Structure Notion of Social Structure

Culture and Social Structure
Jean Piaget Model of Enculturation
Piaget, a Swiss psychologist, suggested that children go through four separate stages in a fixed order that is universal in all children. Piaget declared that these stages differ not only in the quantity of information acquired at each, but also in the quality of knowledge and understanding at that stage. Piaget suggested that movement from one stage to the next occurred when the child reached an appropriate level of maturation and was exposed to relevant types of experiences. Without experience, children were assumed incapable of reaching their highest cognitive ability. Piaget's four stages are known as the sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational,and formal operational stages.
1. The sensorimotor stage in a child is from birth to approximately two years. During this stage, a child has relatively little competence in representing the environment using images, language, or symbols. An infant has no awareness of objects or people that are not immediately present at a given moment. Piaget called this a lack of object permanence. Object permanence is the awareness that objects and people continue to exist even if they are out of sight. In infants, when a person hides, the infant has no knowledge that they are just out of sight. According to Piaget, this person or object that has disappeared is gone forever to the infant.
2. The preoperational stage is from the age of two to seven years. The most important development at this time is language. Children develop an internal representation of the world that allows them to describe people, events, and feelings. Children at this time use symbols, they can pretend when driving their toy car across the couch that the couch is actually a bridge. Although the thinking of the child is more advanced than when it was in the sensorimotor stage, it is still qualitatively inferior to that of an adult. Children in the preoperational stage are characterized by what Piaget called egocentric thoughts. The world at this stage is viewed entirely from the child's own perspective. Thus a child's explanation to an adult can be uninformative.
Note: These Notes are an effort and may be are not 100 % accurate. If found any blunder in these notes please give your feedback to make better effort. For feedback & queries :anwar.qureshi88@gmail.com, anthropologist786@hotmail.com Regards: Anwaar Qureshi and Abuzar Manjotha Page 1
3. The concrete operational stage lasts from the age of seven to twelve years of age. The beginning of this stage is marked by the mastery of the principal of conservation. Children in the concrete operational stage have a better understanding of time and space. Children at this stage have limits to their abstract thinking, according to Piaget. Children develop the ability to think in a more logical manner and they begin to overcome some of the egocentric characteristics of the preoperational period. One of the major ideas learned in this stage is the idea of reversibility. This is the idea that some changes can be undone by reversing an earlier action. An example is the ball of clay that is rolled out into a snake piece of clay. Children at this stage understand that you can regain the ball of clay formation by rolling the piece of clay the other way. Children can even conceptualize the stage in their heads without having to see the action perform.
4. The formal operational stage begins in most people at age twelve and continues into adulthood. This stage produces a new kind of thinking that is abstract, formal, and logical. Thinking is no longer tied to events that can be observed. A child at this stage can think hypothetically and use logic to solve problems. It is thought that not all individuals reach this level of thinking. Most studies show only forty to sixty percent of American college students and adults fully achieve it. In developing countries where the technology is not as advanced as the United States, almost no one reaches the formal operational stage.
INSTITUTES
Institutions are structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals. Institutions are identified with a social purpose and permanence, transcending individual human lives and intentions, and with the making and enforcing of rules governing cooperative human behavior. The term, institution, is commonly applied to customs and behavior patterns important to a society, as well as to particular formal organizations of government and public service. As structures and mechanisms of social order among humans, institutions are one of the principal objects of study in the social sciences, including sociology, political science and economics. Institutions are a central concern for law, the formal regime for political rule-making and enforcement. The creation and evolution of institutions is a primary topic for history.
