Rich people never go to war. You ask a college kid to go to war, and he's like, 'Umm, I'm taking this sociology class, and I think war is, like, really stupid, and my roommate's, like, half Afghani, so it's going to cause some static.'
Culture
(Part A)
by
Charles Lamson
Dimensions of Culture
The culture of any people on Earth, no matter how simple it may seem to us, is a complex set of behaviors and artifacts. A useful framework for thinking about culture was suggested by Robert Bierstedt (American sociologist who often wrote about sociological theory, culture, and constitutional law) in 1963. Bierstadt views culture as having three major dimensions: ideas, or ways of thinking that organize human consciousness; norm's, or accepted ways of doing or carrying out ideas; and material culture, or patterns of possessing and using the products of culture.
Ideas
Theories about how the physical world operates (scientific knowledge), strongly held notions about what is right and wrong (values), and traditional beliefs, legends, and customs (folklore) are among the most important types of ideas found in any given culture. Of these, values are especially important because people feel so strongly about them and because they often undergo changes that result in social conflict as we can see in contemporary debates about abortion.
Values are socially shared ideas about what is right. Thus for most people in North America education is a value; that is, they conceive of it as a proper and good way to achieve social standing. Loyalty to friends and loved ones, patriotism, the importance of religion, the significance of material possessions---these and other values are commonly found in our culture and many others, but of course there are wide differences in how people interpret these values and in the extent to which they adhere to them. In small tribal and peasant societies, there tends to be far greater consensus on values than in large, complex industrial societies. In a large and diverse society like ours, there is bound to be a good deal of conflict over values. Some people are satisfied with the way wealth and power are distributed, for example, while others are less satisfied with the status quo. Some people feel that it is desirable to attempt to improve one's own well-being and that society as a whole gains when everyone strives to be well-off. Others assert that the value of individual gain conflicts with the values of community and social cohesion; too great a gap between the well-off and the not well-off creates suffering, envy, crime, and other problems.
In societies undergoing rapid and far-reaching social change, such as the United States, there is bound to be conflict over values. Controversies over "family values," the sanctity of marriage, obligations to children, and similar issues tend to be particularly intense because people's individual experiences differ greatly. The more diversity there is among the people who share a basic culture, the more conflict there is likely to be over a certain aspect of that culture. Such disputes often turn on ideas about how to behave---that is, on the norms governing behavior in a society.
Norms From people's beliefs in what is right and good---that is, from their values---are derived the norms, or rules of behavior, of a society. Values are more abstract than norms; they are the ideas that support or justify norms. Norms are more specific. They are the adjustments which human beings make to the surrounding environment. We may think of them as solutions to recurring problems or situations. But norms involve more than behavior. Any given norm is supported by the idea that a particular behavior is correct and proper or incorrect and improper. The moral order of society is a kind of tissue of "oughts;" negative ones which forbid certain actions and positive ones which require certain actions.
If we think about a complex aspect of everyday life like driving a car, it is evident that without norms life would be far more chaotic and dangerous than it already is. When we drive we keep to the right, obey traffic lights and speed limits, and avoid reckless behavior that could cause accidents. These are among the many norms that allow the automobile to be such an essential article of North American culture.
Examples of norms are easy to find. Take the college or high school classroom. The classroom is organized according to norms of educational practice: There should be a textbook or books; there should be a class discussion; there should be assignments, exams, grades. Note that these "shoulds" correspond to actual behavior. Norms usually refer to behavior that we either approve or disapprove of. However, members of a culture often disagree about how a particular norm operates. Thus in the case of classroom organization there is considerable debate about what educational practices are most effective. In Israel, for example, there is a debate among orthodox and liberal Jews over whether boys and girls should be separated in classrooms, and similar debates divide fundamentalist and more secular Muslims in other Middle Eastern societies.
In societies where values are in conflict or where changes are occurring rapidly, Norms are also subject to change. This can readily be seen in the case of smoking. The norms governing smoking are changing rapidly as a result of changing values regarding health. Until recent years the norms governing smoking in the United States were very liberal. One could light up almost anywhere, and non-smokers were expected not to complain. Recently, however, greater emphasis on fitness and health, as well as new knowledge about the dangers of second-hand smoke, have increased the value people place on clean air and have tipped the balance against the earlier norms. But the change has not occurred without conflict between smokers and non-smokers and their representatives in courts and legislatures.
