Subject Matter of Sociology
Discussion Notes for Project 1:
Subject Matter of Sociology
You Will Answer 1 of the Following
1. The general in the particular
Mills maintains that sociology studies patterns of behavior in order to draw conclusions about a social issue that transcends the effect of the problem or issue on any particular individual. Mills defines “social issue” in broad outlines.
1) A behavior or event is “patterned” when it is recurrent. Find patterns in your everyday life for example, in mass media use, dietary choices, musical preferences, and clothing styles. Flesh out your “particular pattern” in detail.
2) Where in the society do you find your particular pattern? Connect your particular, or personal, pattern to a more general pattern for a “group” or “category” of people who occupy a place in the social structure: (e.g., the core audience for heavy metal music is young while males).
3) Is this a named pattern (e.g., Metalheads, Vegans)? What are the rules or “norms” that govern a general (i.e., cultural) pattern like social media use, musical taste, or dietary choice? For example, dietary choices may be governed by religious beliefs.
4) Use the Notes and relevant literature to interpret this general pattern as a social “institution” (e.g., “marriage”, “youth culture”, “Hip Hop”).
5) What can explain these patterns sociologically (e.g., heavy metal reflects the symbolic rebellion of young white males against adult authority; dietary choices reflect financial means).
6) To what extent do you derive an individual identity from this pattern? How does this connect you to others and a group or collective identity? For example, you can cook without being identified as a cook (or chef).
2. The group and the individual
The French sociologist Emile Durkheim defined “the social” as a reality that is “external” to the individual and that “constrains” individual behavior – what sociologists define as a social institution.
1) Consider your involvement in a relationship or membership in a group (e.g., a family) or network (e.g., social media) as a “social fact” or “social institution”.
2) What makes this social reality “outside” of you as an individual?
3) Describe situations in which this social reality “constrains” your behavior? Consider expectations to conform to social norms, for example, in regard to a role, dress (e.g., fashion), speech (e.g., jargon), religious or political beliefs, etc.
4) Why do you submit to these social constraints? Consider the benefits realized from fitting in such as the derivation of an identity (i.e., a “somebody”) and status privilege (e.g., being a “fan” of a sports team or pop culture celebrity). On the other hand, consider the penalties in being labeled deviant.
5) Does constraint and conformity leave room for your individuality within the group/relationship? In particular, to what extent is individuality compromised or even suppressed?
_______
READ: Openstax, Chapters 1, 2 and 3
Culture and Society
Sociology is the study of groups and group interactions, societies and social interactions, from small and personal groups to very large groups. A group of people who live in a defined geographic area, who interact with one another, and who share a common culture is what sociologists call a society. Sociologists study all aspects and levels of society. Sociologists working from the micro-level study small groups and individual interactions, while those using macro-level analysis look at trends among and between large groups and societies. For example, a micro-level study might look at the accepted rules of conversation in various groups such as among teenagers or business professionals. In contrast, a macro-level analysis might research the ways that language use has changed over time or in social media outlets.
Societies are collectivities with a common culture. The concept of culture refers to the group’s shared practices, values, and beliefs. [SEE CHAPTER 3 in OpenStax] It is a total way of life, from routine, everyday interactions to the most important parts of group members' lives. It includes everything produced by a society; everything we do is social insofar as it is 1) learned from others, 2) done with others or 3) done with others in mind. Even human biology is shaped by culture. For example, while sleep is a biological necessity, it is forced into a schedule that makes sense culturally. See this excerpt on “napping” following the Thanksgiving meal:
“Naps in general have a stigma attached to them as something you only do when you’re lazy or when you’re sick,” Dr. Alger said.
Wrapped inside nap phobia in the United States is often a message reminding us to be productive during what we now think of as normal working hours, although that concept is relatively new.
Modern attitudes about napping go back to the Industrial Revolution, according to Matthew J. Wolf-Meyer , an anthropologist at Binghamton University in New York and the author of “ The Slumbering Masses: Sleep, Medicine, and Modern American Life .”
“For a long time, people had flexible sleep schedules,” Dr. Wolf-Meyer said. Farmers and tradespeople had some autonomy over their time. They could choose to rest in the hottest part of the day, and might take up simple tasks during a wakeful period in the middle of the night, between two distinct bouts of sleep.
As the 1800s went on, more and more Americans worked in factories on set shifts that were supervised by a foreman. “They work for a total stranger, and a nap becomes totally nonnegotiable,” he said.
Staying awake all day and getting one’s sleep in a single long stretch at night came to be seen as normal. With that came a strong societal expectation that we ought to use our daylight hours productively.
“Even on a holiday, we’re not exempt from those expectations about productivism,” Dr. Wolf-Meyer said. “Even on Thanksgiving. You’re supposed to be doing something, even if it’s watching TV. Our labor on holidays is to interact with our relatives. So the nap is kind of a problem.”
“This Thanksgiving, It’s Time to Stop Nap-Shaming”, Pete Wells, NYT (11.24.2020). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/24/dining/thanksgiving-nap.html
____________
Social Structure
The concept of social structure is often folded into the related concept of culture. Structure refers to the relationship of parts to the whole. More specifically, it refers to relationships or arrangements of individuals and groups to others and to the society and social institutions. Structural issues, then, are focused on the position of individuals in relation to other individuals. Thus, there is a relationship of individuals to others in a family, a baseball team, a neighborhood, or a workplace; in the example of a family, structural issues pertain to membership, or the drawing of boundaries that place persons outside the family. Groups also have relationships to other groups; consider the relationship between racial and ethnic groups, the police and citizens, teachers and students. Another structural issue is the relationship of individuals and groups to social institutions like the government, schools, or the labor market. For example, some groups (e.g., the middle class) are more likely to focus on formal education as a path to employment (e.g., professions like medicine or law). There is also the relationship between social institutions like the government and the economy (e.g., the regulation of interest rates by the Federal Reserve).
Structural questions ask about social connections. To drill down on the concept of social structure, consider the difference between “weak ties” and “strong ties”:
Think of the parents you see in the drop-off line at school. Your favorite bartender. The other dog owners at the park. The sociologist Mark Granovetter calls these low-stakes relationships “ weak ties .” Not only can these connections affect our job prospects, they also can have a positive impact on our well-being by helping us feel more connected to other social groups, according to Dr. Granovetter’s research. Other studies have shown weak ties can offer recommendations (I found my accountant via a weak tie) and empower us to be more empathetic . We’re likely to feel less lonely, too, research shows .
A 2014 study found that the more weak ties a person has (neighbors, a barista at the neighborhood coffee shop or fellow members in a spin class), the happier they feel. Maintaining this network of acquaintances also contributes to one’s sense of belonging to a community, researchers found.
In her work examining social interactions, Gillian Sandstrom , a senior lecturer of psychology at the University of Essex, found that maintaining a network of low-stakes connections further enmeshes us in our community, especially after a major move away from family and close friends or the loss of a loved one.
“A lot of us think it’s not worth our time to have those kinds of interactions, that they can’t possibly provide any meaning,” Dr. Sandstrom said. “We’re focused on whatever is next and we don’t stop and take that second to enjoy the moment.”
Taking a few minutes to engage with people we see regularly or joining a group — such as a religious group, a sports team or a hobby meetup — has been shown to increase our satisfaction with life.
Seeing acquaintances removed from their usual contexts can also help elevate these casual connections into genuine friend territory. A study from 2018 found that people formed a “casual” friendship after spending 30 hours together. While a 20-minute chat with your hairstylist outside the salon is far shy of dozens of hours, the interaction brings you closer to having more common ground.
“Why You Need a Network of ‘Weak Ties’”, Allie Volpe, NYT (5.13.19) https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/smarter-living/why-you-need-a-network-of-low-stakes-casual-friendships.html
Case Study: Social Determinants of “Vaccination Behavior”
Positioning in the social structure also shapes culture. The preponderance of males in meaningful contact with the automobile (i.e., in work and in leisure roles) leaves a masculine imprint (e.g., the automobile as symbol of macho). To the extent that “a woman’s place was in the home”, they were expected to not only learn domestic roles like tending to children and sewing but be defined by them (i.e., an identity as “housewife”). In this social and spatial niche, women were not “socialized” into masculine culture like the wage economy (e.g., offices and factories), competitive sports, and taverns. To this extent, the large-scale entrance of women into medicine can modify the role of physician while men can bring a distinctive style to childrearing now that they contribute more in this area. What is the position of women in car culture?
____
The article below exposes the relationship between the acceptance of Covid 19 vaccines and social class. There is increasingly solid evidence that whether a person in American accepts the vaccination is primarily dependent on education, occupational status, and income (we will study what sociologists define as “social class” in the last section of the course).
It is common to hear about two different demographic groups that are hesitant to receive a Covid-19 vaccination: Republican voters and racial minorities, especially Black and Latino Americans.
The two groups seem to have different motivations. For Republicans, the attitude is connected to a general skepticism of government and science. For Black and Hispanic Americans, it appears to stem from the country’s legacy of providing substandard medical treatment, and sometimes doing outright harm , to minorities.
These ideas all have some truth to them. But they also can obscure the fact that many unvaccinated Republicans and minorities have something in common: They are working class. And there is a huge class gap in vaccination behavior.
There are still differences by ethnicity, because racial inequities are a reality of U.S. life. Many Hispanic Americans, across social classes, say either that they want a shot but have not yet received one or that they are waiting to see how the vaccines affect other people. And there are even bigger differences by partisanship, with many Republicans, including professionals, skeptical of the vaccines.
But you can’t understand the country’s struggle to vaccinate everyone — and save thousands of lives — without understanding the class gap.
The story here is bigger than Covid-19. Last year, the economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton published a book called “Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism” that documented a growing class divide in one area of American life after another.
Income and wealth have grown much more quickly over recent decades for people with a bachelor’s degree than people without one. Marriage, church attendance and self-reported happiness have declined more for the working class than the professional class; chronic pain, obesity and alcohol consumption have increased more. As the title of the book indicates, life expectancy has also diverged, partly because of deaths from alcoholism, drug overdoses and suicide.
“This B.A./non-B.A. divide,” says Deaton, a Nobel laureate, “just comes up again and again and again.”
Case and Deaton, who are Princeton professors, argue that behind these trends is a “coming apart” of the working-class experience . For many people, life lacks the structure, status and meaning that it once had.
Frequently, people are not officially employed by the company where they work, which robs them of the pride that comes from being part of a shared enterprise. They don’t belong to a labor union, either. The timing of their work shifts can change unexpectedly. Many parents are trying to raise children without a partner.