SOCIAL SYSTEMS Social systems are the focal point of a society, relating to patterned and relatively stable arrangement of roles and statuses found within societies. Radcliffe-Brown describes these systems as "...what comes to later be called 'the first law of social statics,' was that in a particular form of social life there are relations of interconnection and interdependence." SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS Social institutions are organized structures and are shaped by cultural
values. Typically includes: family, economy, politics, education, health care, and media. SOCIAL ROLES Social roles are specific behavioral expectations. An individual within a particular status performers their role via normative expectations. SOCIAL STATUS Social status is a position in a specific culture that is regulated by norms and typically ranked according to prestige. Status is derived from a persons ethnicity, gender, and is also separated by their level of recognition in the surrounding community. STRUCTURE NOTION OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE Structural Functionalism is a broad perspective in sociology and anthropology which interprets society as structure with interrelated parts. Functionalism addresses the society as a whole in terms of function of its constituent elements such as norms, customs, traditions, institutions etc. Social structures are stressed and placed at the center of analysis and social functions are deduced from these structures. Social functions have 3 components: 1. Manifest functions: The recognized and intended consequences of any social pattern are its manifest functions. [conscious motivation/motives] e.g. Manifest function of Education include preparing for a career by getting good grades, graduation and finding good job etc. 2. Latent functions: Latent functions are the unrecognized and unintended consequences of any social pattern. [objective consequences/functions] e.g. latent functions of Education include meeting new people, participating in extra curricular activities taking school trips or
maybe finding a spouse. o the concept of latent function extends the observer's attention beyond the question of whether or not the behavior attains its avowed purpose o sociological observers are less likely to examine the collateral/latent functions of the behavior 3. Dysfunction: Social pattern's undesirable consequences for the operation of the society are considered dysfunction. [failure to achieve manifest function] e.g. Dysfunction of education include not getting good grade, not getting a job etc. o functional analysts tend to focus on the statics of social structure and to neglect the study of structural change o concept of dysfunction implies the concept of strain, stress and tension on the structural level of a social system. So it provides the analytical approach to the study of dynamics and change Human societies are natural systems where by all its parts are interrelated and interdependent, resulting in complex relationships that make up the whole (system).
ORGANISMIC NOTION OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE
The term structure has been used with reference to human societies since the 19th century. Before that time, it had been already applied to other fields, particularly construction and biology. Herbert Spencer and others conceived of society as an organism, the parts of which are interdependent and thereby form a structure that is similar to the anatomy of a living body. Moreover, he added, it is a character of social bodies, as of living bodies, that while they increase in size they [also] increase in structure.
AMERICAN SCHOOL OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE
1. George Peter Murdock
George P. Murdock, in his Social Structure (1949), a comparative study of kinship systems, used the concept as a taxonomic scheme for classifying, comparing, and correlating aspects of kinship systems of different societies. Murdock asserts that the forms of social organization, indeed, appear to show a striking lack of correlation with levels of types of technology, economy, property rights, class structure, or political integration. In another place he says quite pointedly, social organization is a semi-independent system comparable
in many respects to language, and similarly characterized by an internal dynamics of its own. If social systems have this much of an autonomous existence what can be said to evolve and in what direction? Murdock supplies us with this answer: Unlike such cultural categories as language, technology, folklore, and ceremonial, where the possibilities of innovation are almost limitless, the various aspects of social organization admit of only a very few, relatively obvious, alternative variations. By reducing forms of social organization to types and indicating what types can develop or are known to have developed from other types possible developmental sequences or evolutions are derived, though no assumptions are made about ultimate origins or over-all priorities among the several types of social structure. OR Murdock contends that the nuclear family is a universal, distinct, and strongly functional group in every known society. Murdock traces the strength of the nuclear family to its contributions to four fundamental functions-the sexual, economic, reproductive, and educational. The amount of premarital license permitted in many societies convinces him that sex is less important in the establishment and perpetuation of the family than has been assumed. From the establishment of the family flow the recognition of relatives (primary, secondary, and tertiary) and rules of descent and residence. Murdock claims that when there is any shift to unfamiliar territory at marriage, it is the woman who ordinarily leaves the parental home, as womans work, especially in a hunting society, can be carried on as well in one place as in another, while the man depends on familiarity with the environs for the successful discharge of his major task. Murdock had something to say about these too, which are to be distinguished from the structure of the family. He derived four functions.
1. Sexual: which he regarded as necessary for the family's parents to continue to bond together. There is an exchange theory here of giving to a relationship that brings more from it - the bonding together.
2. Reproductive: without which there would be no next generation.
3. Economic: by which parents could specialize their co-operation (e.g. earning money, housework or generally support one another and the family) without which the family could
not sustain itself. Economic includes needs such as shelter and food, because these need resourcing.
