Weebly



SOCI 121- SOCIOLOGY

[pic]

Letter of Contents

I. Course Structure

• Resource : Dr Kithsiri Edirisinghe, (MBBS, MSc, MD)

• Duration : 45 Hours of study , 08 sessions

• Method of Delivery : Lecture presentations , discussions , videos

• Evaluation methodology : Debates, quizzes , role play , Vivas , MCQ and structured written examinations

II. Syllabus

1. Course structure

OBJECTIVES

Sociology provides a clear picture of various social structures in the world which helps nurse to interact more efficiently when dealing with clients from different cultures.

COURSE DESCRIPTION

❖ Allocated total number of hours is 45hrs

❖ Lecturer Healthcare professional

❖ Methods of instructions are lectures, debates and group discussions

❖ Performances are evaluated by through quizzes, assignments and vivas during the sessions.

❖ Term exam papers include MCQ, structured essays and essay questions.

REFERENCES

1. David.M.N.,Sociology-Exploring the Architecture of Everyday Life,

4thed, Pine Forge, 2002

2. Roger.E., The ways of Religion-An introduction to the Major Traditions, Oxford, 1999

2.2 Course outline

1. Introduction to Sociology – 02 hours

• What is Sociology

• Definitions of Sociology

• Importance of Study Sociology

• Sociological

2. Culture, Society and the Individual – 03 hours

• What is culture

• Language

• Elements of Culture

• Organization of a culture

• Norms and Values

3. Family - 02 hours

• Characteristics of Family

• Family Patterns

• Forms of Family

4. Marriage – 03 hours

• Definition of Marriage

• Forms of Marriage

5. Socialization – 04 hours

• Socialization

• Development in children

• Resocialization

6. Gender and Sexuality – 03 hours

• Sexual Differentiation

• Sex Vs Gender

• Gender roles over the Life span

• Social Inequalities between Men and Women

• Feminist Theories

7. Social Interaction and Everyday life – 03 hours

• Civil Inattention

• Non Verbal Communication

• Face and culture

• Social rules and Talk

• Encounters

• Impression management

8. Stratification and Class Structure 03 hours

• Social Stratification

• Basic Systems of Stratification

• Theories of Stratification

9. Ethnicity and Race – 03 hours

• Ethnicity

• Racism

• Prejudice and Discrimination

• Stereotypes and Scapegoats

10. Deviance and Crime - 03 hours

• Norms, Conformity

• Social Control

• Deviance

• Crimes

11. Education - 03 hours

• Development of Literacy and Schooling

• Origins of Development of Education System

• Functions of Education

• Consequences of Education

12. Religion - 03 hours

• What is Religion

• Characteristics of Religion

• Major Religions of the World

13. Population – 03 hours

• Statistical measures

• Industrial revolution

• The third world

• Population Growth, Environment and Poverty

1. Introduction to Sociology

1. What is Society ?

A society, or a human society, is a group of people related to each other through persistent relations, or a large social grouping sharing the same geographical or virtual territory, subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural expectations. Human societies are characterized by patterns of relationships (social relations) between individuals who share a distinctive culture and institutions; a given society may be described as the sum total of such relationships among its constituent members. In the social sciences, a larger society often evinces stratification and/or dominance patterns in subgroups.

Insofar as it is collaborative, a society can enable its members to benefit in ways that would not otherwise be possible on an individual basis; both individual and social (common) benefits can thus be distinguished, or in many cases found to overlap.

A society can also consist of like-minded people governed by their own norms and values within a dominant, larger society. This is sometimes referred to as a subculture, a term used extensively within criminology.

More broadly, a society may be described as an economic, social, or industrial infrastructure, made up of a varied collection of individuals. Members of a society may be from different ethnic groups. A society can be a particular ethnic group, such as the Saxons; a nation state, such as Bhutan; or a broader cultural group, such as a Western society. The word society may also refer to an organized voluntary association of people for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes. A "society" may even, though more by means of metaphor, refer to a social organism such as an ant colony or any cooperative aggregate such as, for example, in some formulations of artificial intelligence.

Society is made up of individuals who have agreed to work together for mutual benefit. It can be a very broad term, as we can make generalizations about what the whole of Western society believes, or it can be a very narrow definition, describing only a small group of people within a given community. But no matter the size, and no matter the link that binds a society together, be it religious, geographic, professional or economic, society is shaped by the relationships between individuals.

There has been much debate over what makes a society successful. Philosopher Thomas Hobbes believed that without society, human life would be "nasty, brutish and short." Man's natural state, he argued, would be to preserve only oneself -- a man without society would steal another family's food, seduce other men's wives and kill anyone who got in his way. Of course, the same man would be in constant danger of those things happening to him, his wife and his children. What people needed, therefore, was a society, which would provide protection by subjecting everyone to a set of rules. But the number of governments, tribes and communities today demonstrate that there's no single way to form or govern a society.

Philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau dubbed the set of rules that a society lives by "the social contract." In other words, people must play a part in agreeing to certain laws and in choosing a given leader. If people lose that right, then society won't function as well. To return to Coach Lombardi's area of expertise, a society without an agreed-upon code of conduct would be like football without rules or a referee. People will cooperate and commit to a society only as long as they can choose the person who mediates and voice an opinion on the rules.

It's interesting, then, to observe the effects of the Internet on society. On the Internet, there's no referee, and the rules that govern our interpersonal contact don't seem to hold much sway. With the anonymity provided by a screen name, people feel like they can say things they wouldn't otherwise say, things that may even be hurtful or dangerous. And because you can do everything from order a pizza online to pay your electric bill, some academics worry that the Internet will erode our real societies, as people opt out of participating in real life in favor of participating in cyberspace. On the other hand, some would argue that the Internet has only made our societies larger -- a person in Delaware, after all, can now converse easily with a person in China. It will be interesting to see how technology shapes society in the future.

2. What is Sociology?

Sociology enables us to understand the structure and dynamics of society, and their intricate connections to patterns of human behavior and individual life changes. It examines the ways in which the forms of social structure -- groups, organizations, communities, social categories (such as class, sex, age, or race), and various social institutions (such as kinship, economic, political, or religious) affect human attitudes, actions, and opportunities.

The discipline also explores how both individuals and collectivities construct, maintain, and alter social organization in various ways. Sociology asks about the sources and consequences of change in social arrangements and institutions, and about the satisfactions and difficulties of planning, accomplishing, and adapting to such change. Areas studied in examining social dynamics include: culture, values, socialization, cooperation, conflict, power, exchange, inequality, deviance, social control, violence, order and social change.

The term "society" came from the Latin word societas, which in turn was derived from the noun socius ("comrade, friend, ally"; adjectival form socialis) used to describe a bond or interaction among parties that are friendly, or at least civil. Without an article, the term can refer to the entirety of humanity (also: "society in general", "society at large", etc.), although those who are unfriendly or uncivil to the remainder of society in this sense may be deemed to be "antisocial". Adam Smith wrote that a society "may subsist among different men, as among different merchants, from a sense of its utility without any mutual love or affection, if only they refrain from doing injury to each other."[1]

Used in the sense of an association, a society is a body of individuals outlined by the bounds of functional interdependence, possibly comprising characteristics such as national or cultural identity, social solidarity, language, or hierarchical organization.

Societies are social groups that differ according to subsistence strategies, the ways that humans use technology to provide needs for themselves. Although humans have established many types of societies throughout history, anthropologists tend to classify different societies according to the degree to which different groups within a society have unequal access to advantages such as resources, prestige, or power. Virtually all societies have developed some degree of inequality among their people through the process of social stratification, the division of members of a society into levels with unequal wealth, prestige, or power. Sociologists place societies in three broad categories: pre-industrial, industrial, and postindustrial.

ACTIVITY 01

Describe the different type of social groups .

3. Definitions of Sociology

Sociology is the study of society. It is a social science—a term with which it is sometimes synonymous—which uses various methods of empirical investigation[2] and critical analysis[3] to develop a body of knowledge about human social activity. For many sociologists the goal is to conduct research which may be applied directly to social policy and welfare, whilst others focus primarily on refining the theoretical understanding of social processes. Subject matter ranges from the micro level of individual agency and interaction to the macro level of systems and the social structure.[4]

Sociology is a very broad discipline. Its traditional focuses have included social stratification, social class, social mobility, religion, secularisation, law, and deviance. As all spheres of human activity are sculpted by social structure and individual agency, sociology has gradually expanded its focus to further subjects, such as health, medical, military and penal institutions, the Internet, and even the role of social activity in the development of scientific knowledge.