These challenges can interfere with Covid vaccination in multiple ways. Carving out the time — to do the logistical research, get the shot, cope with side effects and schedule a second shot — can be hard . Working-class Americans also have less reason to trust public health officials; if you had suffered the damaging “coming apart” of the past few decades, would you trust people in positions of authority?
After I described the vaccination trends to Case and Deaton, they sent me some broader data on life expectancy , by both race and class. It shows a significant Black-white gap. But that gap has not grown over the past decade. What has grown is the life expectancy gap between college graduates and non-graduates, among both Black and white Americans.
“Though race divisions continue,” Case said, “education is becoming more important relative to race, and perhaps that might be true for vaccinations, too.”
David Leonhardt, "Education Divide Bared In Vaccination Behavior", NYT (5.24.2021). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/24/briefing/vaccination-class-gap-us.html
______
Sociology as Science: A Note on Sociological Research Methods
So far, we have been discussing the subject matter of sociology. Sociology is a social science; it is the scientific study of society and culture. The scientific method involves developing and testing theories about the world based on empirical evidence. It is defined by its commitment to systematic observation of the empirical world and strives to be objective, critical, skeptical, and logical. It involves a series of prescribed steps that have been established over centuries of scholarship.
This section presents the protocol for conducting this research, specifically methods for collecting data. Sociologists make use of signature methods of social science research including experiments, surveys, interviews, and field research. For this course, you will be asked to conduct small-scale research projects in social worlds that you already inhabit.
Field Work
The work of sociology rarely happens in limited, confined spaces. Sociologists go out into the world. They meet subjects where they live, work, and play. Field work refers to gathering primary data from a social environment. It is a research method suited to an interpretive framework rather than to the scientific method. Field work is optimal for observing how people behave – and the meanings they attach to those behaviors. To conduct field research, the sociologist must be willing to step into new environments and observe, participate, or experience those worlds. In field work, the sociologists, rather than the subjects, are the ones out of their element.
The researcher interacts with or observes a person or people and gathers data along the way. The key point in field research is that it takes place in the subject’s natural environment, whether it’s a coffee shop or tribal village, a homeless shelter or the DMV, a hospital, airport, mall, or beach resort. I used field research to study an Italian American youth culture based in the outer boroughs known as Guido. The first publication on this subject can be linked on my QCC web page.
Participant Observation
A form of field work called participant observation, in which researchers join people and participate in a group’s routine activities for the purpose of observing them within that context. This method lets researchers experience a specific aspect of social life to obtain information that people may be unwilling or unable to divulge. A researcher might go to great lengths to get a firsthand look into a trend, institution, or behavior. Researchers temporarily put themselves into roles and record their observations. A researcher might work as a waitress in a diner, live as a homeless person for several weeks, or ride along with police officers as they patrol their regular beat. Often, these researchers try to blend in seamlessly with the population they study, and they may not disclose their true identity or purpose if they feel it would compromise the results of their research. I did a “community study” of an Italian American neighborhood in lower Manhattan which was published as a book in 1984 (see link below for “The Italians of Greenwich Village on my QCC web page). I had “insider” access to the community because my family lived there for several generations. It made it possible to know things that are not typically disclosed to a stranger, such as the workings of the “Mafia”. Also see my QCC web page for a study of the Italian American youth culture known as “Guido” that relied on observational methods, including a study of an online chat room: https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialSciences/dtricarico.html
Case studies like my participant-observation study of a particular Italian American neighborhood offer a way for sociologists to collect deep and rich data that may not be collectable by any other method Each one of your projects will be a case study. Still, it is possible for researchers to offer generalizations, no matter how tentative or hypothetical. Sociology is a “generalizing” science – committed to explaining a wider swath of social reality than the single “case”. My Greenwich Village study made it possible to “generalize” about how Italian immigrants adapted to life New York City into the 2d and 3d generations at a particular historical juncture.
_____________________
The work of C. Wright Mills’ provides the theoretical underpinning for the first research project, in particular the first option “The General in the Particular”. Sociologists are interested in the experiences of individuals and how those experiences are shaped by interactions with social groups and society as a whole. To a sociologist, the personal decisions an individual makes do not exist in a vacuum. In particular, Mills maintains that individual lives have to be understood in the context of society and history. For example, Americans continue to get married. However, they are older when they marry compared to previous generations. In the 1950s, the median age of marriage for women was 21, while it is now 28. Sociologists explain this generational, or historical, shift in terms of structural changes in particular the necessity of extended formal education and the labor-force participation of women. I have copied Mills on his concept of the “sociological imagination”:
Nowadays people often feel that their private lives are a series of traps. They sense that within their everyday worlds, they cannot overcome their troubles, and in this feeling, they are often quite correct. What ordinary people are directly aware of and what they try to do are bounded by the private orbits in which they live; their visions and their powers are limited to the close-up scenes of job, family, neighborhood; in other milieux, they move vicariously and remain spectators. And the more aware they become, however vaguely, of ambitions and of threats which transcend their immediate locales, the more trapped they seem to feel.
Underlying this sense of being trapped are seemingly impersonal changes in the very structure of continent-wide societies. The facts of contemporary history are also facts about the success and the failure of individual men and women. When a society is industrialized, a peasant becomes a worker; a feudal lord is liquidated or becomes a businessman. When classes rise or fall, a person is employed or unemployed; when the rate of investment goes up or down, a person takes new heart or goes broke. When wars happen, an insurance salesperson becomes a rocket launcher; a store clerk, a radar operator; a wife or husband lives alone; a child grows up without a parent. Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both.
Yet people do not usually define the troubles they endure in terms of historical change and institutional contradiction. The well-being they enjoy, they do not usually impute to the big ups and downs of the societies in which they live. Seldom aware of the intricate connection between the patterns of their own lives and the course of world history, ordinary people do not usually know what this connection means for the kinds of people they are becoming and for the kinds of history-making in which they might take part. They do not possess the quality of mind essential to grasp the interplay of individuals and society, of biography and history, of self and world. They cannot cope with their personal troubles in such ways as to control the structural transformations that usually lie behind them.
Surely it is no wonder. In what period have so many people been so totally exposed at so fast a pace to such earthquakes of change? That Americans have not known such catastrophic changes as have the men and women of other societies is due to historical facts that are now quickly becoming 'merely history.' The history that now affects every individual is world history. Within this scene and this period, in the course of a single generation, one sixth of humankind is transformed from all that is feudal and backward into all that is modern, advanced, and fearful. Political colonies are freed; new and less visible forms of imperialism installed. Revolutions occur; people feel the intimate grip of new kinds of authority. Totalitarian societies rise, and are smashed to bits - or succeed fabulously. After two centuries of ascendancy, capitalism is shown up as only one way to make society into an industrial apparatus. After two centuries of hope, even formal democracy is restricted to a quite small portion of mankind. Everywhere in the underdeveloped world, ancient ways of life are broken up and vague expectations become urgent demands. Everywhere in the overdeveloped world, the means of authority and of violence become total in scope and bureaucratic in form. Humanity itself now lies before us, the super- nation at either pole concentrating its most coordinated and massive efforts upon the preparation of World War Three.
The very shaping of history now outpaces the ability of people to orient themselves in accordance with cherished values. And which values? Even when they do not panic, people often sense that older ways of feeling and thinking have collapsed and that newer beginnings are ambiguous to the point of moral stasis. Is it any wonder that ordinary people feel they cannot cope with the larger worlds with which they are so suddenly confronted? That they cannot understand the meaning of their epoch for their own lives? That - in defense of selfhood - they become morally insensible, trying to remain altogether private individuals? Is it any wonder that they come to be possessed by a sense of the trap?
It is not only information that they need - in this Age of Fact, information often dominates their attention and overwhelms their capacities to assimilate it. It is not only the skills of reason that they need - although their struggles to acquire these often exhaust their limited moral energy.
What they need, and what they feel they need, is a quality of mind that will help them to use information and to develop reason in order to achieve lucid summations of what is going on in the world and of what may be happening within themselves. It is this quality, I am going to contend, that journalists and scholars, artists and publics, scientists and editors are coming to expect of what may be called the sociological imagination.
The sociological imagination enables its possessor to understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and the external career of a variety of individuals. It enables him to take into account how individuals, in the welter of their daily experience, often become falsely conscious of their social positions. Within that welter, the framework of modern society is sought, and within that framework the psychologies of a variety of men and women are formulated. By such means the personal uneasiness of individuals is focused upon explicit troubles and the indifference of publics is transformed into involvement with public issues.
The first fruit of this imagination - and the first lesson of the social science that embodies it - is the idea that the individual can understand her own experience and gauge her own fate only by locating herself within her period, that she can know her own chances in life only by becoming aware of those of all individuals in her circumstances. In many ways it is a terrible lesson; in many ways a magnificent one. We do not know the limits of humans capacities for supreme effort or willing degradation, for agony or glee, for pleasurable brutality or the sweetness of reason. But in our time we have come to know that the limits of 'human nature' are frighteningly broad. We have come to know that every individual lives, from one generation to the next, in some society; that he lives out a biography, and lives it out within some historical sequence. By the fact of this living, he contributes, however minutely, to the shaping of this society and to the course of its history, even as he is made by society and by its historical push and shove.
The sociological imagination enables us to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society. That is its task and its promise. To recognize this task and this promise is the mark of the classic social analyst. It is characteristic of Herbert Spencer - turgid, polysyllabic, comprehensive; of E. A. Ross - graceful, muckraking, upright; of Auguste Comte and Emile Durkheim; of the intricate and subtle Karl Mannheim. It is the quality of all that is intellectually excellent in Karl Marx; it is the clue to Thorstein Veblen's brilliant and ironic insight, to Joseph Schumpeter's many-sided constructions of reality; it is the basis of the psychological sweep of W. E. H. Lecky no less than of the profundity and clarity of Max Weber. And it is the signal of what is best in contemporary studies of people and society.
No social study that does not come back to the problems of biography, of history and of their intersections within a society has completed its intellectual journey. Whatever the specific problems of the classic social analysts, however limited or however broad the features of social reality they have examined, those who have been imaginatively aware of the promise of their work have consistently asked three sorts of questions:
(1) What is the structure of this particular society as a whole? What are its essential components, and how are they related to one another? How does it differ from other varieties of social order? Within it, what is the meaning of any particular feature for its continuance and for its change? (
2) Where does this society stand in human history? What are the mechanics by which it is changing? What is its place within and its meaning for the development of humanity as a whole? How does any particular feature we are examining affect, and how is it affected by, the historical period in which it moves? And this period - what are its essential features? How does it differ from other periods? What are its characteristic ways of history-making?
