¡Descarga class notes sociology y más Apuntes en PDF de Administración de Empresas solo en Docsity!
DURKHEIM
Durkheim said that the social fact are something that is external from the human but have exert power on us, to understand the society and this social fact. The social fact say how people live and interact with other, what are the social norms. This have to be studied not only in biological or individual thoughts, that is something that have to be studied in real life and not in a laboratory.
Something that Durkheim wanted to study is what people wanted to suicide, and he said that were 3 different types of suicide:
- Egoistic suicide: The people that commit this suicide is the people that is not involved in collective life. The collective help us to support and help when we have some problems, when the person don’t have a collective life they feel to be lonely in the world. This people use to look for himself, and have self-doubt.
- Altruistic suicide: Is the opposite of the egoistic suicide, this people are very deeply relationated with the collective, sometimes the collective is more important than their personal life, sometimes as much that they don’t have personal life. (kamikaze) their suicide for the others.
- (^) Anomic suicide: suicide for personal problems
▲ Normless suicide: very common for famous people and for rich, they are more free and the laws may not affect the same, this excess of “power” may lead to this people to suicide
▲ Rapid social change: people that have a change in their life (loss of job, loos of some familiar, change in the money…)
▲ Loss of personal compass: people that doesn’t know how to lead their life.
Durkheim say that the society is like a body, there are different social element that make or produce a job and the overall of this work is the society. The society may be unhealthy (excess
of inequality) that is why sociology exist as a medicine for the society.
Looking to the division of labour Durkheim say that everybody make something and specialize, rather than everybody doing the same. There are two types of division of labour:
- Simple societies: this societies are poor evolved, in this societies everybody does a little bit of everything. This societies have the mechanical solidarity, that means that the collective share the believes and values.
- Complex society, this societies are more evolved, and every person focus on one work. The thing here is that they have organic solidarity, this means that there is an interdependence between persons because now everybody needs others. And also, the complementary difference.
All the religions have common things, supernatural (things that cannot be explained), divinity (god), and rites and beliefs. The think is that not every religion has god as the central, and that the importance has varied through time.
The religions support social order and solidarity, and have some rites that say what we have to do, also the religions separate profane and sacred:
- (^) Sacred, are the thing that are not ordinary and that are superior to other things, sometimes became sacred because they were forbidden.
- Profane: are the ordinary things, nothing to do with sacred.
Religion also work as a social cohesion because people sacralize the same things, have the same moral and have the same rites, religion remind people that are part of something bigger than them. So religion make cohesion between persons give an order, social relations. Nationalism could be also as the religion of today.
KARL MARX:
Karl Marx saw the society and says that there was a he inequilibrium (poors, children’s working at the factory), he wrote Das Kapital.
Marx was very in contact with Adam Smith (father of the economy) that it was very agree with capitalism, said that if there were an increase In the exchange market it would be more division of labour, that would lead to a welfare societies, so an increase in consumption.
Marx said that:
- some group/countries produce the good that is taken by the others. For example in a factory the workers are the people who actually is creating the good but the benefits of that good is for the owner.
- (^) Society is not only the individual, but groups, organizations, institutions… the society is move by the material interest that use the coercion, obligation, and manipulation.
- Exchange is done it between powers, there are monopolies that have as much power that can exchange the good at the price that they want
- There are many types of societies.
Marx said that the society evolve through the stage, and in every stage, there are some conflicts between twos opposite forces this conflict may lead to historical change.
In the history, there have been many societies:
- Primitive communism: everybody does everything and share everything and it was not efficient.
- (^) Slave society: That society appears when it appears the owners, that use repression to to wield power to the slave that are the people that are able to accumulate resources in the agriculture.
- Feudalism: the people that accumulate wealth “rulers” became more and more important and appears kings and lords and Bourges.
- (^) Finally, we have the capitalism: where the market economy works due to the demand and supply, the workers are paid for their work, and the surplus is what is gained without the labour cost. 1. In Capitalism if the workers have high wages mean less profit for the owner, because it has more cost, so normally what the owner wanted to do is decreasing wages to have more profits. That is why the workers and capitalism are opposite forces. All the wealth in concentrate for the rich.
Capitalism have some tools to maintain:
▲ Calvin: The destiny is already written and only some people is chosen to be saved.
In this case, what would you do to know whether your fate in the afterlife. You can see what other people purchase and consume. Churches say that the more you have in the earth the more wealth in the afterlife.
The spirit of capitals has 2 dimensions: devotion to work make money to make more money, so
that is what the protestant say devotion workforce and capital to do more capital. Protestant ethic is not linked anyone with the religion, but it still has power of how we act.
Weber said that the economic class appears depending on how much you are able to purchase in the market.
Social Status ”Honor and prestidge” people wanted to seem like important and rich people, even
when there are not as much rich.
MICRO-SOCIOLOGY
That studies the day-to day behaviour that are set in the face-to-face relationships.
Pragmatism: that say that the humans are problem solvers and that the actions are the solutions for the problems. So, the habits that human have are the solution in response to the daily challenges.
