What can social science tell us about the formation of identities? Identity is a ‘socially recognised position’ encompassing how we see ourselves and how we are acknowledged by others (Woodward, 2004, p7). A complex set of influences and constraints contribute to an identity. Structures, outside forces that aren’t controllable, and agency, internal control that can be wielded, combine to provide identity; our relationships and the society we dwell in construct a framework of identities, some of which individuals will have placed upon them by others, and some they will actively assume. A sense of belonging and rapport is engendered within collective identities; being part of a group implies common traits that give individuals the same identity, showing them as different to other groups and identities.
Their relationship is complex matter and their effects are very specific and unique for every individual. There is not an easy answer to this question. This essay aims to look at the effects that social structure and social interaction have on shaping the person's identity and to emphasise their equally important roles in identity development of the person. According to Jenkins, social identity is defined as understanding of who we and other people are and reciprocally, other people's understanding of themselves and others (Jenkins, 1996, cited in Macionis 2005, p.175). It also includes one's identification as belonging to a particular social group and displaying corresponding behaviours, it captures sense of sameness and difference between others and the person (Macionis 2005, p.175).
The world and culture is founded on the social construction of reality. How people perceive society to be has an influence on how society actually is. Our views affect how we treat other people and our actions toward them influence their actions and how they treat us as well. Different situations that take place in our lives and ones’ social interactions are the basis on which we choose what type of dispositions we take, who we take them with, and the setting in which these interactions occur. One’s life experiences can lead to a person's "construction of reality" by living the realities of everyday life.
Sharing the same culture integrates individuals into society by giving them a sense of solidarity with others. In which this enables members to agree on goals and how to achieve them, this would result in allowing them to act and co-operate harmoniously, through social order. Functionalists believe that society could be studied scientifically. They study society on a macro scale, in which they generalise their ideas to the overlooking society, they study human behaviour and how it is shaped by the social structure i.e they look at what education does for society as a whole not just an individual. Functionalists views society is like an organism, they view it as a social system of interconnected parts, for example like the human body and how it functions, i.e the body needs the heart and lungs and brain to work together to stay alive.
In this sense, who humans beings are, what they believe, and how they came to be, have all been influenced by society. Society has formed human nature to a point that is hard to argue against. ELABORATE/MORE EVIDENCE. To determine the social coordination/organization of society, Benedict stems many of her claims from observations of three groups: the Zuñi, Dobu, and Kwakiutl. In order to determine social coordination/organization, Benedict claims, “we need detailed information about contrasting limits of behaviors and the motivations that are dynamic in one society and not in another” (229).
How this will be accomplished will be by comparing and contrasting their assumptions. Then I will state my opinion on which of the two better fits my personal sociological views. Functionalism and the conflict theory are sociological perspectives that present different assertions of studying the society and how the resultant perspectives of the society are enhanced. The functionalist perspective perceives the society as a system and on a large scale. The functionalist perspective presents social moulding of an individual rather than use of force to the individual in order to carry out societal roles.
They are affected by any event occurring in the group or with any member of the group. -Social organization: The group can be perceived as a social organization with roles, rules, status, and an affective relationship. -Interaction: The group members influence each other and respond by establishing communication between them when they are together or when they are in different positions. So we could call it a group even they are not reunited in the same place. -Cohesiveness: Members are willing to be a group and stay in it contributing and achieving common goals.
“Culture, gender, personality and other factors are believed to have great impact on how people conform themselves in a group settings” (Fiske, 2004). The concept of conformity has a broad meaning because it refers to individuals displaying common behavior as others in a group, but this is something that is group sensitive because everyone is not the same, and your behavior is something that is
TMA04 – Introduction to Social Science Question: Compare and contrast two social science views about the ordering of social life Understanding social order is central to social sciences as it largely determines human behaviour and allows individuals live together, sharing a common space. As a concept, social order can be interpreted as a social condition in which stability and consistency are maintained through a set of rules of conduct, often implicit, inducing people exercise self-control within life situations. It differs over time and place, and tends to be restored immediately when it is breached I looked at the main differences and similarities between the two theorists Michel Foucault and Erwing Goffman? If we now compare and contrast Goffman’s and Foucault’s explanations of how social order is made and remade. I looked at Goffman’s theory, he believes social order is produced through actions of individuals and their practises through living there lives.
Chapter 1 mainly discusses the three primary perspectives of sociology; functionalist, conflict, and symbolic interactionism. These perspectives offer uniquely conceptualized theoretical paradigms for explaining how society influences people, and vice versa. The symbolic interactionism & Theory The central idea of symbolic interactionism is that symbols are the key to understanding how we interpret the world and interact with each other. George H. Mead (1863-1931) developed the milestone of the symbolic interactionism. According to him, people attach meanings to symbols, and then they act according to their subjective interpretation of these symbols.