(3) What varieties of men and women now prevail in this society and in this period? And what varieties are coming to prevail? In what ways are they selected and formed, liberated and repressed, made sensitive and blunted? What kinds of `human nature' are revealed in the conduct and character we observe in this society in this period? And what is the meaning for 'human nature' of each and every feature of the society we are examining?
Whether the point of interest is a great power state or a minor literary mood, a family, a prison, a creed - these are the kinds of questions the best social analysts have asked. They are the intellectual pivots of classic studies of individuals in society - and they are the questions inevitably raised by any mind possessing the sociological imagination. For that imagination is the capacity to shift from one perspective to another - from the political to the psychological; from examination of a single family to comparative assessment of the national budgets of the world; from the theological school to the military establishment; from considerations of an oil industry to studies of contemporary poetry. It is the capacity to range from the most impersonal and remote transformations to the most intimate features of the human self - and to see the relations between the two. Back of its use there is always the urge to know the social and historical meaning of the individual in the society and in the period in which she has her quality and her being.
That, in brief, is why it is by means of the sociological imagination that men and women now hope to grasp what is going on in the world, and to understand what is happening in themselves as minute points of the intersections of biography and history within society. In large part, contemporary humanity's self-conscious view of itself as at least an outsider, if not a permanent stranger, rests upon an absorbed realization of social relativity and of the transformative power of history. The sociological imagination is the most fruitful form of this self-consciousness. By its use people whose mentalities have swept only a series of limited orbits often come to feel as if suddenly awakened in a house with which they had only supposed themselves to be familiar. Correctly or incorrectly, they often come to feel that they can now provide themselves with adequate summations, cohesive assessments, comprehensive orientations. Older decisions that once appeared sound now seem to them products of a mind unaccountably dense. Their capacity for astonishment is made lively again. They acquire a new way of thinking, they experience a transvaluation of values: in a word, by their reflection and by their sensibility, they realize the cultural meaning of the social sciences.
Perhaps the most fruitful distinction with which the sociological imagination works is between 'the personal troubles of milieu' and 'the public issues of social structure.' This distinction is an essential tool of the sociological imagination and a feature of all classic work in social science.
Troubles occur within the character of the individual and within the range of his or her immediate relations with others; they have to do with one's self and with those limited areas of social life of which one is directly and personally aware. Accordingly, the statement and the resolution of troubles properly lie within the individual as a biographical entity and within the scope of one's immediate milieu - the social setting that is directly open to her personal experience and to some extent her willful activity. A trouble is a private matter: values cherished by an individual are felt by her to be threatened.
Issues have to do with matters that transcend these local environments of the individual and the range of her inner life. They have to do with the organization of many such milieu into the institutions of an historical society as a whole, with the ways in which various milieux overlap and interpenetrate to form the larger structure of social and historical life. An issue is a public matter: some value cherished by publics is felt to be threatened. Often there is a debate about what that value really is and about what it is that really threatens it. This debate is often without focus if only because it is the very nature of an issue, unlike even widespread trouble, that it cannot very well be defined in terms of the immediate and everyday environments of ordinary people. An issue, in fact, often involves a crisis in institutional arrangements, and often too it involves what Marxists call 'contradictions' or 'antagonisms.'
In these terms, consider unemployment. When, in a city of 100,000, only one is unemployed, that is his personal trouble, and for its relief we properly look to the character of the individual, his skills and his immediate opportunities. But when in a nation of 50 million employees, 15 million people are unemployed, that is an issue, and we may not hope to find its solution within the range of opportunities open to any one individual. The very structure of opportunities has collapsed. Both the correct statement of the problem and the range of possible solutions require us to consider the economic and political institutions of the society, and not merely the personal situation and character of a scatter of individuals.
Consider war. The personal problem of war, when it occurs, may be how to survive it or how to die in it with honor; how to make money out of it; how to climb into the higher safety of the military apparatus; or how to contribute to the war's termination. In short, according to one's values, to find a set of milieux and within it to survive the war or make one's death in it meaningful. But the structural issues of war have to do with its causes; with what types of people it throws up into command; with its effects upon economic and political, family and religious institutions, with the unorganized irresponsibility of a world of nation-states.
Consider marriage. Inside a marriage a man and a woman may experience personal troubles, but when the divorce rate during the first four years of marriage is 250 out of every 1,000 attempts, this is an indication of a structural issue having to do with the institutions of marriage and the family and other institutions that bear upon them.
Or consider the metropolis - the horrible, beautiful, ugly, magnificent sprawl of the great city. For many members of the upper class the personal solution to 'the problem of the city' is to have an apartment with private garage under it in the heart of the city and forty miles out, a house by Henry Hill, garden by Garrett Eckbo, on a hundred acres of private land. In these two controlled environments - with a small staff at each end and a private helicopter connection - most people could solve many of the problems of personal milieux caused by the facts of the city. But all this, however splendid, does not solve the public issues that the structural fact of the city poses. What should be done with this wonderful monstrosity? Break it all up into scattered units, combining residence and work? Refurbish it as it stands? Or, after evacuation, dynamite it and build new cities according to new plans in new places? What should those plans be? And who is to decide and to accomplish whatever choice is made? These are structural issues; to confront them and to solve them requires us to consider political and economic issues that affect innumerable milieux.
In so far as an economy is so arranged that slumps occur, the problem of unemployment becomes incapable of personal solution. In so far as war is inherent in the nation-state system and in the uneven industrialization of the world, the ordinary individual in her restricted milieu will be powerless - with or without psychiatric aid - to solve the troubles this system or lack of system imposes upon him. In so far as the family as an institution turns women into darling little slaves and men into their chief providers and unweaned dependents, the problem of a satisfactory marriage remains incapable of purely private solution. In so far as the overdeveloped megalopolis and the overdeveloped automobile are built-in features of the overdeveloped society, the issues of urban living will not be solved by personal ingenuity and private wealth.
What we experience in various and specific milieux, I have noted, is often caused by structural changes. Accordingly, to understand the changes of many personal milieux we are required to look beyond them. And the number and variety of such structural changes increase as the institutions within which we live become more embracing and more intricately connected with one another. To be aware of the idea of social structure and to use it with sensibility is to be capable of tracing such linkages among a great variety of milieux. To be able to do that is to possess the sociological imagination.
“The Sociological Imagination”, Chapter 1: The Promise. C.W. Mills http://sites.middlebury.edu/utopias/files/2013/02/The-Promise.pdf (accessed 3.28.20).
1. The general in the particular
Mills maintains that sociology studies patterns of behavior in order to draw conclusions about a social issue that transcends the effect of the problem or issue on any particular individual. Mills defines “social issue” in broad outlines.
1) A behavior or event is “patterned” when it is recurrent. Find patterns in your everyday life for example, in mass media use, dietary choices, musical preferences, and clothing styles. Flesh out your “particular pattern” in detail.
2) Where in the society do you find your particular pattern? Connect your particular, or personal, pattern to a more general pattern for a “group” or “category” of people who occupy a place in the social structure: (e.g., the core audience for heavy metal music is young while males).
3) Is this a named pattern (e.g., Metalheads, Vegans)? What are the rules or “norms” that govern a general (i.e., cultural) pattern like social media use, musical taste, or dietary choice? For example, dietary choices may be governed by religious beliefs.
4) Use the literature to interpret this general pattern as a social “institution” (e.g., “marriage”, “youth culture”, “Hip Hop”).
5) What can explain these patterns sociologically (e.g., heavy metal reflects the symbolic rebellion of young white males against adult authority).
6) To what extent do you derive an individual identity from this pattern? How does this connect you to others and a group or collective identity? For example, you can cook without being identified as a cook (or chef).
_________
Social life is not random but patterned. Patterns are events that are recurrent, or repeated on a frequent basis. For example, marrying for love (and like) is the dominant pattern of mate selection in modern societies. Women, in this society, routinely wear makeup; they apply lipstick and eye shadow, following rules that are cultural. Men, typically, do not “put on their face”.
For a perspective on discovering “patterns” of behavior, see the video, “Quantified Self: Apps to Help Track Habits and Identify Patterns”, Kit Eaton (NYT Video, 1.20.16) https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/technology/personaltech/video-feature-quantified-self-apps-to-help-track-habits-and-identify-patterns.html
Cultural patterns that are established over time put pressure on people to select one choice over another, especially when supported by strong norms, or laws. Sociologists try to identify these general patterns by examining the behavior of large groups of people living in the same society and experiencing the same societal pressures. While there are “individual differences”, the existence of a shared culture makes it possible to generalize. Generalizations, for example that marriage in modern societies is based on romantic love, are valid because social life is patterned and not random. Generalized statements represent a broader understanding – a knowledge of an aggregate of particular cases. You will be asked to generalize from the “particular” case studies that comprise your research projects.
The role of norms is important, here. The violation of norms, or rules, is defined as deviant. Individuals and groups are motivated to avoid being labeled deviant which carries sanctions, or punishment, to one degree or another. Formal sanctions are applied by lawful authorities like the police and the courts; this represents the interest of society on social order or control, recently challenged on a major scale in the Capitol attack. Sanctions are also informal such as when people are criticized or shunned socially for awkward behavior or tacky dressing. The matter of individuals conforming to norms makes it possible to live with others – whether in families, in neighborhoods, or driving an automobile in traffic. The approval of significant others is its own reward. Consider the importance of “likes” on Facebook. Social media is widely remarked to be more about “affirmation” (of the self) than “information”.
Cultural patterns that are established over time are known as social institutions. They are “established” because they meet important human social needs like the material and emotional care of the young (i.e, the family). They are shared throughout a population and come to define them as a society. The major societal institutions are government, the economy, the legal system, religion, the healthcare system, and the family. Institutions are comprised by rules, or norms, that regulate action. See this useful definition of the concept below:
A social institution is a complex, integrated set of social norms organized around the preservation of a basic societal value. Obviously, the sociologist does not define institutions in the same way, as does the person on the street. Laypersons are likely to use the term "institution" very loosely, for churches, hospitals, jails, and many other things as institutions. According to Sumner and Keller institution is a vital interest or activity that is surrounded by a cluster of mores and folkways. Sumner conceived of the institution not only of the concept, idea or interest but of a institution as well. By structure he meant an apparatus or a group of functionaries. Lester F Ward regarded an institution as the means for the control and utilization of the social energy. L.T Hobhouse describe institution as the whole or any part of the established and recognized apparatus of social life. Robert Maclver regarded institution as established forms or conditions of procedure characteristic of group activity.