4. Educational: by which parents pass on the norms and values of the society and act as agents of primary socialization. They continue to be conservative in a sociological sense (functionalism is always about how things continue) and politically. These definitions are not exclusive to the family, and the family performs many more functions (for example, leisure with entertainment functions). Although Murdock's study includes families that are not nuclear, he has a preference for the nuclear family in its efficiency of functionalism both towards the individuals in it and society at large.
2. Robert K. Merton
Merton criticized functional unity, saying that not all parts of a modern, complex society work for the functional unity of society. Some institutions and structures may have other functions, and some may even be generally dysfunctional, or be functional for some while being dysfunctional for others. This is because not all structures are functional for society as a whole. Some practices are only functional for a dominant individual or a group [Holmwood, 2005:91]. Here Merton introduces the concepts of power and coercion into functionalism and identifies the sites of tension which may lead to struggle or conflict. Merton states that by recognizing and examining the dysfunctional aspects of society we can explain the development and persistence of alternatives. Thus, as Holmwood states, Merton explicitly made power and conflict central issues for research within a functionalist paradigm.
Merton also noted that there may be functional alternatives to the institutions and structures currently fulfilling the functions of society. This means that the institutions that currently exist are not indispensable to society. Merton states that just as the same item may have multiple functions, so may the same function be diversely fulfilled by alternative items. This notion of functional alternatives is important because it reduces the tendency of functionalism to imply approval of the status quo. Merton believes that there are 5 situations facing an actor which are given below,
Conformity occurs when an individual has the means and desire to achieve the cultural goals socialized into him.
Innovation occurs when an individual strives to attain the accepted cultural goals but chooses to do so in novel or unaccepted method.
Ritualism occurs when an individual continues to do things as proscribed by society but forfeits the achievement of the goals.
Retreatism is the rejection of both the means and the goals of society.
Rebellion is a combination of the rejection of societal goals and means and a substitution of other goals and means.
The last of Mertons important contributions to functionalism was his distinction between manifest and latent functions. Manifest functions refer to the conscious intentions of actors; latent functions are the objective consequences of their actions, which are often unintended Merton used the example of the Hopi rain dance to show that sometimes an individuals understanding of their motive for an action may not fully explain why that action continues to be performed. Sometimes actions fulfill a function of which the actor is unaware, and this is the latent function of an action.
3. Talcott Parsons
For Parsons, the social structure is essentially normative; it consists of "institutionalized patterns of normative culture." Social behavior is structured insofar as it conforms to norms, ranging from general ideas of right and wrong (values) to specific rules of behavior in specific situations. These rules vary according to the positions of the individual actors: they define different roles, such as various occupational roles, or the roles of husbandfather and wife-mother. Norms also vary according to the type of activities or sphere of life: they form clusters called social institutions, such as the institution of property or the institution of marriage. Norms, roles, and institutions are components of the social structure on different levels of complexity.
Although he had published The Structure of Social Action in 1937, it was not until The Social System (1951) and Towards a General Theory of Action (1951) were completed that Talcott Parsons (19021979) emerged as the most inuential contributor to structural functionalism. There are important differences in Parsonss major writings, but constant throughout his career was the ambition to formulate a systematic general theory that he described as a conceptual scheme for the analysis of social systems in terms of the action frame of reference (Parsons 1951: 3). For Parsons, the fundamental starting poin t for constructing any scientic theory is to establish an abstract frame of reference. In the scientic study of social action, the empirical basis for the frame of reference is a group of interacting individuals (social actors). Social actors have particular goals that they wish to achieve, and to realize those goals they must take advantage of opportunities (means) that are available under a particular set of conditions (situations). Parsons was clear that none of these elements can be reduced to the others, and he sought to formulate an action frame of reference for the study of social action that was capable of accounting for the individual and situational factors motivating people to act in the ways that they do.
