Sociology

1. What Is Sociology?
The American Sociological Association (2006) describes “sociology as the
study of social life, social change, and the social causes and
consequences of human behavior. The ASA contends that “sociologists
investigate the structure of groups, organizations, and societies, and how
people interact within these contexts.” Sociology is the scientific study of
society and human behavior. This means, when sociologists apply their
trade, they use a rigorous methodology.
Other definition: Sociology is the science or study of the origin, development,
organization, and functioning of human society; the science of the fundamental
laws of social relationships, institutions, etc. It generally concerns itself with the
social rules and processes that bind and separate people not only as individuals, but
as members of associations, groups, and institutions, and includes the examination
of the organization and development of human social life.
The sociological field of interest ranges from the analysis of short
contacts between anonymous individuals on the street to the study of
global social processes. Most sociologists work in one or more
specialties or subfields.
The meaning of the word comes from the suffix "-logy" which means
"study of," derived from Greek, and the stem "socio-" which is from the
Latin word socius, meaning member, friend, or ally, thus referring to
people in general. It is a social science involving the study of the social
lives of people, groups, and societies, sometimes defined as the study of
social interactions. It is a relatively new academic discipline which
evolved in the early 19th century.
Because sociology is such a broad discipline, it can be difficult to define,
even for professional sociologists. One useful way to describe the
discipline is as a cluster of sub-fields that examine different dimensions
of society. For example:
• social stratification studies inequality and class structure;
• demography studies changes in a population size or type;
• criminology examines criminal behavior and deviance;
• political sociology studies government and laws;
• the sociology of race and sociology of gender examine society's
racial and gender cleavages.

2. New sociological sub-fields continue to appear - such as economic
sociology and network analysis - many of which are cross-disciplinary in
nature.
Since the late 1970s, many sociologists have tried to make the discipline
useful for non-academic purposes. The results of sociological research
aid educators, lawmakers, administrators, developers, and others
interested in resolving social problems and formulating public policy,
through subdisciplinary areas such as survey research, evaluation
research, methodological assessment, and public sociology.
Sociological methods, theories, and concepts compel the sociologist to
explore the origins of commonly accepted rules governing human
behavior. This specific approach to reality is known as the sociological
perspective. Sociology is methodologically diverse using both
qualitative and quantitative methods, including case studies, survey
research, statistical analysis, and model building among others.
History of Sociology
Sociology is a relatively new academic discipline among other social
sciences including economics, political science, anthropology, history,
and psychology. The ideas behind it, however, have a long history and
can trace their origins to a mixture of common human knowledge and
philosophy. Sociology as a scientific discipline emerged in the early
19th century as an academic response to the challenge of modernity: as
the world was becoming smaller and more integrated, people's
experience of the world was increasingly atomized and dispersed.
Sociologists hoped not only to understand what held social groups
together, but also to develop an antidote to social disintegration.
The term was coined by Auguste Comte in 1838 from Latin Socius
(companion, associate) and Greek logos (speech). Comte hoped to unify
all studies of humankind-including history, psychology and economics.
His own sociological scheme was typical of the 19th century; he
believed all human life had passed through the same distinct historical
stages (theology, metaphysics, positive science) and that, if one could
grasp this progress, one could prescribe the remedies for social ills.
Sociology was to be the 'queen of sciences'.

3. The first book with the term 'sociology' in its title was The Study of
Sociology (1874) by the English philosopher Herbert Spencer. In the
United States, Lester Frank Ward, described by some as the father of
American sociology, published Dynamic Sociology in 1883 and the
discipline was taught by its own name for the first time at the University
of Kansas, Lawrence in 1890 under the course title Elements of
Sociology (the oldest continuing sociology course in America). The
Department of History and Sociology at the University of Kansas was
established in 1891 and the first full fledged independent university
department of sociology was established in 1892 at the University of
Chicago by Albion W. Small, who in 1895 founded the American
Journal of Sociology. The first European department of sociology was
founded in 1895 at the University of Bordeaux by Emile Durkheim,
founder of L'Annee Sociologique (1896). The first sociology department
to be established in the United Kingdom was at the London School of
Economics and Political Science (home of the British Journal of
Sociology) in 1904. In 1919 a sociology department was established in
Germany at the Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich by Max
Weber and in 1920 in Poland by Florian Znaniecki.
International cooperation in sociology began in 1893 when Rene Worms
founded the small Institut International de Sociologie that was eclipsed
by the much larger International Sociological Association starting in
1949 (ISA). In 1905 the American Sociological Association, the world's
largest association of professional sociologists, was founded.
Other "classical" theorists of sociology from the late 19th and early 20th
centuries include Karl Marx, Ferdinand Tonnies, Emile Durkheim,
Vilfredo Pareto, and Max Weber. Like Comte, these figures did not
consider themselves only "sociologists". Their works addressed religion,
education, economics, law, psychology, ethics, philosophy, and
theology, and their theories have been applied in a variety of academic
disciplines. Their most enduring influence, however, has been on
sociology, (with the exception of Marx, who is a central figure in the
field of economics as well) and it is in this field that their theories are
still considered most applicable.
One shift in the discipline away from scientific explanation had
philosophical roots. Early theorists' approach to sociology, led by
Comte, was to treat it in the same manner as natural science, applying

4. the same methods and methodology used in the natural sciences to study
social phenomena. The emphasis on empiricism and the scientific
method sought to provide an incontestable foundation for any
sociological claims or findings, and to distinguish sociology from less
empirical fields like philosophy. This methodological approach, called
positivism, became a source of contention between sociologists and
other scientists, and eventually a point of divergence within the field
itself. Thus, while most sciences evolved from deterministic, Newtonian
models to probabilistic models which accept and even incorporate
uncertainty, sociology began to cleave into those who believed in a
deterministic approach (attributing variation to structure, interactions,
or other forces) and those who rejected the very possibility of
explanation and prediction.
A second push away from scientific explanation was cultural, even
sociological, itself. As early as the 19th century, positivist and naturalist
approaches to studying social life were questioned by scientists like
Wilhelm Dilthey and Heinrich Rickert, who argued that the natural
world differs from the social world due to unique aspects of human
society such as meanings, symbols, rules, norms, and values. These
elements of society both result in and generate human cultures. This
view was further developed by Max Weber, who introduced anti -
positivism (humanistic sociology). According to this view, which is
closely related to anti - naturalism, sociological research must
concentrate on humans' cultural values. This has led to some controversy
on how one can draw the line between subjective and objective research
and has also influenced hermeneutical studies. Similar disputes,
especially in the era of the Internet, have led to variations in sociology
such as public sociology, which emphasizes the usefulness of
sociological expertise to abstracted audiences.

5. Auguste Comte
Sociological reasoning pre-dates the foundation of the discipline. Social
analysis has origins in the common stock of Western knowledge and
philosophy, and has been carried out from at least as early as the time of
Plato. There is evidence of early sociology in medieval Islam. It may be
said that the first sociologist was Ibn Khaldun, a 14th century Arab
scholar from North Africa, whose Muqaddimah was the first work to
advance social-scientific theories of social cohesion and social conflict.
The word sociology (or "sociologie") is derived from the Latin: socius,
"companion"; -ology, "the study of", and Greek λόγος, lógos, "word",
"knowledge". It was first coined in 1780 by the French essayist
Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès (1748–1836) in an unpublished manuscript.
Sociology was later developed by the philosopher, Auguste Comte
(1798–1857), in 1838. Comte had earlier used the term "social physics",
but that had subsequently been appropriated by others, most notably the
Belgian statistician Adolphe Quetelet. Comte endeavoured to unify
history, psychology and economics through the scientific understanding
of the social realm. Writing shortly after the malaise of the French
Revolution, he proposed that social ills could be remedied through
sociological positivism, an epistemological approach outlined in The
Course in Positive Philosophy [1830–1842] and A General View of
Positivism (1844). Comte believed a positivist stage would mark the
final era, after conjectural theological and metaphysical phases, in the
progression of human understanding.