Sociologists agree that institutions arise and persist because of a definite felt need of the members of the society. While there is essential agreement on the general origin of institutions, sociologists have differed about the specific motivating factors. Sumner and Keller maintained that institutions come into existence to satisfy vital interests of man. Ward believed that they arise because of social demand or social necessity. Lewis H Morgan ascribed the basis of every institution to what he called a perpetual want.
Primary Institutions
Sociologists often reserve the term "institution" to describe normative systems that operate in five basic areas of life, which may be designated as the primary institutions.
(1) In determining Kinship;
(2) in providing for the legitimate use of power;
(3) in regulating the distribution of goods and services;
(4) in transmitting knowledge from one generation to the next; and
(5) in regulating our relation to the supernatural.
In shorthand form, or as concepts, these five basic institutions are called the family, government, economy, education and religion.
Sociologists operating in terms of the functionalist model society have provided the clearest explanation of the functions served by social institutions. Apparently there are certain minimum tasks that must be performed in all human groups. Unless these tasks are performed adequately, the group will cease to exist.
An important feature that we find in the growth of institutions is the extension of the power of the state over the other four primary institutions. The state now exercises more authority by laws and regulations. The state has taken over the traditional functions of the family like making laws regulating marriage, divorce, adoption and inheritance. The authority of state has similarly been extended to economics, to education and to religion. New institutional norms may replace the old norms but the institution goes on. The modern family has replaced the norms of patriarchal family yet the family as an institution continues.
“Social Institutions”, Sociology Guide. https://sociologyguide.com/basic-concepts/Social-Institutions.php (accessed 3.28.20).
Case Study: Major Social Institutions
For example, our system of democracy is distinguished by the “rule of law” rather than by the absolute power of an individual or family and “no man is above the law”. Conduct that violates a norm is considered deviance from a sociological perspective. See excerpts from this NYT article on the relationship between government and “big business”:
The longstanding alliance between big business and the Republican Party is being tested as never before.
As President Trump and his allies sought to overturn the election results in recent months, chief executives condemned their efforts and called on Republicans to stop meddling with the peaceful transfer of power.
Now, in the aftermath of the deadly Capitol rampage by Mr. Trump’s supporters, corporate America is turning its back on many senior Republicans, and flexing its political muscle.
One major trade group called on Mr. Trump’s cabinet to consider removing him from office. Dozens of companies , from AT&T to Walmart, have said they will no longer donate to members of Congress who opposed the Electoral College certification of President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.
For decades, the Republicans were seen as the party of big business. Their support for low taxes and light regulation was manna to executives eager to raise profits and avoid government entanglements, and chief executives and big companies were reliable funders of Republicans up and down the ballot.
Mr. Trump has frayed those bonds. Four years ago, few major chief executives supported Mr. Trump during his first campaign. And throughout his time in the White House, executives from many of the company’s biggest brands publicly sparred with the president on everything from gun control to climate change to immigration.
“I can’t remember a time when the business community has spoken out so strongly in opposition to an administration on so many important issues,” said Rich Lesser, chief executive of Boston Consulting Group.
“It’s not just a break with Trump but potentially with the Republican Party,” said Richard Edelman, chief executive of the global corporate communications firm Edelman. “It’s not OK what’s going on in America, and businesspeople are going to hold you to account.”
Even as they objected to some of Mr. Trump’s stances, however, business leaders continued to take seats at the table, working with the Trump administration on issues including taxes and trade policy.
But last week seemed to be a breaking point. Big business could evidently tolerate working with Mr. Trump despite his chauvinism, his flirtations with white nationalism and his claims of impunity, but the president’s apparent willingness to undermine democracy itself appeared to be a step too far.
“This thing was a little different. I mean, we had sedition and insurrection in D.C.,” said Jamie Dimon, the chief executive of JPMorgan Chase. “No C.E.O. I know condones that in any way, shape or form. We shouldn’t have someone, you know, gassing up a mob.”
The fallout has been swift. After the president exhorted his supporters to march on the Capitol, chief executives used their strongest language to date to repudiate Mr. Trump, and some of his longtime allies have walked away. Ken Langone, the billionaire co-founder of Home Depot and an ardent supporter of the president, renounced Mr. Trump, telling CNBC , “I feel betrayed.”
Twitter, Facebook and YouTube have banned or suspended Mr. Trump’s accounts . Amazon, Apple and Google have cut ties with Parler , a messaging app popular among his supporters.
Charles Schwab , the brokerage firm founded by a Republican who supported Mr. Trump, said it would shut down its political action committee altogether. And many companies, along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have sought to punish Mr. Trump’s supporters in Congress by depriving them of crucial funds.
“For those members of Congress that were involved in helping to incite the riot, and support the riot, there’s going to be consequences, no question about it,” said Ed Bastian, chief executive of Delta Air Lines.
Some companies said they were only temporarily stopping their corporate giving, but executives were sending a clear message that they were fed up with Washington.
“It’s just a sad time for our country,” said Chuck Robbins, the chief executive of Cisco, which is also halting donations to members who voted against certification. “At a time where we have so many challenges, the partisanship is astounding.”
With political rancor worsening by the day and few politicians enjoying bipartisan support, business leaders have emerged as a uniquely potent force, the rare constituency whose pleas for stability and national unity are largely untainted by allegiance to one party or the other.
“C.E.O.s have become the fourth branch of government,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, which has pressured big companies to take stands on social issues. “They’re trying to hold the country together.”
Executives are confronting their newfound authority with a mix of swagger and reticence. “There’s no question that our voice is seen as more important than ever,” said Mr. Bastian of Delta, which said it was reviewing its political giving and has banned some pro-Trump protesters from its flights.
“’We Need to Stabilize’: Big Business Breaks With Republicans”, David Gelles, NYT (1.15.21) https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/15/business/republicans-business-trump.html
Racial inequality is embedded in major social institutions in the United States at the national level in this NYT article by Denise Lu et al. The article focuses on a pattern of racial dominance, specifically the overrepresentation of whites and the underrepresentation of nonwhites, at the top of these institutions – finance, government, the corporate economy, sports and entertainment, etc. To this extent, race is institutionalized or built into the institutions that shape American life. See “Faces of Power: 80% Are White, Even as U.S. Becomes More Diverse” https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/09/09/us/powerful-people-race-us.html
While racial identity is not equivalent to culture, there is historical precedence to assume that institutional cultures have been shaped by racial dominance. It is in this sense that law enforcement can be said to be racialized (e.g., to be organized around white privilege).
Also see the video, “Race: The Power of an Illusion” (Part 3) which can be streamed on Kanopy through the QCC Library. Pay special attention to two areas of institutionalized racism. One, is the segregation of the U.S. Armed Forces during World War Two. The other example are the Federal policies that promoted racial segregation in housing when the war ended. Home ownership in the suburbs became the basis for wealth-creation for families identified as “white” was inhibited for non-white families as a result of the policies of the banks (as lending institutions) and the Federal government. Black families were limited in moving to the suburbs. Black ethnicity was institutionalized in the inner city “ghetto” culture while whiteness was institutionalized in middle class suburban culture.
Institutions are patterns that are established over time as long as they continue to have meaning for individuals and the society as a whole. However, this is subject to change. The sense that the “pandemic” has disrupted our personal and collective lives can be explained by the impact on social institutions – patterns established over time. How disorienting it is to have teachers and students engaging on the internet rather than in the classroom, or to have spectator sports in venues minus spectators. For what happens when established patterns, or routines, are disrupted by the pandemic see “How to Cope When Everything Keeps Changing”, Cindy Lamothe, NYT (9.7.20). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/07/smarter-living/how-to-cope-when-everything-keeps-changing.html
The first question in Project 1 asks you to find a “particular” pattern which can be followed to something more “general”; the task, here, is to find culture. C. Wright Mills concept of sociological imagination refers to an awareness of the relationship between a person’s behavior and experience (i.e., the “particular”) and the wider culture that shaped the person’s choices and perceptions (i.e., the ”general”). Following Mills, this is a way of seeing our own and other people’s behavior in relationship to history and social structure.
Marriage, for example, is a “particular” pattern that is highly personal, culturally interpreted as a once-in-a lifetime event. At the same time, “getting married” is a wider cultural pattern or norm(al), although delayed marriage has become institutionalized; the median age of first marriage in the U.S. has risen from 23 for males and 21 for females in the early 1950s to 30 and 28 respectively. Romantic love is considered necessary and even sufficient for “getting married”. The cultural ideology of romantic marriage paradoxically explains the high divorce rate in modern society in contrast to arranged marriage which does not require “falling in love” (reflect on what is meant by the metaphor of “falling”?).
Internet spaces like Instagram and Tik Tok have found new ways to connect youth and their peer cultures to consumerism – a mainstream American ideology that bases identity on commodities like cell phones, clothing and cars. See the video “Generation Like” https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/generation-like/ for an investigation of the new online patterns of online communication that have been enthusiastically adopted by the younger generations. The video suggests that online social media shapes a peer group culture that is relatively insulated from adults, and that pressures individuals to conform to behaviors that are largely orchestrated by large corporations actively marketing commodities to this demographic including social media companies like Facebook. Social media is a site where youth pursue “likes” from peers that validate a “cool” self.
It is important to keep in mind that culture is a product of the people in a society; human beings create culture and, at the same time, created by it. See the article by Mark Lilla (below) on what our culture will look like “post-Covid”. According to Lilla, “the post-Covid culture doesn’t exist. It will only exist after we have made it…”. Human beings can take action; we have choices which means change is possible. In terms of the conceptual language of sociology that we are using, new cultural patterns are not yet established, or institutionalized. Think about the BLM mass movement to change the culture of policing and, more broadly, racial inequality. Change is directed at racism that is built-into specific institutions like law enforcement – racism that is institutionalized or systemic.
Case Study: U.S Accents
Americans speak English. Speaking English is necessary for individuals in order to fit into the society, such as the workplace and school. However, there is a variety of ways for speaking American English. This can be explained by settlement and contact patterns in a vast geographical space. How would you characterize your accent? See this video with special attention paid to accent patterns for New Yorkers, Latino New Yorkers, and African Americans:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1KP4ztKK0A
Case Study: Fishing on the Seine
Read the excerpt below for the emergence of a distinctive pattern of fishing in Paris along the river Seine. The people involved in this activity come from a certain place in French society; in particular, according to the article, they are young and male. Their approach to fishing differs in important respect from the way that was customary on the river. For example, fisherman upload photos of their catch on social media rather than eat it. Also note the institutionalization of this new pattern of fishing, even involving social media influencers and commercial branding.