In addition to structures, Parsons was also concerned with functions. Parsons saw functions as those activities that had the goal of fulfilling a need of the system. He believed that there were four necessary functional imperatives of all systems: [A] adaptation (how a system copes with its outside environment by both adapting to it and by adapting the environment to meet the needs of the system), [G] goal attainment (the definition and achievement of the primary goals of the system), [I] integration (how the system regulates the relationship of its various parts as well as the relationship among the other three functional imperatives), and [L] latency, or pattern maintenance (how the system provides, maintains, and rejuvenates the motivation of individuals and the cultural patterns that stimulate and maintain that motivation). These functional imperatives are known as Parsonss AGIL scheme.
Parsons then developed the idea of roles into collectivities of roles that complemented each other in fulfilling functions for society. Some of the roles are bound up in institutions and social structures, such as economic, educational, legal, and even gender structures. These structures are functional in the sense they assist society to operate [Gingrich, 1999], and fulfill its functional needs so that the society runs smoothly. A society where there is no
conflict, where everyone knows what is expected of them, and where these expectations are constantly being met, is in a perfect state of equilibrium. The key processes for Parsons in attaining this equilibrium are socialization and social control. Socialization is important because it is the mechanism for transferring the accepted norms and values of a society to the individuals within the system. Perfect socialization occurs when these norms and values are completely internalized, that is they become part of the individuals personality. Parsons states, this point, it should be made clear, is independent of the sense in which individual is concretely autonomous or creative rather than passive or conforming, for individuality and creativity, are to a considerable extent, phenomena of the institutionalization of expectations, that is they are culturally constructed characteristics. Socialization is supported by the positive and negative sanctioning of role behaviors which do or do not meet these expectations. A punishment could be informal, such as a snigger or gossip, or more formalized through institutions such as prisons and mental institutions. If these two processes were perfect then society would become static and unchanging, and in reality this is unlikely to occur for long.
BRITISH SCHOOL OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE
1. Radcliffe Brown (1881-1955) Radcliffe-Brown focused attention on social structure. He suggested that a society is a system of relationships maintaining itself through cybernetic feedback, while institutions are orderly sets of relationships whose function is to maintain the society as a system. RadcliffeBrown, following Auguste Comte, believed that the social constituted a separate "level" of reality distinct from those of biological forms and inorganic matter. Furthermore, he believed that explanations of social phenomena had to be constructed within the social level. He believed that individuals were replaceable, transient occupants of social roles. Unlike Malinowski's emphasis on individuals, Radcliffe-Brown considered individuals irrelevant. OR Radcliffe-Brown saw social systems almost like an organism where the different parts of a living being do their functions in order to keep the whole working. This physiological explanation works for structural-functionalist theory because customs, practices, social roles, and behavior are used to work together to help the social systems.
OR A.R. Radcliffe-Brown, a British social anthropologist, gave the concept of social structure a central place in his approach and connected it to the concept of function. In his view, the components of the social structure have indispensable functions for each other--the continued existence of the one component is dependent on that of the others--and for the society as a whole, which is seen as an integrated, organic entity. Radcliffe-Brown defined the social structure empirically as patterned, or "normal," social relations (those aspects of social activities that conform to accepted social rules or norms). These rules bind society's members to socially useful activities. 2. E.E. Evans-Pritchard (1902-1973) E Evans Pritchard was a notable British anthropologist, and studied history and anthropology at Oxford. He lived from 1902 to 1973. Evans-Pritchard believed anthropologists should analyze societies based off the local communities view points rather then preexisting ideas. Evans-Pritchard studied primarily in Africa. In 1937 he published his first book called Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic Among the Azande. This book was an analyzed overview on witchcraft within Azande society in East Africa. Evans-Pritchards analysis proves that in the culture of the Azandes witchcraft is rational according to their personal culture. In Cairo Evans-Pritchard became aquatinted with Radcliffe-Brown. EvansPritchard used Radcliffe-Browns theory on structural functionalism to help him write his trilogy of books called, The Nuer, Nuer Religion, and Kingship and Marriage among the Nuer, which became a primary source among British social anthropologists. Evans-Pritchard fundamentally believed that anthropology was more about studying the history and the actual people rather than about natural science. He believed calling it natural science dehumanized the society being studied. 3. Sir Raymond Firth Professor Sir Raymond Firth, who has died aged 100, was one of the most eminent social anthropologists of the last century; indeed, his long career paralleled the emergence of social anthropology as a serious academic discipline, a development in which he himself played a major role. British social anthropologist Raymond Firth has made a notable divergence from orthodoxy of structural functionalist theory in British anthropology during
the post -war years. He employed the concept of social organization as distinct from social structure and his studies in this field were influential in the development of action theory approach in social anthropology. He has made important contributions in the field of kinship especially the study of unilineal descent. OR Firth spends time developing and illustrating the conceptual system which social anthropologists are constructing, while yet keeping in touch with the behavior of real people. Social relations, for example, are differentiated in terms of structure, function, and organization, as follows: social structure: the system of critical or basic relationships between persons in a society; social function: the relation between a social action and the system of which the action is a part, or, alternatively, . . . the result of the social action in terms of the means-ends scheme of all those affected by it; social organization: the systematic ordering of social relations by acts of choice and decision.
