Sociology Pt 2

shared symbols and their meaning

encourages us to interpret the meaning of the structure

ex. middle finger is one or “fuck u”

obvious when the assigned meaning is contrasted

why we can see something we disagree with as ideology

if common sense, human nature or self-evident then its probs culture

the overarching system of meaning that authorizes and justifies the existing structure (including existing social inequalities)

System of meaning that contests the dominant cultured

Dominant: divine right of kings

Subordinate: human beings are fundamentally equal in God’s eyes

Dominant: the grind

Subordinate: anti the grind

dominant: capitalist economies are detrimental to human flourishing

subordinate: challenges the political legitimacy of the communist regimes

considerable cultural fragmentation, no societal-level agreement on meaning of experiences and events

the meanings associated with objects are eroded

assignment of the same meanings to the same objects

Pre-modernity: same sermon form same pastor

Modernity: three tv stations

Post modernity: individual instagram feeds from everyone

structure and culture are mutually reinforcing

culture takes form of traditions and common sense

culture has a weak direct effect on individual behaviour and is in the background

allow for easy social reproduction

Swindler’s theory

structure is out-of-sync with existing traditions

culture takes the form of novel ideology

culture propels people to act in ways against their habits and traditions

revolutionary historic change

Decision to divorce or stay married

strict boundaries between royalty vs. common people

Culture: divine right of kings supported by religious doctrine

existing structure no longer supports social reproduction for the common people

indebted monarchy raise taxes and common people struggle

settled: daily routines, no thought on the meaning of the marriage'

unsettled: routine doesnt help relationship and leads to unhappiness. unhappiness leads to contemplation

divorce: “i deserve to be happy” “we don’t love each other anymore”

save it: “marriage is hard work” “everyone has rough patches”

the intensity of peoples engagement with culture

Cultures impact on behaviour and social reproduction/change

*people can hold beliefs without acting on them*

times: existing relationship between structure and culture no longer function, people no longer rely on tradition and routine, engagement with new ideas lead to social change

lives: habits and routines no longer function, engagement with different cultural narratives leads to different decision, change in ones life

constricts things we think of as possible behaviours

ex. showing up to class naked is not seen as an option when getting dressed

Whether or not you attach yourself to one meaning or another that affects what you’ll see as possible options

the process through which culture is internalized

transfer of socially meaningful knowledge from one group that already has those values to another

tried to socialize baby chimpanzee into family, raised with human son, instead son was socialized as a chimpanzee

think of as continuum

nature is biological determinism

nurture is empiricism

genetics and the biological systems

they produce imbued individuals with particular qualities: temperament, intelligence, behaviour, etc

people experience’s account for the way they develop

ethical reasons

the difference is confounded in the wild

genetics and socializations are also confounded experiences

both are involved and you can not disentangle the effect of one from the other

the same trait may be understood differently depending on the social context (ex. bar fight vs football)

all traits require some level of nurture

human beings are radically open to nurture

even behaviours seen as human require socialization (walking on two legs, speaking languages)

explicit: purposeful, declarative instruction of knowledge

Implicit: automatic, unconscious transmission of social knowledge

process of acquiring the basic skills needed to function in society during childhood

consists of:

• languages

• rules of social interaction

• sense of self

animal species and job are related variables

information about species leads to categories of employment

teaches that when lower class people get higher skilled or higher authority jobs they fail

the process of learning and internalizing gender differentiation

ex. talk more to female babies, rougher with male babies, colours of toys

the idea that differences between men and women are biologically based

this is confounded by gender socialization

explicit and implicit socialization that occurs outside the context of the childs primary socialization environment

two sources of social knowledge: authority figures, peer groups

peers engage with social knowledge received from primary socialization, here they can challenge and reject it, can result in deviant behaviour

socialization is the process by which culture is concretized at the level of in the individual

the micro-level encounters between individuals

responsible for early socialization

always involved in socialization

the smallest unit in sociology

socialization is a mechanism that explains agency

culture gets internalized

“The Self, as that which can be an object to itself, it is essentially a social structure, and it arises in social experience”

4 stages of social development

imitation (infancy and toddlerhood)

ex. parent sticks out their tongue → baby sticks out their tongue

don’t need to understand language for this

role-playing (pre-school)

child takes on the role of the other during play

“playing doctor,” “playing house”

children role play what they witness

this play is essential for the development of socially mature adults

simultaneous appreciation of multiple roles (school age)

team sports, board games

kids develop the ability to predict others experiences

internalization of the generalized other (maturity)

become socially mature

no need to think consciously about what their behaviour looks like to others

The organized community or social group which gives to the individual his unit of self.