PARIS — On a recent wintry afternoon along the Seine, a Parisian teenager took a fishing rod out of a narrow holster, stuck a glittery rubber fish on a hook and cast his line into the water.
The fisherman, Eliot Malherbe, 19, was soon joined at the river’s edge by his friend Kacim Machline, 22, an art student. But first, Mr. Machline spray painted a greenish striped fish on the concrete walls by their spot on the river, in an renovated former industrial area near the Jardin des Plantes on the Left Bank.
The Seine used to be the fishing playground of older, working-class men who whiled away their retirement days at the river. These days, a younger and more diverse generation is disrupting the scene.
Many of the younger anglers were first drawn to the Seine by the promise of other adventures. The city’s quays offer some of the city’s prime skateboarding territory, and for graffiti artists, it provides areas with little traffic so they can discreetly spray their tags during the night.
During the official fishing season from May to January, young fishers meet at certain spots — near barges stretching for miles along the river and under which fish shelter, or by the Canal Saint-Martin or Canal de l’Ourcq, where the water is calmer and warmer than in the Seine.
Although they are carrying on a centuries-old tradition of fishing in the shadows of Notre-Dame or below the Eiffel Tower, younger fishers have brought with them updated rules and codes.
Foremost among them: The ultimate aim of the day’s catch is no longer about sharing a meal with friends and family. Instead, the goal is to share on social media close-up images of the pikes, perches, zanders, wels catfish and other species — and then releasing them back in the river.
Thierry Paquot, who studies urban life and teaches at the Paris Urban Planning Institute, sees the urban anglers as part of a push by city dwellers across France to be more in tune with nature.
“There is a whole new range of practices heading in the same direction, like urban agriculture,” he said.
He said a generation of young adults, suffering from growing economic precariousness, find a sense of community in the tradition of fishing, which they have transformed by an ecological awareness and by sharing their passion through technology.
The fishing federation of the Parisian region has 8,500 members, all of whom buy an annual license for about $120. Add in those who occasionally purchase a daily license for $15, and those who fish illegally, and the total number of people who fish in the capital could be over 30,000, according to fishing store owners.
“The number of fishermen remains quite stable, but now young people clearly outnumber people of a certain age,” said Marcelo D’Amore, who has been selling fishing gear in Paris for the past 30 years, first at a sporting goods chain and now at “ Giga-pêche ” — which means something like “mega-fishing” — a store he opened in 2016 in eastern Paris.
The growing appeal of Parisian fishing to the younger crowd has drawn the attention of entrepreneurs like Fred Miessner, who says he noticed the trend in the early 2000s and nicknamed it “street-fishing.” With a business partner, Mr. Miessner — who also fishes in the Seine — launched French Touch Fishing , a fishing items wholesale company, and Big Fish 1983 , a streetwear collection for urban fishers including hats, printed T-shirts and polarized sunglasses.
His brand and others like it sponsor young fishermen who have become social media influencers in the community. Mr. Machline, the art student, receives hundreds of dollars’ worth of goods from a company in exchange for posts mentioning the brand to his 4,000 followers on Instagram .
Some fishing customs remain unchanged in the social media age. While sharing photos of the day’s trophy catch is essential, fishers tend to avoid making their exact locations obvious to protect them from “crabbers” — as they call those who identify good spots from pictures.
And bragging about the size of one’s catch continues unabated.
“Catch a Fish in Paris. Post on Social Media”. Release”, Antonella Francini, NYT (1.11.21). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/world/europe/france-paris-seine-fishing.html
Case Study: Education and Health
You will be asked to provide explanations in reporting your case studies. An explanation is an answer to the question why did something happen? For example, why are some people in better health than others? See the article below on the causal relationship between education and health. Not uncommonly, cause and effect works both ways in this relationship.
Education is associated with better health outcomes, but trying to figure out whether it actually causes better health is tricky.
People with at least some college education have mortality rates (deaths per 1,000 individuals per year) less than half of those without any college education, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In addition , people who are more educated exhibit less anxiety and depression, have fewer functional limitations, and are less likely to have a serious health condition like diabetes, cardiovascular disease or asthma.
But causality runs both ways. People in poor health from a young age may be unable to pursue education as much as those with better health. On the other hand, a person who tends to focus on long-term outcomes may be motivated to develop healthier habits like regular exercise — even if blocked from a pursuit of higher education.
Some clever studies have teased out the causal effects of education by exploiting natural experiments. One, by the U.C.L.A economist Adriana Lleras-Muney , relied on state compulsory education laws enacted between 1915 and 1939. These laws required some children to obtain more education than they might have otherwise, resulting in longer lives for those that did so. According to the study, having an additional year of education by 1960 increased life expectancy at age 35 by 1.7 years.
Studies that relied on inducements for greater education because of a poor labor market or as a way to avoid the Vietnam draft found that increased education led to better health and a lower likelihood of smoking. This finding is one clue about how education may improve health. It can reduce people’s engagement in risky behaviors, perhaps because those behaviors could threaten the higher income that greater education typically confers.
But health behaviors can explain only a portion of the relationship between education and mortality. Education may also provide skills to analyze information and tackle complex problems — precisely what’s needed to navigate the modern health system and attend to chronic diseases.
A higher level of education is also associated with higher income and greater wealth, which are also correlated with better health.
Again, causality goes both ways. You have to be reasonably healthy to keep a job or to work long hours, for example. But higher income also often comes with better health insurance and easier access to health care.
Much of income’s effect on health may originate in childhood. Many studies demonstrate that children of wealthier parents are in better health, perhaps because of better access to prenatal care and nutrition, or because they live in less polluted environments. A healthier childhood often means a healthier adulthood. And children born to higher-income parents are more likely to obtain more education and have higher incomes themselves. That’s how the income-health relationship may propagate across generations.
Greater education and wealth can also confer greater social status or rank, which has also been linked to health. A landmark study published in 1978 found that higher-ranking British civil servants (like administrators) had lower rates of mortality due to coronary heart disease than lower-ranking ones (like messengers). Lower-ranked civil servants tended to be heavier; they had higher blood pressure and blood sugar, and smoked more. Many investigations have replicated this relationship between social rank and health.
An intriguing hypothesis that links social standing and health is that people of lower status lead more stressful lives. Stress is known to alter blood flow and release hormones damaging to tissue, suppressing the immune system and raising risks of cardiovascular disease and mortality. One study linked childhood poverty to chronic stress and subsequent reductions in memory , which could affect education, wage attainment and health. Even stress endured in pregnancy can affect the health of the fetus in ways that endure throughout life, research suggests.
Health also varies by racial and ethnic identity, which also tend to play a big role in social standing.
For example, African-Americans have higher rates of mortality than white Americans, even after adjusting for income and education. Here too, there are childhood origins — African-American infants are more likely to be born preterm and with lower birth weights.
One reason may be less access to prenatal care. African-American patients are also less likely to receive preventive health care and more likely to live in areas with lower-quality hospitals and doctors. Disadvantages and stress stemming from a history of discrimination and community segregation underlie these and other disparities.
Hispanics tend to be healthier than comparable non-Hispanic white Americans, despite being poorer on average. The Hispanic paradox , as it’s known, could be because Hispanic immigrants are typically in better health than native U.S. residents (people who are healthier in the first place may be more likely to migrate). Or it could be because of health behaviors. For example, Hispanics are less likely to smoke or drink frequently than their non-Hispanic white counterparts.
In this century, there has been a sharp rise in so-called deaths of despair — suicides, drug overdoses or alcohol abuse — for middle-aged white Americans without a college degree. Even as mortality rates for the poorly educated have risen, the rates among those with some college education have held nearly steady or gone down since 2007.
In 2012, researchers found that life expectancy for white women without a high school diploma was 73.5 years compared with 83.9 years for white women with a college degree or more. For white men, it was 67.5 years for those without a diploma compared with 80.4 for those with a college degree or better.
Just as our health is affected by lifestyle, genes, the environment and the health system, education has a role, too. We can’t yet say exactly how much or exactly why. But a decrease in longevity associated with lower education levels may help explain why overall American life expectancy has declined slightly in recent years — and fallen well off the pace of progress of most other advanced nations.
“Does Your Education Level Affect Your Health?”, Austin Frakt, NYT (6.3.19)
Case Study: Crime Rates in NYC
The sociologist C.W. Mills maintains that sociology studies patterns of behavior in order to draw conclusions about a social issue that transcends the effect of the problem or issue on any particular individual. At the Republic National Convention in late August, Rudy Giuliani underscored the rise in crime in NYC. The New York Times fact-checked this charge. Notice that the Times story begins with the murder of a “particular individual” and proceeds to generalize by framing that case in a broader pattern of murder rates for the entire city that vary over time. Following C. W. Mills, this reflects the importance of culture and history as a context for explaining biography.
There is no doubt that shootings and murders have increased sharply in New York since last year, and that many of the killings have been tragically senseless. As Mr. Giuliani noted, one recent victim was Davell Gardner Jr. , a 1-year-old boy who was fatally shot at a cookout in Brooklyn in July as he was sitting in his stroller.
As of last week, according to police statistics, there had been 280 murders in New York this year, a 35 percent increase over last year. Shooting incidents have also spiked to 955 so far this year, 87 percent more than during the same period last year.
But the surge in violence has arrived amid a 2 percent drop in overall reports of all major crimes, the police say. Rape reports, for instance, are down 25 percent, and grand larceny has dropped 20 percent.
The spike in killings and gun violence also comes after seven years of record-breaking calm when murders dipped to below 300 one year — 2017 — for the first time since the 1950s. That milestone was reached under Mayor Bill de Blasio, the Democrat whom both Mr. Lynch and Mr. Giuliani have blamed for the rise in crime.
The NYT article went on to consider the causes of the rise in crime in the city:
Police officials in New York have linked the rise in shootings to the state’s new bail law — which vastly increased the number of criminal defendants who could be freed before trial without the possibility of bail — and to an emergency effort to release hundreds of inmates from the city’s jails to curb the coronavirus crisis .
But criminologists say the rise in violence can be attributed to the advent of summer, always a high-crime season and especially difficult this year because of the economic and psychological strain of the pandemic and the civil unrest over police brutality.
And a recent analysis by city officials of police department data seemed to point to a different cause for the rise in violence: The number of arrests the police have made for gun crimes in New York has plummeted.