The range of social scientific methods has also broadly expanded. Social researchers draw upon a variety of qualitative and quantitative techniques. The linguistic and cultural turns of the mid-twentieth century led to increasingly interpretative, hermeneutic, and philosophic approaches to the analysis of society. Conversely, recent decades have seen the rise of new analytically, mathematically and computationally rigorous techniques, such as agent-based modelling and social network analysis.[5][6] Sociology should not be confused with various general social studies courses which bear little relation to sociological theory or social science research methodology

'Sociology' which had once been treated as social philosophy, or the philosophy of the history, emerged as an independent social science in 19th century. Auguste Comte, a Frenchman, is traditionally considered to be the father of sociology. Comte is accredited with the coining of the term sociology (in 1839). "Sociology" is composed of two words : socius, meaning companion or associate; and 'logos', meaning science or study. The etymological meaning of "sociology" is thus the science of society. John Stuart Mill, another social thinker and philosopher of the 19th century, proposed the word ethology for this new science. Herbert Spencer developed his systematic study of society and adopted the word "sociology" in his works. With the contributions of Spencer and others it (sociology) became the permanent name of the new science.

The question 'what is sociology' is indeed , a question pertaining to the definition of sociology. No student can rightfully be expected to enter on a field of study which is totally undefined or unbounded. At the same time, it is not an easy task to set some fixed limits to a field of study. It is true in the case of sociology. Hence it is difficult to give a brief and a comprehensive definition of sociology.

4. Importance of Studying Sociology

Of the various social sciences, sociology seems to be the youngest. It is gradually developing. Still it has remarkable progress. Its uses are recognized widely today. In modern times, there is a growing realization of the importance of the scientific study of social phenomena and the means of promoting what Prof. Giddings calls human adequacy (human welfare).

The study of sociology has a great value especially in modern complex society. Some of the uses of sociology are as follows.

1. Sociology studies society in a scientific way. Before the emergence of sociology, there was no systematic and scientific attempt to study human society with all its complexities. Sociology has made it possible to study society in a scientific manner. This scientific knowledge about human society is needed in order to achieve progress in various fields.

2. Sociology throws more light on the social nature of man. Sociology evolves deep into the social nature of man. It tells us why man is a social animal, why he lives in groups, communities and societies. It examines the relationship between individual and society, the impact of society on man and other matters.

3. Sociology improves our understanding of society and increases the power of social action, capabilities, talents and limitations. It enables him to adjust himself to the environment. Knowledge of society, social groups, social institutions, associations, their functions etc. helps us to lead an effective social life.

4. The study of sociology helps us to know not only our society and man but also others, their motives, aspirations, status, occupations, traditions, customs, institutions, cultures etc. In a huge industrialized society, our experience is comparatively limited. We can hardly have a comprehensive knowledge of our society and rarely have an idea regarding other societies. But we must have some insight into an appreciation of the motives by which others live and the conditions under which they exist. Such an insight we derive from the study of sociology.

5. The contribution of sociology is not less significant in enriching culture. Sociology has given training to us to have rational approach to questions concerning ourselves, our religion, customs, mores, institutions, values, ideologies etc. It has made us to become more objective, rational, critical and dispassionate. The study of societies has made people to become more broad-minded. It has impressed upon its students to overcome there prejudices,-misconceptions, egoistic ambitions, and class and religious, hatreds. It has made our life richer, fuller and meaningful.

6. Another aspect of the practical side of sociology is the study of great social institutions and the relation's of individuals of each one of them. The home and family, the school and education, the state and government, industry and work, religion and morality, marriage and family, law and legislation, property and government etc. are some of the main institutions, through which our society functions. More than that, they condition our life in countless ways. Knowledge of sociology may help to strengthen them to serve man better.

7. Sociology is useful as a teaching subject too. Sociology is a profession in which technical competence brings its own rewards. Sociologists, especially those trained in research procedures, are in increasing demand in business, Government, industry, city planning, race relations, social work, social welfare, supervision, advertising, communications, administration, and many other areas of community life. A few years ago, sociologists could only teach sociology in schools and colleges. But sociology has now become practical enough to be practiced outside of academic halls, areas of application of sociology in schools and colleges. Careers apart from teaching are now possible in sociology, which are coming more international levels.

8. The need for the study of sociology is greater especially in underdeveloped countries. Sociologists have now drawn the attention of economists regarding the social factors that have contributed to the economic backwardness of a few countries. Economists have now realized the importance of sociological knowledge in analyzing the economic affairs of country.

9. The study of society is of paramount importance in solving social problems. The present world is best with several social problems of great magnitude like poverty, beggary, unemployment, prostitution, over population, family disorganization, community disorganization, racial problems, crime, juvenile delinquency, gambling alcoholism, youth unrest, untouchability etc. A careful analysis of these problems is necessary in order to solve them. Sociology provides such an analysis.

10. Sociological knowledge is necessary for understanding and planning of society. Social planning has been made easier by sociology. Sociology is often considered a vehicle of social reform and social reorganization. It plays an important role in the reconstruction of society.

11. Study of society has helped several governments to promote the welfare of the tribal people. Not only the civilized-societies, but even the tribal societies are faced with several socio-economic and anthropologists regarding tribal societies and problems have helped many governments in undertaking various social welfare measures to promote the welfare of the tribal people. Efforts are now being made to treat the tribals on par with the rest of the civilized people.

12. Sociology has drawn our attention to the intrinsic worth and dignity of man. Sociology has been greatly responsible in changing our attitudes towards fellow human beings. It has helped people to become catholic in outlook and broad-minded in spirit. It has made people to become too lenient and patient towards others. It has minimized the mental distance and reduced the gap between different peoples and communities.

13. Sociology is of great practical help in the sense; it keeps us up-to date on modern social situations and developments. Sociology makes us to become more alert towards the changes and developments that take place around us. As a result, we come to know about our changed roles and expectations and responsibilities.

Activity 01 : Discuss the relation ship between Health and society

2. Culture, Society and the Individual

1. What is culture

The word culture has many different meanings.  For some it refers to an appreciation of good literature, music, art, and food.  For a biologist, it is likely to be a colony of bacteria or other microorganisms growing in a nutrient medium in a laboratory Petri dish.  However, for anthropologists and other behavioral scientists, culture is the full range of learned human behavior patterns.  The term was first used in this way by the pioneer English Anthropologist Edward B. Tylor in his book, Primitive Culture, published in 1871.  Tylor said that culture is "that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society."  Of course, it is not limited to men.  Women possess and create it as well.  Since Tylor's time, the concept of culture has become the central focus of anthropology.

Culture is a powerful human tool for survival, but it is a fragile phenomenon.  It is constantly changing and easily lost because it exists only in our minds.  Our written languages, governments, buildings, and other man-made things are merely the products of culture.  They are not culture in themselves.  For this reason, archaeologists can not dig up culture directly in their excavations.  The broken pots and other artifacts of ancient people that they uncover are only material remains that reflect cultural patterns--they are things that were made and used through cultural knowledge and skills.