Attitudes of the generalized other are the attitudes of the whole community

(attitudes depend on the society they’re embedded in)

provide a space for kids to practice taking the position of the other

position-taking is explicit so it’s not incorporating the other into one’s own personality

social interaction → development within one’s self of an implicit appreciation of the orientation of society towards one’s self

doesn’t mean someone will always coform but if they don’t conform they are aware of it

the generalized other

social interaction amounts to a relationship between individuals who take on roles in particular settings

ex. doctor-patient

prescribed ways of interacting that are conditioned by a particularly social time and space

ex. teacher, student, etc

social interaction occurs as much between people and roles

existence of roles becomes clear when they do not fit into the role

must have defined front and back stages

role people adopt when ill, nonparticipant in public life, withdraw from responsibility while still seen as worthy of resources

1. appearance (uniform)

2. manner (how they carry themselves)

human interaction is conditioned by the character of the space in which it takes place

activities involve the coordination of roles to present a certain kind of interactive experience to the audience

ex. front of restaurant

must be defined for roles

also a setting with roles, actors coordinate to produce the situation of the front stage

ex. back of the restaurant

must be defined for roles

relatively stable patterns of social relations/interactions

influences behaviour by making it easy to fit and difficult to deviate from the structure (bypasses subjectivity)

why people conform to things they don’t agree with in postmodern society

structure has a larger impact on our life outcomes than our individual choices

ex. when dating its now easier to use an app even if u don’t want to

microstructure, macrostructure, global structure

patterns of relatively intimate social relations formed during face-to-face interactions

ex. friends, family

overarching patterns of social relations that lie outside and above a person’s circle of intimate acquaintances

ex. university of manitoba

patterns of social relations that lie outside and above the national level

ex. global economy

a set of social individuals that are linked by communication

describes social structure

ex. economic exchange, friendship

an individual point of contact

ex. individuals, organizations, countries

mostly microstructures

a social relationship between two nodes

most basic unit of network structure

takes two to make but only one to die

ex. best friends

a social relationship between three nodes

1. number of nodes

2. number of connections

3. centrality

• measure relative number of connections enjoyed by each node

4. path distance

• number of connections to go through to get from one node to another

reveals the objective structure of a social group without necessitating any analysis of the content of interaction

objective organization of the built environment influences the structure of social networks

ex. cubicle vs open office

networks or connections that people have that can be accessed or deployed for social gain

about the quality of connections

increased network centrality = increased social capital

study in connections and finding a job

DV: time to find a job

People with weak ties are more likely to be hired

1. managers constrained in a closed discussion network were less likely to have valuable ideas

2. no control variables are associated with the idea value when network density is considered

probability of a raise decreases with network constraint

space between two networks that might connect

connection that allows info to flow from one dense network to another dense network

microstructures

ie. friends

formal networks (allows them to develop into bureaucracies)

structure of the network is concrete such that the network structure is independent of the individual who occupy them

a large impersonal organization comprising many clearly defined positions arranged in a hierarchy

have permanent salaried staff and written goals or rules

Max Weber

as social structure becomes increasingly formalized, the possibility that an individual could act in a way that deviates from the expectations of the structure decreases

ex. lost luggage

particularly institutions

made up of multiple organizations that are formally networked

ex. the criminal justice system has police, prosecutors, courts, etc

the process by which informal networks become formally organized and formally recognized

is both structural and cultural

culture can influence the public opinion of an institution

Particular character today can only be understood if we reference the history of how they occurred

the institution could be organized differently so to understand why it is not, must look at the historical network

unlike formal networks, institutions are resistant to change

Weber: “the iron cage of bureaucracy”