4. Edmund Leach
A common critique of structural functionalism is that is relies too heavily on the notion that the very structures within a society are the things holding it together. Edmund Leach, a British anthropologist, criticized this in "Political Systems of Highland Burma" (1954). In this he theorizes that the political leaders are actually manipulating the political structures of their communities, not the other way around, as theorized by structural functionalists. Leach's argument states that these leaders have been perpetuating either egalitarian or hierarchical political systems based upon their own interests, "while confirming Malinowski's old idea that kinship and myth were not morally or judicially binding norms but charters for action, which might be manipulated and reinterpreted by actors in accordance with their interests.
FRENCH SCHOOL OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE 1. Claude Levi Strauss Lvi-Strauss explains the notion of social structure as follows: The term social structure has nothing to do with empirical reality but with models which are built up after it while social structure can, by no means, be reduced to the ensemble of the social relations to be described in a given society. It is rather a method to be applied to any kind of social studies,
similar to the structural analysis current in other disciplines. A structure consists of a model meeting with several requirements: First, the structure exhibits the characteristics of a
system. It is made up of several elements, none of which can undergo a change without effecting changes in all the other elements. Second, for any given model there should be a possibility of ordering a series of transformations resulting in a group of models of the same type. Third, the above properties make it possible to predict how the model will react if one or more of its elements are submitted to certain modifications. Finally, the model should be constituted so as to make immediately intelligible all the observed facts. OR He constructed theories concerning the underlying structure of kinship systems, myths, and customs of cooking and eating. The structural method, in short, purports to detect the common structure of widely different social and cultural forms. The structure does not determine the concrete expressions; the variety of expressions it generates is potentially unlimited. The structures that generate the varieties of social and cultural forms ultimately reflect, according to Lvi-Strauss, basic characteristics of the human mind.
2. Marvin Harris
The major principle of cultural materialism is that the modes of production and reproduction determine structure and structure determines superstructure. The argument that priority should be given to infrastructure is based in the idea that society adapts to the environment through infrastructural practices. Harris argues that studies in anthropology should give infrastructure-focused studies the "strategic priority," because, if the goal of science is to find out law-like generalizations, then one should start by studying "the greatest direct restraints from the givens of nature"(Harris 1979:57). Cultural materialism does not hold that all system changes come from alternations in the infrastructure. Nor does cultural materialism argue that the structure and superstructure are just passive reactors. They do influence infrastructure. However, if changes in a superstructure or structure are not compatible with the existing modes of production and reproduction, those superstructural or structural changes are not effective or lasting. Infrastructural determinism proposes a probabilistic relationship among these three levels. Therefore when we notice a superstructural or structural change of a society, we have to look at its infrastructure first. Marvin Harris explains the collapse of Soviet and East European communism with this
paradigm. Cultural materialism considers that all socio-cultural systems consist of three levels: infrastructure, structure and superstructure.
1. Infrastructure A. Mode of Production: the technology and the practices employed for expanding or limiting basic subsistence production, especially the production of food and other forms of energy. B. Mode of reproduction: the technology and the practices employed for expanding, limiting and maintaining population size.