Laws are norms that are included in a society's official written codes of behavior. Laws are often developed by a specialized occupational group, such as priests in the ancient world and legislators, judges, and lawyers in the modern world. Some of the oldest examples of laws are the Code of Hammurabi, the ancient Babylonian order that specified punishments equal to the gravity of the crime (e.g., an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth); the Ten Commandments, written by God, according to the Old Testament, on stone tablets at least 1,600 years before the birth of Christ; and the codes of Confucius, written and interpreted by the royal scribes of the ancient Chinese Empire. In our time, laws are the special province of professional lawmakers, but all citizens participate in a network of laws and other written regulations that govern daily life. Basic behaviors like driving, going to school, marrying, and investing are greatly influenced by laws governing the conduct of these activities.
At times we may grumble or protest against laws that we find overly restrictive. And there is always some group planning to protest a law that is under consideration in a legislative body like Congress. But when we regard the world beyond our own society we see that the rule of law could save millions of lives if only it could be achieved in less-developed, poverty-stricken, war-torn nations. On the other hand, even in nations where the rule of law is generally accepted, social scientists often find that new laws have unintended consequences. For example, when extremely strict laws against adult drug-dealing were passed, the dealers began recruiting juveniles to sell drugs, the lawmakers never intended the new laws to encourage teenagers to become dealers, but in many states that is what happened. Laws often have unintended consequences because they were created in response to vigorous efforts by people who espouse particular ideologies.
Ideologies
Ideologies comprise two dimensions of culture; they are sets or systems of ideas and norms. Ideologies combine the values and norms that all the members of a society are expected to believe in and act upon without question. A classic study of the emergence of an ideology was Max Weber's analysis of the link between Protestantism and capitalism, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905). Weber noticed that the rise of Protestantism in Europe coincided with the rise of private enterprise, banking, and other aspects of capitalism. He also noticed that a majority of the most successful early capitalists were Protestants. Weber hypothesized that their religious values taught them that salvation depended not on good deeds or piety but on how they lived their entire lives and particularly on how well they adhered to the norms of their "callings" (occupations). As a result, the Protestants placed a high value on frugality and abstinence. To prove that they were worthy of salvation, they devoted themselves tirelessly to commerce and plowed their profit back into their firms. But Catholics, who did not share these values, were less single-mindedly dedicated to their business ventures. They often spent their profits on good deeds rather than investing them in their businesses. Weber attempted to show how a set of religious values and norms combined with economic norms to create the ideologies of capitalism.
A contemporary example of an ideology may be found among religious fundamentalists. Christian fundamentalists in the United States generally share a set of ideas and norms of behavior that include the value of prayer, the value of family and children, the negative value of abortion and secular humanism (an ethical system based on scientific knowledge rather than on religious teachings), the belief in salvation and redemption for one's sins and other values. In the Islamic world, conflict between religious fundamentalists and more secular people is especially widespread and bitter. And the fundamentalists often see the United States as a threat to their most cherished values. In part because of their prominence on global television, examples of life in the United States---especially those that feature sexual display, the consumption of alcohol, or gender equality (which is not permitted among orthodox Muslim) become symbols of moral corruption
Values and Ideologies in Conflict
Most societies and regions of the world experience conflict among people with differing values and ideologies. At times this conflict can have serious outcomes, such as widespread violence among antagonistic factions or parties, as occurred in Northern Ireland between Protestants and Catholics, in Israel between ultra-orthodox Jews and more secular populations, and in Islamic Nations like Egypt or Algeria, between extremely orthodox Muslims and those who seek compromise between secular values and religious ones. We return continually to the subject of conflicting values and resultant conflict among social groups because the subject is so important in understanding social life and social change. In discussing values and ideologies, however, it is important to point out that in almost every known society there are inherent conflicts in the values the society claims to support. In most democratic societies, for example, the values of liberty, (freedom), and equality are cherished. But there is an inherent conflict in these two central values.
