading conflation of westernization and modernization: it is easier to conceive of Japan “Westernizing” than “Euroamericanizing”. European-American civilization is however, universally referred to as Western civilization and that term despite its serious disabilities will be used here…In the earlier phases of change, Westernization thus promotes modernization. In the later phases modernization promotes de-Westernization and the resurgence of indigenous culture…’-Samuel Phillips Huntington (BOOK: The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order)

Features or characteristics of Westernization

Anglicization
- Prominence and dominance of English language
- Though the term is westernization but the linguistice dominance is that of English
- Language of study, entertainment
Rationalization
- Westernization is based on rationalization
- Modernization and westernization are both based on rationalization.
Individualism
- Individuals are given more importance than the family or group.
Weakening of religious values
- Westernization means weakening of religious values
- Dominance of scientific and rational.
Weakening of family ties
- The westernization means people have less attachment with their family
Nuclear family
Flexibility in marriage
- Seriousness of marriage will be in decline.
Relaxation in sexuality
- Sex is no longer viewed as evil, impure or dangerous.
- Sexual relationship outside marriage is seen as natural
Prominence of western education
- Westernization means use of western education in non western societies.
Dominance of western perspective of the world
- History and philosophy of the west gets prioritized
Dominance of western art and culture
Deification of the west

Westernization in Nepal

Westernization in Nepal began before 1950s but it was only after 1950 that when Nepal was finally opened to foreign tourists that westernization began in Nepal with more force.
The western tourists who came to Nepal began westernization in their own small way.
In 1970s Nepal and India’s Goa became the center outside California for Hippie youths of America who were spiritual, rebellious, anti-government, and anti-war.
- Kathmandu was popular for marijuana and hashish which was not illegal till then.
- Hippies came in large number in Kathmandu and settled in Jhose which till this date is called freak street.
- Hippie did not directly bring westernization but they showed Nepali youths that western culture was different.
- Youths were attracted to them.
The culture of sending the children of upper and middle class to westernized schools in India (Darjeeling, Kalingpong, Dehra Dun) also started after 1950s.
In 1990 Nepal overthrew autocracy and accepted the multiparty democracy.
The multi-party democratic system uplifted all the restrictions on foreign literatures, and medias.
The foreign medias and influx of large number of foreigners to Nepal started westernization in Nepal among youths.
The upper and middle class began to send their children to expensive westernized private school within Nepal.
The post 2000 Nepal saw the explosion of internet and internet related subculture (facebook, chat etc).

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.

The Syrian Gazelle Boy

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

Jean-Claude Auger, an anthropologist from the Basque country, was traveling alone across the Spanish Sahara (Rio de Oro) in 1960 when he met some Nemadi nomads, who told him about a wild child a day’s journey away. The next day, he followed the nomads’ directions. On the horizon he saw a naked child “galloping in gigantic bounds among a long cavalcade of white gazelles”. The boy walked on all fours, but occasionally assumed an upright gait, suggesting to Auger that he was abandoned or lost at about seven or eight months, having already learnt to stand. He habitually twitched his muscles, scalp, nose and ears, much like the rest of the herd, in response to the slightest noise. He would eat desert roots with his teeth, pucking his nostrils like the gazelles. He appeared to be herbivorous apart from the occasional agama lizard or worm when plant life was lacking. His teeth edges were level like those of a herbivorous animal. In 1966 an unsuccessful attempt was made to catch the boy in a net suspended from a helicopter; unlike most of the feral children of whom we have records, the gazelle boy was never removed from his wild companions.

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

Effects of the social contract

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

Hobbes: People will live in peace but without rights except for the right to self-defense
Locke: The three natural rights which exist in the State of Nature will be easier to enforce by the government. Those who have given express consent will be bound by the contract; those who have given tacit consent can opt out and leave.
Rousseau: Life will be fair for all if we employ the general will and set aside our personal interests.
Kant: The people will be fairly represented by the Sovereign without actually having to participate.
Rawls: We will have decided on a system that is fair for everyone, using the “Veil of Ignorance.”

Human & Animal Societies

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

Need of society for animals and humans

Evolution
Humans and animals both live in society not as their choice between isolation and society but because they are genetically programmed to be living in society. There are of couse exceptional cases in which humans or animals live away from society but in majority of the cases the evolution have made it this way.

Survival
Chances of survival in society is much more present than in isolation. This is true for humans and animals.

Reproduction
After survival the second greatest human instinct is for reproduction. It is easier to find reproduction partners in society than in isolation.