6. Foundations of the academic discipline
Émile Durkheim
Though Comte is generally regarded as the "Father of Sociology", the
academic subject was formally established by another French thinker,
Émile Durkheim (1858–1917), who developed positivism in greater
detail. Durkheim set up the first European department of sociology at the
University of Bordeaux in 1895, publishing his Rules of the Sociological
Method. In 1896, he established the journal L'Année Sociologique.
Durkheim's seminal monograph, Suicide (1897), a case study of suicide
rates amongst Catholic and Protestant populations, distinguished
sociological analysis from psychology or philosophy. It also marked a
major contribution to the concept of structural functionalism.
A course entitled "sociology" was taught in the United States at Yale in
1875 by William Graham Sumner, drawing upon the thought of Comte
and Herbert Spencer rather than Durkheimian theory. In 1890, the oldest
continuing American course in the modern tradition began at the
University of Kansas, lectured by Frank Blackmar. The Department of
History and Sociology at the University of Kansas was established in
1891. The Department of Sociology at the University of Chicago was
established in 1892 by Albion W. Small. George Herbert Mead and
Charles Cooley, who had met at the University of Michigan in 1891

7. (along with John Dewey), would move to Chicago in 1894. Their
influence gave rise to social psychology and the symbolic interactionism
of the modern Chicago School. The American Journal of Sociology was
founded in 1895, followed by the American Sociological Association
(ASA) in 1905.
The first sociology department to be established in the United Kingdom
was at the London School of Economics and Political Science (home of
the British Journal of Sociology) in 1904. In 1909 the Deutsche
Gesellschaft für Soziologie (German Society for Sociology) was founded
by Ferdinand Tönnies and Max Weber, among others. Weber
established the first department in Germany at the Ludwig Maximilians
University of Munich in 1919, having presented an influential new
antipositivist sociology. In 1920, Florian Znaniecki set up the first
department in Poland. The Institute for Social Research at the University
of Frankfurt (later to become the Frankfurt School of critical theory) was
founded in 1923. International co-operation in sociology began in 1893,
when René Worms founded the Institut International de Sociologie, an
institution later eclipsed by the much larger International Sociological
Association (ISA), founded in 1949.
Sociology evolved as an academic response to the challenges of
modernity, such as industrialization, urbanization, secularization, and a
perceived process of enveloping rationalization. The field predominated
in continental Europe, with British anthropology and statistics generally
following on a separate trajectory. By the turn of the 20th century,
however, many theorists were active in the Anglo-American world. Few
early sociologists were confined strictly to the subject, interacting also
with economics, jurisprudence, psychology and philosophy, with
theories being appropriated in a variety of different fields. Since its
inception, sociological epistemologies, methods, and frames of enquiry,
have significantly expanded and diverged.
Durkheim, Karl Marx and Weber are typically cited as the three principal
architects of social science. Their thought is central to the modern
sociological paradigms of functionalism, conflict theory and anti-
positivism respectively. Vilfredo Pareto, Alexis de Tocqueville, Adam
Ferguson, Robert Michels, Werner Sombart, Ferdinand Tönnies, Georg

8. Simmel and Karl Mannheim are occasionally included on academic
curricula as further founding theorists. Each key figure is associated
with a particular theoretical perspective and orientation.
Marx and Engels associated the emergence of modern society above all
with the development of capitalism; for Durkheim it was connected in
particular with industrialization and the new social division of labour
which this brought about; for Weber it had to do with the emergence of a
distinctive way of thinking, the rational calculation which he associated
with the Protestant Ethic (more or less what Marx and Engels speak of
in terms of those 'icy waves of egotistical calculation'). Together the
works of these great classical sociologists suggest what Giddens has
recently described as 'a multidimensional view of institutions of
modernity' and which emphasizes not only capitalism and industrialism
as key institutions of modernity, but also 'surveillance' (meaning 'control
of information and social supervision') and 'military power' (control of
the means of violence in the context of the industrialization of war).
Positivism and anti-positivism
The methodological approach toward sociology by early theorists was to
treat the discipline in broadly the same manner as natural science. An
emphasis on empiricism and the scientific method was sought to provide
a tested foundation for sociological research, and to distinguish
sociology from less empirical fields such as philosophy. This
perspective, called positivism, is based on the assumption that the
only authentic knowledge is scientific knowledge, and that such
knowledge can come only from positive affirmation of theories
through strict scientific and quantitative methods. Émile Durkheim
was a major proponent of theoretically grounded empirical research,
seeking correlations between "social facts" to reveal structural laws. His
position was informed by an interest in applying sociological findings in
the pursuit of social reform and the negation of social "anomie".
Accounts of Durkheim's positivism may be vulnerable to exaggeration
and oversimplification: Comte was the only major sociological thinker
to postulate that the social realm may be subject to scientific analysis in
the same way as noble science, whereas Durkheim acknowledged in
greater detail the fundamental epistemological limitations.

9. Karl Marx
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class
struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf,
guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood
in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now
hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a
revolutionary re-constitution of society at large, or in the common ruin
of the contending classes.
– Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels The Communist Manifesto 1848
Reactions against social empiricism began when German philosopher
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel voiced opposition to both empiricism,
which he rejected as uncritical, and determinism, which he viewed as
overly mechanistic. Karl Marx's methodology borrowed from Hegel
dialecticism but also a rejection of positivism in favour of critical
analysis, seeking to supplement the empirical acquisition of "facts" with
the elimination of illusions. He maintained that appearances need to be
critiqued rather than simply documented. Marx rejected Comtean
positivism but nonetheless endeavoured to produce a science of society
grounded in historical materialism.

10. A bust of Ferdinand Tönnies in Husum, Germany
Ferdinand Tönnies theorized on "gemeinschaft and gesellschaft" (lit.
community and society) as two "normal types" of social grouping.
Tönnies drew a sharp line between the realm of conceptuality and the
reality of social action: the first must be treated axiomatically and in a
deductive way ("pure sociology"), whereas the second empirically and
inductively ("applied sociology").
Max Weber
At the turn of the 20th century the first generation of German
sociologists formally introduced methodological antipositivism,
proposing that research should concentrate on human cultural norms,
values, symbols, and social processes viewed from a resolutely
subjective perspective. Max Weber argued that sociology may be

11. loosely described as a science as it is able to identify causal
relationships of human "social action"—especially among "ideal types",
or hypothetical simplifications of complex social phenomena. As a non-
positivist, however, Weber sought relationships that are not as
"ahistorical, invariant, or generalizable" as those pursued by natural
scientists.
Sociology is ... the science whose object is to interpret the meaning of
social action and thereby give a causal explanation of the way in which
the action proceeds and the effects which it produces. By 'action' in this
definition is meant the human behaviour when and to the extent that the
agent or agents see it as subjectively meaningful ... the meaning to which
we refer may be either (a) the meaning actually intended either by an
individual agent on a particular historical occasion or by a number of
agents on an approximate average in a given set of cases, or (b) the
meaning attributed to the agent or agents, as types, in a pure type
constructed in the abstract. In neither case is the 'meaning' to be thought
of as somehow objectively 'correct' or 'true' by some metaphysical
criterion. This is the difference between the empirical sciences of action,
such as sociology and history, and any kind of priori discipline, such as
jurisprudence, logic, ethics, or aesthetics whose aim is to extract from
their subject-matter 'correct' or 'valid' meaning.
Georg Simmel
Both Weber and Georg Simmel pioneered the 'interpretative' method in
social science; a systematic process by which an outside observer
attempts to relate to a particular cultural group, or indigenous people, on

12. their own terms and from their own point-of-view. Through the work of
Simmel, in particular, sociology acquired a possible character beyond
positivist data-collection or grand, deterministic systems of structural
law. Relatively isolated from the sociological academy throughout his
lifetime, Simmel presented idiosyncratic analyses of modernity more
reminiscent of the phenomenological and existential writers than of
Comte or Durkheim, paying particular concern to the forms of, and
possibilities for, social individuality. His sociology engaged in a neo-
Kantian critique of the limits of perception, asking 'What is society?' in a
direct allusion to Kant's question 'What is nature?'
The deepest problems of modern life flow from the attempt of the
individual to maintain the independence and individuality of his
existence against the sovereign powers of society, against the weight of
the historical heritage and the external culture and technique of life. The
antagonism represents the most modern form of the conflict which
primitive man must carry on with nature for his own bodily existence.
The eighteenth century may have called for liberation from all the ties
which grew up historically in politics, in religion, in morality and in
economics in order to permit the original natural virtue of man, which is
equal in everyone, to develop without inhibition; the nineteenth century
may have sought to promote, in addition to man's freedom, his
individuality (which is connected with the division of labor) and his
achievements which make him unique and indispensable but which at
the same time make him so much the more dependent on the
complementary activity of others; Nietzsche may have seen the
relentless struggle of the individual as the prerequisite for his full
development, while socialism found the same thing in the suppression of
all competition - but in each of these the same fundamental motive was
at work, namely the resistance of the individual to being levelled,
swallowed up in the social-technological mechanism.
– Georg Simmel The Metropolis and Mental Life 1903
Determinism: Economic, Environmental, Biological
Except in the philosophy of Karl Marx (whose writings ranged over all
the social science fields rather than specifically in sociology), the
doctrine of economic determinism never gained a strong foothold in
sociology. This was not a consequence of scholarly ignorance;

13. sociologists of all periods have read Marx and have usually read such
writers as the historian Charles A. Beard, who emphasized economic
self-interest, and Werner Sombart, the German sociologist who had been
a convinced Marxist in his early career.
But there have been only some adapted reflections of these economic
views in the writings of such sociologists as Franklin H. Giddings or
Frank H. Hankins who viewed some political and religious doctrines as
rationalizations of economic and social interests.
The human geographers--Ellsworth Huntington, Ellen Semple, Friedrich
Ratzel, Paul Vidal de La Blache, Jean Brunhes, and others were also
read critically by sociologists but did not make a lasting major
contribution to the mainstream of sociological thought, even though
there are some who believe that the social morphology of Emile
Durkheim, Maurice Halbwachs, and others--that is, their theories about
the roles of individuals interacting in a social system--grew in part from
this interest.
Aside from the interest in evolution, organismic analogies, and the
instinct concept, sociologists have not found biological determination of
value to them and have spent more energy in refuting it than in making
use of it.
Functionalism and conflict theory
Structural functionalism is a broad paradigm, both in sociology and
anthropology, which addresses the social structure in terms of the
necessary function of its constituent elements. A common analogy
(popularized by Herbert Spencer) is to regard norms, values and
institutions as 'organs' that work toward the proper-functioning of the
entire 'body' of society. The perspective is implicit in the original
sociological positivism of Comte, but was theorized in full by
Durkheim, again with respect to observable, structural laws. Although
functionalism shares a history and theoretical affinity with the empirical
method, later functionalists, such as Bronisław Malinowski and Talcott
Parsons, are to some extent antipositivist. Parsons, in fact, came to view
the term as descriptive of a particular stage in the methodological

