Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Social Science: Institutions - Coggle Diagram
Social Science: Institutions
I. Religion
1.1. Identification and Definition
Identification: Who decides what is religion and what is not? What roles in our lives
No universal definition of religion
Many versions: Monotheistic, Polytheostic or Non-Theistic
Inclusive/Functionalism definition
(Inclusive Role):
Religion = necessary for H. life (necessary for society)
H. : into a community of same beliefs due to: Existence or hope
Idea of supernatural force beyond our experience, used for struggles in life
Macro-Studies
: Social instit. that transmit values, norms and moral code (Religion = great effect in H. lives)
Exclusive definition
(Content): Reject of Functionalist ideas
Reg. to the substance of their varied beliefs based on different sacred texts and supernatural entities
All religions ≠ empirical reality, it ∈ transcendent/ "Super empirical" reality
Social Constructionism
(In use):
Investigation to all situations referred to “religion” or “religious meaning” and engage in self def. “religious practices/rituals”
Importance to SS: How religion influenced H. life?; How do ppl. acquire religion?; How religion meaning evolved over the years?
Micro-Studies
: How is religion still a influence in H. life, what constitutes. it?
1.2. Theories
Functionalist Theory (DURKHEIM)
:
Religion= help for social cohesion maintenance (collective conscience)
Rituals = bind ind. together in a shared values community (not only personal but also collective matters)
Sacred ≠ Profane
Are we living in the secular age?:
Secularization = losss of religion meaning in ≠ spheres of life
Difficult measure, religion is much more complex than secularization thought
Conflict Theory (MARX --> FEURBACH):
"Religion is the heart of a heartless society"; "Opium of the Masses"
∈ Ruling class = promote beliefs that justify socio-econ order (maintain status quo)
Postive values (guide for H. improving) ≠ Traditional form (should disappear)
Study of Pop. religious (WEBER):
Religion connection to development (not necessary a conservative force)
eg. Protestantism (Puritan form) = source for Klism --> "+ L = + chance to heaven"
Can religion lead to social change? (O. MADURO):
Religion = can be radical force for change
Neo-Marxist POV.: Independent of ruling class and Econ. base (in a certain degree)
II. Family
2.1. Family Definition and Structure
Definition: Group of ppl. connected to each other through a relationship of blood, marriage adoption or choice
Household: group of ppl. that live under the same roof
Functionalist POV. of fam. structure
Social functions: Social reproduction, edu., Econ., emotional and practical support...
Meta functions: guarantees continuity of society (norms, values and behavior attributed in fam.)
Critique: Diversity of structures; Gender Inequalities, Idealizes fam. w/ no problems (Fake)
Individualisation POV. of fam. structure
Past stigma of divorce = no longer exists ("if u want kids, u need to be married")
Def.: No longer obey trade norm. of loyalty of fam.
Feminist/Conflict theories POV. of fam. structure
Functionalism support gender inequality (exploits W.)
Marxist feminism: "Fam. helps sustains Klist system"
Radical feminism: "Fam. = source of oppression within patriarchy
Liberal feminism: "Fam. = perpetuates tradition gender roles"
Evaluation: Should conflict in pvt. sphere in fam. ; Tradi roles can lead to inequality (W. = diverse)
2.2. Family Then and Now
Then:
Pre Industrial fam.: Rural society w/ multigenerational households (passing on property) --> Econ production, edu., and health within fam.
1950s: Nuclear fam.: Urbanization w/ spé. roles --> dad = provider; mom = household (marriage for life), no more grandparents
Now:
UK, ONS, 2014: + divorce, + step. fam. and polygamy (69% of 'nuclear fam. still)
Kids in same sex fam.: ↗ 1356% (96-2022), children = + flex to gender and sexuality, but may experience stigmatization in society
Single parents UK, result of breakdown = 57% ; 1/4 of dependent child and 1/5 single parent ∈ poverty
Divorce trends: Since 70s = less marriages; Civil marriages > religious ceremonies; Trend towards social monogamy
Are fam. roles and relationships changing?