A. Layers of Culture

There are very likely three layers or levels of culture that are part of your learned behavior patterns and perceptions.  Most obviously is the body of cultural traditions that distinguish your specific society.  When people speak of Italian, Samoan, or Japanese culture, they are referring to the shared language, traditions, and beliefs that set each of these peoples apart from others.  In most cases, those who share your culture do so because they acquired it as they were raised by parents and other family members who have it.

| | |

| |[pic] |

| | |

The second layer of culture that may be part of your identity is a subculture In complex, diverse societies in which people have come from many different parts of the world, they often retain much of their original cultural traditions.  As a result, they are likely to be part of an identifiable subculture in their new society.  The shared cultural traits of subcultures set them apart from the rest of their society.  Examples of easily identifiable subcultures in the United States include ethnic groups such as Vietnamese Americans, African Americans, and Mexican Americans.  Members of each of these subcultures share a common identity, food tradition, dialect or language, and other cultural traits that come from their common ancestral background and experience.  As the cultural differences between members of a subculture and the dominant national culture blur and eventually disappear, the subculture ceases to exist except as a group of people who claim a common ancestry.  That is generally the case with German Americans and Irish Americans in the United States today.  Most of them identify themselves as Americans first.  They also see themselves as being part of the cultural mainstream of the nation.

|[pic] | |These Cuban American |

| | |women in Miami, Florida |

| | |have a shared subculture |

| | |identity that is reinforced |

| | |through their language, |

| | |food, and other traditions |

The third layer of culture consists of cultural universals.  These are learned behavior patterns that are shared by all of humanity collectively.  No matter where people live in the world, they share these universal traits.  Examples of such "human cultural" traits include:

| 1.  |communicating with a verbal language consisting of a limited set of sounds and grammatical rules for |

| |constructing sentences |

| 2. |using age and gender to classify people (e.g., teenager, senior citizen, woman, man) |

| 3. |classifying people based on marriage and descent relationships and having kinship terms to refer to |

| |them (e.g., wife, mother, uncle, cousin) |

| 4. |raising children in some sort of family setting |

| 5. |having a sexual division of labor (e.g., men's work versus women's work) |

| 6. |having a concept of privacy |

| 7. |having rules to regulate sexual behavior |

| 8. |distinguishing between good and bad behavior |

| 9. |having some sort of body ornamentation |

|10. |making jokes and playing games |

|11. |having art |

|12. |having some sort of leadership roles for the implementation of community decisions |

While all cultures have these and possibly many other universal traits, different cultures have developed their own specific ways of carrying out or expressing them.  For instance, people in deaf subcultures frequently use their hands to communicate with sign language instead of verbal language.  However, sign languages have grammatical rules just as verbal ones do.

b. Culture and Society

Culture and society is not the same thing.  While cultures are complexes of learned behavior patterns and perceptions, societies are groups of interacting organisms.  People are not the only animals that have societies.  Schools of fish, flocks of birds, and hives of bees are societies.  In the case of humans, however, societies are groups of people who directly or indirectly interact with each other.  People in human societies also generally perceive that their society is distinct from other societies in terms of shared traditions and expectations.

While human societies and cultures are not the same thing, they are inextricably connected because culture is created and transmitted to others in a society.  Cultures are not the product of lone individuals.  They are the continuously evolving products of people interacting with each other.  Cultural patterns such as language and politics make no sense except in terms of the interaction of people.  If you were the only human on earth, there would be no need for language or government.

c. Is Culture Limited to Humans?

| |

|  |[pic] |  |Non-human culture?  |

| | | |This orangutan mother is |

| | | |using a specially prepared |

| | | |stick to "fish out" food from |

| | | |a crevice.  She learned this |

| | | |skill and is now teaching it |

| | | |to her child who is hanging |

| | | |on her shoulder and intently |

| | | |watching. |

There is a difference of opinion in the behavioral sciences about whether or not we are the only animal that creates and uses culture.  The answer to this question depends on how narrow culture is defined.  If it is used broadly to refer to a complex of learned behavior patterns, then it is clear that we are not alone in creating and using culture.  Many other animal species teach their young what they themselves learned in order to survive.  This is especially true of the chimpanzees and other relatively intelligent apes and monkeys.  Wild chimpanzee mothers typically teach their children about several hundred food and medicinal plants.  Their children also have to learn about the dominance hierarchy and the social rules within their communities.  As males become teenagers, they acquire hunting skills from adults.  Females have to learn how to nurse and care for their babies.  Chimpanzees even have to learn such basic skills as how to perform sexual intercourse.  This knowledge is not hardwired into their brains at birth.  They are all learned patterns of behavior just as they are for humans.

d. Elements of Culture

There are 07 elements of culture ; Language , norms , values , beliefs and ideologies , Social Collectives,  cultural integration Statuses and Roles. They are described as follows:

1. Language.

Language is a set of symbols used to assign and communicate meaning. It enables us to name or label the things in our world so we can think and communicate about them.

Language may refer either to the specifically human capacity for acquiring and using complex systems of communication, or to a specific instance of such a system of complex communication. The scientific study of language in any of its senses is called linguistics.

The approximately 3000–6000 languages that are spoken by humans today are the most salient examples, but natural languages can also be based on visual rather than auditory stimuli, for example in sign languages and written language. Codes and other kinds of artificially constructed communication systems such as those used for computer programming can also be called languages. A language in this sense is a system of signs for encoding and decoding information. The English word derives ultimately from Latin lingua, "language, tongue", via Old French. This metaphoric relation between language and the tongue exists in many languages and testifies to the historical prominence of spoken languages.[1] When used as a general concept, "language" refers to the cognitive faculty that enables humans to learn and use systems of complex communication.

The human language faculty is thought to be fundamentally different from and of much higher complexity than those of other species. Human language is highly complex in that it is based on a set of rules relating symbols to their meanings, thereby forming an infinite number of possible innovative utterances from a finite number of elements. Language is thought to have originated when early hominids first started cooperating, adapting earlier systems of communication based on expressive signs to include a theory of other minds and shared intentionality. This development is thought to have coincided with an increase in brain volume. Language is processed in many different locations in the human brain, but especially in Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas. Humans acquire language through social interaction in early childhood, and children generally speak fluently when they are around three years old. The use of language has become deeply entrenched in human culture and, apart from being used to communicate and share information, it also has social and cultural uses, such as signifying group identity, social stratification and for social grooming and entertainment. The word "language" can also be used to describe the set of rules that makes this possible, or the set of utterances that can be produced from those rules.

All languages rely on the process of semiosis to relate a sign with a particular meaning. Spoken and signed languages contain a phonological system that governs how sounds or visual symbols are used to form sequences known as words or morphemes, and a syntactic system that governs how words and morphemes are used to form phrases and utterances. Written languages use visual symbols to represent the sounds of the spoken languages, but they still require syntactic rules that govern the production of meaning from sequences of words. Languages evolve and diversify over time, and the history of their evolution can be reconstructed by comparing modern languages to determine which traits their ancestral languages must have had for the later stages to have occurred. A group of languages that descend from a common ancestor is known as a language family. The languages that are most spoken in the world today belong to the Indo-European family, which includes languages such as English, Spanish, Russian and Hindi; the Sino-Tibetan languages, which include Mandarin Chinese, Cantonese and many others; Semitic languages, which include Arabic, Amharic and Hebrew; and the Bantu languages, which include Swahili, Zulu, Shona and hundreds of other languages spoken throughout Africa.

2. Norms.

Norms as humanly created rules for behavior. The production of norms.The need for orderly, stable, predictable interactions . The role of power in the production of norms..The reification of norms. Renegotiating and changing norms.

Social norms are the accepted behaviors within a society or group. This sociological and social psychological term has been defined as "the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. These rules may be explicit or implicit. They have also been described as the "customary rules of behavior that coordinate our interactions with others."[1]

Norms vary and evolve not only through time but also vary from between social classes and social groups. What is deemed to be acceptable dress, speech or behavior in one social group may not be accepted in another. Essentially, social norms are rules that define the behaviour that is expected, required, or acceptable in particular circumstances. They are learned through social interaction.

Deference to social norms maintains one's acceptance and popularity within a particular group. Social norms can be enforced formally (e.g., through sanctions) or informally (e.g., through body language and non-verbal communication cues). By ignoring social norms, one risks becoming unacceptable, unpopular or even an outcast.

As social beings, individuals learn when and where it is appropriate to say certain things, to use certain words, to discuss certain topics or wear certain clothes, and when it is not. Thus, knowledge about cultural norms is important for impression management,[2] which is an individual's regulation of their nonverbal behaviour. One also comes to know through experience what types of people he/she can and cannot discuss certain topics with or wear certain types of dress around. Typically, this knowledge is derived through experience.

Types of norms.

a. Folkways.

Sociologists speak of at least four types of norms: folkways, mores, taboos, and laws. Folkways, sometimes known as “conventions” or “customs,” are standards of behavior that are socially approved but not morally significant. For example, belching loudly after eating dinner at someone else's home breaks an American folkway

Folkways, in sociology, are any informal mores characterized by being followed through imitation and mild social pressure but not strictly enforced or put into law. The term folkways, introduced by American sociologist William Graham Sumner in 1907, sees some use, especially in more modern sociology.[1] A specific practice within a wider system of mores is known as a custom, so that this term is sometimes used as the approximate singular of "mores."

b. Mores.