Intelligence

It has been proven through scientific research than human beings and animals learn from experiences of other social mates. This means that if one lives in group then it gives more opportunity for one to learn than when living alone. People and animals learn from each other.

Biological difference between humans and animals

Ability to Speak
The larynx ( voice box) is located at the lower throat in humans than in chimps, one of several features that enable human speech. Human ancestors evolved a descended larynx roughly 350,000 years ago. We also possess a descended hyoid bone — this horseshoe-shaped bone below the tongue, unique in that it is not attached to any other bones in the body, allows us to articulate words when speaking.

Upright Posture
Humans are unique among the primates in how walking fully upright is our chief mode of locomotion. This frees our hands up for using tools. Unfortunately, the changes made in our pelvis for moving on two legs, in combination with babies with large brains, makes human childbirth unusually dangerous compared with the rest of the animal kingdom. A century ago, childbirth was a leading cause of death for women. The lumbar curve in the lower back, which helps us maintain our balance as we stand and walk, also leaves us vulnerable to lower back pain and strain.

Nakedness
We look naked compared to our hairier ape cousins. Surprisingly, however, a square inch of human skin on average possesses as much hair-producing follicles as other primates, or more — humans often just have thinner, shorter, lighter hairs.

Hands
Contrary to popular misconceptions, humans are not the only animals to possess opposable thumbs — most primates do. (Unlike the rest of the great apes, we don’t have opposable big toes on our feet.) What makes humans unique is how we can bring our thumbs all the way across the hand to our ring and little fingers. We can also flex the ring and little fingers toward the base of our thumb. This gives humans a powerful grip and exceptional dexterity to hold and manipulate tools with.

Extraordinary Brains
Without a doubt, the human trait that sets us apart the most from the animal kingdom is our extraordinary brain. Humans don’t have the largest brains in the world — those belong to sperm whales. We don’t even have the largest brains relative to body size — many birds have brains that make up more than 8 percent of their body weight, compared to only 2.5 percent for humans. Yet the human brain, weighing only about 3 pounds when fully grown, give us the ability to reason and think on our feet beyond the capabilities of the rest of the animal kingdom, and provided the works of Mozart, Einstein and many other geniuses.

The human brain is the largest brain of all vertebrates relative to body size
It weighs about 3 pounds (1.4 kilograms)
The brain makes up about 2 percent of a human’s body weight

Clothing
Humans may be called “naked apes,” but most of us wear clothing, a fact that makes us unique in the animal kingdom, save for the clothing we make for other animals. The development of clothing has even influenced the evolution of other species — the body louse, unlike all other kinds, clings to clothing, not hair.

Fire
The human ability to control fire would have brought a semblance of day to night, helping our ancestors to see in an otherwise dark world and keep nocturnal predators at bay. The warmth of the flames also helped people stay warm in cold weather, enabling us to live in cooler areas. And of course it gave us cooking, which some researchers suggest influenced human evolution — cooked foods are easier to chew and digest, perhaps contributing to human reductions in tooth and gut size.

Blush
Turns out, the cheek-reddening reaction is a universal human response to social attention. Everyone does it some more than others. Common blushing triggers include meeting someone important, receiving a compliment and experiencing a strong emotion in a social situation.

Blush biology works like this: Veins in the face dilate, causing more blood to flow into your cheeks and producing a rosy complexion. However, scientists are stumped as to why all that happens, or what function it serves.

Long Childhoods
Humans must remain in the care of their parents for much longer than other living primates. The question then becomes why, when it might make more evolutionary sense to grow as fast as possible to have more offspring. The explanation may be our large brains, which presumably require a long time to grow and learn.

Life after Children
Most animals reproduce until they die, but in humans, females can survive long after ceasing reproduction. This might be due to the social bonds seen in humans — in extended families, grandparents can help ensure the success of their families long after they themselves can have children

Cry
How odd that sadness causes water to spill from our eyes! Among all animals, we alone cry tears of emotion.Not only do they serve the purpose of communicating feelings of distress, scientists believe tears also carry certain undesirable hormones and other proteins that are produced during periods of stress out of the body, which may explain the cathartic effect of “a good cry.”

Socio-cultural difference between humans and animals

Respect for the dead
When a human dies, we all feel sad emotions if we felt a strong bond with that person. We often have elaborate burial ceremonies to show respect for our dead. However, animals rarely do such a thing. Only a few animals have been observed to throw a few leaves on their dead. But animals do not routinely bury their dead like us humans.