14. development of the social sciences, rather than a specific school of
thought. Whilst functionalism shares an affinity with 'grand theory' (e.g.
systems theory in the work of Niklas Luhmann), emphasis may be
placed on small units of socialization, such as the nuclear family. It is
also simplistic to equate the approach directly with conservative
ideology. Functionalism has been associated with thinkers as diverse as
the post-structuralist philosopher Michel Foucault. In the most basic
terms functionalism concerns "the effort to impute, as rigorously as
possible, to each feature, custom, or practice, its effect on the
functioning of a supposedly stable, cohesive system."
To aim for a civilization beyond that made possible by the nexus of the
surrounding environment will result in unloosing sickness into the very
society we live in. Collective activity cannot be encouraged beyond the
point set by the condition of the social organism without undermining
health.
Conflict theories, by contrast, are perspectives which critique the
overarching socio-political system, which emphasize the inequality of a
particular social group, or which otherwise detract from structural
functionalism (though they may also be 'structural'). Conflict theories
draw attention to power differentials, such as class conflict, and
generally contrast traditional or historically-dominant ideologies.[49] The
term is most commonly associated with Marxism, but as a reaction to
functionalism and the scientific method may be associated with critical
theory, feminist theory, queer theory, postmodern theory, post-
structural theory, postcolonial theory, and a variety of other
perspectives.
Social Darwinism and Evolutionism
Darwinian evolutionary theory doubtlessly suggested a way in which a
science of human behaviour could become academically respectable,
and a line of creative thinkers, including Herbert Spencer, Benjamin
Kidd, Lewis H. Morgan, E.B. Tylor, L.T. Hobhouse, and others,

15. developed analogies between human society and the biological organism
and introduced into sociological theory such biological concepts as
variation, natural selection, and inheritance - evolutionary factors
resulting in the progress of societies through stages of savagery and
barbarism to civilization, by virtue of the survival of the fittest.
Some writers also perceived in the growth stages of each individual a
recapitulation of these stages of society. Strange customs were thus
accounted for on the assumption that they were throwbacks to an earlier
useful practice; an example offered was the make-believe struggle
sometimes enacted at marriage ceremonies between the bridegroom and
the relatives of the bride, reflecting an earlier bride-capture custom.
Social Darwinism waned in the 20th century, but in its popular period it
was used to justify unrestricted competition and a laissez-faire doctrine
in order that the "fittest" would survive and that civilization would
continue to advance.

16. Culture
May 23, 2009
by Russ Long
Key Concepts
• culture • folkways
• culture shock • mores
• taboos
• norms
• values
I.Culture and Society
A.What is Culture?
Culture is the totality of learned, socially transmitted behavior.
• Culture is all the values, norms, and customs that people share with one
another.
• Culture includes language and beliefs
• Culture is all of the material objects such as monuments, three-piece
suites, the lottery, fur coats, and fine automobiles.
• Culture is ideas (like the belief in democracy and freedom) found within a
society.
• Culture is what individuals think is right and important as they interact
(Schaefer, 1992:67).
Culture is a way of life. When people talk about "the way of life" of people with a
distinctive life style, whether they live in Appalachia or Norway, they are talking about
culture. It defines what is important and unimportant. Culture refers to everything that
people create. Values, norms, goals, and culture in general, develop as people interact
with one another over time.
Culture accounts, in part, for the unprecedented success of the human species. It
allows us to adapt to extreme environments. We could not survive without our culture. In
a sense, we create our culture, but our culture, in turn, recreates us (See Robertson,
1989:38-42).
Culture provides the context (back ground) that we use to interact with each other. It
defines boundaries that we use to distinguish us from them.
B.Language
Henslin (2006:38-40) notes that language is the primary way people communicate with
one another.

17. • It’s a system of symbols which all us to communicate abstract thought
(Henslin, 2004:40).
• It’s a perspective which allows culture to exist.
• Language is universal in that all cultures have it, but it is not universal in
that people attach different meanings to particular sounds.
1.The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis argues that language provides categories through which
social reality is defined and constructed. It argues that thinking and perception are not
only expressed through language but also shaped by language.
C.Perspectives
We need to keep in mind the notion of perspective when talking about culture. A culture
is a "shared perspective." It is not absolute truth. Perspectives are limited by their
nature. They allow us to see life from only a certain angle. As we interact, we come to
share ideas about the way the world is. Perspectives filter what we see (Charon,
1986:199-203).
Example: "The Allegory of the Cave"
D.Ethnocentrism
Ethnocentrism, according to Farley (1988:16-17), refers to the tendency to view one's
own culture as the norm. There is a tendency to assume one's culture is superior to
others. "Our" truths and values are so central to whom "we" are that it is difficult to
accept the possibility that our culture represents only one of many. A particular culture
does not represent universal "TRUTH." This is not to say that to be proud of one's
heritage is inappropriate. On the contrary, a little ethnocentrism is beneficial because of
its bonding effect. Ethnocentrism becomes a problem when we expect others to
become like us.
Example
An American who thinks citizens of another country are barbarian because they
like to attend bull fights is an example of ethnocentrism.
E.Cultural Relativism and Verstehen
To accurately study unfamiliar cultures, sociologists have to be aware of culturally-
based biases. Max Weber advocates the use of "value-free" Sociology, which means
that one should eliminate, as much as possible, bias and prejudice.
Weber calls attention to the German idea of verstehen to describe the practice of
understanding unique culture from the standpoint of others. Cultural relativism refers to
the understanding of a culture on its own terms. In essence "you have to be able to
stand in the other persons shoes." When you can "see" from the perspective of another,
then you can understand that culture.

18. II.Components of Culture
A.Cultural Universals
Cultural universal refers to a cultural item that exists in all cultures part and present.
Items like religion and language are found in every culture. They are examples of
cultural universals
B.Innovation
Innovation is the process of introducing an idea or object that is new to culture. There
are two forms of innovation: discovery and invention.
C.Diffusion
Sociologists use the term diffusion to refer to the process by which a cultural item is
spread from group to group or society to society. Cultures learn from one another.
Diffusion can occur through a variety of means, among them exploration, military
conquest, missionary work, etc. (Schaefer & Lamm, 1992: 70).
Henslin (2004:51) contends that when groups make contact with one another, they most
often exchange nonmaterial culture.
D.Cultural Leveling
Henslin (2004:51) uses cultural leveling to describe a situation in which cultures become
similar to one another as a result of travel and communication. The fact that one can
find a McDonalds or a Coke nearly every where in the world is an example of cultural
leveling.
E.Material Vs. Nonmaterial
1.Material
Culture is easily divided into material or nonmaterial concepts (See Robertson,
1989:29). Material culture includes:
• weapons
• machines
• eating utensils
• jewelry
• art
• hair styles
• clothing
Anthropologists study material artifacts when exploring cultures which have been extinct
for hundreds or thousands of years. All which remains from ancient cultures are artifacts
of their material culture.
2.Nonmaterial

19. Often Sociologists will investigate nonmaterial aspects. Nonmaterial culture refers to
abstract human creations. Included in this category are:
• language
• gestures
• values
• beliefs
• rules (norms)
• science
• philosophies
• customs
• governments
• institutions
F.Ideal Culture and Real Culture?
Appelbaum and Chambliss (1997:42) contend that ideal culture refers to the norms and
values that a society professes to hold. Henslin (2004:49-50) ideal culture describes
models to emulate and which as worth aspiring to.
Real culture refers to norms and values that are followed in practice.
Example: Henslin (2004:49-50) notes that Americans glorify academic achievement
and material success. However, most students do not graduate with honors and most
citizens are not wealthy. Thus there is a gap between ideal culture and real culture.
G.Culture Lag
Culture lag refers to the tendency for culture to be slow to adapt to changes in
technology. Technological change can happen over night while some times it takes
culture a few generations to adapt to changes in technology (Henslin, 2004: 50).
Example: When Napster provided free music exchange, the record producers argued
that the practice was unfair, but yet no laws existed which made music sharing illegal.
This example highlights the lag between technology and social adaptation.
Henslin (2004:50) calls this the distinction between material and non material culture.
Material culture runs ahead of non material culture.
H.Culture Shock
As people grow, they develop a sense of what to expect in their familiar surroundings.
"Culture becomes the lens through which we perceive and evaluate what is going on
around us" (Henslin, 1999:36). We don't generally question these assumptions. When
one travels into a completely different culture, for example, a rural village in Africa, one
encounters different assumptions that might violate what we come to expect as normal.
An individual suddenly immersed in a unique and unfamiliar setting experiences
disorientation. This is known as culture shock (see Henslin, 2004:35).
Example