Mores are norms of morality. Breaking mores, like attending church in the nude, will offend most people of a culture. Mores, in sociology, are any given society's particular norms, virtues, or values. The word mores (English pronunciation: /ˈmɔəreɪz/ or /ˈmɔəriːz/, from the Latin plural mōrēs; singular mōs) is a plurale tantum term borrowed from Latin, which has been used in the English language since the 1890s.

c. Taboos.

A taboo is a strong social prohibition (or ban) relating to any area of human activity or social custom that is sacred and or forbidden based on moral judgment, religious beliefs and or scientific consensus. Breaking the taboo is usually considered objectionable or abhorrent by society. The term comes from the Tongan word tabu, meaning set apart or forbidden, and appears in many Polynesian cultures. In those cultures, a tabu (or tapu or kapu) Often has specific religious associations. American author Herman Melville, in his first novel "Typee" describes both the origin and use of the word in Polynesian culture. "The word itself (taboo) is used in more than one signification. It is sometimes used by a parent to a child, when in the exercise of parental authority forbids the child to perform a particular action. Anything opposed to the ordinary customs of the islands, although not expressly prohibited is said to be "taboo"." When an activity or custom is taboo, it is forbidden and interdictions are implemented concerning it, such as the ground set apart as a sanctuary for criminals. Some taboo activities or customs are prohibited under law and transgressions may lead to severe penalties. On the other hand taboos result in embarrassment, shame, and rudeness. Although critics and/or dissenters may oppose taboos, they are put into place to avoid disrespect to any given authority, be it legal, moral and/or religious.

d. Rituals.

A ritual is a set of actions, performed mainly for their symbolic value. It may be prescribed by a religion or by the traditions of a community. The term usually excludes actions which are arbitrarily chosen by the performers.

The field of ritual studies has seen a number of conflicting definitions of the term. One given by Kyriakidis (2007) is that Ritual is an outsider's or "etic" category for a set activity (or set of actions) which to the outsider seems irrational, non-contiguous, or illogical. The term can be used also by the insider or "emic" performer as an acknowledgement that this activity can be seen as such by the uninitiated onlooker.

A ritual may be performed on specific occasions, or at the discretion of individuals or communities. It may be performed by a single individual, by a group, or by the entire community; in arbitrary places, or in places especially reserved for it; either in public, in private, or before specific people. A ritual may be restricted to a certain subset of the community, and may enable or underscore the passage between religious or social states.

The purposes of rituals are varied; with religious obligations or ideals, satisfaction of spiritual or emotional needs of the practitioners, strengthening of social bonds, social and moral education, demonstration of respect or submission, stating one's affiliation, obtaining social acceptance or approval for some event—or, sometimes, just for the pleasure of the ritual itself.

Rituals of various kinds are a feature of almost all known human societies, past or present. They include not only the various worship rites and sacraments of organized religions and cults, but also the rites of passage of certain societies, atonement and purification rites, oaths of allegiance, dedication ceremonies, coronations and presidential inaugurations, marriages and funerals, school "rush" traditions and graduations, club meetings, sports events, Halloween parties, veterans parades, Christmas shopping and more. Many activities that are ostensibly performed for concrete purposes, such as jury trials, execution of criminals, and scientific symposia, are loaded with purely symbolic actions prescribed by regulations or tradition, and thus partly ritualistic in nature. Even common actions like hand-shaking and saying hello may be termed rituals.

3. Values.

Values are anything members of a culture aspire to or hold in high esteem. Values are things to be achieved, things considered of great worth or value. Values are human creations. They are social products.Values can and do become reified.Values can be renegotiated and changed. 

While people and groups may disagree as to which are most important, Americans generally value the following. 

• Democracy, liberty, freedom, independence, autonomy, and individual rights.

• Capitalism, competition, hard work, self-discipline, and success.

• Wealth, prosperity, materialism, and consumerism.

• Equity, fairness, and justice.

• Equality of opportunity.

• Love, compassion, humanitarianism, charity, service, and respect for others.

• Tolerance, forgiveness, and acceptance.

• Faith, religion, family, conformity, and tradition.

• Nationalism, patriotism, civic responsibility, and loyalty.

• Health, happiness, and life.

• Education, knowledge, science, technology, and innovation.

Complimentary and conflicting values.

• A groups values tend to compliment and support one another. They tend to be in agreement and make sense when considered together. A careful look at the values above reveals “sets” of values that seem to go together.

• However, it is also possible for values to contradict and conflict with each other, especially in complex modern industrial societies.  For example, competition and success can be seen as contradictory to humanitarianism, compassion, service and self-sacrafice; while equity and justice contradict forgiveness and conformity and tradition contradict tolerance and acceptance. 

• In fact, many social and political problems can be seen as conflicts between groups emphasizing different values.

Activity 02 Find the relationship between norms and values.

4. Beliefs and ideologies.

a. Beliefs

Beliefs are the things members of a culture hold to be true. They are the "facts" accepted by all or most members. Beliefs are not limited to religious statements, but include all the things a people know and accept as true, including common sense everyday knowledge.

Like all other cultural elements, beliefs are humanly created and produced. They are collective social agreements produced during interaction and reified over time. What is "true" or "factual" for a given people is what they collectively agree to be true at that point in time.

Beliefs can and do change, especially in modern industrial societies. Today we laugh at things our grandparents used to believe and chances are that our grandchildren will laugh at many of our beliefs as well.This suggests that their is no absolute knowledge or absolute truth. All knowledge and truth is relative.

b. Ideologies

Ideologies are integrated and connected systems of beliefs. Sets of beliefs and assumptions connected by a common theme or focus. They are often are associated with specific social institutions or systems and serve to legitimize those systems.Some prominent American ideologies.

• Capitalism.

• Christianity (Protestantism).

• Individualism

• Sexism.

• Racism.

Ideologies are, themselves, often related and connected to each other in complex ideological systems, such that one ideology "makes sense" when considered with another. They also often serve to legitimize each other. Religious ideologies often encompass or subsume many of a culture's ideologies, giving them added legitimacy.

However, it is also possible for a culture to hold ideologies that are conflicting and contradictory

5. Social Collectives.

Social collectives such as groups, organizations, communities, institutions, classes, and societies are also collectively produced symbolic social constructions. Social collectives are symbolic entities. They are defined into existence when people define themselves as a group or are defined as a group by others. They can and do become reified over time, such that they are seen and treated as real objective entities. However, they remain fundamentally symbolic entities and as such can be renegotiated and redefined.

The symbolic nature of social collectives means that they are typically justified and maintained by ideological systems and ritualistic behavior.Although symbolic entities, social collectives have a real impact on our lives.

• Collectives as contexts for interaction.

• Collectives and local cultures.

• Collectives, status, roles, identity, and the self.

6. Cultural Integration. & Statuses

 Cultural integration refers to how interconnected, complimentary, and mutually supportive the various elements of culture are:

• Diversity, complexity, and integration.

• Variation within modern mass cultures.

• Diversity in historical and cultural traditions.

• Subcultures.

• Counter-cultures.

• Local cultures.

A. Status, although related, is not a measure of a persons wealth, power, and prestige. To speak of "high" or "low" status is somewhat misleading. A status is a slot or position within a group or society. They tell us who people are and how they "fit" into the group. Status and group membership. Statuses as collective social agreements that become reified over time, but which can and do change.Society as a network of inter-related statuses. The multiplicity of statuses filled by individuals in modern societies.Ascribed and achieved statuses.Master statuses--age, sex, race, class.Status, prestige, wealth, and power.Status inconsistency.

7. Roles

Roles are norms specifying the rights and responsibilities associated with a particular status. The term role is often used to mean both a position in society and role expectations associated with it.

Roles define what a person in a given status can and should do, as well as what they can and should expect from others. Roles provide a degree of stability and predictability, telling how we should respond to others and giving us an idea of how others should respond to us.

Roles are negotiated and produced during interaction, and often become reified over time. However, roles can be renegotiated and changed. Role set, role strain, role conflict, and role transition.Roles, identity, and the self.