Other big cities have seen a similar pattern this year: Murders and shootings have risen sharply — often from record lows — while the overall rate of major crimes has dipped slightly.
During the first six months of the year, overall crime was down 5.3 percent in 25 large American cities relative to the same period in 2019, with violent crime down 2 percent. But murders rose in these 25 cities by 16.1 percent over the previous year.
Murders were up about 22 percent in Chicago in the first half of the year, and 44 percent in New Orleans .
Richard Rosenfeld, a criminologist at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, said that crime this summer has not spread across cities in the same way it did 30 years ago. It appears to be concentrated in poor neighborhoods. “Cities are not awash in crime,” he said.
Excerpted from “Trump Says Crime is Rampant in New York City”, Alan Feuer, NYT (8.29.20). Also see “A Violent August in New York City: Shootings Double, Murders Up by 50%”, Mihir Zaveri, NYT (9.2.20).
_______
The first option for this project challenges you to find culture by tracking the individual, or “particular”. This second option, “the group and the individual”, reverses that sequence. It starts with the social/culture and challenges you to find the individual – in effect, moving from the general to the particular.
2. The group and the individual
The French sociologist Emile Durkheim defined “the social”, or “social fact”, as a reality that is “external” to the individual and that “constrains” individual behavior – what sociologists define as a social institution.
1) Consider your involvement in a relationship or membership in a group (e.g., a family) or network (e.g., social media) as a “social fact” or “social institution”.
2) What makes this social reality “outside” of you as an individual?
3) Describe situations in which this social reality “constrains” your behavior? Consider expectations to conform to social norms, for example, in regard to a role (e.g., adhering to the oath of President of the United States), dress (e.g., keeping up with the fashion), speech (e.g., using insider jargon), beliefs (e.g., professing the dominant faith), etc.
4) Why do you submit to these social constraints? Consider 1) the cost of deviance from the norms, and; 2) the benefits received from fitting including the derivation of an identity (i.e., a “somebody”) and status privilege (e.g., what accrues to being a “fan”).
5) Does constraint and conformity leave room for your individuality within the group/relationship? In particular, to what extent is individuality compromised or even suppressed?
The sociological perspective assumes that the individual and society are inseparable (and, that a sociological perspective is necessary to uncover the social which is typically taken-for-granted). It is impossible to study one without the other. However, Durkheim long ago called attention to the separate reality of “the social”, and the need for a discipline called sociology to study it (and why psychology was inadequate for the job). Durkheim’s concept of “social facts” points to a reality that is “outside” the individual. This means that it is already established in the culture, i.e., it is a social institution. An obvious example is language. The individual may use a language, even to constitute thoughts, an inner language, but it is created by a “people” who constitute a society over time. Individuals are born into a culture that is reproduced from one generation to the next.
Social facts are also “constraining”. By this Durkheim means that the society creates limits or parameters within which individuals act. Historically, women in this country have been responsible for domestic chores like cooking and housecleaning; there continues to be a gender imbalance in these tasks even now that women are working full-time jobs in large numbers. Individuals and groups are “constrained” to speak the language that is established in the society; it is institutionalized. Similarly, gun ownership and a taste for barbecue are strongly institutionalized in the American south, especially in rural areas. If you grow up in the United States, playing baseball, basketball, and football are “constraining” because they are “institutionalized” (i.e., easy to get into a game in the neighborhood and see on TV). Why is golf, swimming, and lacrosse not as constraining in the inner city as in the suburbs?
“What Are ‘Social Facts’?”, ReviseSociology https://revisesociology.com/2016/12/12/what-are-social-facts/ (accessed 3.27.20).
Case Study: Eating as a Social Fact
We often take for granted how we eat. However, this if fundamentally cultural and, therefore, socially constructed. In the excerpted article below, Mark Bittman argues that dietary patterns are shaped by a “food system”. Thus, the way we eat is a “social fact”. Individuals are typically socialized to know what to eat and at what times. The excerpt below discusses learned preferences for “ultra-processed” food which is now consumed at home as well as in fast-food restaurants. This “standard” American diet constrains commitment to losing weight and wellness in general.
Nearly all of us will fail at our annual round of New Year’s resolutions, which historically are led by eating better and losing weight.
But the struggle for your health is not a battle between you and the scale, or you and the brownies. Excessive weight is a symptom — not one of laziness, stupidity or a lack of discipline but of a food system that thrives on pushing junk. The struggle is really between you and the Big Food marketers that sell you that junk — their most profitable products — and politicians who enable them.
Now, more than half of our total calories come from ultra-processed foods, and our ancestors, no matter where they’re from, would not recognize our diet. In the last quarter of the 20th century, the number of calories consumed in snacks nearly doubled . We tend to blame fast-food restaurants for our poor eating habits, but much of what’s now consumed at home is ultra-processed food. The result has been an average weight gain for adults of more than 24 pounds between 1960 and 2002, and an epidemic of chronic disease.
In short, most of us are overweight, and losing that weight is so difficult because we’re set up to eat too much food that’s high in calories and bereft of nutrients. The new diet is believed to cause chronic disease, led by insulin resistance, which in turn causes Type 2 diabetes , a precursor to a variety of cardiovascular diseases.
Healthy food exists, of course, but it’s overwhelmingly marketed to a specific demographic: wealthier, often white people, almost always adults. Children, poorer whites and especially people of color are the primary targets of ultra-processed-food sales.
There are five fast-food restaurants for every supermarket in the United States, and they’re found more in poor areas than in wealthy ones. So-called food deserts — areas where healthy and affordable food choices are nil — are better labeled as areas of food apartheid and are found more often in poor areas, especially those whose residents are people of color. It’s money that brings supermarkets and good food options to a neighborhood, and even bringing a new grocery store to a lower-income neighborhood doesn’t improve things much if people’s incomes remain low.
The primary determinant of the quality of diet is income, not ignorance, intelligence or will. With 12 percent of Americans going hungry , and millions of households with children uncertain that they’ll be able to feed their kids, the “choice” is often between eating processed food and not eating at all. With each passing generation, unhealthful diets become more normalized. Food preferences begin to be shaped in utero. One study found that mothers with varied diets who breastfeed and wean their children with normal food create much different eaters than mothers with standard American diets who rely on formula and baby food. When we began to feed our children as marketers dictated, pushing the gloss of “convenience” and “modernity,” the cycle spiraled out of control.
Only good policy can rescue us, but government has largely been a part of this problem, embracing the interests of agribusiness, food processors, marketers and retailers. The weight that our society really needs to shed is the shame we allow ourselves to feel for a problem we didn’t create. Or, to put it more bluntly, the dead weight of the profiteers who poison us, and of the plutocrats who abet them.
“Why Your New Year’s Diet Is Doomed”, M. Bittman, NYT (1.9.21). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/opinion/diet-resolution-new-years.html
Case Study: The Crowd/Mob
Crowds are composed of individuals. However, whether referring to the fans in the stands at a soccer match or attending a concert by an iconic artist, sociologists (and psychologists) have long pointed out that there is something about being in the “crowd” that transforms the behavior of the incorporated individuals. Following Durkheim, the “mentality” of the mob can be seen as a “social fact”, both “external” to the individual and “constraining”. See the excerpts below which appeared in the NYT shortly after a violent mob broke into the Capitol building on 1.6.21:
…social scientists have sought to describe the dynamics of humans en masse. What, independent of police provocation, causes a seemingly peaceful group of people to turn violent? How coherent in their purpose are crowds? Why and how does a crowd become a mob?
Last week’s march and deadly assault on the Capitol has raised these questions again, and many more besides. News media reports have openly struggled to find the right language. Was this an angry throng, a chaotic demonstration, a protest turned ugly or a deliberate insurrection — or some combination of them all?
A full account of the episode — the inside story, from those who know — may never emerge, given the lack of neutral chroniclers. But ample video footage is available, perhaps more than from any other such crowd action; experts have already begun viewing and analyzing the imagery in the context of a vast scholarship on crowd dynamics, and the events of Jan. 6 are likely to be studied and referenced for years to come.
If the scenes from the Capitol grounds reveal one thing, it is variety. There were people in military gear, carrying guns, zip-ties and maps of the corridors; individuals in Uncle Sam hats and animal-skin costumes ; others carrying nooses, planting explosive devices, breaking windows, attacking journalists; and hundreds just milling around outside, carrying pro-Trump signs, socializing as if at a backyard barbecue. Perhaps for brevity, headline writers have gravitated toward using the term “mob,” but the word hardly captures the totality of the events, much less what researchers have learned about crowd behavior in the last century and a half.
“Making Sense of the Mob’ Mentality”, Benedict Carey, NYT (1.12.21). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/science/crowds-mob-psychology.html
__________
Case Study: Deviance and Stigma
Individuals and groups conform to social expectations under penalty of being labeled deviant. There are attendant penalties which vary with the norms that are violated. Consider the difference between failing to hold the door for a stranger and failing to pay Federal income taxes. See this excerpt below which is distinguished by expectations set during a public health crisis, but filtered by a small-town social order which can ramp up the shame felt for rule-breaking.
For a time, Cortland Cronk, 26, was Canada’s most famous — and infamous — coronavirus patient.
Mr. Cronk, a traveling salesman, went viral after testing positive in November and recounting his story of being infected while traveling for work to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation .
He was called a virus-spreader, a job-killer, a liar and a sleaze. Online memes painted him as the Grinch, since subsequent outbreaks led to restrictions against Christmas parties. Many people, including a newspaper columnist, made elaborate fun of his name.
He also received threats. So many, in fact, that he fled his hometown, Saint John, for Victoria — a city on the opposite end of the country, 3,600 miles away.
“They were acting like I purposely got Covid,” Mr. Cronk said from his new apartment. “I had hundreds of death threats per day. People telling me I should be publicly stoned.”
Many Canadians believed that it was just rewards and that his case formed a cautionary tale to others who flagrantly break the rules, putting lives and livelihoods at risk. Some even think more formal shaming should happen in Canada, with governments not just fining culprits for breaking coronavirus regulations but broadcasting their names.
Others have argued Mr. Cronk is a victim of a worsening civic problem in the country — public shaming of people testing positive — that is not just unfair but ineffective and that makes the coronavirus harder to quash.
“It might feel like a release for the community, but it does very little to prevent virus transmission,” said Robert Huish, an associate professor at Dalhousie University in Halifax, who is conducting a study on the coronavirus and stigma. “In the process, we are causing people harm.”
Canadians might be known internationally as nice, apologetic and fair-minded. But, a year after the pandemic arrived, some Canadians worry it has exposed a very different national persona: judgmental, suspicious and vengeful. Covid-shaming has become fervent in parts of the country, with locals calling for the heads of not just politicians and doctors breaking the rules but their own family members and neighbors.