20. A rural individual who is suddenly taken to a large city
III.Norms and Values
Norms are rules that govern our lives and values are the goal of our lives. Norms are
the expectations, or rules of behavior, that develop out of values. Norms are guidelines
for our behavior.
Norms may be informal or they may be formalized into laws.
Values are principles, standards, or qualities considered worthwhile or desirable.
Norms are rather specific while values are abstract and general in nature.
A.Norms
Norms are the shared rules or guidelines that govern our actions in society. Norms can
be laws, but they also can be procedures, morals, customs or expectations. Many
times, One's position within the social structure determines the definitions of norms.
Often norms are outward expressions of a society's deeply held and shared values.
Norms are important for defining boundaries. The text uses gangs as an example again.
In order to belong to a gang, a potential gang member has to learn the "norms" of the
gang. Norms define us and them.
1.Folkways
Folkways are norms that ordinary people follow in everyday life. Conformity is expected,
but not absolutely insisted on. Folkways are not strictly enforced.
Example: "No shirt, no shoes, no service"
2.Mores
Mores are norms are taken more seriously and are strictly enforced. Henslin (1999:44)
considers them as "essential to our core values." Henslin suggests that we insist on
conformity.
Example: Flag burning, murder
3.Taboo
Taboos approximate super mores. Henslin (1999:44) argues that taboos are so
"strongly ingrained that even the thought of its violation is greeted with revulsion."
Examples are Incest and cannibalism.
4.Laws

21. A law is a norm that is formally enacted by a political authority. The power of the state
backs laws.
5.Social Control
Society always establishes a way of ensuring that people "behave in expected and
approved ways"
6.Sanctions
Henslin (1999:43) contends that sanctions are positive or negative reactions to the ways
in which people follow norms. They can be either positive or negative. Rewards accrue
for conformity and punishment for nonconformity. They can be material, such as a fine
for not adhering to a norm, but they can also be gestures, "such as frowns, stares,
harsh words, or raised fists" (Henslin, 1999:43).
B.Values
• Each culture has a general consensus of what is worth working for (ends).
• Values refer to that which we consider important or unimportant, desirable
or undesirable, good or bad, and beautiful or ugly.
• They guide most of our actions.
• Values are long range commitments to ends that people share culturally.
• Values are abstract and general.
• Essentially, values describe our "moral" goals in society.
• Values indicate the standards by which people define their ideas about
what is desirable in life.
IV.Variations Within Cultures:
Sub-Cultures and Counter Cultures
Some cultures in the U.S. have remained relatively isolated from the dominant culture.
These are subcultures. Charon (1986:199) points out that subcultures have goals,
values, and norms that are different from those of the dominant culture. Although their
culture differs from the dominant culture, they do not openly oppose the dominant
culture. Members of subcultures are usually content to avoid the dominant culture.
Countercultures, on the other hand, like the SDS, Hippies, and the Black Panthers are
examples of subcultures that openly oppose the dominant culture. Countercultures
actively seek to change the dominant culture.
The following are two examples of subcultures. They are not counter cultures. Neither
group seeks to change the status quo.
B.The Vice Lords
The Vice Lords is another subculture. In a book called Vice Lords R. Lincoln Keiser (in
Charon, 1987:221-4) discussed four aspects [which Keiser calls ideological sets] that
the Vice Lords use to define their world and guide their actions. Keiser defines four
ideological sets which he calls Heart ideology, Soul ideology, brotherhood ideology, and
game ideology.

22. 1. Heart Ideology:
Heart ideology refers to the displays of courage and daring which are important for the
Vice Lords. A member has to show that he's willing to put his personal safety on the
line. An individual who talks a lot about fighting, but who doesn't back up his rhetoric is
a "punk."
2. Soul Ideology:
Soul for the Vice Lords has the same general connotation as it does for the Black
community. Soul refers to ways of conducting ones self that strips away the superficial
surface and gets down to the nitty-gritty. Soul is the essence of the Black community.
The Vice Lords judge one another in terms of soul.
3. Brotherhood Ideology:
The spirit of brotherhood is also important. Drinking wine is an important shared social
experience for the group. Each person contributes what money he has for a "bottle."
Each then gets an equal amount regardless of how much money he puts in. Drinking
wine reinforces the brotherhood.
4.Game Ideology:
In "game ideology" the gang member attempts to manipulate other gang members by
playing games. Manipulating others through games is a significant part of the Vice
Lords life. Such games may include hustling money from strangers. A "light weight"
game player may simply ask for money. More than likely he gets turned down. A
"heavy" on the other hand may concoct a story that another street gang is going to jump
the stranger. There for the stranger should pay protection money to the "lords."

23. What is counterculture
Counterculture is a subculture that adheres
to a set of norms and values that sharply
contradict the dominant norms and values
of society of which that group is a part.

24. Examples
• Delinquent gangs, the Hare Krishna religious sect, hippies,
punks, rockers and some extreme religious right – wing can
be classified as counterculture.
• The norms and values of each of these groups contrast
sharply with those held by conventional middle – class.
• Delinquent gangs may grant prestige and social approval
for law breaking, violence, theft, or the use of drugs to
achieve their goals of dominance and material success
subculture
 Subculture are cultures within a
culture that has their own way of
doing things that is different from
the m ain culture that they live.
 Subcultures exist sim ply because
it fits the person’s way of life. For
instance: Take m usic fans as
m any will try to dress and im itate
their favorite rock band or m usic
artist. These allow fans a way of
feeling connected to their favorite
band or artist.

25. DANGerOus subcultures
 Some subcultures can be
dangerous not only to an
individual but also to
society as a whole. It is
those dangerous
subcultures that prey on
our children and cause
harm and destruction
where ever they are
present.
DruG subculture
 Drug are another dangerous
subculture. Within the drug
subculture two things remain a
constant and that is money and
getting high. The drug culture
has those who deal drugs and
those who do the drugs. Either
side of this subculture is
dangerous to anyone around
them and to society as a whole.
 Not all subcultures are
dangerous though. Some exist
just to provide like minded
individuals with a sense of
belonging.

26. • By maintaining
schools to instill
Amish values in
their children,
prohibiting
mechanized
vehicles and
equipment, and
dressing in plain
clothing, the Amish
proclaim their own
Definition: Subculture are cultures within a culture that have their own way
of doing things that is different from the main culture that they live. Most
societies include groups who have their own distinctive set of norms, values
, symbols and lifestyles. These units of culture are subcultures. Subculture is
the culture of those who are dissatisfied with their place in society.
Different subcultures have their own beliefs, value systems, fashion, and
favourite music. Subcultures exist within the confines of a larger culture.
Rockers-bought standard factory-
made motorcycles and stripped them down,
tuning them up and modifying them to appear like

27. racing bikes.Their bikes were not merely transport, but
were used as an object of intimidation and masculinity
projecting them uneasily close to death, an element
exaggerated by their use of skull and cross bone-type symbolism. They raced on public roads
and hung out at transport cafes such as The Ace Cafe, Chelsea Bridge tea stall, Ace of Spades,
Busy Bee and Johnsons. First seen in the United States and then England, the rocker fashion
style was born out of necessity and practicality. Rockers wore heavily-decorated leather
motorcycle jackets, often adorned with metal studs, patches, pin badges and sometimes an Esso
gas man trinket. When they rode their motorcycles, they usually wore no helmet, or wore a
classic open-face helmet, aviator goggles and a white silk scarf (to protect them from the
elements).
Who are emos
First, let’s start with what an emo actually is. An
Emo is usually a teen who is depressed for; get this,
no reason at all (well maybe having rich parents). All
they do is go on about how dark the world is and
wanting to end there so called “life”, although they
never do.

28. What EMO means
EMO means emotional. There favorite colors are
black and pink. Emo’s usually have badly dyed,
black hair. It covers their eyes, and is
straightened, or sometimes a mop (saçaq).
The extreme Emo’s freshly dye there hair
black every time they leave the house, and
then have black fingernails because of it.
What do they wear
They sport around in tight black jeans (the tighter the better), with either a
hoodie (balaxon) on top, or their favorite band t-shirt on. They sometimes have
numerous amounts of piercing’s. Mainly below their lower lip. They wear thick
eyeliner and sometimes black eye shadow around their eyes. Then there a some
who have the lot, eyeliner, black eye shadow around their eyes and foundation all
over their face. A classic example of this is the lead singer from My Chemical
Romance, a band emos love to jam too.
What do these people do?
Now that you know what emos look like and can spot them from a mile
away, lets continue with what they are and what they do. Now emos hate
their life right. Well it doesn’t end there they usually hate people, their
parents; well pretty much everything. To ease this “everlasting” pain they’ll
slit their wrists. Its sick right?
They love to kick it old school, and be as non-conforming as they can. One thing
they do is play Super Nintendo; they’ll get a stack of old games but only play one.

