LESSONS AFTER THE FIRST MID-TERM EXAM

Lesson 2: Sociological Approaches to the Study of Society

Introduction:

You have learned in lesson 1, that culture defined as “the complex

whole which encompasses beliefs, practices, values, attitudes, laws, norms,
artifacts, symbols, knowledge and everything that a person learns and
shares as a member of society (Taylor, 1920).

Society, in layman’s term, is composed of group of people living

together in a certain geographical location sharing similar culture. But in a
deeper context, society includes the sum total of existing relationships
between its people.

The term society is shaped by attributes such as likeness and

differentiation; cooperation and conflict; and interdependence. As quotation
says, “no man is an Island” and so as society.

Theoretical Paradigms (Patterns)

 MACRO VIEW
Sociologists may study human society by focusing on the large
social phenomena or “the big picture”, such a social institutions and
inequality to see how it operates

 MICRO VIEW
Sociologists may zero in on the immediate social situation where
people interact with one another or looking at the situational patterns
of social interaction.

Major Perspective in Sociology

Sociologists analyze social phenomena at different levels and from

different perspectives. From concrete interpretations to sweeping
generalizations of society and social behavior, sociologists study everything
from specific events (the micro level of analysis of small social patterns) to
the “big picture” (the macro level of analysis of large social patterns).

Culture and society can be defined in different perspectives or

approaches. These perspectives explain the manner of interaction of
members of the society. Sociologists use 4 theoretical approaches:
  the historical approach
 the structural-functional approach
 the social-conflict approach
 the symbolic-interaction approach

1. Historical Approach
-Current and future human and forest landscape conditions are
influenced by the cumulative, unfolding of social-ecological
interactions. Examining past system responses, especially unintended
consequences, can reveal valuable insights that promote learning and
adaption.

2. Structural-Functional Approach

-Structural-functionalists view society as a “complex system

whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability”
(Macionis 2012: 12). It involves an analysis of social structure, any
relatively stable pattern of social behavior. Social structure gives our
lives shape—in families, the workplace, the classroom, the community.
-seeks to identify a structure’s social functions, or “the
consequences of any social pattern for the operation of society as a
whole” and members share sets of rules and values and maintain a
balance harmonious system.

3. Social-Conflict Approach

The social-conflict approach sees society as an “arena of

inequality that generates conflict and change” (Macionis 2012: 13).

It highlights inequality and change. This approach views class

conflict and class exploitation as the prime moving force in
mankind’s history, and that the struggle for power and wealth as
a continuous process between and among categories of people. It
focuses on how social patterns benefit the dominant groups in
society. Typically, “people on top try to protect their privileges
while the disadvantaged try to gain more for themselves”.

The conflict perspective focuses on the negative, conflicted,

and ever-changing nature of society.
 4. Symbolic-Interaction Approach

The symbolic-interaction approach views society as the “product

of the everyday interactions of individuals”(Macionis 2012). Human
beings live in a world of symbols. In the process of social interaction,
they attach meaning to everything.

According to the symbolic interactionist perspective, people

attach meanings to symbols, and then they act according to their
subjective interpretation of these symbols. Verbal conversations, in
which spoken words serve as the predominant symbols, make this
subjective interpretation especially evident. The words have a certain
meaning for the “sender,” and, during effective communication, they
hopefully have the same meaning for the “receiver.”

Concept of Society

In order to concretize society mainstream sociologists have tended to

define it as structure that is a recognizable network of inter-relating
institutions. The word recognizable is crucial in its context because it
suggests that the way in which societies differ from one another depends on
the manner in which their particular institutions are inter-connected. The
notion that societies are structured depends upon their reproduction over
time. In this respect the term institution is crucial. To speak of
institutionalized forms of social conduct is to refer to modes of belief and
behaviors that occur and recur are socially reproduced. While we may
subscribe to the arguments that society is both structured and reproduced
the Marxist account attempts to provide us with a basis for understanding
how particular social formations arise and correspond with particular mode
of production.
Society is not a static or peace-fully evolving structure but is
conceived of as the tentative solution to the conflicts arising out of
antagonistic social relations of production. Frequently social scientists
emphasize the cultural aspect of social relationships.
In doing so, they see society as being made possible by the shared
understanding of its members. Because human beings exist in a linguistic
and symbolic universe that they themselves have constructed the
temptation is to construe society as a highly complex symbolic and
communication system. This stress on culture is associated with the notion
that society is underpinned by ideas and values.
 Society is a process in which people continuously interact with one
another, the key terms are negotiation, and self, other, reflexivity the
implication being that society is constituted and reconstituted in social
interaction. Society is not imposed upon people in the processual definition
rather it has to be accepted and confirmed by participants. Each
interaction episode contains within it the possibility of innovation and
change. So against the view of society that sees it as structure the process
view asserts that people make structure.

Definitions of Society

August Comte - the father of sociology saw society as a social

organism possessing a harmony of structure and function.

Emile Durkheim - the founding father of the modern sociology

treated society as a reality in its own right.

Talcott Parsons Society is a total complex of human relationships.

Elements of Society

1. Social Interaction

Within the framework of society is a process called social interaction.

This is a compilation of ways and means by which humans interact with
each other within the confines of a society. Hence, the prevailing culture
within a society dictates the forms of interaction used by individuals with
one another.
Interaction is not merely defined by an actual physical contact, as it
covers every human interchange that is within a mutually subjective
orientation. This implies as long as the parties involved are aware of each
other, interaction is possible.

2. Social Organization

This concept refers to the interrelationship of arts of society. As a

society is an organization itself, it is structurally divide into layers of
context and positions that help perpetuate it existence. The positions
created within a society constitute the category of status. This may include
being a son, a student, and a parent.

