To a large degree culture determines how members of society think and feel; it directs their actions and defines their outlook on life. Members of society usually take their culture for granted as it has become so ingrained into them that they are often unaware of it. Culture defines accepted ways of behaving for members of a particular society; this can lead to considerable misunderstanding between members of different societies. Without a shared culture, members of society would be unable to communicate and cooperate, and confusion and disorder would result. Culture therefore has two essential qualities; first, it is learned, second it is shared. Without it there would be no human society.
Norms and Values
Every culture contains a large number of guidelines that direct people's behaviour in particular situations. These guidelines are known as norms. A norm is a specific guide that defines acceptable and appropriate behaviour in particular situations. For example, in all societies, there are norms governing dress. Members of society generally share norms that define acceptable male and female attire and what is appropriate dress for different age groups. Unlike norms, which provide specific directives for conduct, values provide more general guidelines. A value is a belief that something is good and desirable. It defines what is important, worthwhile and worth striving for. Some sociologists maintain that shared norms and values are essential for the operation of human society. If the society had differing or conflicting values they would often be pulling in different directions and pursuing incompatible goals, and disorder and disruption might well result. Thus an ordered and stable society requires shared norms and values.
Socialisation
Socialisation is the process by which individuals learn the culture of their society and how they acquire personal and social identity.
Primary socialisation takes place during infancy by children responding to the approval and disapproval of their parents and copying their example. The child learns the language, basic behaviour patterns, the norms and the values of its society. There are two basic processes involved in primary socialisation: the internalization of society's culture and the structuring of the personality (Talcott Parsons 2000). Secondary socialisation occurs during the later years when the family exerts less influence and the child learns appropriate behaviour from other agencies such as peers groups, school and media.
Some sociologists believe that socialisation is not confined to just childhood; but is a life long process that takes place within the confines of other influences including institutions of education, media, law, religion, and groups including occupation, peer and class. However, perhaps behaviour, culture, norms and values are not completely learnt and determined by society, as people have very powerful minds with the capacity and capability to think reasoned, logical thoughts and this combined with freewill, enables human beings to make rational choices and decisions, thus shaping their behaviour and possibly their personalities.
The Nature/Nurture Debate
The nature/nurture debate examines if human behaviour is either natural i.e. inherited, biological, innate, genetic, or inherent, or whether behaviour is learned through environment. The nature/nurture debate concerns fundamental questions about the causes of human development, sometimes focussing in on abilities or capacities common to all human beings such as language and perception, and sometimes on individual differences such as intelligence and schizophrenia. According to Plomin (1994) it is in the latter that this debate 'properly' takes place. The two viewpoints are represented by the nativists who see the knowledge of the world as largely innate, whilst empiricists stress the role of learning and experience. The extremes of these viewpoints are reflected in early psychological theories, such Gesell's Maturation and Watson's Behaviourism.
Research has been carried out on identical twins separated at birth, with the aim of discovering the role of genetics and environment in intelligence development. Correlations have been found in intelligence between the twins that can only be explained in genetic inheritance terms. Equally differences have been found that can only be explained in environmental terms. In practice it would seem impossible to divide the world into matters of natural or nurture, the interactions are so complete that we need to think in ways that are not tied to their purified categories.
It can seem that there are no definite answers to the questions raised by the nature-nurture debate, however, it is important to accept that human growth and development is a very complex area. One can only hope that as the two camps of researchers develop and refine their understanding of growth and development processes, they eventually work together and do as Plomin (2000) suggests: " … It is time to put the nature-nurture controversy behind us and to bring nature and nurture together in the study of development in order to understand the processes by which genotypes become phenotypes."
Conflict and Consensus (Functionalist) Views
Unfortunately due to word limitations I will look at both conflict and functionalist theories but I can only evaluate one small part of the one of the theoretical frameworks, of which I have chosen functionalism.
From a functionalist perspective society is regarded as a system. This system is an entity made up of interconnecting and interrelated parts, from this viewpoint it follows that that each part will in some way affect the other parts and the system as a whole. Functionalists are guided by a set of ideas. These ideas are that societies have certain basic needs or requirements that must be met if they are to survive; these requirements are known as functional prerequisites, i.e. a society must be able to produce food and shelter in order to survive. Another possible prerequisite is a system of socialising new members of the society and this is an important function of the family. Functionalists view society as a whole and emphasise the need for integration between the parts of the system. Many functionalists argue that this integration is based on value consensus, which is, agreement about values between the members of the society. The major function of social institutions is to meet the functional prerequisites of society. The view of the functionalist is that the progress of society is best achieved through maintaining order and then allowing society to evolve naturally without too much planning. Many functionalists see that the order and stability are essential for the maintenance of the social system by value consensus. Although functionalists emphasise the importance of value consensus in society; they do recognise that conflict can occur. However they see conflict as being a result of temporary disturbances in the social system. These disturbances are usually corrected as the society evolves. They believe that all social groups (although these groups have their differences, they are regarded as of being of minor importance) benefit if their society runs smoothly and prospers.