29. What do they listen to?
• That damn music they listen to. It is terrible. Have you ever
heard a song about how bad life is? Or a song about
suicide? Basically just anything depressing. Well then, this
would be classed as an “Emo” song. A prime example of
this would be Simple Plan’s song “Welcome to my life”.
More bands that this emo type thrive on would be,/p
• My Chemical Romance
• Bullet For My Valentine
• AFI
• I Write Sins Not Tragedies
• Good Charlotte
• Green Day (The New Stuff)
Goth fashion-is stereotyped as a
dark, sometimes morbid, eroticized fashion and style of
Typical gothic fashion Includes dyed black hair,
dark eyeliner, black fingernails, black period-styled
clothing; goths may or may not
have piercings. Styles are often borrowed from the

30. Elizabethan, Victorian or medieval period and
often express pagan, occult or other religious
imagery such as pentacles or ankhs. The extent to which goths hold to this style varies amongst
individuals as well as geographical locality, though virtually all Goths wear some of these elements.
Fashion designers, such as Alexander McQueen and John Galliano, have also been described as
practicing "Haute Goth“. Goth fashion is often confused with heavy metal fashion: outsiders often
mistake fans of heavy metal for goth, particularly those who wear black trench coats or wear "corpse
paint" (a term associated with the black metal music scene).
Cultural ethnocentrism
Ethnocentrism is the personal idea that your culture are superior to all
others. Ethnocentrism also involves using your own culture and belief
system to judge others by only the standards of your own viewpoint.
Ethnocentrism can be a benefit in uniting societies, but overall it has a
negative effect on both culture and society.
All cultures are ethnocentric to some degree. When a culture takes an
ethnocentric viewpoint, it automatically places itself as the dominant culture.
Ethnocentrism is especially relevant when it comes to a culture's sense of
moral values. For example, polygamy, the practice of having more than one
wife is normal or even necessary in Eastern culture. But it is not normal in
Western culture.
The extremes of ethnocentrism
When branching from culture to society, we see the real effects of
ethnocentrism. A society can be a grouping of separate cultural groups living
together in a specific area. If each culture within the society continues to
view themselves as superior, this will drive dividing lines through the
society. Not only will it separate the society, but it will also negatively affect
commerce, trade and even normal day-to-day relations. Ethnocentrism is
also the cause of many wars.
What is relativism?
The solution to ethnocentrism is cultural relativism.
Cultural Relativism is defined as understanding cultures from their own
perspective, not necessarily as a comparison to your own culture.

31. Someone who uses cultural relativism would look at a culture not from their
own perspective, but try and look at the culture from the own people's view.
Cultural relativity is a better way to discuss culture than that of
ethnocentrism, because it allows the people discussing it to be more open to
the different cultures around them; not decide someone else's culture is bad
because it's not like theirs.
Many people, many views
Nudity in the shower is appropriate, but nudity is classroom or in public
places (in many countries) is inappropriate. In some hunting societies, being
fat may have survival values and may serve as a source of admiration.
The practice of abandoning unwanted infants would be viewed as intolerable
by most contemporary cultures, but many cultures used to follow this
practice, and some still do.
This points that only aspect of a culture must be considered within its larger
cultural aspect. Each aspect may be regarded as good if it acceptable to the
members and helps attain desired goals and bad if it’s unacceptable or fails
to achieve these goals.
When in Rome do as Romans do!
Cultural relativity does not mean that a behavior appropriate in one place is
appropriate everywhere.
It’s not a license to do as one wishes. Even though having three wives is
acceptable in Muslim countries (and in Brazilian tribe), and wearing
loincloths is acceptable to African bushmen, these behavior is not acceptable
in the same Muslim countries and USA.
They are acceptable in some societies because they are part of a larger belief
and value system and are coincident with other norms appropriate to that
cultural settings
Judging other societies on the basis of cultural relativism make us less likely
to ridicule or scorn (həqarətçi nifrət) the beliefs and habits of people from
other cultures.
Xenocentrism.

32. The opposite of ethnocentrism is Xenocentrism, the belief that what’s
foreign is best, that our own lifestyle, products or ideas are inferior to those
of others. The strange, distant and exotic are regarded as having special
value, cars made in Japan,watches made in Switzerland, beer brewed in
Germany, fashions created in Farnce, silks imported from India and
Thailand. In some instances feelings of xenocentrism are so strong that
people reject their own group. Thus we find Anti – American Americans,
anti – Semitic Jews, priests who revolt against the church, blacks who reject
black identity.
Xenocentrism may focus on a product, an idea, or a life – style. Regardless
of a focus, it’s assumed that native techniques and concepts are inferior.
Religion and Society
Religion is a cultural system that creates powerful and long-lasting
meaning by establishing symbols that relate humanity to beliefs and values.
The word religion is sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief
system, but religion differs from private belief in that it has a public aspect.
Some academics have divided religions into three broad categories: world
religions, a term which refers to transcultural international faiths; indigenous
religions, which refers to smaller, culture-specific or nation-specific
religious groups; and new religious movements, which refers to recently
developed faiths.
Societal Effects of Religion
Religion has contributed a lot to the social, cultural and economic
development of most first world societies. Religion has also been used as an
economic tool to exploit the gullibility of the commoners in favor of the
elite. It has been used as a tool to maintain political dominance of the world
order. Religion has been one of the biggest obstructions to scientific
development and success. Medical science has faced some of the most
disgusting attacks from religious fanatics hiding behind facades of morality
and righteousness. Religion is now and has always been the cheapest and
most effective way of controlling the masses.
Religion has also had a positive influence on humanity. This was especially
true during the earlier years. Religion helped reinforce moral behaviour
among people without the treat of divine punishment. You can run from the

33. man whose house you just robbed but you can't run from God or something
along those lines. It also served to provide hope to people in desperate
situations, giving them something to believe in rather than just giving up on
everything. This is especially true for the elderly even today as belief in the
afterlife provides comfort.
Religions have the societal effect of dividing people into "us" and "them".
This unfortunately has the same characteristics as any other form of
discrimination, such as racialism. It becomes easy to consider "us" as the
righteous and "them" as unrighteous.
Why is there Religion
Religion is said to help to satisfy the human need for spiritual fulfillment.
This at once raises the question of what spiritual fulfilment is. One
description of spiritual fulfillment is the need to feel comfortable with things
that are beyond human understanding. Thus the need to believe in a god or
gods arises from the inability to understand the origin and purpose of life.
Stereotypes
A stereotype is a popular belief about specific social groups or types of
individuals. The concepts of "stereotype" and "prejudice" are often confused with
many other different meanings. Stereotypes are standardized and simplified
conceptions of groups based on some prior assumptions.
Etymology
The term stereotype (στερεότυπος) derives from the Greek words στερεός (stereos),
"firm, solid" and τύπος (typos), "impression," hence "solid impression".
It was invented by Firmin Didot in the world of printing; it was originally a
duplicate impression of an original typographical element, used for printing instead
of the original. American journalist Walter Lippmann coined the metaphor, calling
a stereotype a "picture in our heads" saying, "Whether right or wrong (...)
imagination is shaped by the pictures seen (...) originally printers' words, and in
their literal printers' meanings were synonymous. Specifically, cliché was a French
word for the printing surface for a stereotype. The first reference to "stereotype,"

34. in its modern, English use was in 1850, in the noun, meaning "image perpetuated
without change."
The term, in its modern psychology sense, was first used by Walter Lippmann in
his 1922 work Public Opinion[5] although in the printing sense it was first coined in
1798.
Dynamics
Social psychologists believe that mental categorizing (or labelling) is necessary
and inescapable. In one perspective of the stereotyping process, there are the
concepts of in-groups and out-groups. In groups are viewed as normal and
superior, and are generally the group that one associates with or aspires to join. An
out- group is simply all the other groups. They are seen as lesser than or inferior to
the in-groups.
A second perspective is that of automatic and explicit or subconscious and
conscious. Automatic or subconscious stereotyping is that which everyone does
without noticing. Automatic stereotyping is quickly preceded by an explicit or
conscious check which permits time for any needed corrections. Automatic
stereotyping is affected by explicit stereotyping because frequent conscious
thoughts will quickly develop into subconscious stereotypes.
A third method to categorizing stereotypes is general types and sub-types.
Stereotypes consist of hierarchical systems consisting of broad and specific groups
being the general types and sub-types respectively. A general type could be
defined as a broad stereotype typically known among many people and usually
widely accepted, whereas the sub-group would be one of the several groups
making up the general group. These would be more specific, and opinions of these
groups would vary according to differing perspectives.
Certain circumstances can affect the way an individual stereotypes. For instance:
Studies have shown that women stereotype more negatively than men, and that
women read into appearance more than men. Some theorists argue in favor of the
conceptual connection and that one's own subjective thought about someone is
sufficient information to make assumptions about that individual. Other theorists
argue that at minimum there must be a casual connection between mental states
and behavior to make assumptions or stereotypes. Thus results and opinions may
vary according to circumstance and theory. An example of a common, incorrect
assumption is that of assuming certain internal characteristics based on external
appearance. The explanation for one's actions is his or her internal state (goals,
feeling, personality, traits, motives, values, and impulses), not his or her
appearance.
Sociologist Charles E. Hurst, "One reason for stereotypes is the lack of personal,
concrete familiarity that individuals have with persons in other racial or ethnic