Activity 03 :discuss the different views on Organization of a culture

3. Family

3.1 The introduction

The family unit in terms of applied sociology is a micro level society, or the smallest structure of society within our vast world of societies. It consists of more than one person that forms the most intimate and personal of groups. Though it may be a very small group of very like-minded people there are still guidelines in place that govern the functionality of the family and create behaviors within the group which makes the tiny society distinguishable from others.

Applied sociology is used to find and address the problems within a society by using various methods that are based on a theory and then tested using both evidence that can be measured and evidence that is more sensory. Looking at your family as a small society you can better understand how these methods can be used to analyze and correct your own problems.

Within the family unit there are still social roles that the family members take on and that are aware to everyone in the group. For example, traditionally the father is the head of the family with the mother a close second, a partner. However, the unique family structures that are becoming prevalent in America are making for interesting questions as to the roles within the family and what affects it will lead to in society outside the family. It is not uncommon to now find single parent led families, grandparents raising grandchildren, step families that combine two family units and other combinations.

Still the fact remains that there is a power hierarchy within the family society and each member has their societal roles. Using applied sociology within the family unit is very similar to practicing it at the micro level. The micro level focuses on the smallest societies which includes the family. Like any applied sociologist in order to use the science within your society you must first understand that society.

It should be easy as a member of your family to recognize the key qualities that form the family society. There four areas in which a micro society like a family unit creates the ideas that govern it.

• Socialization : Socialization is the creation of shared beliefs and ideals that led to the norms of a micro society. Socialization is the indicator as to how one should interact within a society. An example of socialization would be sharing every meal at the table instead of in front of the television because that is family discussion time.

• Segregation on the other hand is the separation of parts of a society that are found to function better when separated from the whole. Even within the family there are some activities that people are far more comfortable performing in their own space on their own that could otherwise lead to conflict. It’s like each family member having their own room.

• Ritual is also involved in micro level societies. In this circumstance ritual refers to actions that are repeated, typical interactions for the society in a certain situation. They are the action that come second nature within the setting and expected. Tucking a child before bed can be a ritual within a family unit.

• Sanctioning is the fourth social control that makes up a micro society. This is the one on one interaction of reading another person’s actions and expressions to determine the appropriate behavior within the society. By interpreting these gestures and expressions members of the society react to different situations as they understand they should in that moment. It’s the standard I’ll count to three routine that parents use when a child is about to be reprimanded.

By understanding how these elements create the family unit you can better understand the interactions between the family members and the ideas and actions that link you together as a miniature society. As a society the family has overall institutions and policies as well as smaller components that may not affect every member in the same way.

If the larger policies that affect the group as a whole aren’t functioning then the family unit will experience stress. When considering the policies that govern the family every member must be taken into consideration since each individual forms the whole. However, the social roles of each member must also be taken into consideration. The head of the family is the one who keeps order by setting rules and enforcing them.

In the case of problematic children it could be a refusal to recognize their social role in the family. By helping them understand their social role and explaining how it factors into the society children can better understand the need for such regulation. This is especially true if you actively involve the child and really incorporate their needs and thoughts into the policies that are set.

By using the interview method of applied sociology you can discover what factors are important to each family member, what isn’t working or isn’t fair within the current policies, and get an idea as to the changes that can correct problems. Interviewing is a direct way to gain information that can be both measured or a sensory feeling as well as give you the opportunity to observe a family member which is another applied sociology method for gaining valuable information.

As we take in mass media and other media such as books and newspapers it is a form of communication. We learn from and are influenced by the media we consume thus affecting how we communicate with others as well. Think about someone who watches nothing but MTV, their vernacular is going to be decidedly more youthful and likely laced with the newest catch phrases and slang.

2. Characteristics of Family

The characteristics of a family are as follows:

i. Universality: There is no human society in which some form of the family does not appear. Malinowski writes the typical family a group consisting of mother, father and their progeny is found in all communities ,savage, barbarians and civilized. The irresistible sex need, the urge for reproduction and the common economic needs have contributed to this universality.

I. Emotional basis: The family is grounded in emotions and sentiments. It is based on our impulses of mating, procreation, maternal devotion, fraternal love and parental care. It is built upon sentiments of love, affection, sympathy, cooperation and friendship.

II. Limited size: The family is smaller in size. As a primary group its size is necessarily limited. It is a smallest social unit.

III. Formative influence: The family welds an environment which surrounds trains and educates the child. It shapes the personality and moulds the character of its members. It emotionally conditions the child.

IV. Nuclear position in the social structure: The family is the nucleus of all other social organizations. The whole social structure is built of family units.

V. Responsibility of the members: The members of the family has certain responsibilities, duties and obligations. Maclver points out that in times of crisis men may work and fight and die for their country but they toil for their families all their lives.

VI. Social regulation: The family is guarded both by social taboos and by legal regulations. The society takes precaution to safeguard this organization from any possible breakdown.

3. Family Patterns

Throughout history, family composition has affected children's lives in important ways. The size and structure of the family and its capacity to sustain itself has played a critical role in how children are raised, their level of formal education, and whether or not they participate in the labor force. The principal household structures are nuclear, extended, and blended. The nuclear household contains two generations, parents and children. Extended families are multigenerational and include a wide circle of kin and servants. In blended households–the result of divorce or the death of a spouse followed by remarriage and a new generation of children–mothers and fathers can be both biological parents and STEPPARENTS simultaneously.

Patterns of Family Structure through the Modern Era

Household structure took a variety of forms throughout Europe and North America during the fifteenth to eighteenth centuries. Research during the late twentieth century on European family systems situated these forms within sharp geographical boundaries over time. Those models, however, have since been adjusted, with consensus that geographical areas held more than one family pattern contemporaneously. Moreover, household systems sometimes changed over historical cycles. Finally, households were not necessarily autonomous but part of a wider network of relations with the community. The nuclear family, with late marriage preceded by a term of service in another household, was one common form in northwest Europe and North America, while multi-generational households were common to southern and eastern Europe. In Albania, Bulgaria, and European Russia as well as some parts of Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal, new households were formed when large ones divided or small ones combined. Marriage was not restricted to one son or daughter, there were few servants save for the rich, and households were home to multiple married couples. Children thus were supervised by co-resident adult kin. Elsewhere, in parts of central and southern France, Italy, Austria, and Germany, nuclear households combined with the fission and fusion processes of the East and South. Others contained two residential married couples consisting of parents and a married son. This usually occurred when there was not enough land to start a separate household.

Age at marriage and life expectancy were two important variables influencing household structure. Early marriage permitted a longer cycle of fertility than marrying late. Late marriage for women, from the mid to late twenties, was a means of restricting the number of births per household. Late marriage for men may or may not have affected the household's fertility cycle. It did, however, impinge upon the number of years fathers would be available to their children. The same was true for mothers. In fact one or both parents could be expected to die during the child's lifetime during the early modern period, creating the potential for economic hardship. There was a large percentage of ORPHANS, many of whom were farmed out to other families as servants, laborers, or apprentices. They lived with their employers rather than in their natal households. In other cases, the death of a parent brought remarriage, new stepsiblings, and the constitution of a blended family. This was common, for example, in New England and the Chesapeake area of North America during the colonial era. Children too died young. INFANT MORTALITY rates were very high during the early modern period, making it highly uncertain whether parents could expect their children to reach an age when they could help support the family household or sustain them in their elderly years.

INHERITANCE practices also affected household structure. Primogeniture in the nuclear family insured that the patrimony remained intact, under the authority of the eldest son upon his father's death. That son was expected to marry and carry on the family's future over time. In a stem family, common in Austria, brothers might work for the eldest sibling but would not be allowed to marry or to inherit. Sisters might marry or take vows, yet only the eldest son would inherit the family estate. Partible inheritance, on the other hand, allowed for the formation of separate households among all children. Extended families, whose size was generally limited by high mortality and low fertility, practiced joint inheritance, that is, shared ownership of their patrimony.