2. Structure A. Domestic Economy: Consists of a small number of people who interact on an intimate basis. They perform many functions, such as regulating reproduction, basic production, socialization, education, and enforcing domestic discipline. B. Political economy: These groups may be large or small, but their members tend to interact without any emotional commitment to one another. They perform many functions, such as regulating production, reproduction, socialization, and education, and enforcing social discipline.
3. Superstructure A. Behavior Superstructure: Art, music, dance, literature, advertising, Rituals, Sports, games, hobbies, Science B. Mental superstructure: Values, Emotions, Traditions KARL MARXS NOTION OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE
Karl Marx, where he speaks of "the economic structure [Struktur] of society, the real basis on which is erected a legal and political superstructure [berbau] and to which definite forms of social consciousness correspond." This phrase expresses the Marxian view that the basic structure of society is economic, or material, and determines, at least to a large extent, the rest of social life, which is defined as spiritual or ideological.
In Marxist theory, the capitalist mode of production consists of two main economic parts: the substructure and the Superstructure. The base comprehends the relations of production employer-employee work conditions, the technical division of labor, and property relations into which people enter to produce the necessities and amenities of life. In the capitalist system, the ruling classes own the means of production, which essentially includes the working class itself as they only have their own labor power ('wage labor') to offer in order to survive. These relations fundamentally determine the ideas and philosophies of a society, constituting the superstructure. A temporary status quo is achieved by various methods of social control employed, consciously or unconsciously, by the bourgeoisie in the course of various aspects of social life. Through the ideology of the ruling class, false consciousness is promoted both through ostensibly political and non-political institutions, but also through the arts and other elements of culture. Marx believed the capitalist mode would eventually give way, through its own internal conflict, to revolutionary consciousness and the development of egalitarian communist society. Friedrich Engels (28 November 1820 5 August 1895) was a German industrialist, social scientist, author, political theorist, philosopher, and father of Marxist theory, alongside Karl Marx. In 1845 he published The Condition of the Working Class in England, based on personal observations and research. In 1848 he co-authored The Communist Manifesto with Karl Marx, and later he supported Marx financially to do research and write Das Kapital. After Marx's death Engels edited the second and third volumes. Additionally, Engels organized Marx's notes on the "Theories of Surplus Value" and this was later published as the "fourth volume" of Capital.
FRENCH MARXIST SCHOOL OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE Lett (1987) points out, Lvi-Strauss analysis of the role of the coyote as trickster in many different Native American mythologies rationalizes that the coyote, because it preys on herbivores and carnivores alike, is associated with agriculture and hunting, and life and death (Lett 1987:104) is thus a deviation from natural order, or abnormal. Lett further shows that a materialist perspective is offered by Marvin Harris in the explanation of the recurrent theme of coyote as trickster: The coyote enjoys the status of a trickster because it is an intelligent, opportunistic animal (Lett 1987:104). Lvi-Strauss helped to spawn the rationalist-empiricist debate by furthering the inquiry into the idea of panhuman mental processes, and what determines culture.
The structuralist paradigm in anthropology suggests that the structure of human thought processes is the same in all cultures, and that these mental processes exist in the form of binary oppositions (Winthrop 1991). Some of these oppositions include hot-cold, malefemale, culture-nature, and raw-cooked. Structuralists argue that binary oppositions are reflected in various cultural institutions (Lett 1987:80). Anthropologists may discover underlying thought processes by examining such things as kinship, myth, and language. It is proposed, then, that a hidden reality exists beneath all cultural expressions. Structuralists aim to understand the underlying meaning involved in human thought as expressed in cultural acts.