Animals are mostly driven on instincts
We humans also have instincts, however, we can control them much better. We are mostly driven by reason. Animals are driven much more by instincts, and only use some reasoning. They have it pre-programmed in their minds from birth on what to do in most situations. Most animals from birth know what foods to eat and how to eat them. They know how to reproduce, where to migrate, and more. Even a baby turtle comes out of it’s shell and immediately knows to swim towards the ocean.

Humans are aware of “self,” and contemplate the afterlife
Other animals do not think of the afterlife. They tend to live in the “now.” They live in the heat of the moment. Their main goals all day long are to eat, sleep, mate, and survive. Humans, however, spend a lot of time thinking of the future, past, and present. We think about ourselves and how we relate to life. We think of what happens when we die.

Humans feel a sense of right and wrong
We all have a basic conscience. Animals kill and never think twice. They kill for food, and they kill based on instincts. They do not stop to think about if they have “sinned.” When a human murders another human, it is out of evil pre-meditation. We know better, but we murder someone anyways. That is a huge difference. Most animals kill purely to eat, or to defend themselves.

Humans have a complex language and communication method
Humans can talk, write, read facial expressions, gestures, and more. Some can even speak multiple languages. Animals do communicate, but they cannot communicate with the level of a human.

Humans use their brains in much more complex ways

The cognitive abilities of a human compared to an animal is incredible. Humans can critically think, invent, find solutions to problems, and much more. Animals are much more simple-minded. An anteater looks for ants all day. A bear gets in the water and slaps salmon out. They never stop to think of a more efficient way of doing things. The bear never creates a net or constructs a fishing pole. They find something that works, and will continue doing it. Humans will always seek out more efficient ways, and even invent complex tools. Again, this gets back to our more complex mental faculties.

Technology
We humans have the ability to quickly learn new technology, and adapt and use that technology. We can create machines and computers that help us to do work more efficiently. Even the most complex animals do not share this feature. The only tool you will likely ever see an animal use is a stick or a rock. And even then they look confused and clumsy with it.

Justice
Only human society goes against nature and seeks justice. Natures is for the survival of the fittest. Human society is governed by the philosophy of justice.

Planning
Only human society plan for the future. Not animal societies.

Religion
Only human society have religion.

Protection of the weak
Only human society allows weak to be protected through laws and rules.

Social Control

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

What Is Social Control?

Any action, deliberate or unconscious, that influences conduct toward conformity, whether or not the persons being influenced are aware of the process.
The primary function of law is to establish and maintain social control.
Why is social control necessary?
- Peaceful coexistence
- Predictable coexistence

Meaning of Social Control

The Social Control Theory instead of asking what drives people to commit crime or rebel (as in case of Marxist and feminists), they ask why do most people not commit crime( or do not rebel against the injustice in society as in case of Marxists).
All human beings suffer from innate human weaknesses which make them unable to resist temptation to commit crime and rebel but they don’t. This theory or different theories tries to answer the why part.
The theory is focused on analyzing the restraining or “controlling” factors that are broken or missing inside the personalities of criminals (as in case of normal social control theories) or inside rebels (as in case of Marxists and other left oriented theories).
Control theory investigate the ways in which our behavior is regulated, including the influences of family, school, morals, values, beliefs, etc.
It is this regulation that is seen as leading to conformity and compliance with the rules of society

Emile Durkheim, 1858-1917

Emile Durkheim studied societies during the peak of the industrial revolution in the late 19th century. It was a type of society in which the social solidarity or what he called mechanical solidarity or a sense of bond and attachment people had with each other had collapsed. Due to this the individuals were alone and culturally lost.

Nature of social control
Durkheim was very clear in his argument that social control was stronger in rural areas and in non industrialized societies. In rural society people had strong attachment with the group and as a result they did not feel alone and lost. In urban setting people had organic solidarity which was the weakening of the “collective force of society”. Due to this there was weakening of social bonds. This led to extreme individualism and caused suicide (anomie led suicide). Anomie is a social condition of normlessness under which individuals feel less or almost no pressure to conform to social norms. This leads to deviance.