George Mead was one that studies microsociology, he was very interested in self as a social, so the relation that we have with ourselves.
Individuals though emerge from social interactions, the language that is a tool to communicate with the other it is also useful to communicate with ourselves, thinking is another form to communicate with ourselves, for example sometimes we imagine conversation with others, or even with and imaginary friend.
We can considerate us as a subject (I) or as an object (ME). Us as a subject is the spontaneous part , the creativity, sometimes we surprise ourselves when we confront new situation. Us as an object I how the other see how we are, is how we act habitually. We are not just I and Me we are both.
A person learn to take the role of other at a very early age unconsciously , in the game age the children is able to see how the other see him so that is important to have sympathies to the others. While you are getting older and older you learn to be as a part of general community.
People imagine how we appear to the other, then imagine what the other think about us depending on our appearance then we develop feeling and emotions of ourselves depending on the interpretation of the others.
Erving Goffman was one that also study the relationship with ourselves. He said that we have like a frontstage and a backstage. In the frontstage is what the people see of us, what we let them know and let them see about us. Open to social judgement. The backstage is the thing that we never let see to the people because they would find unacceptable. There are different degrees of backstage and frontstage. Our personal front is the way be dress, we act…
We all have different roles, we use them to have positive reinforcement from the others.
The ethnomethodology is the study of the norms and the rules that are normal for the society if someone break this norms that can lead to the anxiety of the others (that will try to have and order) and maybe you labelled as a mental ill.
PIERRE BOURDIEU
He talks about the cultural capital, that it has nothing to do with materialism.
There are three different modalities of cultural capital:
- Institutionalized: have diplomas, certificates.
- Objectified: books, paintings, clothes…
- Embodied: Knowledge, the way that we behave in a situation, for example eating in a luxury restaurant with a good behaviour, with gesturing…
The cultural capital is the central of the social status, that this could lead to you to economic capital. Depending on the social group you will have a different social and economic capital.
Many of our habitus that we done, we done it that way because of our social class, that is irrational, our habitus tend to reproduce our social class. Our cultural disposition may reflect our social class. If we find ourselves in a foreign environment we may feel like “fish out of water”. EX: A poor men in a luxury dinner with king and all the lords. That men won’t be able to have the properly habitus in this situation.
The general habitus; are those that we have in the day to day life.
The specific habitus are those that we have in a specific time or place, politic, sport…
There are some habitus that are instinctively or natural.
Also depending of you social class, there is a difference in social taste (Music, art, food, dress… ), Why is that? Because taste is something cultural that people cultivate from the childhood, the cultural preference reflect that you are rich, because you are able to choose what you prefer, if you don’t like something it doesn’t matter you will have another thing that you will like, the working class are not able to choose if you don’t like then you won’t have anything else. An example is the food, normally the working class tend to purchase products that are both cheap and nutritious, and rich prefer something tasty, health-giving (expensive).
class distinction don’t have to do only with the amount of capital that the people have, but also to the amount of culture, If you accumulate a lot of capital you won’t be accepted for the other people because of the lack of the culture. This is something that rich tend to monopolize (education…) but the working class want also the same kind of recognition.
Sometimes there are social world where we can find many types of subcultures, each with own specific form of capital. Not all the societies have the same cultures and capital, not every society is equal.
Some cultures tend to be more legitim than other, always in the classification there is a degree of violence. Usually the more legitim cultures tend to be from the dominant class, usually have a high culture in the way to difference the upper and lower classes. And normally those cultures than seem to be not very legitim (low quality) are from the lower classes (dominated class). Sometimes happen that some form of culture of the lower classes become to be trend among the highest classes, and goes to the legitim.
TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIAL CAPITAL
Normally in the USA it is tend to do many activities in group, in America group activities is about communication. But increasingly the technology is making persons being lonely, we are more self-entertained, we don’t need other to entertain us.
- Sex is something biological and physiology, is how we born, we cannot change that (only with surgery)
- Gender: is the behaviour that result from the culture and the socialization, is how the societies say that have to act a boy and a girl. The civilization is who produces this creature.
The construction of the gender is not 100% separated of the physiology of the person.
Gender is something that everybody does without realizing that they are doing it. Is in the way that we sit, in the way that we talk, in our gestures… Until we don’t break the norms of gender we don’t realize the gender’s ubiquity in our life.
Socialization lead gender in many ways in the family roles, career choice, personality… For example there are some jobs that “fit” better to one gender that in other (cleaner, football player, nursery…). But who teach us about that, who say what should do the men and what should do the women; there are many aspect in our life that teach us that (social media, TV, religion, family, schools, state…). But of course there are many people that does not fit well with their sex, and feel like to be of the opposite sex, and wanted to act and have the gender of the opposite sex (transgender, transsexual) usually this people is exclusionary.
