Gattaca, 1984 and Fahrenheit 451 essay "A blueprint, a mirror, a warning or simply fanciful entertainment" what is the purpose of utopia and dystopia texts you have studied. Utopias and Dystopias are alternate societies created to serve as a platform to highlight the values associated with the contexts of their respective times. While they may be antonymous concepts, utopias and dystopias are ultimately a critique of the events of a certain time or the attitudes and values of a society, thus such a text offers a vision of how cultural values have changed through the process of appropriation as a result of the changing connects that shape these texts. This is illustrative in the text 1984 a novel by George Orwell published in 1949, Andrew Niccols 1997 Gattaca film and Fahrenheit 451 is a 1953 dystopian novel by Ray Bradbury, the novel presents a future American society where books are outlawed and firemen burn any house that contains them. Through a variety of literary and visual techniques, all texts concurrently present themes of technology and physiological manipulation revealing the disgusting homogeneity of a superficial utopia.
The purpose of the following paper is to analyze, interpret and discuss individualism vs. collectivism and their significance in understanding cultural differences. Individualism vs. Collectivism In order to understand the different processes and roles that an individual goes through their life span development it is very important to understand what is the meaning of culture and how much does culture matters. Every human being reacts and behaves according to the environment in which is exposed through their life. People live in different societies and as a consequence their cultural perspective and psychological processes are different from others. From a multicultural psychological perspective individualism and collectivism are concepts that enclose essential differences in how the interactions between people and their roles in societies are build.
CULTURAL STUDIES ESSAY PLAN SUBCULTURES: Body-Mod, modifying social identity -What is Body-Mod? Where did it start? Why? When? Introduction to the history of the modified body, this being through tattoos and other body art, adornments, surgical procedures and garments worn to change the shape of the body and what this represented in its social/historical/geographical context.
Considering Obligations Abstract The objective of this paper is to define, describe and identify the meaning and the role that obligation plays within society today. Obligation can be conflicting in personal, professional, and employment situations. This paper provides an in-depth view of the role obligation plays in the workplace and personal life. Discuss how moral obligations can cause conflict with self, friends, family and employers. Considering Obligations Obligation is defined a course of action imposed by society, law, or conscience by which one is bound or restricted (Dictionary, 2007).
Ethnocentrism is judging another culture solely by the values and standards of one's own culture. [1][page needed] Ethnocentric individuals judge other groups relative to their own ethnic group or culture, especially with concern for language, behavior, customs, and religion. These ethnic distinctions and subdivisions serve to define each ethnicity's unique cultural identity. [2] Ethnocentrism may be overt or subtle, and while it is considered a natural proclivity of human psychology, it has developed a generally negative connotation. [3] Origins of the concept and its studyEdit The term ethnocentrism was created by William G. Sumner, upon observing the tendency for people to differentiate between the in-group and others.
Within the social sciences, the conceptualization of sexism depends upon the basic assumptions about human nature, society, and their relationship which underlie current theories about society and social behavior; theories vary in the emphasis given to either human nature or to society. If priority is given to human nature, persons are considered to have inherent traits such as selfishness, competitiveness, and utilitarianism. Social relations and institutions are viewed, consequently, as products of those individual traits. In this context,, men and women are considered to have innate traits that make them different from each other. For example, while.males are aggressive, strong, instrumental, etc., females are weak, submissive, affective, nurturant, etc.
Determinism & Incompatiblism Respective Negations and Moral Implications In the following treatise, we shall explore the metaphysical themes of compatiblism, determinism, libertarian free will, and their respective negations (where applicable). In addition, we will examine the supposed moral implications of adopting these views, such as, moral responsibility, the proper assessment of criminal behaviour, justification for punishment, and the like. Moreover, certain metaphysical views will undergo examination and summary given; in order to greater understand their roles within society. Similarly, moral inferences will be illustrated and scrutinized where necessary. Furthermore, an opinion piece regarding the adoption of a particular metaphysical notion will be voice, and placed under inspection for error.
Knapp describes how "people act on the basis of their values; their actions are oriented and constrained by the values and norms of people around them; and these norms and values are the basis of social order" ( 1994:191-192). As this essay progresses, the comparison of both Parson’s and Goffman’s theory’s will be expressed in order to understand the way in which society controls the actions and goals of people in their everyday lives and how both functionalist and symbolic interactionist views can be linked to social order and norm expectations. Erving Goffman was a key micro-sociologist and symbolic interactionist who was interested in the ways in which people were influenced and affected by their surroundings
In doing this, I hope to provide an evaluation of the weaknesses in the relativist argument, in addition to an exploration of an alternative account of why the IBR has failed to integrate into certain non-Western societies that does not depend on an assertion (radical or non-radical) of relative cultural values. Cultural relativism is the view which advocates for ethical relativism on grounds of cultural differences. Kajit John Bagu defines it as “[t]he notion that a practice, value, norm and law of a society should be understood and appraised by people outside of that society only in that society's terms and standards”1. Human rights, in contrast, are defined within the articles of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which states in its preamble that it is a “common standard of achievement for all peoples and nations (...) secur[ing] their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction”. These two notions, at their respective extremes (extremes herein referred to as radical cultural relativism and radical universalism2), are at odds with one another.
Culture can be defined as that set of values and beliefs, norms and customs, and rules and codes that socially define groups of people. Cultures differ in some fundamental ways: Basic philosophical differences about religion and the nature of the universe contribute to a culture’s overall worldview. Also in terms of locus of control: Control cultures believe in an internal locus of control; they feel that people control their own destinies; "Don’t let anything stand in your way" might be a motto.