Short Essay Response
This essay is going to be about the
The attempt for sociologist to advocate for the removal of racial categories in society would be grueling, there would be many subjects to consider. To remove racial lines is to hold every person to an equal standard. Destroying social construction which was built hundreds of years ago would in fact erase what the country was constructed on. There would be different views on taking away racial lines, being both positive and negative. How would these social changes come about in society?
emphasize the traumatic, unforeseen character of nature’s forces. Conversely, social approaches to disaster focus on the social system itself, and how ongoing structural and societal norms, buildings and organizations directly or indirectly create disasters and related vulnerabilities. The latter often dismiss “classic” physical descriptions of disaster as ignoring the genuine systemic inequalities or vulnerabilities that calamity exposes rather than causes. At first glance, a more socially constructed approach seems more likely to foster empathy and prosocial decision-making. As mentioned earlier, the intensity of experienced emotion, perceptions of the situation and victim, and characteristics of the empathizer all substantially determine
Social construction is how society groups people and how it privileges certain groups over others. The social construction of race means that humans construct race and ethnicity through interactions. When we talk and interact with other people we get an idea of what race and ethnicity is. In our society, for example, the wealthy and powerful people tend to believe that their positions are the direct result of their own individual hard work, intelligence, or self-discipline and character. They believe that those who are worse off that they are just lazy, stupid, or undisciplined.
The theory of social constructionism has been shown to be a very intriguing idea with vast implications for any and every area of reality. It stands in opposition to theories of a transcendent human nature and theories of an evolved human nature, for it does not believe in natures. The implications of the view for politics were demonstrated, and it was evident that social constructionism leads more to a view of the society and the state molding man than a view in which man molds himself. These are things that must be further expounded upon, and I will now express my own views on the matter. A. Essences
I Social construction of reality is sometimes difficult to grasp. We sometimes think that meanings are external to us, that they originate out there somewhere, rather than in our social group. What this means is that a lot of the things in our life only exist because we’ve created them. They only exist because we give them validity to exist.
In this Essay I will compare and contrast two major theoretical perspectives in Sociology. The Functionalist theory of Emile Durkheim and the Marxist theory of Karl Marx (Giddens, 2009, p. 72) Sociology is the scientific study of social life. It describes and analyses social behaviour. It seeks to discover how human society has come to be the way it is, and reveal the social forces that shape people’s lives.
Sociological controversies are often confronted through a selection of opinions formed by the passion of activists. With the evolving principled ideals of society, the idea of social constructionism is becoming more of a controversial issue facing a variety of different standpoints. Debates on the topic of social construction have been ongoing for centuries causing a dramatic divide between those who believe it and those who don’t. Social constructionism is a social theory of knowledge that scrutinizes the development of the way social occurrences are created, developed and practiced by humans. In this case, social constructivism is argued through the eyes of a feminist.
Max Weber and Emile Durkheim are two of the three founding fathers of sociology, who are both famous for their scientific methods in their approach towards sociology. They both wanted their methodological approaches to be more and more organized and scientific, however because of the difference in their views on the idea of scientific, Durkheim’s approach tends to be more scientific than Weber’s. This is because Weber does not wish to approach sociology in the manner scientists approached the natural sciences and believes more in interpretive analysis, than observational analysis. In this paper, I will compare and contrast the methodological approaches of Weber and Durkheim and discuss how Weber’s approach is more historical and Durkheim’s