Purpose of social control
Durkheim argued that the modern individual in industrialized urban societies were insufficiently integrated into society because of the weakening bonds, collapse of social and the controlling influence of society on the animal desires and interests of the individuals. The purpose of social control is to control these wild instructs of people and integrate them into society. If these wild instincts are not controlled then individuals lose interest in society and as a result die of anomie (meaning and purposelessness)

Mechanism of social control
Durkheim argued that religion and education are some of the major mechanisms of social control. Religious ceremonies he argued brought people together and gave them a sense of solidarity. Durkheim believed that education served as an instrument to reinforce social solidarity. School is a society in miniature: it has a similar hierarchy, rules, expectations to the “outside world,” and trains people to fulfill roles. Durkheim was clear that anomie is a social construct not an individual attribute (anomia).Social control comprises all mechanisms at preventing anomie

Max Weber’s authority as social control

Nature of social control
Traditional society is controlled by traditional values and sometimes by values of new charismatic leaders. But social control in traditional society is by traditional authority. In modern system however the social control is done through rational authority. That means a highly rational and calculative system controls modern society.

Purpose of social control
The purpose of social control in society is goal attainment through efficient system . The goal attainment could be profit or power.

Mechanism of social control
In traditional society, the mechanism was traditional organizations like family, religion.

In modern society, the mechanism is bureaucracy based on meritocracy and rationality.

Karl Marx

Nature of social control
Those who control the economy are the exploiters. They need to create superstructure (law and ideology) to secure the economic system.

Purpose of social control
The purpose of social control is to prevent the exploited class from revolting against the system so as to run the system in a smooth manner.

Mechanism of social control
Marx argued that all ideology manufacturing institutes like religion, law, and education were controlled by the economic elites hence the ideology and education they manufactured were aimed at producing people who could not revolt against the system.

Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman

In the book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. The two authors talk about media as social control.

Nature of social control

The model suggests the existence of a set of news “filters”, which dilute the raw news content into a content that suits the dominant corporate and governmental interests. Herman and Chomsky’s “propaganda model” describes five editorially distorting filters applied to news reporting in mass media:

FILTER 1: Corporate ownership:Size, Ownership, and Profit Orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large firms which are run for profit. Therefore they must cater to the financial interest of their owners – often corporations or particular controlling investors. The size of the firms is a necessary consequence of the capital requirements for the technology to reach a mass audience. The media is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a small number of private companies, owned by wealthy individuals.
FILTER 2: Financial reliance on advertising: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising(not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a “de-facto licensing authority”. Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the interest of the working class.
FILTER 3: Reliance on PR for information: Sourcing Mass Media News: Herman and Chomsky argue that “the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media’s costs of acquiring […] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become ‘routine’ news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers.”
Flak and the Enforcers: “Flak” refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet’s public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.
Anti-Communism: This was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91), anticommunism was replaced by the “War on Terror”, as the major social control mechanism.

Purpose of social control
The purpose of social control is to prevent people from having access to the truth so that they will accept society as it is.

Mechanism of social control
Social control is through media which is controlled by economic elites.

Ivan Nye

Nature of social control
Ivan Nye argued that there are three types of social control in society:

Direct control, by which punishment is imposed for misconduct and compliance is rewarded. For example a thief is sent to jail or a coldblooded murder is given death sentence.
Indirect control, by which a individuals refrains from delinquency because such acts might cause pain/disappointment to their loved ones or significant others
Internal control, by which a individuals are taught that to violate social norms is bad. They feel guilty when they are engaged in delinquent acts

Purpose of social control
The main purpose of social control is to prevent youths from performing deviant or delinquent behavior.

Mechanism of social control
Family is the most important agent of social control according to him. The more young individuals need for affection, security, and recognition through the family, the less they will deviate from social norms.

Travis Hirschi’s social bond theory

Nature of social control
Travis Hirschi’s social bonding theory may be the most popular criminological theory in criminology. It was first presented in 1969. Hirschi questioned why people do not commit the crime. Hirschi theorized that crime is more common among individuals who had a weak relationship with social institutions such as family and religion.

Purpose of social control
For Hirschi, the purpose of social control was to control delinquency and crime.

Mechanism of social control
Travis Hirschi assumes that all people have the capacity to be delinquent. Preventing most people from engaging in law-breaking is a “bonding” to society. Hirschi identifies 4 elements to the social bond which can prevent crime:

1. Attachment:

Attachment to parents, teachers, peers (attachment to parents is the most important).
Attachment deters criminal activities

2. Commitment:

The more an individual is attached with parents or loved ones the more he or she is committed to social goals.
The more an individual is attached to social goal the more likely that a person will not commit crime as the crime could disturb her from achieving the social goal

3. Involvement:

A person who wants to achieve a social goal will be busy in the activities that help him to achieve his social goal.
People who are involved with social goal-oriented activities will not be able to find time to commit a crime

4. Belief:

People who believe that laws and social values are good for them and for society will respect the law and will not break it.