“It’s not getting Covid — it’s breaking the rules that worries us,” said Randy Boyagoda, a novelist and English professor at the University of Toronto, noting that a Canadian foundational motto is “peace, order and good government.”
“What’s the key point? It’s order,” he said. “For order to be sustained, we have to follow the rules. Canadians are a distinctly rule-focused and rule-following people.”
Complaint lines — or so-called “snitch lines” — set up across Canada have been flooded with tips about people suspected of breaking quarantine rules, businesses flouting public health restrictions and outsiders, arriving with unfamiliar license plates, potentially bringing the disease with them.
Facebook groups are full of stories of people being labeled potential vectors and being refused service, disinvited from family gatherings and reported to the police and public health authorities.
“This is impacting our ability to contain the virus,” said Dr. Ryan Sommers, one of eight public health doctors in Nova Scotia who published a letter beseeching locals in the small Atlantic province to stop shaming one another, as fear of discrimination was delaying reports of Covid symptoms and potentially driving cases underground.
The province has one of the lowest Covid rates in the country: just 18 active cases, as of Feb 20. But instead of offering solace, people have become hypervigilant, Dr. Sommers said.
“We want to create a social norm, where people will be supportive and caring and compassionate” Dr. Sommers said. “Social media can be more virulent than the virus itself.”
In the country’s four eastern provinces, which have enforced self-isolation rules for anyone entering the region, the shaming is not just online, Mr. Huish said. It’s intimate, particularly in small communities, where “community cohesion quickly flips to become community surveillance.”
Trisha Girouard said a member of her extended family reported her to public health officials after learning she was driving from her home in Irishtown, New Brunswick, across the border to Maine to work as a nurse. She was disinvited from a family baby shower, even though she was complying by self-isolation guidelines, she said.
The sense of being policed by her small community made her feel so frightened, she didn’t dare walk into a coffee shop one day to use the washroom — instead choosing to urinate in a cup in the back of her truck.
“I’m an educated person, but that’s how worked up they had me,” she said in an interview, referring to her extended family.
Some say the fear of stigma has become worse than the fear of catching the disease.
Recently, after taking her second mandatory coronavirus test, Jennifer Hutton pulled out her suitcases, preparing to leave Halifax if she tested positive. She envisioned a front-page newspaper story saying she had brought the virus into the community because she travels for her job as an I.T. director for a medical supply company, she said.
Already, she had received a cold reception from local stores and a profane note had been put on her vehicle, which had Ontario license plates, telling her to go “home and take the rona with you.” “I just couldn’t handle any more stigma,” she said.
“Covid Shaming, Virulent in Canada, Forced Him to Flee Town”, Catherine Porter, NYT (2.22.21). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/21/world/canada/coronavirus-public-shaming.html
___________
To say that something is “institutionalized” is to say that it is built into the culture and social structure. This makes race, gender, and social class “social categories” that mark the place of groups as well as individuals in the society. Social placement is typically hierarchical, or stratified (we will discuss this further in Part 4), creating a rank order of domination and subordination. Racial stratification, which refers to inequality based on “race” is evidenced in the case of the woman walking her dog who called the cops on a man who was watching birds in Central Park (see bibliography below). Race and social class are prominently “built-into” American residential patterns which explains variations in Covid 19 infection and death rates. Racial Inequality has spawned institutional responses from minority groups, in turn. See the article/video below on Historically Black Colleges and Universities which developed to furnish higher education to a population that was historically denied the opportunity on the grounds of racial subordination. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/07/style/welcome-to-homecoming.html
We tend to accept society as it is because we are socialized into what others have created before us. Society is, in fact, “habit” or routine. For example, your school exists as a school and not just as a building because you and others agree that it is a school. If your school is older than you are, it was created by the agreement of others before you. In a sense, it exists by consensus, both prior and current. This is another example of the process of institutionalization, the act of implanting a convention or norm into society. Bear in mind that the institution, while socially constructed, is still quite real. It can be regarded as “second nature”. It is disorienting when the routines, or patterns, that comprise everyday life are disrupted. The pandemic has brought about fundamental cultural dislocations. See “How to Cope When Everything Keeps Changing”, Cindy Lamothe, NYT (9.7.20). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/07/smarter-living/how-to-cope-when-everything-keeps-changing.html
Although individuals come together to form groups or relationships with other individuals, the latter have a reality of their own that is social (i.e., as “social facts” or “institutions”). Couples, or dyads, are made up of two individuals but exist outside the individual and, once established and enduring in custom and in law (i.e., institutionalized), constrain individual behavior. Marriage and sports teams exemplify this kind of social reality which is more than the sum of its parts. See the Shenk article, “The Power of Two”, which muses on how the songwriting team of John Lennon and Paul McCartney wrote much better songs than either did on their own. The Beatles as a rock band further illustrate this point. This musical group wrote and played music that stayed within the conventions of rock and roll, a social institution in its own right, although they are important because of the way they stretched its limits and power (e.g., by incorporating classical arrangements and orchestras).
Individuals have to fit into groups and, more broadly, the society as a whole (i.e., assume a status in society. Societies are arranged or structured – there is a social structure that is comprised of relationships between individuals like a husband and a wife, between the individual and groups like the family, and between groups like the police and a local community. In the second research project in Part 1, you are asked to find the place of an individual in the social structure – in a marriage or a family, the workforce, a college or university, a high school baseball team, an orchestra, etc. Status carries what sociologists call social roles. If you are a member of a baseball team, you are identified, or defined, by a position (e.g., lead-off hitter or “closer”) that prescribes your role or expected performance (e.g., have a high on-base average to score runs or get outs in the last inning to prevent runs). Students have been at odds with the pandemic regulations stipulated by Universities for a return to campus in the Fall of 2020. Instead of complying to social distancing requirements, the campus “party” culture prescribed congregating. In this example, the new university culture took precedence and students who violated social distancing rules were sent home. See https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/22/us/college-campus-covid.html
Most of us are socialized to know what is expected of us in important situations (e.g., to apply yourself in school, to fall in love, to highly value consumer goods). In particular, individuals learn to define their individuality or sense of self in relation to the group (see the next section of socialization). However, membership in a group can be at odds with individual identity - the way individuals define themselves, leading to alienation and rebellion. Consider students who cut class and drop out, perhaps even joining a “deviant” gang (note that alienated or rebellious individuals still have identities referenced to a group that breaks the rules).
Meeting Social Expectations
Excerpts from the article below highlight the way the expectations of parents as well as peers (i.e., peer pressure) have weighed on teenagers during the pandemic, magnifying pressures that are routinely present in parent-child relationships:
When schools shut down last spring, Carson Roubison, a charter school student in Phoenix, was initially relieved. There were some difficulties in those early days at home — when classes went online, Carson and his parents , both public-school teachers, had to share the sole family computer. But Carson’s stress levels fell as school became less demanding during the transition to distance learning.
“I wasn’t aware of the giant impact the pandemic would have,” he said, “so I was excited, to be honest, to have some time off school.”
But things changed in the fall. The academic load went back to prepandemic levels, even though learning was still remote. Carson, a senior, struggled to stay motivated. His mental health suffered. He hoped to attend community college the following fall, but grew increasingly “terrified” that the education he’d received in high school over the past year would leave him unprepared.
“I’m afraid I’m going to get to community college,” he said, “and be held to the same standards as past students, and fail. That’s the biggest source of my anxiety.”
While many experts believe that the reason adolescents are struggling today is that they’re away from friends and school, a closer look at the research reveals a more complicated picture. According to psychologists who study adolescent resilience, one of the biggest threats to the well-being of today’s teenagers is not social isolation but something else — the pressure to achieve, which has intensified over the past year.
What’s driving their misery, the research shows, is the pressure to excel in multiple academic and extracurricular pursuits. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation suggest children living in an achievement-oriented culture are at risk for adjustment problems, like those facing more predictable forms of adversity, such as poverty and trauma.
The pandemic offered a rare reprieve for students — at first. Since 2019, Dr. Luthar and her colleagues have surveyed thousands of adolescents each year at public and private schools across the nation. Replicating findings of earlier research, these students reported suffering from anxiety and depression at higher rates than national norms before the pandemic. But when schools closed last spring, something unexpected happened — the well-being of these students actually improved . As classes and exams were canceled, grading moved to pass/fail and extracurricular activity ceased, they reported lower levels of stress, anxiety and depression compared with 2019.
Other research supports these findings. In a nationally representative study conducted by NBC News and Challenge Success, a nonprofit affiliated with Stanford’s education school, researchers studied over 10,000 high school students in the fall of 2020. Comparing the experience of these students with about 65,000 adolescents surveyed between 2018 and February 2020, these researchers, too, found that many students reported feeling more stressed about school during the fall of 2020 than before the pandemic. A chief cause of their stress: the pressure to achieve.
Nearly half of all students reported that the pressure to do well in school had increased since 2019, and over half said their school-related stress over all had risen. Grades, workload, time management, lack of sleep and college fears were the most commonly cited sources of stress. These findings held across socioeconomically diverse schools. At underresourced schools, students were more likely to report being stressed about family finances, according to Denise Pope, a founder of Challenge Success, but the top stressors were still grades, assessments and college.
“My school is giving too much work,” a 10th grader in this study wrote, “even though times are tough for everyone. At first, this was just a break from school, but now all I feel is stress, anxiety and pain.”
Parents appear to play a big role in this phenomenon. Fifty-seven percent of students said that their parents’ expectations for their performance stayed the same during the pandemic, while 34 percent said their expectations increased. The stereotype of the adolescent aloof from parental influence doesn’t seem to apply to these students, who report feeling more stressed about family pressure than peer pressure.
Larger cultural forces are also pushing students to define success narrowly. As inequality rises and two major recessions in the past decade have left millions out of work, many students may feel compelled to climb the ladder to ensure their economic security as adults. College admissions at top-tiered schools has become more selective over the same period of time, leaving students competing harder for fewer spots — only to receive an education that will likely leave them or their parents in debt for many years to come.