35. groups. Lack of familiarity encourages the lumping together of unknown
individuals."[6]
Stereotypes focus upon and thereby exaggerate differences between groups.
Competition between groups minimizes similarities and magnifies differences.[7]
This makes it seem as if groups are very different when in fact they may be more
alike than different. For example, among African Americans, identity as an
American citizen is more salient than racial background; that is, African
Americans are more American than African.[8]
Theories on stereotypes
Different disciplines give different accounts of how stereotypes develop:
Psychologists may focus on an individual's experience with groups, patterns of
communication about those groups, and intergroup conflict. Pioneering
psychologist William James cautioned psychologists themselves to be wary of
their own stereotyping, in what he called the psychologist's fallacy. Sociologists
focus on the relations among groups and the of different groups in a social
structure. Psychoanalytically-oriented humanists have argued (e.g., Sander
Gilman) that stereotypes, by definition, are representations that are not accurate,
but a projection of one to another.
A number of theories have been derived from sociological studies of stereotyping
and prejudicial thinking. In early studies it was believed that stereotypes were only
used by rigid, repressed, and authoritarian people. Sociologists concluded that this
was a result of conflict, poor parenting, and inadequate mental and emotional
development. This idea has been overturned; more recent studies have concluded
that stereotypes are commonplace.
One theory as to why people stereotype is that it is too difficult to take in all of the
complexities of other people as individuals. Even though stereotyping is inexact, it
is an efficient way to mentally organize large blocks of information. Categorization
is an essential human capability because it enables us to simplify, predict, and
organize our world. Once one has sorted and organized everyone into tidy
categories, there is a human tendency to avoid processing new or unexpected
information about each individual. Assigning general group characteristics to
members of that group saves time and satisfies the need to predict the social world
in a general sense.
Another theory is that people stereotype because of the need to feel good about
oneself. Stereotypes protect one from anxiety and enhance self-esteem. By
designating one's own group as the standard or normal group and assigning others
to groups considered inferior or abnormal, it provides one with a sense of worth.
Some believe that childhood influences are some of the most complex and
influential factors in developing stereotypes. Though they can be absorbed at any

36. age, stereotypes are usually acquired in early childhood under the influence of
parents, teachers, peers, and the media. Once a stereotype is learned, it often
becomes self-perpetuating.
Other theories propose that the praising of intelligence and ability rather than effort
and hard work inevitably changes the prospective from a malleable sense of self-
worth to a definite concept of self-worth as seen from the individual and others
around them.
Effects, accuracy, terminology
Stereotypes can have a negative and positive impact on individuals. Joshua
Aronson and Claude M. Steele have done research on the psychological effects of
stereotyping, particularly its effect on African Americans and women. They argue
that psychological research has shown that competence is highly responsive to
situation and interactions with others. They cite, for example, a study which found
that bogus feedback to college students dramatically affected their IQ test
performance, and another in which students were either praised as very smart,
congratulated on their hard work, or told that they scored high. The group praised
as smart performed significantly worse than the others. They believe that there is
an 'innate ability bias'. These effects are not just limited to minority groups.
Mathematically competent white males, mostly math and engineering students,
were asked to take a difficult math test. One group was told that this was being
done to determine why Asians were scoring better. This group performed
significantly worse than the control group.
Possible prejudicial effects of stereotypes are:
• Justification of ill-founded prejudices or ignorance
• Unwillingness to rethink one's attitudes and behavior towards stereotyped
group
• Preventing some people of stereotyped groups from entering or succeeding
in activities or fields
The effects of stereotyping can fluctuate, but for the most part they are negative,
and not always apparent until long periods of time have passed. Stereotypes allow
individuals to make better informed evaluations of individuals about whom they
possess little or no individuating information, and in many, but not all
circumstances stereotyping helps individuals arrive at more accurate conclusions.
Over time, some victims of negative stereotypes display self-fulfilling prophecy
behavior, in which they assume that the stereotype represents norms to emulate.
Negative effects may include forming inaccurate opinions of people, scapegoating,
erroneously judgmentalism, preventing emotional identification, distress, and
impaired performance.

37. Yet, the stereotype that stereotypes are inaccurate, resistant to change,
overgeneralized, exaggerated, and destructive is not founded on empirical social
science research, which instead shows that stereotypes are often accurate and that
people do not rely on stereotypes when relevant personal information is available.
Indeed, Jussim et al. comment that ethnic and gender stereotypes are surprisingly
accurate, while stereotypes concerning political affiliation and nationality are
much less accurate; the stereotypes assessed for accuracy concerned intelligence,
behavior, personality, and economic status. Stereotype accuracy is a growing area
of study and for Yueh-Ting Lee and his colleagues they have created an EPA
Model (Evaluation, Potency, Accuracy) to describe the continuously changing
variables of stereotypes.
Role in art and culture
Stereotypes are common in various cultural media, where they take the form of
dramatic stock characters. These characters are found in the works of playwright
Bertolt Brecht, Dario Fo, and Jacques Lecoq, who characterize their actors as
stereotypes for theatrical effect. In commedia dell'arte this is similarly common.
The instantly recognizable nature of stereotypes mean that they are effective in
advertising and situation comedy. These stereotypes change, and in modern times
only a few of the stereotyped characters shown in John Bunyan's The Pilgrim's
Progress would be recognizable.
In literature and art, stereotypes are clichéd or predictable characters or situations.
Throughout history, storytellers have drawn from stereotypical characters and
situations, in order to connect the audience with new tales immediately. Sometimes
such stereotypes can be sophisticated, such as Shakespeare's Shylock in The
Merchant of Venice. Arguably a stereotype that becomes complex and
sophisticated ceases to be a stereotype per se by its unique characterization. Thus
while Shylock remains politically unstable in being a stereotypical Jew, the subject
of prejudicial derision in Shakespeare's era, his many other detailed features raise
him above a simple stereotype and into a unique character, worthy of modern
performance. Simply because one feature of a character can be categorized as
being typical does not make the entire character a stereotype.
Despite their proximity in etymological roots, cliché and stereotype are not used
synonymously in cultural spheres. For example a cliché is a high criticism in
narratology where genre and categorization automatically associates a story within
its recognizable group. Labeling a situation or character in a story as typical
suggests it is fitting for its genre or category. Whereas declaring that a storyteller
has relied on cliché is to pejoratively observe a simplicity and lack of originality in
the tale. To criticize Ian Fleming for a stereotypically unlikely escape for James
Bond would be understood by the reader or listener, but it would be more

38. appropriately criticized as a cliché in that it is overused and reproduced. Narrative
genre relies heavily on typical features to remain recognizable and generate
meaning in the reader/viewer.
In movies and TV the halo effect is often used. This is when, for example,
attractive men and women are assumed to be happier, stronger, nicer people .
Racial and ethnic stereotyping
African stereotypes
Africans are typically presented as living in tiny huts in rural villages.
In the Americas
Latino people are stereotyped as needing handouts through welfare and private
charity, being Roman Catholic, having many children, and being present in the US
illegally. The stereotypes say that they rarely complete high school and cannot
speak English well.
Native Americans may be presented positively, as acutely environmentally
conscious, spiritual, wise, loyal, or with extraordinary skill in hunting or tracking.
They may also be portrayed negatively, as indigent, drunk, violent, or implacable
enemies.
Black Americans were stereotyped in the early 20th century as joyous, naive,
superstitious, and ignorant. Many portrayals showed them with thick lips, and in
cartoons they were often portrayed as crows. By the end of the 20th century, the
stereotypes said that they were poor, lazy, ignorant, criminals, and violent, and
occasionally ardent adherents of Christianity.
White Americans are also subject to being stereotyped by others, e.g., the ugly
American stereotype of American visitors.
East Asian and South Asian stereotypes
Irish stereotypes

39. The cartoon above (New Physiognomy, New York, 1866), contrasts Florence
Nightingale, the Crimean War nurse, with "Bridget McBruiser," the stereotypical
Irish woman.
Scientific racism from an American magazine, Harper's Weekly, says that the Irish
are similar to 'Negroes.'
An analysis of nineteenth-century British attitudes by Mary J. Hickman and
Bronwen Walter wrote that the 'Irish Catholic' was one viewed as an "other," or a
different race in the construction of the English nationalist myth. Likewise, the
Irish considered the English "other" and fought hard to break away.
Some of the more vulgar generalizations against Irish people are characterizations
of them as quick-tempered brawlers and alcoholics. One 19th century British
cartoonist even depicted Irish immigrants as simian and racially different from
Anglo-Saxons. One American doctor in the 1850s, James Redfield, argued that
"facial angle" was a sign of intelligence and character; likening the physiognomies
of human ethnic groups to animals. Thus Irishmen resembled dogs, Yankees were
like bears, Germans like lions, blacks like elephants and Englishmen like bulls. In
the 20th century physical stereotypes survived in the comic books until the 1950s,
with Irish characters like Mutt and Jeff, and Jiggs and Maggie appearing daily in
hundreds of newspapers.
Middle Eastern, West and Central Asian stereotypes
Jewish stereotypes

40. Antisemitic caricature based on racial stereotypes, 1873
Jewish people have been stereotyped throughout the centuries and made
scapegoats for a multitude of societal problems. Jews are still stereotyped as
greedy, nit-picky, misers. They have often been shown counting money or
collecting diamonds. Antisemitism prevailed for centuries and reached a climax in
Nazi Germany during World War II with the Holocaust.
Early films such as Cohen's Advertising Scheme (1904, silent) stereotyped Jews as
"scheming merchants."
Sexual stereotypes
The British biologist, Angus John Bateman was the one who first talked
about sexual stereotypes in the late 1940s. His theory would say that males
are promiscuous and females tend to be more selective when choosing their
sexual partners. Although Bateman's principle was based on experiments
made of fruitflies, later on he concluded that the theory applies also in the
case of humans. His ideas also were based on the fact that males presented
an "undiscriminating eagerness" to mate while females display
Prejudices and biases