Layers of context and positions

 Roles - status prescribes a set of accepted behaviors that define

the individual’s response and inclinations. Government official, for
instance, their role is to ensure that the people’s needs are
addressed through government projects and policies.
What is your role in your community?
  Group - basic unit of an organization.
 Involves at least two individuals who are in constant
interaction based on their statuses and roles.
 In school, it consists of two groups: teachers and students.
You interact with your teachers based on your role as a
student. Hence, your manner of speaking and the content of
your statements are different when you are interacting with
your classmates from when you interact with your teachers.

 Institutions - building blocks of a society, as it is through these

that norms are produced from the consistent exchanges of
individuals and groups.
 Established when roles, statuses, and group are perpetuated
within the context of a society.
 These institutions are also in constant recreation as human
interactions are affected by external forces such as
environmental shift.
 Examples of institutions are: Family, marriage, education,
religion, and government.

3. Social Structure

This is the foundation in every society from which emanates the

possible roles, statuses, institutions, and organizations. It can be said that
social structure is the determining factor by which every other part of a
society gains its context. The common analogy used to describe social
structure and the elements of society is that of a BUILDING. The pillars and
foundation of a building is equated to the social structure. Remember that
these parts provide the general framework of the building—these determine
its height, width, and shape. What provides the building with its design and
body are institutions, statuses, groups, and roles.

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

Lesson 3: Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism as orientations

in viewing other cultures

Introduction

Human identities are varied due to the variance in their environment

and culture. The variation in human conditions promotes diversity and
plurality in cultural traditions. This could lead to discrimination and
ostracism. Cultural ignorance is the main factor why discrimination happens
in cultural diversity. People especially those who belong in majority groups
see their culture as superior, natural, and correct compare to others. Other
people see their culture or way of living as inferior than others. These two
different perspectives about their culture are called ethnocentrism and
xenocentrism, respectively.
 Human differences, however, are social fact that must be understood
and accepted by many to avoid discrimination, racism, and ostracism.
People should learn how to embrace and accept diversity in our society.

Ethnocentrism
When people find cultural practices and values not their own as
disturbing and threatening, that can be regarded as ethnocentrism. A literal
meaning of ethnocentrism is the regard that one’s own culture and society
is the center of everything and therefore far more superior than others
(Kottak 2012: 39; Eriksen 2001:7). Anthropologists use this term to
describe the opinion that one’s own way of life is natural and correct.
Ethnocentric individuals believe they’re better than the other individuals for
reasons based solely on their heritage. Others would simply call it as cultural
ignorance. It is understandable that people laud and hold importance to the
cultural values that were taught to them by their parents, elders, and other
institutions of their society. The problem is when a person or groups of
people regard their own society’s set of cultural values as the only agreeable,
acceptable, and highly respectable set of convictions. From this perspective,
the practices and institutions of people from other societies are regarded as
inferior, less intelligent, and even vicious. An ethnocentric attitude can be
an obstacle to understanding each other’s culture and foster tensions within
or between societies.

Xenocentrism and Xenophobia

This refers to preference for the foreign. In this sense it is the opposite
of ethnocentrism. It is characterized by a strong belief that one’s own
products, styles, or ideas are inferior to those which originate elsewhere. In
this sense, people feel inferiority of their own culture. Xenocentric
individuals believe that someone else’s culture is superior to their own. Thus,
adapting or emulating other’s culture which they feel or think it is better
than their own. Example of this, Filipinos prefer to eat Korean Food rather
than Filipino cuisine.

Xenophobia is the fear of what is perceived as foreign or strange.

Cultural Relativism
The concept of cultural relativism underscores the idea that the
culture in every society should be understood and regarded on its own
terms.
 Societies are qualitatively different from one another, such that each
one has its own “unique inner logic” (Eriksen 2001: 14). Cultural traits can
only be known and valued in the context of the society by which they
emerge and are practiced.
Cultural relativism promotes the idea that a society has to be viewed
from the inside so that inner logic can be better explained. A society’s idea
of a good life will not likely be shared by another society that interprets the
notion of “good” from a sharply different social perspective. In other words,
each society has a different yardstick in appreciating the value of its own
cultural trait. Cultural relativism, however, cannot be regarded as the flip
side of ethnocentrism. The concept of cultural relativism is more analytical
and methodological rather than being a moral principle. Anthropologists
apply the concept of cultural relativity in investigating and comparing
societies without declaring one being better or more preferable to the other.
Moreover, appreciating and accepting the uniqueness of one society’s
cultural trait does not mean that universal human moral traits of right or
wrong no longer apply.

Essential Learning

Ethnocentrism, which means as a perspective that promotes an individual’s culture

as the most efficient and superior, as well as xenocentrism, which means the belief that some
else’s culture is superior to their own, may not, in some circumstances, be avoidable. We all
often have instinctual reactions toward another person or culture’s practices or beliefs. But
these reactions do not have to result in horrible events such as genocide or war. In order to
avoid such awful things like those we must all try to be culturally relative. Cultural
relativism promotes the perspectives that culture must be understood in the context of their
locality. Using this perspective makes us tolerant of the different attitudes and practices of
thers—a chracteristics that is essential to a highly globalized world that we live in.

References:

Eriksen, Thomas Hyland (2001) Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction to Social and Cultural
Anthropology, 2nd Edition. London: Sterling Press

Gonzalez, M. A. (2016). Anthropology and the study of Culture. In M. A. Gonzalez, Understanding Culture,
Society, and Politics (pp32-36). Makati City: Diwa Learning Systems, Inc.

Gonzalez, M. A. (2016). Sociology and the study of Society. In M. A. Gonzalez, Understanding Culture,
Society, and Politics (pp41-44). Makati City: Diwa Learning Systems, Inc’//