In the history, it has been gender inequality, the suffrage comes to Spain in 1931, in US in 1920 and in UK in 1928). So, women didn’t have political participation in the history until few years ago. People use some argument such as that the place of women was in the home and not in public life, also said that the women didn’t have enough education and knowledge to participate in something like that, and finally women does not “fit” with the politic. But not only in the politics, in the workplace women have lower salaries than men, job that “fit” better for women and that composed mainly for women usually have less compensation, also women that have the same job as men earn less than him, men use to be disproportion represented in politics and economic environment. Another thing is that is said that women are not good leader, because is too emotional and use to be not rationally or objective. Finally women have the celling glass, something that give away from the highest ranks (medicine, law…)
Depending in the way that we act it seems different if is done it for men that if is done it for women, for example in the promiscuity women are whores and men are players. If a men farts it is funny and if it is done by a women is unladylike
FOUCAULT
Foucault was interested in the punishment for the people that not follow the norms of the society. The public punishment is a way to show the power of the state, show what could happen to the people if do not follow the norms, making people fear, so they will obey the law, but there is something danger in that: the people may be sympathized by the punished and turn against the sovereign, and that could lead to a revolution, then a solution would be privatizing the punishments, people don’t see how is the punishment, so people don’t will sympathize with the criminal.
Nowadays the modern penal system is doing it in a different way, now the punishment is privatized, so there is behind close door. Now this system is total different, the prisoners follow a timetable (lunch sleep, learn, work…), and now the aim is to correct, cure the prisoners, using specialist such as doctors, psychologist… that try to change the mentality of the prisoner. There is not physic punishment anymore, now there are trials.
The discipline transform the individuals, that is not only for prisoners, the disciplinary and the control of the state is dispersed in all social institutions. There are 3 types:
- Hierarchical observation: based on the observation that is essential for the discipline. In that way, there are construction that follow certain rules to make easier to observe (panopticon) to the people, also the capacity to concentrate all of them in a specific place (compartments). The authority observes to the individuals. The perfection disciplinary is when the observer is invisible for the observed.
Panopticon is a structure constructed in jails that allow to the authority to see the prisoners, but this is invisible for the prisoners, now there is not necessary physical exercise. The prisoners don’t know if there is something watching so they think that he is.
In the 18 th^ century there was the industrial revolutions and a demographic change. How we can maintain the order? The Panopticism (based on Panopticon make easier this) is used in different societal realms, and it is cheaper and efficient, that allow to maintain an order on the division of labour, control the population, ensure health and security. Ex. Cameras
- (^) Normalizing judgment: that is based on the correction of any deviation of the norm and the normalization, based on the punish. That make normality increase. Ex. Left handed, homosexual.
Homosexual treated as illness, something that can be corrected with the treatment and punish.
- Examination: observation, evaluation and classification. Something that is increasingly made in the health and educational system. Students make exams to give daily weekly basis. That make a standardization, the exam show the ability and the skills that one person that is compared with all the rest, depending on this skills and grades, they will fit better on one side or in other, will have different hierarchy.
The power not is only something good or something bad, may in some cases limit you or be repressive, but it also work through shaping our inclinations.
NATIONALISM
First of all we are going to say some definitions to understand better this topic:
Nation: Large group of body that are in a given territory that feels unified and that have or is searching for political autonomy.
National consciousness: conscious of belonging to a nation.
National sentiment: loyalty, sentiment of love for the nation.
National-building: practices and politics that strength the counciousness of belonging in a nation, and the sentiment.
The difference between Empire and Nations is the following:
- Empire: there use a relation central-periphery, that means that the importance and the power is in the centre, there is not territorial limits, all have to be for the empire (make empire bigger and with more power) so they claim universal legitimacy. The rules are often indirect, and don’t make big effort to homogenize the territory (language, culture…).
- Nation: The citizenship is all equal, and in this situation, there are territorial limits. There are direct rules, and have limited tolerance for other languages and cultures.
spheres. Now the market and the state is what controls the organization of the society, no religion anymore. Religion become one more spheres of the society but no more the main.
- Decline of religion: People become increasingly less religion (Mainly in Western Europe) but in the others religion remain strong, like in poor countries and EEUU.
- Privatization:
▲ Invisible religion (luckmann): the search of salvation away from private sphere.
▲ Religion and cohesion: There are more different societies that share less culture, and have less cohesion.
But is say that the secularization is just a myth, something that happened only in little period in the history, but nothing else, because now the religion is one of the main source of identities, and also a force of the politics.
But the secularization is not something that was a little period without consequences, the reality is that the religion has changed a lot, and appear new religions that qualitatively different from the traditional.
The globalization lead to a world with breakdown traditional cultures and weakness of national border, no the connexion between countries is very easier (ideas, culture, information…)
Deculturation, more and more we are losing the traditions, and are appearing new forms of religiosity (pure) the beliefs over knowledge and you can be god Christian, Muslim… without knowing about the history and all tradition of this religion.
The religion want to be an important part of the culture inculturation. That means religion and culture follow the same way.
Exculturation, Is the opposite of inculturation, the religion reject culture as a form of pagan, the culture is morally corrupt, also the culture rejects religion. The sources of culture rejecting religion is communism, ignorance (people does not care anymore about religion, and its traditions…). If religion is disconnected from national culture how is transmitted from one generation to another? Many Europeans remains religions as a central to identity, the Danes have to contribute to the church even if they don’t believe