41. A prejudice is a prejudgment, an assumption made about someone or
something before having adequate knowledge to be able to do so with
guaranteed accuracy.
The word prejudice is most commonly used to refer to a preconceived
judgment toward a people or a person because of their personal
characteristics. It also means beliefs without knowledge of the facts and
may include "any unreasonable attitude that is unusually resistant to rational
influence.
More often, speaking about prejudices, mean the representations divided by
enough quantity of people. It can be elements of the existing or already
disappeared religious beliefs circulating in mass consciousness (any
superstition), out-of-date scientific hypotheses («the Atom cannot be split»,
«Weight and energy — independent physical sizes»), a consequence of
action of propagation («in the West only and think, as though to enslave
Russia», or «The main target of the Western countries is Islamic world»),
advertizing (high prices mean high quality), cultural stamps («all Russian —
drunkards and slovens», «all Germans — punctual and adhered to the law»,
«all Englishmen — cold and prudish», «all Americans fat and are mad about
money»).
A great many people
think they are thinking
when they are merely
rearranging their
prejudices.
William James
Prejudices can be:
• Racial
• Religious

42. • Gender
• Age
In each phase of development of an organism and the person of the
individual there are features which are perceived by himself and by others as
inferiority signs.
Judgment of adults that «all children are unreasonable» (as many children
believe that fantastic heroes or, for example, Santa Claus and etc., exist
actually).
Opinion adult and elderly that «all young — are irresponsible»
Opinion young that all «old are not suitable» for active vital activity (sports,
physical activities).
Racial prejudices
Racial prejudice is an insidious moral and social disease affecting peoples
and populations all over the world. It is diagnosed by the cataloguing of its
various symptoms and manifestations which include fear, intolerance,
separation, segregation, discrimination, and hatred. While all of these
symptoms of racial prejudice may be manifest, the single underlying cause
of racial prejudice is ignorance. Historically, a race of people is defined as a
population with distinguishable biological features.
When we don’t know an individual well, we consciously or unconsciously
begin to characterize him or her based on what we see. Again, this is due to
our ignorance of the person’s real character and personality. We will form
opinions, often based along stereotypical lines: “all people of such and such
race are. . .” We can fill in the blanks with such expectations that certain
races are intellectually superior, others are full of avarice, another is more
artistically or athletically inclined, still another has members who are apt to
be dishonest, etc, etc…
Gender prejudice

43. Gender prejudices the prejudices, concerning a gender, according to
numerous researches one of the most widespread in the world. Gender
prejudice had long been woven into the fabric of most societies. It was
driven by a universal belief that women were the weaker of the sexes
emotionally as well as physically and must be protected from the world
outside the home. Normally, males were expected to be the provider and
dominated in family matters, particularly those relating to the outside world
in commerce and politics.
Religious prejudices
Religious prejudices or Religious intolerance is the intolerance of another's
religious beliefs or practices. The mere statement on the part of a religion
group that its own beliefs and practices are correct and any contrary beliefs
incorrect does not in itself constitute intolerance (i.e., ideological
intolerance). There are many cases throughout history of established
religions tolerating other practices. Religious prejudice, rather, is when a
group (e.g., a society, religious group, non-religious group) specifically
refuses to tolerate practices, persons or beliefs on religious grounds (i.e.,
intolerance in practice).
Problems of Bias
Since most sociological knowledge is based on the study of samples
from some larger universe of items, the possibilities of major errors from
sampling bias constitute a methodological issue. Where biases cannot be
controlled, the direction and extent may sometimes be estimated, but
elimination of biases through use of quotas--or, when possible, random
methods--yields the best results.
This can be done, for example, by first randomly selecting a number of
definable regions and metropolitan areas, then selecting randomly from
each such area certain urban blocks and rural segments, then further
selecting from these segments certain dwelling units, and finally
selecting from the dwelling units the specific persons to constitute the
sample.
In every stage of the process of discovery in sociology there are
possibilities of error, and recognition of these is a part of the progress of

44. sociological methodology. There is continuous creation of technical
devices to reduce such errors and to estimate the amount of error that
has not been eliminated.
The social groups
Humans are social creatures. Even those who think of themselves as
loners participate in many groups, and for most of us, groups are a
major source of satisfaction. You may eat with a particular group of
friends every day, belong to a drama club, or play tennis every week
with your gym class. You probably depend on social groups, social
organizations, and social systems for most of your psychological and
physical needs. Research indicates that we are influenced not only by
the groups we currently belong to and those we identify with but also
by those we associated with in the past. In fact life without groups
seems impossible. Without group involvement, infants die, adolescents
get depressed, middle – aged people suffer psychologically, and the
elderly get lonely and lose their will to live. We learn eat, work and
worship in groups and deprivation of group involvement is damaging.
To better understand groups we ask, What do sociologists mean when
they use the word group?
The main definition. A group is a number of people who have
something in common.
Types of social groups.
Social groups vary widely in their size, purpose, and structure. Some are
short – lived, such as a group that gathers at the scene of an accident,
whereas others last a lifetime, such as family group.

45. Membership in one type does not preclude membership on other
types; in fact it is not unusual for a single group to fall into several
different categories.
Primary and secondary groups.
Primary groups. The main definition. Primary groups are small and
informal and emphasize interpersonal cohesion and personal
involvement. This category includes such groups as the family and the
play groups which are the most important in shaping the human
personality ( Charles H. Cooley 1909) Primary groups involve intimate
face – to – face association and interaction, and their members have a
sense of “we – ness” involving mutual identification and shared
feelings. Their members tend to be emotionally attached to one
another and involved with other group members as a whole people,
not just with those aspects of a person that pertain to work, school or
some other isolated part of one’s life. Your family, close friends, and
some neighbors and work associates are likely to be your primary
group.
A secondary group is a group whose members interact in an
impersonal manner, have few emotional ties, and come together for a
specific practical purpose. Like primary groups, they may be small and
may involve face – to – face contacts and cordial or friendly
interactions. However, they are more formal than primary group
interactions. Sociologically they are just as important. Most of our time
is spent in secondary groups – committees, professional groups,
classroom – groups or neighborhood – groups. The key difference
between primary and secondary groups is in the quality of the
relationships and the extent of personal intimacy and involvement.

46. Primary groups are person – oriented, whereas secondary groups tend
to be goal – oriented.
In – Groups and Out - Groups
An in – group is a social category to which persons feel they belong
and in which the members have a consciousness or awareness of kind.
They feel that they share a common fate, adhere to a common
ideology, come from a common background, or otherwise resemble the
other members. In groups may be primary groups but are not
necessarily.
We can feel “in” with people we have never met or shared personal
intimacies with – members of our alumni group, religious group, or
veterans group, Buddhists, or Vietnam veterans may experience
feelings of comradeship or a sense of togetherness.
Conversely, an out – group is one to which people feel they do not
belong. We do not identify or affiliate ourselves with members of out –
groups, and we feel little allegiance to them.
Peer groups.
Peer groups is an informal primary group of people who share a
similar status and who usually are of similar age. The unique factor in
per groups is equality. Although peer groups are most often discussed
in connection with young people, they are found in all age groups. Most
friendships, regardless of the friends’ age, share the characteristics of a
peer group: they are informal, primary relationships, and the
participants are of equal rank and often of the same sex.
Reference groups

47. Reference groups are the groups we identify with psychologically. They
serve as sources of self – evaluation and influence how we think and
act and what we believe. People need not belong to a group for it to be
a reference group for them; groups we aspire to belong to may also be
a reference group. Negative reference group, those we don’t want to
be identify with, also serve as sources of self – evaluation. A person
might for example, try to avoid resembling members of a group
composed of intellectuals or of football players.
Most attention is focused on positive reference groups. These are the
ones we want to be accepted by. Thus, if you want to be an executive,
you must carefully observe and imitate the behavior of executives. If
you note that they play golf, wear conservative clothes, and read The
Wall Street Journal, you might do the same.
Reference groups are an important source of information about our
performance in a given area. Just as cultures tend to asses themselves
on the basis of their own standards individuals assess themselves in
accordance with the standards of their reference group.
Reference groups serve not only as sources of current evaluation but
also as sources of aspiration and goal attainment. A person who
chooses to become a football player, a lawyer , or a teacher begins to
identify with that group and is socialized to have particular goals and
expectations associated with that group.
A knowledge of people’s reference groups can sometimes help us
understand why they behave as they do. It may explain why a teenager
who never smokes or drinks at home will do so with a school group, or
why politicians may vary their stances on an issue, depending on the
audiences they are addressing.
Small groups and large groups.