“Teenagers Are Struggling, and It’s Not Just Lockdown”, Emily Esfahani Smith, NYT (5.4.2021)
_____________
Finding a place in a group can leave little room for “individuality”. A traditional Japanese proverb holds that “The nail that stands out is hammered down”. Groups that demand cohesion like the U.S. Marine Corps level individual differences to build a structure of command – “corps” is Latin for ‘body’ (see NYT article by Addario below). Athletes in team sports are instructed (by a coach that often emulates military authority) that “There is No ‘I’ in ‘TEAM’”. Even when professional sports in our society promotes individual celebrity, the name of the team is more prominent on uniforms (i.e., one form)than the name of individual players. To be a “team player” is highly valued because it matters most that “we” win. Also see the documentary file “City of Joel” (Kanopy) for an incisive look at the Hasidic “Satmar” sect which has created a satellite settlement in Monroe, New York. This ultra-orthodox Jewish culture demands far more conformity to a shared culture, in this case the extensive list of religious rules of the Torah. This is evidenced in strict adherence to appearance norms and intensive participation in communal rituals which are characteristic of a closeknit social network - this became problematic when “social distancing” was prescribed in lieu of “congregating” as a public health response to the pandemic. See “When Covid Flared Again in Orthodox Jewish New York”, Ginia Bellafante, NYT (10.11.20).
Most Americans are involved in “social media”. It comprises a broad cultural pattern that has only intensified and further evolved during the pandemic. To gauge the trends see Pew Research: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/ Kristin Wong calls attention to the way that social media connects us to others, even exacting conformity and other-directedness.
“Social media makes it easy to buy into this notion that if you don’t post it, did it really happen? Was it important? Sharing makes it valid. In other words, social media can inspire people to do things for the purpose of sharing, as the platforms themselves encourage external validation.”
Wong contrasts social media as a social institution with another social institution, play. She defines play as “intrinsically motivated which means that it is something “you might have more fun keeping it to yourself”. So, the next time you do something fun, don’t post about it online. This can help you focus on the pure joy of doing something fun for yourself. She goes on to say that this is “the work of childhood”, which Mr. Rogers famously observed, and so difficult for adults and youth who are “adulting”. The implication, here, is that play is compatible with individuality or self-direction, including individual creativity, which has to be compromised if not submerged with adulthood.
See K. Wong, “How to Add More Play to Your Grown-Up Life, Even Now”, NYT (8.14.20) https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/14/smarter-living/adults-play-work-life-balance.html
The topic of social media can also be investigated from the perspective of race. The article hyperlinked below considers the relationship of an African American identity referenced to race and the social media platform LinkedIn. Adapted to the project “The Group and the Individual”, this question becomes how does one participate in LinkedIn, a social media platform that is defined by a corporate mission statement, when constructing an identity referenced to Black activism, specifically the Black Lives Matter movement. See “Black LinkedIn is Thriving. Does LinkedIn Have a Problem with That?”, Ashanti Martin, NYT (10.8.20). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/08/business/black-linkedin.html
Society and Culture in the Time of Covid 19: A Case Study
The current pandemic is exceptionally jarring to our individual and collective reality. It reverberates throughout the culture including how we work, where we live, and interaction in public. Mark Lilla maintains that our way of life in the wake of the pandemic will depend on “what we want to happen, and how to make it happen”. However, this public health crisis will occur within “the constraints of the moment”. These constraints are always primarily economic and political. The former refers to the availability and allocation of scarce resources like PPEs and vaccines. The latter refers to the collective will to make certain choices such as wearing masks and social distancing or privileging science over corporate profits in a search for a vaccine. Lilla’s title implies that societal responses to the pandemic were still in process and, so not, yet, institutionalized.
Here is an excerpt from Mark Lilla’s article, “No One Knows What’s Going to Happen”, NYT (5.22.20):
But the post-Covid future doesn’t exist. It will exist only after we have made it. Religious prophecy is rational, on the assumption that the future is in the gods’ hands, not ours. Believers can be confident that what the gods say through the oracles’ mouth or inscribe in offal will come to pass, independent of our actions. But if we don’t believe in such deities, we have no reason to ask what will happen to us. We should ask only what we want to happen, and how to make it happen, given the constraints of the moment.
Apart from the actual biology of the coronavirus — which we are only beginning to understand — nothing is predestined. How many people fall ill with it depends on how they behave, how we test them, how we treat them and how lucky we are in developing a vaccine.
The result of those decisions will then limit the choices about reopening that employers, mayors, university presidents and sports club owners are facing. Their decisions will then feed back into our own decisions, including whom we choose for president this November. And the results of that election will have the largest impact on what the next four years will hold.
The pandemic has brought home just how great a responsibility we bear toward the future, and also how inadequate our knowledge is for making wise decisions and anticipating consequences. Perhaps that is why our prophets and augurs can’t keep up with the demand for foresight.
At some level, people must be thinking that the more they learn about what is predetermined, the more control they will have. This is an illusion. Human beings want to feel that they are on a power walk into the future, when in fact we are always just tapping our canes on the pavement in the fog.
A dose of humility would do us good in the present moment. It might also help reconcile us to the radical uncertainty in which we are always living.
Case Study: Soccer During the Plague
Also see this excerpt below to appreciate the extent of cultural adaptation/change – and its limits:
You’re still not allowed to touch the ball with your hands.
But in many other important ways, the soccer being played by Massachusetts high schools this fall differs significantly in shape and form from the soccer known and played around the rest of the world.
No physical contact. No slide tackles. No headers. No throw-ins. Six feet of distance between players is required whenever play is restarted — in other words, no walls or close marking on free kicks. And to top things off, everyone on the field must wear a mask at all times.
Sports leagues across the country, from youth leagues to the pros, are implementing safety protocols this fall to try to play games amid the coronavirus pandemic. Some guidelines, on things like sharing water bottles or high-fiving or locker room use, are common sense in the coronavirus era. Others are more extreme: In Vermont, for example, high schools are playing seven-on-seven football this year, and volleyball matches are moving from indoor gyms to outdoor courts.
But few have taken things as far as the state of Massachusetts, which unveiled its unusual rules for soccer on the eve of what is shaping up to be one of the strangest high school sports seasons in memory.
The fateful moment came in August, when the state agency in charge of the latest phase of reopenings released its guidelines . Sports officials noticed almost immediately that they included a prohibition on “deliberate contact.”
“I don’t know if you’ve seen soccer,” said Tara Bennett, a spokeswoman for the athletic association, “but that’s how you play soccer.”
Not anymore. The rules sent coaches to their drawing boards to figure out how to play what is essentially a new game.
“Is This Still Soccer?”, Andrew Keh, NYT (10.12.20). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/12/sports/soccer/coronavirus-soccer-rules-changes.html
If you are interested in building a research project around the pandemic, also consider the reading list below:
“Going Up? Not So Fast: Strict New Rules to Govern Elevator Culture”, Matt Richtel, NYT (6.28.20).
“A Crisis Shows Us How to Live Online: Connect, Share, Solve”, K. Roose, NYT (3.19.20).
“What a Mask Uncovers”, V. Friedman, NYT (3.19.20).
“Silver Lining to the Mask? Not Having to Smile”, Jessica Bennett, NYT (6.10.20).
“What We Lose When We Go from the Classroom to Zoom”, K. Strassler, NYT (5.4.20).
“How the Stoop and the Sidewalk Helped New Yorkers Stay Home”, By the NYT (6.14.20).
“What Will Our New Normal Feel Like? Hints Are Beginning to Emerge”, M. Fisher, NYT (4.22.20).
“How We Use Our Bodies to Navigate a Pandemic”, G.C. Kouras and A. Vasta, NYT (3.30.20).
“How the Virus Transformed the Way Americans Spend Their Money”, L. Leatherby and D. Gelles, NYT (4.11.20).
“The Supermarket After the Pandemic”, Ian Bogost, NYT (4.17.20).
“Cupid in Quarantine”, H. Fisher, NYT (4.13.20).
“Coronavirus Threatens China’s Devotion to Chopsticks and Sharing Food”, Amy Qin, NYT (5.26.20).
Supplementary Reading:
The General in the Particular
“Why Surviving the Virus Might Come Down to Which Hospital Admits You”, Brian Rosenthal et al., NYT (7.2.20); “My Father Leaned on Routine to Create Stability. Now, I Do, Too”, Rob Hoerburger, NYT (5.26.20); “Who Killed the Knapp Family?” [personal troubles as social issues], Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn, NYT (1.9.20); “U.S. Population Grows at Slowest Rate Since 1919”, Sabrina Tavernise, NYT (3.26.20); “Let’s Help Men Live Longer”, Louise Aronson, NYT (11.8.19); “At School, ‘Everyone is Vaping’, and Adults Are in Crisis Mode”, Julie Bosman, NYT (9.20.19); “Of Home Cooking and Obesity”, Anahad O’Connor, NYT (6.18.19); “The Booming, Ethically Dubious Business of Food Delivery” [“convenience maximalism”], Derek Thompson, The Atlantic, (8.2.19); “A “Generationally Perpetuated’ Pattern: Daughters Do More Chores”, Claire Cain Miller, NYT (8.8.2018); “The Age That Women Have Babies”, Q. Buri and C.C. Miller, NYT (8.4.2018); “C.D.C. Survey Takes Stock of the Lives of Teenagers”, Jan Hoffman, NYT (6.15.18); “Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?”, Jean M. Tweng, The Atlantic (9.3.17); “Even Nobodies Have Fans Now”, Jamie Lauren Keiles, NYT (11.13.19).
The Group and the Individual
“What Changes in the First Year of Marriage?”, Allie Jones, NYT (7.23.20); “Women Becoming Marines: ‘I’ Will No Longer Be in Your Vocabulary”, L. Addario, NYT (3.24.19); “The Nuclear Family Was A Mistake”, David Brooks, The Atlantic (2.15.20); “White Woman Is Fired After Calling Police on Black Man in Central Park”, Sarah M. Nir, NYT (5.27.20); “We All Live in Bubbles. How Safe is Yours?”, H. Murphy, NYT (4.17.20); “Do Children’s Zip Codes at Birth Determine Their Futures?”, NYT (5.17.20); “The Power of Two”, J.W. Shenk, The Atlantic (6.25.14); “People Didn’t Used to Ask for ‘Space’ in Their Relationships”, Julie Beck, The Atlantic (12.14.19); “Truth, Lies and Culture”, Brian X. Chen, NYT (7.25.19; “There Should Be More Rituals”, David Brooks, NYT (4.22.19); “Neighborliness Enabled Through an App”, John Herrman, NYT (3.26.20).
[When we return to campus.]
QCC Library Reserve: Mills, “The Promise” (Chapter 1, Intersections Reader); Risman, “Families: A Great American Institution”, Norton Reader); Wright et al., “The Time Use of Teenagers”, Norton Reader); Becker, “Culture: A Sociological View” (Norton Reader);