During the early modern period another important variable influencing household structure was the family's proximity to a means of production and its ability to sustain itself. Climate, geography, the productivity of the land, and the strength of the labor market all shaped household composition, and consequently childhood experience, in important ways. They helped determine whether or not people married and at what age, whether to try and restrict fertility, whether children worked and/or went to school, and whether or not they would be able to live at home under the supervision of their parents. Affluent households might have had less incentive to restrict fertility since they did not depend on offspring to contribute to the family economy. They did quite frequently, however, restrict marriage in order to keep the family patrimony intact. Modest households, however, presented another case, for there children were an economic liability. Children could remain under the family hearth only if there was a viable means of sustaining them. Otherwise they were sent to work as domestic servants, laborers, or apprentices, living in employers' houses. Frequently in northwest Europe and North America, marriage took place only when the couple could afford to set up an independent household. Life-cycle servitude followed by late marriage was common because it was only at that stage that couples had accumulated the resources needed to set up the customary separate household. In extended families, on the other hand, where married children were joining a preestablished household, age at marriage was normally younger. The main consideration in deciding whether to marry was whether the new couple had the means to sustain a new family. Ten to 15 percent of the population never achieved the means to marry.

Until the end of the nineteenth century, land was perhaps the most important financial resource for the majority of the population. Its availability and how it was managed affected household composition. Firm assurance of land tenure, even in conditions where land was scarce, could encourage the establishment of more complex households, while adequate landed resources lent itself to the establishment of small, independent households. Peasant families required an adequate but not excess number of children to work the land. The nuclear household ideally contained several children spaced widely so that the oldest had left the household by the time the youngest came along, thus avoiding surplus mouths to feed. This was achieved by postponing marriage to the late twenties for men and early twenties for women, a practice that shortened their years of fertility. In addition, parents often sent their children to live and serve other households in need.

Yet not all peasants were able to avail themselves of land. Population growth and land shortage, characteristic of eighteenth-century North America, for example, forced sons to leave the family hearth. Landless villagers who sought employment where they could find it may not have formally married but procreated. This often resulted in pools of abandoned women and children. On the other hand, some peasant economies were replaced by more commercialized systems in which rural households were centers of production associated with the textile industry. Free markets created a greater demand for labor, drawing families into the production process. Children could remain at home rather than be farmed out to service if there was work allowing them to contribute to the sustenance of the household. This was also true when the center of production moved outside the home, a phenomenon characteristic of the nineteenth century. Fathers and children rather than mothers went to work in factories to support the family. In short, household composition and children's ability to remain living with their parents depended heavily on the availability of economic resources and employment.

The household as a center of production affected childhood experience. To age seven, even among slaveholders in North America, children were generally exempt from work. But from then on they were gradually brought into the labor force. On farms young children collected firewood and worms on the vines, herded livestock, weeded, and helped around the house. After age ten boys might be trained outside in fields and stables to learn to be farmers or herders, while girls were tracked into domestic work. By the eighteenth century children were helping with sewing, spinning, lace making, and nail making. Slave children in North America had a similar experience, with light chores to age six and domestic or farm labor after age ten. In midwest and western North America, where the labor market was small, gender roles were less rigid than normal. Girls worked in the tobacco fields and did herding, harvesting, and hunting while boys took on domestic duties as well as working outside. On the frontier, children assumed duties earlier than in other regions. The young panned gold as well as performing a variety of domestic chores.

When the household did not offer a means of production it affected children in dramatic ways. In the nineteenth century they left school at the minimum required by the state and were put to work in factories, much to the horror of social reformers, and they were not normally under parental supervision. Cotton mills and coal mines, industries with steam power and machinery, drew children into the adult labor market. In the cities poor children took to street selling. All the while, domestic service was one of the largest employers of child labor. At the beginning of the nineteenth century children were 10 percent of the labor force in the American Northeast; by 1832 they constituted 40 percent.

Childhood experience during the early modern period was thus affected in numerous ways by family structure. First, their primary caretakers differed according to the configuration of the household. In nuclear families, parents normally assumed responsibility for raising their children, while in extended and blended families other adults besides the parents might be involved in the lives of the children. That might include uncles, aunts, and GRANDPARENTS in multi-generational extended families, while in a blended family, where one parent has remarried and constituted a new family, children might be raised by both a stepparent and a parent. In a nuclear household, children had economic and emotional relationships with their parents alone, while in extended and blended families the network of ties was potentially much larger. Domestic production in the home facilitated both parents assuming responsibility for child rearing. In the nineteenth century, when production moved outside the domestic hearth, mothers assumed more authority over children while fathers worked outside.

Another way household structure affected childhood was that the quality of a child's experience was directly affected by whether he or she was expected to contribute to the financial well-being of the household and whether he or she would inherit land. The latter determined whether or not marriage would be possible. Broader trends affected ability to marry as well. In periods of demographic rise and land shortage, marriage was delayed and restricted, while the opposite conditions encouraged early marriage. Although parents assumed responsibility for children's religious instruction, until the early twentieth century imparting vocational skills that would serve the means of production constituted the primary responsibility in child rearing.

The Twentieth Century

The parameters of household structure and childhood experience described above dramatically changed for the middle class during the first half of the twentieth century. The steady decline of the birthrate in Europe and North America from the nineteenth century was an important underpinning of this transformation. During the twentieth century highly reliable BIRTH CONTROL methods and legalized abortion made the one- or two-child family the norm. During the 1990s, for example, the average number of births per household in Italy was only 1.2, and in Muslim communities of Europe such as Albania they averaged no more than 2.5. With fewer children, parents devoted more time to their proper care and upbringing. Other developments that contributed to the transformations in household structure and childhood experience included state intervention in child labor, rising real wages, COMPULSORY SCHOOL ATTENDANCE, and new ideals of childhood and family life. Extended families also declined. In the nineteenth century, a grandparent often lived with an adult child and her children, and rates of co-residence in Europe actually increased. But in the 1920s older people began more consistently to live separately, a sign of quiet change in family structure.

Increasing prosperity had the effect of extending childhood beyond the minimum that had been experienced by working-class families. For the more fortunate, life shifted from the farm, domestic manufacture, factory, or streets to the home where parents nurtured and emotionally protected youngsters and socialized them for the wider world. While poorer children continued to receive minimum schooling so that they could help support their families, middle-class children increasingly withdrew from the labor force, enrolled in schools, and became the focus of parental investment both emotionally and financially. The age at which children became wage earners for their families was thus delayed to the late teens or beyond, and the period in which children remained living in the parental household was prolonged. Ethnicity and social class produced variation. Immigrants to North America, for example, brought their own customs. If they were poor, they depended more on their children to be wage earners rather than students. Socially mobile immigrants placed greater emphasis on schooling and higher education.

The transition from wage earner to schoolchild did not occur in a linear fashion. World War II, for example, disrupted all aspects of family life and the family economy due to separation, death, and financial hardship. Women entered the workforce while men were at war, and children were forced to mature more precipitously. However, from the 1950s, childhood in Europe and America became a defined stage of the life cycle which preceded formal schooling and vocational training and was clearly separate from the adult world of work. Age at marriage dropped, birthrates were exceptionally high compared to preceding periods, and divorce rates were low. There was a sharp gendered division of childrearing responsibilities, with mothers at home, ideally giving affection and emotional support, and fathers out in the work force supporting their families. There was a marked preference for residential independence. In North America families moved to suburbs where, with economic prosperity, they could endow their children with material goods and better education. Middle-class children had more leisure time and money than ever before, but not without some cost: by the 1990s the majority of parents worked outside the home to maintain consumption standards, leaving children in care facilities.

The late twentieth century, especially in North America, produced quantitative leaps in the structure of the modern family. Divorce was relatively rare until the twentieth century. However, from 1900 onward it spread in both Europe and North America, becoming available to all social groups by the end of the century. By the 1980s birthrates had fallen dramatically and divorce rates had doubled or tripled. Women obtained greater property rights as well as the possibility of alimony and child support, making divorce a realistic option. Moreover, women could more effectively choose whether or not to marry. The result was a rise in singleparent households and households headed by women. Financial independence, coupled with desires for self-fulfillment and gender equality, caused more women than ever to enter the labor force. These developments reduced the amount of time mothers could spend with their children. Fathers took greater responsibility in nurturing their children as mothers contributed to the family economy, but in cases where both parents worked, parents in the United States struggled to find child care arrangements while parents in Europe usually placed children in day care facilities.