48. Social networks
One daily basis each of us is involved in numerous groups of the types
just described: primary, secondary, large, small, peer, reference, and so
forth. Through these groups we develop linkage or ties to a total set of
relationships: a social network. Social networks link people. Think for
example, of your social network. It probably includes your family, your
friends, your neighbors, classmates, members of social clubs, people
you work with, and others.
Social networks do not just happen. Over time we build and establish
ties to others, some strong, some weak. Strong ties may be
characterized by emotional involvement and are sustained in a variety
of ways, including calls, visits, letters, cards, attendance at particular
events, and as suggested by Cheal (1988) – through gifts. Results from
intensive interviews led Cheal to suggest that people use gifts to
reinforce relationships already in existence. Strong ties were based on
numerous small gifts rather than large expensive ones.
Unlike networks just described, many of our social networks include
linkages with people with whom we have little in common and only
occasional contact. These may be people whom we only know of or
who only know of us. These ,,weak” ties, however can be extremely
important in getting a job or a ,,good deal” on a purchase. Perhaps this
can be illustrated by the frequently heard phrase, “whom you know is
as important as what you know”. This is social networking.
Nan Lin and others found that 60 percent of about 400 men in an
urban area had used networks to find a job. As you might expect, social
network linkages were not found to be equal for everyone. Lin found
that men who had fathers with important occupational positions
gained the most from networking. The ,,old boy” network seems to be

49. effective in perpetuating social privileges to those who already hold
positions of higher rank and prestige.
There is little question of the importance of social networks. Women,
for example, whose networks include more relatives than those of
men, are paying increasing attention to building networks in the world
of work. Many professional women, for example, are finding support in
their ties with other women that they find lacking in settings where
men both outnumber and overpower them. Social networks do make a
difference in professional advancement, as well as in developing a
sense of self – worth and integration into the society and culture of
which we are a part.
Stratification. The social structure
The social stratification is division of society into layers or strata whose occupants
have unequal access to sosial opportunities or rewards. The social stratification is
based on Hierarchy
Inequality – the unequal distribution of scarce goods or resources is
found in most societies. Some goods and resources are hard to come by
in every society. In some countries meat is scarce; in others it is
plentiful.

50. Land is a scarce resources in some areas; in others it’s so plentiful that
no one bothers to claim ownership. In countries where there not enough
workers, children become a valuable resource.
Some commodities areuniversally scarce; for example, mansions and
luxury cars arescarce commodity in every society.
Of cource, people differ in other ways as well. Some people travel in
their work, and others prefer to work ar a desk. Some people like to
work with people , and others prefer solitary work. This is sosial
differentiation – how people vary according to their sosial
characteristic. Usually we do not rank people as high or low based on
these differencies.
Rather , people are ranked accordin to the scarce resources they
control. Money and property are two types of scarce resources. Other
scarce resources are social status or prestige in the community. The
ranking of people according their wealth and prestige is known as sosial
stratification.
Type of system The base of differentiation The method to define
differences
The natural features: gender, Physical forcing,
Physical - genetic
age, physical tradition
Rights of citizenship and
Slave- ownership Military forcing
property
Religious and ethnic.
Caste system Religious rituals
Labour division
Estate system Obligations before state Judicial
Ethacratic power The military political
The ranks in a state power
(the state power) power
Class system The amount of property Market excange
Social - Type of profesion and
Education sertificate
professional competency

51. Cultural - Spiritual regulation and
Way of life
normative imitation
Manipulation
Cultural symbolic Sacred aquisition (religious, technocratic,
ideologic)
Types of stratification.
There are two types of stratification: caste and class. In a caste system
everything is given to a person from his birth by belonging to a definite caste.
In a class system human’s status depends on his belonging to a definite class. But
the diggerrence is that it’s possible to change somebody’s class in class system.
For example in 18 – th century in Russia, in time of Peter the First reigning
people from different classes were able to buy a noble title
Social status.
Social status, according to Weber, is the amount of honor and prestige a person
receives from others in the community. Prestige is acquired by being born into a
highly respected family, living in a high status neighborhood, attending
prestigious schools, or joining high status groups or clubs. People also gain
prestige by being able to buy consumer goods that others admire, such as
expensive houses, yachts, or airplanes. Status can also be acquired by holding
respected positions in the community, such as clergy or professors. In short, status
is acquired by doing things and buying things that others admire. Thus, people’s
status is very closely related to their wealth. Some people use their wealth to buy
status while other wealth people are content to live quietly, relatively unknown in
the community.
Theories of social stratification.
Why are societies stratified? How is that some people have more of the scarce
resources society has to offer? This question was widely debated by early
sociologists. As mentioned in Chapter 2, Spenser believed that superior people
would educate themselves and become leaders, whereas inferior people would
remain in the bottom ranks of society. Society, he said, developed through an
evolutionary process, and those who profited from natural selection - ,,survival of
the fittest” – come out on top. This process of natural selection was good for social
progress, he agued, and society should not interfere with it.
Conflict theory

52. The opposing view was formulated by Marx, who argued that stratification
would eventually cause revolution. The upper class in industrial society hired the
proletariat to work in their factories, exploited them for profit, and drove them into
poverty. As the proletariat become poorer, Marx contended, they would become
aware of their plight (acınacaqlı vəziyyət ) and would revolt. The theories of these
early writers have had a strong influence on modern theories of stratification;
structural functionalism and others.
Structural Functional Theory
Structural functionalists have refined Spenser’s notion that society, like any other
organism, is self – regulating and self – maintaining. It consists of interrelated
parts that serve a function in maintaining a system as a whole.
When they recognized that stratification was a persistent force in society, they
argued that it must be serving some function. They hypothesized that because
modern society is so complex, people with strong leadership skills are need to
organize and run the complexes and industries. People with strong leadership
abilities need advanced training and must be willing to work very hard and assume
a great deal of responsibility. Society must encourage these efforts by rewarding
leaders with wealth and status scarce resources that in turn can be used to gain a
power.
The well – known chief manager of Hewlett – Packard company said
once: ,,Work as a slave, create as the God, and rule as a king!”

53. Today the status of artists, actors, singers, sportsmen is
In terms of
significantly increased. Very often their earnings exceed the
inherent worth as
salary of some business owners. It is enough to remember
a human being,
the status of prominent artists as Salvador Dali, and
Davis and Moore
othersmusic, sport and movie stars
(1945)
acknowledged that
. INCLUDEPICTURE
an artist or a
"http://0.tqn.com/d/gonyc/1/0/Y/F/moma-18.JPG" *
teacher might be
equal to corporate
executive.
The talents of
artists and
teachers, however,
are not as scarce
MERGEFORMATINET
and therefore not
as valuable to the INCLUDEPICTURE
society, according "http://0.tqn.com/d/arthistory/1/G/Q/i/dali_pm
to Davis and a_05_06.jpg" * MERGEFORMATINET
Moore. Thus,
corporate
executives who
have the talent to
lead business and
industry are more
highly rewarded,
not because they
are making greater INCLUDEPICTURE "http://0.tqn.com/d/movies/
contribution to the 1/G/_/L/O/jolieshepherd1.jpg" *
functioning of
society.
This theoretical
perspective
permits a belief in
human equality at
the same time that MERGEFORMATINET
it explains INCLUDEPICTURE "http://0.tqn.com/d/movies/
inequality. If 1/G/l/5/N/cageghostcon1.jpg" *
society had an
MERGEFORMATINET

54. equal need for all types of work, then all its members would be equal in the
stratification system.
The social institutes. Family
The institution of family is a basic unit in the society, and the multifaceted
functions performed by it makes it a much-needed institution in a society. Some of
the important functions performed by the family include, reproduction of new
members and socializing them, and provision of emotional and physical care for
older persons and young. Family in fact, is an institution which resolves or eases a
large number of social problems.
The term family had been defined by various sociologists and anthropologists.
Murdock (1949), after studying over 250 multi-cultural societies defines family as
a “social group characterized by common residence, economic co-operation and
reproduction. It includes adults of both sexes, at least two of whom maintain a
socially approved sexual relationship and one or more children - own or adopted -
of the sexually cohabiting adults. The “household” is said to be the “living
arrangement” of such a family unit.
Haralombos and Herald (1997), define family as a procedure for socialization,
economic activity and sexual activities that consists of two persons of opposite
genders who will indulge in sexual activity at least for the sake of pleasure and
would also consist of children and a group of decedents. Most definitions refer to
family as a universal social institution, which is constituted of persons directly
linked by “kin” connection where the adult members, assume the responsibility of
caring for the children (Marsh et al., 1996).
Interconnectedness of individuals in family relationships through bonds of
affection and/or obligation leads to joint decision making, budget – pooling,
cooperative work roles and altruistic parenting within a framework of culturally
accepted notions about the division of rights and responsibilities by sex and
generational position (UN,1996).
There are two main family types introduced by the sociologists. One is the nuclear
family, which consists of two elders and their children. It is often referred to as the
“immediate family”. Extended family is the other type. It consists of an old system
of family performances with the close connections of two or three generations of
relations, such as grand parents, husbands of sisters and wives of brothers, aunts,
uncles, nieces and nephews (Bilton et. al., 1996; Giddens, 1993).
Irrespective of the size of family, the institution of family can again be seen in
two mutually exclusive categories, namely the family of orientation and the family
of procreation. The family into which a person is born can be referred to as the
family of orientation and the family of procreation is constructed by the adult
individual who creates a family as he or she becomes an adult. In sociology, family
systems arecategorized by residence of the couple who formulate the family unit.
For example, if a married couple moves to live with the parents of the bride or of