Basically, Hirschi is arguing that if a person is bonded to society, they are not as likely to break the law.

they have too much to lose
they have little time to break the law
they are too sensitive to the feelings of others to victimize them

David Matza and Gresham Skyes' neutralization theory

Nature of social control
Matza and Skyes argue that criminals do not enjoy or feel good when they are committing crime. They actually feel guilty when committing crime. They, however, have developed a psychological technique called neutralization to justify their criminal activities.

Purpose of social control
The purpose of social control for Matza and Skyes is to control delinquency or crimal behavior.

Mechanism of social control
Criminals according to Matza and Skyes used neutralization as an instrument to justify their crime. These neutralization techniques are as follows:

1. Denial of Responsibility – behavior is due to forces beyond their control

For example, an exploiter in a factory may claim ‘I have to exploit workers otherwise I will not be able to send my children to expensive private schools. I can’t help it’

2. Denial of Injury – no one was hurt

Paying less money to the workers is okay because they can still send their children to schools that are less expensive. Less expensive schools also have good teachers so my exploitation of workers is okay and not that injurious to them.

3. Denial of the Victim – they deserved it

I have to exploit workers. If today I raise their wages or salaries then tomorrow they might demand extra holiday. I have to exploit them.

4. Condemnation of the Condemner – they made me do it.

I had to beat my servant. He was not working properly. He made me hit him.

5. Appeal to Higher Loyalties – I had no choice. If I don’t beat my servants then they will not work. If they don’t work then my money is wasted. So I have to beat him.

Containment Theory of Walter Reckless

Nature of social control
This theory was developed in the 1950s by Walter Reckless. Reckless proposed that positive self-concepts imposed by society on an individual such as being a good daughter could protect individuals from committing crimes. These concepts were instilled by one’s immediate family and other social forces.

Containment Theory assumes that almost every individual can be prevented from committing crime by using outer and internal containment. Reckless suggests that the probability of deviance is directly related to the extent to which internal pushes and external pulls are controlled by one’s inner and outer containment. The primary containment factor is found in self-concept.

Purpose of social control
To prevent people from committing crime.

Mechanism of social control
Criminal behavior can be controlled by outer and internal containment

Internal social control lies within the individual and is developed during socialization. You are practising internal social control when you act according to your conscience (ie. you do something because it is the right thing to do).
- Most people act according to this internal social control (ie. they do the right thing) – most of the time.
- The process of socialization does not ensure that all people will conform all of the time. For this reason, external social control must also be present.
External social control is based on social sanctions – rewards and punishments designed to encourage desired behavior.
- Positive sanctions (eg. smile of approval, awards, raises) are used to encourage conformity.
- Negative sanctions (eg. criticism, fines, imprisonment) are intended to stop socially unacceptable behavior.

Albert J. Reiss

Nature of social control
Delinquency is a result of the failure of individuals to internalize socially accepted norms and behavior.

Purpose of social control
To prevent people from delinquent behavior.

Mechanism of social control
Social control can be activated by creating internal control by convincing people that breaking the law is wrong or by social rules which control people by telling them how they are punished for breaking these social rules (the family, the school, and other important social groups).

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.

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.

Bello of Nigeria

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

Bello, sometimes referred to as the Nigerian Chimp Boy by the media, was found in 1996. No one is exactly sure of his age but many estimated that he was about 2 years old when he was discovered. He was found in the Nigerian forest and is both physically and mentally disabled, possibly the explanation for his abandonment at six months of age (a very common practice within the Fulani tribe). At such a young age, Bello of course could not fend for himself but somehow chimpanzees that lived within the forest took him in and raised him. He took on many chimpanzee behaviors, walking like them and displaying many of their animalistic behaviors.

When he was found in the Falgore forest, no one really mentioned the discovery. It wasn’t until about 2002 when popular news media found out and quickly learned that he was living in Tudun Maliki Torrey, a home for displaced children in Kano, South Africa. It was reported that he often disturbed other children within the home, throwing objects as well as jumping and leaping around at night. Six years later he was much calmer, though he still continued to display behaviors of a chimpanzee. Bello never did learn to speak despite the constant human interaction he had within the home, and in 2005 he died of undetermined causes.