The late twentieth century ushered in new household structures, with unwed parents, gay parents, and remarried parents who brought with them a series of step-relations. Divorce, premarital pregnancy, and single parenthood lost some social stigma. Children in divorced families generally experienced independence at an earlier age. Some developed close relationships with more than one adult, and they developed new relationships with each parent. However, their sense of stability could not help but be disrupted by the breakup of the nuclear family unit, parents dating other people, and in some instances one or two new families being formed as a result of their parents' new relationships. Blended families require considerable emotional if not financial adjustment. Children with SAME-SEX PARENTS also face complex social and emotional issues, including building perspective on gender roles as well as dealing with the community's reception of their nontraditional family structure. For the most part, in the early twenty-first century gay marriage has not been legally recognized in the United States and has been only marginally recognized in Europe. Children face larger challenges from society when their parents' relationship does not fit more familiar role models and is not supported by the institutional structures that uphold heterosexual marriage. On balance, same-sex parents are exceptionally committed to caring for and nurturing their children. The twenty-first century thus witnesses greater social complexities in household structure and family patterns that inevitably impact childhood, itself a structure continually in transition.

3.3 Forms of Family

Types and forms of the family

On the basis of marriage: Family has been classified into three major types:

|Polygamous or polygynous family |

|Polyandrous family |

|Monogamous family |

|On the basis of the nature of residence family can be classified into three main forms. |

|Family of matrilocal residence |

|Family of patrilocal residence |

|Family of changing residence |

|On the basis of ancestry or descent family can be classified into two main types |

|Matrilineal family |

|Patrilineal family |

|On the basis of size or structure and the depth of generations family can be classified into two main types. |

|Nuclear or the single unit family |

|Joint family |

|On the basis of the nature of relations among the family members the family can be classified into two main types. |

|The conjugal family which consists of adult members among there exists sex relationship. |

|Consanguine family which consists of members among whom there exists blood relationship- brother and sister, father and son etc. |

4. Marriage –

a. Definition of Marriage

Marriage understood as the conjugal union of husband and wife really serves the good of children, the good of spouses, and the common good of society. The arguments against this view fail while the arguments for it succeed.

4.1 FORMS AND MEANINGS OF MARRIAGE

The English words "marriage" (from Latin maritus: husband) and "matrimony" (from Latin mater: mother) do not give us any clue as to the origin and meaning of the phenomenon we are trying to discuss here. The same is, of course, also true for similar terms with Latin roots in other European languages. More enlightening is the Germanic word "wedlock" (from Old English wedlac: pledge) which suggests that some sort of promise or contract, i.e., a special relationship between people is involved. Indeed, the best characterization of this relationship is perhaps provided by the German word Ehe (from Old High German êwa: law).

At any rate, when we compare marriages in different societies and different historical periods, we soon discover that marital partners everywhere have very definite duties toward each other. These duties may not always be spelled out in detail, but they are well understood and readily enforced in each case. Therefore, if we had to look for a common denominator in all the various forms of marriage known to mankind, we might very well find it in the element of mutual obligation. Naturally, this obligation itself can appear in many different forms. It may spring from an informal silent agreement, or it may be loudly proclaimed in a popular celebration. It may extend well beyond the couple to their offspring, to the families on both sides, and even to the entire community. It may be considered permanent, or it may end by mutual agreement or unilateral action. None of this matters here: Some officially recognized mutual obligation exists as long as the partners are married. Where men and women make love and have children without it we do not speak of a marriage, but of an affair, a dalliance, a romance, or a state of cohabitation.

As we can see, marriage is a very special phenomenon which involves more than housekeeping, sexual intercourse, and procreation. These "natural" human activities do not, by themselves, make a marriage. Its real meaning derives instead from social sanctions and expectations. Indeed, as such expectations change from one society to another, marriage is bound to change with them. Therefore, it is not very helpful to talk about marriage in generalities. It seems much more promising to list and describe the possible forms and functions of marriage, and for our present limited purpose it is perhaps best if we begin with a simple classification.

Traditionally, scholars have distinguished between four basic types of marriage:

1. Monogamy (i.e., one husband having one wife),

2. (polygamy:) polygyny (i.e., one husband having several wives),

3. (polygamy:) polyandry (i.e., several husbands having one wife),

4. group marriage (i.e., several husbands having several wives).

Monogamy is the prevalent form of marriage today. Polygyny and polyandry (collectively called polygamy) were once practiced in various parts of the world, but now seem to be on the decline. Group marriage has always been rare.

In Victorian times it was often believed that the four basic types of marriage were representative of different stages of human evolution. Thus, the earliest human beings had supposedly lived in a state of indiscriminate promiscuity until they established some form of group marriage. On the next stage of civilization they then entered a matriarchal phase characterized by polyandry. This, in turn, was followed by the patriarchal phase in which polygyny became dominant, and finally monogamy emerged as the crowning achievement of human progress. So far, this beguiling theory has not been confirmed, however. On the contrary, we have learned in the meantime that all four types of marriage have existed since earliest times and under all sorts of technological and economic conditions. Some very "primitive" peoples have always practiced monogamy, while some "civilized" peoples have been and still are polygamous. Moreover, we now understand that each of the four basic types of marriage can appear in several variations. For example, there is quite a difference between monogamy as a lifelong sacramental union and monogamy as a temporary civil contract. Polygyny can mean very different things under different circumstances, such as when a man takes a concubine, or when he marries his brother's widow, or when all his wives are sisters and live under his roof, or when they come from different families and maintain their own separate households. Polyandry can mean that a woman marries several brothers, of whom only the oldest is the official father of her children, or it can mean that she marries several unrelated men who all enjoy equal rights. Group marriage can be the accidental outgrowth of polygamous practices or a conscious "scientific" experiment.

Still, today there is little doubt that monogamy in one variation or another has always been the most common type of marriage. Both group marriage and polyandry have been found only in very few cultures, and polygyny, although permitted in many societies, has almost always been restricted to the wealthier classes. After all, it has never been cheap to purchase and then support more than one wife. Sometimes, of course, wives earned more than their keep as laborers, but even in that case their husband had to be powerful and influential, or he could not have created such an advantage for himself. The other men would have insisted on the same privilege, and this could not have been granted, because "naturally" there is only about one woman for every man. The biological balance between males and females is nearly even, and therefore polygamy can flourish only under exceptional conditions. Such conditions may result from a custom of female infanticide, from frequent wars, in which many men are killed, or from political and religious beliefs that accord a few persons some special prestige. However, where conditions are "normal", and where people are given a fairly equal chance, they tend to favor monogamy.

In view of this fact, one might perhaps call monogamy the "natural" form of marriage, although one should not conclude that everyone will always be happy with it, or that it is practical in every situation. Indeed, even in societies which insist on the strictest monogamy there is often an unofficial toleration of premarital and extramarital intercourse, such as in prostitution, adultery, and homosexual contact. Other societies are still more tolerant and establish monogamy as a flexible or "open" institution from the very start. In addition, they may also permit ready divorces in case of marital failure. At any rate, experience seems to show that one cannot impose a single form of monogamy, or even a single type of marriage on all men and women everywhere. One can, of course, proclaim an ideal, but in real life one has to allow for some improvisation and experimentation.

Nevertheless, even where husbands and wives are given the greatest sexual latitude, marriage is always considered important and is clearly distinguished from nonmarital unions. That is to say, generally speaking, it hardly matters how people arrange, maintain, or modify their marriages, as long as they get married at all. The details may differ from one culture to another, but the principle is nowhere in doubt: Marriage as such is good and must be supported. It also must be proclaimed and made visible to outsiders. For instance, in certain societies married persons are permitted or obliged to dress in a more "dignified" manner than spinsters and bachelors. By the same token, the marital state often carries particular privileges and is celebrated with splendid wedding ceremonies or sumptuous nuptials. These celebrations themselves usually follow some preordained pattern and require their own kind of clothing. In short, there seems to be something special about marriage which makes it different from any other human relationship, and which calls for some public acknowledgment. All of this indicates that marriage serves more than private personal needs, and that it does not exist for the benefit of the spouses alone. Instead, an obvious social interest is involved. It is further obvious that this interest affects not only the form, but also the meaning of marriage, and that the latter can therefore be understood only if one considers both its individual and social aspects.