In evaluating the functionalist perspective critics argue that value consensus does not exist.
If everyone within the society held to the same values and yet over half of the population was not in a position to attain or achieve these values, this would be destabilising to the society.
For example, not all members of society agree on the value of achievement. A lack of commitment to this value by those people at the bottom of society actually serves to stabilise society. The reason, because if all members of society were strongly committed to the value of achievement, the failure in terms of this value of those at the bottom of society would produce disorder. Functionalism has also been criticised for being deterministic, they argue that society shapes people in order to fulfil the roles required, however, maybe it is that humans actually shape the society within which they live.
Conflict theories differ from functionalism in that they hold that there are fundamental differences of interest between social groups. These differences result in conflict being a common and persistent feature of society, and not a temporary deviation. There are a number of different conflict perspectives and their supporters tend to disagree about the precise nature, causes and extent of conflict. Marxist theory offers a radical alternative to functionalism, which involves analysis of the infrastructure (economic factors). It begins (similarly to the functionalist) with the simple observation that that in order to survive; humans must produce food and material objects. In doing so they enter into social relationships with other people. Production of the necessities also involves a technical component known as the forces of production. In all historical society there are basic contradictions between the forces and relations of production, and there are fundamental conflicts of interest between the social groups involved in the production process. The relationship between the major social groups is one of exploitation and oppression. The superstructure (the other aspects of society i.e. law, politics and education) derives largely from the infrastructure and therefore reproduces the social relationships of production. It will thus reflect the interests of the dominant group in the relations of production. Ruling class ideology distorts the true nature of society and serves to legitimate and justify the status quo. However the contradictions in the infrastructure will eventually lead to a disintegration of the system and the creation of a new society in which there is no exploitation and oppression, (a new Marxist society rising out of capitalism).
From the feminism perspective, although there are different versions most share a number of common features. Like Marxists, feminists also see society as divided into different social groups. Unlike Marxists, they see the major division as being between men and women rather than between the different classes. Like Marxists they tend to see society as characterised by exploitation, unlike Marxist, they see the exploitation of women by men as the most important source of exploitation rather than that of the working class by the ruling class.
However, if there was so much conflict within society as stated by the conflict views, surely wouldn't society be changed by revolution. Or have the ruling classes using manipulation through the superstructure of society, clouded the minds and thinking of society's members so much so, that they are content to be pacified with token women boardroom directors and token black trade union leaders. So instead of a revolution we have an evolution of society with relatively slow and almost patronising changes.
There are other conflict theories most of them are either from the schools of Marxism or Feminism, and of course there is the influential theory of Max Weber (cannot expound because of word limits) . Although the views of functionalist and conflict theories seems so very different they actually have a number of characteristics in common. Firstly they offer a general explanation of society as a whole, and as a result of this are sometimes known as macro-theories. Secondly, they regard society as a system, and therefore referred to sometimes as system theories. Thirdly, they tend to see human behaviour as shaped by the system, rather than humans shaping the society in which they live.
References
Dunheim, E. (1938) The Rules of Sociological Method in Haralambos M, Holburn M and Heald R (2000) Sociology - Themes and Perspectives- fifth edition, London, Collins Educational
Linton, R. (1945) 'Present world conditions in cultural perspective' in The
Science of Man in World Crisis in Haralambos M, Holburn M and Heald R (2000) Sociology - Themes and Perspectives- fifth edition, London, Collins Educational
Parsons, Talcott, ( 2000) The 'Basic and Irreducible ' Functions of the Family in Haralambos M, Holborn M and Heald R, (2001) Sociology - Themes and Perspectives- fifth edition, London, Collins Educational
Plomin, R. (1994) Genetics and Experience: The Interplay between Nature and Nurture in
Gross R, Psychology The Science of Mind and Behaviour -fourth edition, London, Hodder & Stoughton Educational
Plomin, R (2000) Genetics and children's experiences in the family. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, pp36, 33-68 in Gross R, (2001) Psychology The Science of Mind and Behaviour -fourth edition, London, Hodder & Stoughton Educational