Further, the theoretical approach offered by structuralism emphasizes that elements of culture must be understood in terms of their relationship to the entire system (Rubel and Rosman 1996:1263). This notion, that the whole is greater than the parts, appeals to the Gestalt school of psychology. Essentially, elements of culture are not explanatory in and of themselves, but rather form part of a meaningful system. As an analytical model, structuralism assumes the universality of human thought processes in an effort to explain the deep structure or underlying meaning existing in cultural phenomena. Structuralism is a set of principles for studying the mental superstructure (Harris 1979:166, from Lett 1987:101). Poulantzas Model
Poulantzas defines the state apparatus as: "(a) The place of the state in the ensemble of the structures of a social formation," that is, the state's functions and "(b) The personnel of the state, the ranks of the administration, bureaucracy, army, etc." (p. 116). The state apparatus is a unity of the effects of state power (i.e., policies) and the network of institutions and personnel through which the state function is executed. Poulantzas emphasizes the functional unity between state power and the state apparatus with the observation "that structure is not the simple principle of organization which is exterior to the institution: the structure is present in an allusive and inverted form in the institution itself".
Althusessers Model
The structural-functionalist/Althusserian view of society rejects the interactionist account of structures as the products of the action of social subjects. The subjective principle is replaced as the basis on which the structure is organized by the functional principle. A variety of different levels are depending according to the functions they full in relation to the whole. The identity of the functions and levels and the relations between them vary according to the particular theory in question. The basic principle is, however, invariant. The differentiation of functions determines that each level should have its own specificity and its own autonomy relative to other levels. The different functions are hierarchically ordered, the technical requirements of material production normally being primary because of the supposed primary requisite of physical reproduction. The hierarchy takes the form of limits imposed by one level on the variation of other levels (PPSC, p. 95): hence very varied normative systems, or ideological and political systems, may be compatible with the requirements of physical reproduction of a society or social formation at a given technical level. Within these limits of variation the different levels are themselves structured under the domination of their relative functions in the whole, and not under the domination of other levels. They are therefore determined as levels of the complex whole, and not as expressions of other levels. For Althusser the various levels are defned as particular kinds of practices, the basic levels being the economic, political and ideological. Maurice Godeliers Model
Maurice Godelier incorporated a dynamic aspect into his structural analysis of Australian marriage-class systems and their relationship to demographic factors (Rubel and Rosman 1996:1269). He did so by incorporating Marxist ideas of structures representing an organized reality and the importance of change in society. Godelier took structuralism a step further with his examination of infrastructural factors. In structuralist thought, inherently conflicting ideas exist in the form of binary oppositions, but these conflicts do not find resolution. In structural Marxist thought, the importance of perpetual change in society is noted: When internal contradictions between structures or within a structure cannot be overcome, the structure does not reproduce but is transformed or evolves (Rubel and
Rosman 1996:1269). This dialectic accounts for the process of antithesis into thesis into synthesis. Emmanuel Terrays Model
Terray argues, it is necessary to recognize the existence of multiple modes of production within primitive social formations and to conceptualize the nature of their articulation and the social relations that "realize" or "represent" them. The key to the discovery of the dominant factor or factors in primitive societies is the study of their various "instruments of labor" from which hypotheses regarding the nature of their mode or modes of production might be derived. "It would then be possible," Terray concludes, "to analyze the concrete social formations and to begin to reconstruct the relations of production of which these structures are one realization.
IDEAL TYPES OF SOCIETY 1. Marxs Ideal Society
One of the greatest debates of all time has been regarding the issue of the freedom of mankind. The one determining factor, for Marx, it that freedom is linked with class conflict. As a historian, Karl Marx traced the history of mankind by the ways in which the economy operated and the role of classes within the economy. For Marx, the biggest question that needed to be answered was Who owns freedom? With this in mind, Marx gives us a solution to both the issues of freedom and class conflict in his critique of capitalism and theory of communism, which is the ideal society for Marx. His theory of communism is based on the ultimate end of human history because there will be freedom for all humankind. Marx saw communism as the ideal society because it is "the genuine resolution of the conflict between man and man- the true resolution of the strife between existence and essence...between freedom and necessity" that capitalism fosters. Marx was also committed to the notion that theory and action go hand in hand. Marx dismissed earlier thinkers because they (philosophers) "have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it." He also stated "Ideas cannot carry out anything at all. In order to carry out ideas men are needed who can exert practical force". However, Marx
would have been appalled by the way his theory of communism was misused. It can be said, though, that Marx's theory of communism was clearly open for interpretation because he failed to offer "principles or guidelines of even the most general kind" for how the system of communism was to be fully established. It was this opportunity for interpretation that made Marx's theory of communism doomed for failure when it was used in practice. 2. Platos Ideal Society In The Republic, Plato presents a political theory upon which the ideal State (i.e. society or political order) should be based. That theory posits that any human individual is at their best when they are pursuing what they are most capable of; for instance, an athlete should pursue physical excellence, an artisan should pursue excellent in their craft, and a leader should pursue justice. 3. Sir Thomas Mores Ideal Society Sir Thomas More gave the idea of Utopian society. Utopia is an ideal community or society possessing a perfect socio-politico-legal system. The word was imported from Greek by Sir Thomas More for his book Utopia, describing a fictional island in the Atlantic Ocean. The term has been used to describe both intentional communities that attempt to create an ideal society, and fictional societies portrayed in literature. It has spawned other concepts, most prominently dystopia.