Feminism
:
70s (Oakley): Household remained W. (small M. %)
Radical feminist: Patriarchal nature of fam. (M. > W., ≠ gender roles)
Marxist feminist: unpaid home L = feed M. and Klist needs
Gender:
*
Marxist vs Klist society: pursuit of personal relationships = hindered by consumption and living under min wage
Children:
Until 18th c: Children = assets of fam. (didn't require love)
Children = Modern and social construction shaped by social and cultural assumptions and attitudes
Modernity: Children = centered fam --> all attention and assets to them
Why? = smaller fam., shorter L and extended Edu.
Arguments on social continuity (
Linked to 2.1
.)
Functionalist POV. (Chester and Leach)
:
Neo-Conventional fam. (Chester, 85): "Nuclear fam. = best type, promotes society continuity
Cereal Pack fam. (Leach, 67): "Ideal fam. = Happy fam. = mother in households and dads as providers (≈ ads at the time)
Marxist & Feminist POV. (Gittins) :
(Gittins, 83): "Nuclear fam ≠ best model = maintenance of powerful ideology and elite imposition w/ idealized ads
Modern POV (Smart):
(Smart, 2007): "Diversity in fam. & intimate relationships: blood, adoption..." ; "Individualization ≠ lead to less fam. commitment"
2.3. Theories
Post-Modernity (Lyotard and Stacy):
JF. Lyotard: "knowledge became relative = ø ideal fam."
J. Stacy: "Ppl. change their lifestyle through ought their needs in life due to fluidity in post-modern fam."
Z. Dauman (Critique): fam. jeopardised as social institutions. = ø role or representations def. in this theory
Reflective Modernisation (Giddens):
Giddens: Tradi norms are dissolving --> reflexivity: ind. create own life script > follow the societal one
Examples: Less restriction to W. household role; Nuclear fam. = only a type (not ideal); Romantic love substituted by Confluent love
Individualisation (Beck & Beck-Gernsheim):
Beck & Beck-Gernsheim: "Social life is now based on constructing lifestyle & avoiding risks
Ind. = no longer titled to 1 role --> seek for self absorption (own fulfillments)
Example, Marriage and kids = risk
III. Education
3.1. Definition and Characteristics that influence Edu.
Definition: Edu. = not neutral (influence in how pov. the WRLD)
Equality and Equity = essential for transformative society
Schooling = formal process through skills are delivered ≠ Education = Social institutions that enables acquisitions of skills and knowledge
Influence in Education
Social Class:
Lower classs children = less qualification = worse performance
Gender:
Stigma: "some subjects are not for G."
Underrepresentation of W. academia (even w/ better performance)
Race:
Underachievement still explained by cultural/ethnic background
Institutional Racism: School Structures, Curriculum and teacher's bias
Ethnic min. = underrepresented in academia
3.2. Theories
Functionalism (Parsons and Durkheim):
Parsons: Edu. should be meritocratic stab skills for L (not in fam.) and stab. ind. values
Durkheim: School teaches value of collective good/ common values (eg. moral) + skills for work
Critique: Evoque only 1 set of values
Marxism (Marx):
Edu. helps shape personality
But, replicates social ≠ through hierarchies and curriculum
Critique: Too simplistic + ø consider student resistance
Culture Reproduction (Bourdieu and Bruner):
Bourdieu: Social life is org. in ≠ power relations (= in edu.) creating habitus--> K can be exchanged (Edu = embodied and institutional. form of Cultural K)
Bruner: Cultural repos in edu. via ≠ roles and norms ; Influence on social institutions. (Edu. < Fam.)
3.3. Influence and Future Implications
Edu. as a political act x practice of freedom:
Political act
: Edu ≠ neutral --> moral and political act w/ massive labels to ethnic min. ("Edu is never innocent, it always requires pol. choices")
Practice of freedom
: No reflection of edu. can exclude issues in power, Econ. and justice ("Not possible to fav. fequality in a regime that denies freedom to be")
Power not always through Econ. manip., but also through legitimate knowledge made by instit. that legitimate inequality
Can edu. change society?
Key instit. if social and personal relations (pt. of society)
ESSENTIAL !