Perfect Liberty is not compatible with perfect equality. If people are free to do anything they choose, then the strong will crush the week, the wolves will eat the sheep, and this puts an end to equality. If perfect equality is to be attained, then men must be prevented from outdistancing each other, whether in material or in intellectual or in spiritual achievement, otherwise inequalities will result.
We will see in later parts of this analysis that the desire of some groups to achieve total equality or freedom continues to produce ideologies in which the goals of actions---that is, equality or freedom---led people to assert that "the ends justify the means" used to achieve those ends, even if they include violating norms like "Thou shalt not steal" or Thou shalt not kill." Such ideologies led to some of the twentieth century's most atrocious episodes of mass violence and destruction. But the inherent conflict among values can also be a creative aspect of society. As we seek to decrease the gap between the haves and the have-nots in the United States and elsewhere while attempting to preserve as much individual freedom as possible, we realize that a just society is one in which people are free to seek the the best peaceful means of balancing their conflicting interests and values.
Material Culture
The third dimension of culture identified by Bierstedt is material culture. Material culture consists of all things a society produces. Mundane things like pots and pans or the wooden eating bowls of nonindustrial societies; immensely complex systems of things, such as the space shuttle; cherished items of religious worship like rosary beads; or Indian fetish necklaces all take their shape and purpose from the ideas of the culture that produces them. Members of societies that place a high value on science and efficiency are used to seeing these values expressed in material objects. For example, we design our houses to conserve energy and create desirable combinations of view and privacy. We may take older forms like the ranch house or the Cape Cod bungalow and modify them to suit modern purposes; in this way our houses is combine tradition with usefulness. The particular form that appeals to us is usually a result of many different ideas, including what we know from our own upbringing, what we can afford, how much space we acquire, and the environmental conditions we anticipate.
The same is true throughout the world. If one travels in Africa, for example, one will find large areas in which people build square houses with thatched roofs or roofs of corrugated metal. Suddenly one will pass into a region where the people build round houses with steeply pitched roofs. In another region people may live in the sprawling apartment-like complexes built of sand and mortar. When asked why they prefer a particular kind of dwelling, people usually say, because we have always built our houses this way. In other words, their answers are based on ideas of what is right for them. But on further discussion a traveler with a sociological imagination will discover that the different building forms also express functional ideas. The mud wall "apartments" of the desert village seem cramped and dark to Western eyes, but the people of the village will explain that they often sleep outdoors and the dark, cool rooms are most useful on very hot days. On the other hand, the tribespeople in a society that builds round houses may give a spiritual explanation for the shape of their dwellings; they may believe that corners are places where evil spirits can lurk. In sum, different cultures may give different reasons for the form and function of a material element such as a house, but in all cultures one will find material culture that stems from the society's most important ideas
Technologies
Technologies are another aspect of culture that spans two of Bierstedt's major dimensions. According to Bierstadt, technologies are the things (material culture) and the norms for using them that are found in a given culture. Without the norms that govern their use, things are at best confusing and at worst useless or dangerous. In the United States, for example, new telecommunications technologies based on computers, modems, and networks like the Internet are a powerful means of communicating information across long distances. But norms for using these new technologies such as norms about privacy, freedom of speech, and personal accountability are only now developing. Because the Internet is a relatively new form of communication, the norms (i.e., laws) that apply to print and TV communication have not yet been fully worked out and applied to this relatively new communication medium. 
Guns present another case in which norms governing use of the things themselves are very much in dispute. Most Americans agree that people should be free to own and use hunting weapons but what about handguns, assault rifles, machine guns, and rocket launchers? What, if any, restrictions should there be on the distribution and use of such weapons? As we will see in later parts of this analysis, the debate about appropriate norms for controlling the distribution and possession of deadly firearms that are clearly not designed for hunting is an indication of a deeper cultural conflict over the right to bear arms versus the state's monopoly over the use of force.
*SOURCE: SOCIOLOGY IN A CHANGING WORLD, 6TH ED., 2006, WILLIAM KORNBLUM, PP. 56-60*
end
|
No comments:
Post a Comment