4. Ideal Society in Islam The family is considered the building block of any society. The peace and security offered by a stable family unit is greatly valued and seen as essential for the spiritual and moral well-being of its members and of society as a whole. A harmonious social order is created by the existence of extended families; children are treasured and rarely leave home until the time they marry. The family is considered the building block of any society. Parents are greatly respected in the Islamic tradition. Mothers are particularly honoured. The Qur'an teaches that since mothers suffer during pregnancy, childbirth, and child rearing, they deserve a special consideration and kindness.
Institutional homes for the elderly are virtually unknown in the Muslim world. Caring for one's parents during this most difficult time of their lives is considered an honour and a blessing. In Islam, serving one's parents is a duty second only to worshipping and it is the parents' right to expect it. It is considered despicable to express any irritation when, through no fault of their own, the old become difficult to handle. It is written in the Qur'an: "Your Lord has commanded that you worship none but Him, and be kind to your parents. If either or both of them reach old age with you, do not say to them a word of contempt nor chide them, but speak to them in terms of honour and kindness. Treat them with humility, and say, 'My Lord! Have mercy on them, for they did care for me when I was little." (Qur'an 17:23-4) Allah also states: "And we have enjoined upon man (to be good) to his parents. With difficulty upon difficulty did his mother bear him and wean him for two years. Show gratitude to Me and to your parents; to Me is your final goal." (Qur'an 31:14) Other Relatives And render to the relatives their due rights, as (also) to those in need, and to the traveller; and do nor squander your wealth in the manner of a spendthrift. (Quran 7:26)
The Prophet said: "He is not a believer who eats his fill when his neighbour beside him is hungry" (Authenticated by: Bukhari) "He does not believe whose neighbours are not safe from his injurious conduct." (Authenticated by: Bukhari)
Actually, according to the Qur'an and example of the Prophet, a Muslim has to discharge his moral responsibility not only to his parents, relatives, and neighbours but to all mankind, animals and useful trees and plants. For example, the hunting of birds and animals for sport is not permitted. Similarly, cutting trees and plants that yield fruit is forbidden unless there is a very pressing need for one to do so.
Thus on the basic moral plane, Islam provides mankind with a higher system of morality that can be used by an individual to realize his greatest potential. Islam purifies the soul of self-seeking egotism, tyranny, wantonness, and lack of discipline. It creates Godfearing men who are devoted to their ideals, motivated by piety, abstinence, and discipline, and unable to make any compromise with falsehood. It induces feelings of moral responsibility and fosters the capacity for self-control. Islam generates kindness, generosity, mercy, sympathy, peace, disinterested goodwill, scrupulous fairness, and truthfulness towards all creation in all situations. It nourishes noble qualities from which only good may be expected.
To be continued.

Structure Notion of Social Structure

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Structure Notion of Social Structure

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Culture and Social Structure

Jean Piaget Model of Enculturation

ORGANISMIC NOTION OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE

AMERICAN SCHOOL OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE

1. George Peter Murdock

2. Reproductive: without which there would be no next generation.

BRITISH SCHOOL OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE

IDEAL TYPES OF SOCIETY 1. Marxs Ideal Society

Anda mungkin juga menyukai