Blog 7: Assimilation

While talking about Anna Julia Cooper in class this week, we talked about four ways in which different groups of people interact in society. These include pluralism, in which all people are treated equally, but traditions and beliefs are kept. The second is assimilation, in which minority groups take up the customs and languages of the majority group. Segregation is third, in which there is a formal separation between the groups. The last is genocide, in which the minority group may be wiped out unintentionally through disease/ other means, or they may be intentionally wiped out such as with the Holocaust. Assimilation was the one which I feel we see the most in our country today.

Assimilation is seen in our country in regards to individuals who may immigrate here and adopt our culture as their own. This can include individuals who come here and adopt English as their main language of speech. An example of this would be immigrants from Mexico who come over and start speaking English instead of Spanish in their lives. They've assimilated into our society to the point where they know the language of the majority and can pass as ordinary American citizens. Another example would be individuals who came here from another country where perhaps they were big soccer fans and then once they have lived here for awhile they join our country in our celebration of American Football.

In class we also talked about benefits and problems of assimilation, although it does seem to be the most realistic option of the four. While it does often hinder the minority group in causing them to lose touch with their traditions and old way of life, it is better for the overall population in allowing better communication as well as enabling society to function to a greater degree due to sharing a common goal. This creates greater cohesion than can be found in pluralism, in which groups of people are often isolated based on beliefs and customs. Thus, assimilation is in my opinion, the best of the four options due to it benefiting society as a whole better than the other three can.

I found this video to be a good example of assimilation, but with Chris having accepted Britain's culture, while the rest of the family has not yet.
   

Blog 5: Ancestor Worship

An important reading this week was titled "Putting an End to Ancestor Worship" by Rodney Stark. Within this reading, he bashes the founding fathers of Sociology, voicing complaints with each one and seemingly having nothing positive to say about any of them or their ideas. In regards to Karl Marx, he focused on Marx's stance on how religion was rooted in poverty, and challenged this through assertions of how even the extremely wealthy can be tied to religion. Religion has also thrived in times of great economic gain, further showing that religion isn't solely connected with poverty and times of woe. When it comes to Durkheim, Stark criticized his view of religion as being too sociological, and stated that ignoring the supernatural aspects is an extreme lapse in judgement. Then with Weber, he explained how Weber's view of capitalism as being initiated by a protestant work ethic was incorrect, as many cultures without a major protestant force are embracing capitalism.
I agree with Stark's criticisms of the three founding fathers for the most part. Many of their original ideas were too biased or rooted in the historical time periods in which they came from, which makes them dated today. However, since Stark focused on the religious aspects of each, he ignored the ideas that were presented that are still useful today. Some of these ideas include Marx's writings about how capitalism leads to alienation in workers, which is still relevant today. Durkheim's work on suicide is also still relevant today, as we still have issues in our population with suicide and it's easier to see how this may occur through his typing and studies. As for Weber, his different categories of authority still hold up today as being accurate. We can still draw modern day examples of each type, although he believed that we would be past those by now. Stark warns not to idolize these figures, but we can still learn much from them and their work, even with the inherent flaws found in each. They're comparable to the early leaders in many sciences, whose ideas may have been wrong, but who will be remembered for paving the way to allow others to carry on their work and eventually come to the correct conclusions.
(When talking about Rodney Stark, I couldn't help but think of Tony Stark. I imagine Rodney Stark would have this look on his face whenever someone would ask him what he thought about the founding sociologists in regards to their other contributions.)

Blog 4: Charismatic Authority

In class this week, we discussed the three types of authority as they were constructed by Max Weber. The three types of authority are traditional, charismatic, and rational. Traditional authority deals with traditions and following customs which are encouraged through society. An example of this would be super bowl parties/football parties in general, due to our societies' firm standing that certain conditions are to be met at these gatherings. These include beer, wearing clothing representing the team, and often food/snack items. Charismatic authority comes from the persuasiveness of individuals to get people to believe in them and their cause. An example of this would be political leaders who are able to rally support for their organization and election. Rational authority is the more commonly thought about one in which laws are the focus, with the power resting in those who carry out and enforce the laws. An example of this would be police officers, who enforce laws for the greater good, such as making sure that speed limits are followed.

When thinking of examples of the authorities from my personal life, I can't help but dwell on traditional authority and how all the people in society are really the enforcers of this type. The "this is the way things have always been" authority depends on people informing others of how certain customs need to be followed.  Along with my football party example, another one would be our culture's tendency to have three meals a day. People don't really question this generally held consensus, instead allowing it to be passed down and learned through families/schools. Another example of this would be the tradition of having the man pay for a date, assuming that it is a male-female date. We have been groomed to expect that if we ask a woman our on a date, she will expect us to pay and we concede. While this view is changing, many still hold it to be the proper way to approach dating in high school and beyond.

(I ended up choosing this picture as an example of a man paying for the date. I do particularly enjoy the blank expression on his face though.)