Of course, in everyday life we normally talk about marriage without worrying much about its precise definition or all of its possible implications. Even professionals are often deliberately vague as they try to illuminate different facets of the phenomenon. Thus, depending on the context, we can find marriage described in very different terms from very different points of view. In American law, for example, marriage may be variously defined as an institution, a status, or a contract. Accordingly, in this country today politicians praise "the institution of marriage", bureaucrats ask other people to declare their "marital status", and lawyers draw up formal "marriage contracts" for their cautious clients, spelling out certain marital rights and duties in advance.

Actually, marriage contracts are neither new nor typically American. Many societies all over the world have known written marriage agreements, if not between bride and bridegroom, then between their respective families. Indeed, in feudal times a marriage contract could seal an alliance between whole tribes or nations. At present, such motives are still formalized on a more modest scale by our own upper classes. Thus, marriage contracts are customary where the possible loss or consolidation of huge family fortunes is involved. After all, in these cases the marriage could well determine the fate not only of two, but perhaps dozens or hundreds of individuals. Still, as a rule, these contracts cover only externals, such as dowry, allowances, financial settlements, inheritance, etc. They rarely say anything about marital conduct in the proper sense and do not concern themselves with questions of intimacy. Therefore, they are in fact mere safeguards or security measures. They accompany and protect, but do not constitute marriage.

This elementary difference has not always been clearly perceived. On the contrary, the fact that marital unions may be protected or guided by contracts and even contain some contractive elements, has led some modern observers to believe that marriage itself is a contract and nothing more. This view also seems to be supported by certain customs and regulations in other cultures. For example, Islamic law explicitly defines marriage (nikah) as "a contract for the legalization of sexual intercourse and the procreation of children". As such, it is strictly a private matter, requires no religious ceremony, and can be terminated under certain conditions. However, this definition was never meant to be exhaustive and should not be read dogmatically. After all, the custom of mut'ah marriages indicates that the procreation of children need not be essential to the contract. (For details see "Marriage in Islamic Countries.") Furthermore, since it has been possible in Islamic countries for fathers to contract compulsory marriages for their unwilling daughters, it cannot be assumed that the contracting parties are always bridegroom and bride. Similarly, in early medieval Europe, where marriage was a transfer of lordship over a woman from her father to her husband, the bride was not herself party to the contract, but rather its object. Her lot improved only under the influence of the Church, which gave marriage a religious meaning and elevated it to the status of a sacrament.

Needless to say, once marriage had been endowed with a sacramental character, it could no longer be called a contract in any sense of the word. First of all, it was now a vehicle of grace, and thus its essence lay not in any formal stipulations, but in the mutual decision of both partners which made them "one flesh" (Mark 10:8). This reduced both the influence of parents and the importance of economic considerations. As a result, for a while even secret marriages were permitted. Secondly, since the marital relationship mirrored that of Christ with his church, it could not be dissolved: "What God has joined together, let not man put asunder" (Mark 10:9). However, this latter change eventually came to be resented, and therefore the Protestant Reformation returned to the concept of marriage as a civil contract, making it once again possible for Christians to obtain a divorce. In Puritan England, John Milton called marriage a "covenant" which need not bind the parties forever.

The secularization of marriage was, of course, especially welcomed by the emerging bourgeoisie. The bourgeois lived in an increasingly sober world of commodities which were subject to sale, disposal, contract, and regulation, and thus he had less and less sympathy for mythical or supernatural notions. Finally, in the 18th century the German bourgeois philosopher Immanuel Kant felt enlightened enough to put the matter in its baldest terms when he defined marriage as "an association of two persons of different sex for the life-long mutual possession of their sexual qualities" (Rechtslehre, § 24}. Much could be said about this definition, but here we can simply point out that it is obviously not universal. The references to "two" persons and a "lifelong" mutual possession indicate that only a special form of Western marriage is being considered. Moreover, it should be noted that there is no mention of any contract. After all, irrevocable personal contracts are out of harmony with the modern demands for individual freedom. The lifelong possession of one human being by another is now alien to our whole system of justice. People can no longer legally sell themselves as slaves or buy someone else as a servant for life. Much less are such contracts acceptable in the case of marriage. Indeed, even in ancient Rome marital vows never to separate were invalid before the law. Therefore, the "association" mentioned by Kant must be more than just a legal agreement.

However, it should be apparent that even our contemporary, soluble marriage can never be fully described as a contract. The unique personal relationship that exists between spouses cannot be created, shaped, and maintained by written provisions, clauses, or codicils, or by signatures on some dotted line. This relationship is so intimate that no comprehensive and binding contract could possibly be devised for it, and it goes without saying that nonbinding contracts are worthless. Even simple common sense tells bridegroom and bride not to approach each other in a legalistic spirit, so as not to doom their marriage from the start. On the other hand, they also know that, once a marriage has foundered, it cannot be saved by the law.

These few observations may be sufficient to show that the subject of marriage is too complex for easy generalizations. The precise nature of the marital union itself is elusive, and its role in society varies with changing conditions, Thus, no single definition can capture all conceivable meanings of marriage or fit all of its forms. Still, we may obtain at least some limited insight, if we put the issue in some historical and cross-cultural perspective. The following pages, therefore, briefly sketch the past development and present state of marriage in Western and a few non-Western societies. A concluding section offers some speculations about the future.

5. Socialization – 04 hours

a. Socialization

b. Development in children

c. Resocialization

6. Gender and Sexuality – 06 hours

a. Sexual Differentiation

b. Sex Vs Gender

c. Gender roles over the Life span

d. Social Inequalities between Men and Women

e. Feminist Theories

7. Social Interaction and Everyday life – 04 hours

a. Civil Inattention

b. Non Verbal Communication

c. Face and culture

d. Social rules and Talk

e. Encounters

f. Impression management

8. Stratification and Class Structure 03 hours

a. Social Stratification

b. Basic Systems of Stratification

c. Theories of Stratification

9. Ethnicity and Race – 03 hours

a. Ethnicity

b. Racism

c. Prejudice and Discrimination

d. Stereotypes and Scapegoats

10. Deviance and Crime - 04 hours

a. Norms, Conformity

b. Social Control

c. Deviance

d. Crimes

11. Education - 04 hours

a. Development of Literacy and Schooling

b. Origins of Development of Education System

c. Functions of Education

d. Consequences of Education

12. Religion - 03 hours

a. What is Religion

b. Characteristics of Religion

c. Major Religions of the World

13. Population – 03 hours

a. Statistical measures

b. Industrial revolution

c. The third world

d. Population Growth, Environment and Poverty

14. Introduction to Sociology – 02 hours

a. What is Sociology

b. Definitions of Sociology

c. Importance of Study Sociology

15. Culture, Society and the Individual – 03 hours

a. What is culture

b. Language

c. Elements of Culture

d. Organization of a culture

e. Norms and Values

16. Family - 02 hours

a. Characteristics of Family

b. Family Patterns

c. Forms of Family

17. Marriage – 02 hours

a. Definition of Marriage

b. Forms of Marriage

18. Socialization – 04 hours

a. Socialization

b. Development in children

c. Resocialization

19. Gender and Sexuality – 06 hours

a. Sexual Differentiation

b. Sex Vs Gender

c. Gender roles over the Life span

d. Social Inequalities between Men and Women

e. Feminist Theories

20. Social Interaction and Everyday life – 04 hours

a. Civil Inattention

b. Non Verbal Communication

c. Face and culture

d. Social rules and Talk

e. Encounters

f. Impression management

21. Stratification and Class Structure 03 hours

a. Social Stratification

b. Basic Systems of Stratification

c. Theories of Stratification

22. Ethnicity and Race – 03 hours

a. Ethnicity

b. Racism

c. Prejudice and Discrimination

d. Stereotypes and Scapegoats

23. Deviance and Crime - 04 hours

a. Norms, Conformity

b. Social Control

c. Deviance

d. Crimes

24. Education - 04 hours

a. Development of Literacy and Schooling

b. Origins of Development of Education System

c. Functions of Education

d. Consequences of Education

25. Religion - 03 hours

a. What is Religion

b. Characteristics of Religion

c. Major Religions of the World

26. Population – 03 hours

a. Statistical measures

b. Industrial revolution

c. The third world

d. Population Growth, Environment and Poverty

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download