Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on the concept of community
The concept of community
The concept of community
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on the concept of community
The theme of community has always had a central and prominent place in social theory. A number of connected problems are at the heart of social theory. These related problems are often thought of as variations of the key problems of the relationship between ‘the community’ and ‘the individual’. (Browning et al., 2000) Communitarianism is a philosophy that emphasizes the connection between the individual and the community. While the “community “may be a family unit, it is usually understood in the wider sense of interactions between the community of people in a geographical location, or who have a shared history or interest. (Wiki, 2014) Thus, this philosophy, in this period, has been said to be prominent in a number of distinctive and time-specific ways. Community is just the whole range of that sort of group or institution-not the individual, not the family, not the state, not the market, but all the ones in between: churches, neighbourhoods, schools, clubs, kinship networks, associations etc. The concept of community refers to both a particular class of social entities, and to a particular range of social relations. (Browning et al., 2000) Some characteristics of this philosophy includes the fact that it is related to older theories of community such as Marxism, pragmatism, romanticism, ethical socialism, and strands of theology from the Jewish, Christian and other religious traditions. Secondly, a number of government-sponsored social policies have brought the term ‘community’ to a new prominence in political and social discourses- policies such as community care, community policing and community regeneration. These programmes during the 1980s were introduced by right-wing governments who attempted to yoke them together with ... ... middle of paper ... ...ghts are often overly individualistic, and conduce to a picture of the individual as a kind of atom-autonomous, self-sufficient and essentially separate from everyone else. Secondly, although the acquisition of individual rights and freedoms historically is wholly admirable-it has ruled out barbaric practices like torture, the withholding of property rights from women, etc. Thirdly, a wholly undesirable and unintended upshot of a society which emphasizes too much rights and too little duty. Communitarians believe that ‘rights culture’ has now gone too far, to the extent that the emphasis on rights has squeezed out any emphasis on duty and judging by the most outcomes of present day, one has to agree with this. However, communitarians differ as to their interpretation of the value of community, and their criteria for the relation of community. (Browning et al., 2000)
In the book Seedfolks by Paul Fleischman there are many different characters, and even some of them cross paths. A community garden was started just by one person therefore everyone follows. They all learn how to get along with other people, how to not stereotype so much, and how to depend on each other in their community. All of them struggle with something, whether it's with family, friends, or feeling stereotyped. They learn the importance of a community, and realize how much they really depend on each other. Having a community is important for all people to incorporate diversity, culture,and unique stories into their lives. You don't realize how much people depend on their community until its gone. The importance
Mond and his compatriots and predecessors must forge and maintain this social paradigm through careful conditioning in order to produce an efficient community of consistently wanton consumers. “The current Social Ethic, it is obvious, is merely a justification after the fact of the less desirable conse¬quences of over-organization.” Here, in Revisited, Huxley posits that in fact, the social ethics of such a World State-like society exist only to validate and vindicate the manner in which the would-be-individuals are forced to conform into their assigned roles. Huxley goes on to state, though, that it must be understood that the social organism, or rather “organization,” is an inorganic tool of society and the members of it, something that has value only so long as its parts-humans-perceive it to. Yet, over half a century later in the year 2014, the modern world has been unable to comprehend this wisdom (Or is it that it is ignorant of it?). The public educators of the day put so much emphasis on “group work” and “community service,” which seems to be an absolute prerequisite for a “higher
Kittay’s work detailing the dependency relationship explains that human rely on each other; Aristotle’s work conveys that human forms household for economical interest; and Marx’s work implied that humans are eventually one classless society with best economical benefits for all. Whether or not being members in community is the best way to live for every human is still debatable, but it is the only choice that humans all made by
In the first chapter the World State and its motto of “Community, Identity, Stability” (page1) is introduced. The motto is in a shield that hangs in a sign over the Central London Hatchery and Condition Centre; and this motto encompasses the slogan for this ideal society. Huxley explains that the main goal of this society is for the people to be happy all of the time and for this reason he designed the motto. He demonstrates the idea of a “community”, which is when all the people i...
Individualism and collectivism are conflicting beliefs with the nature of humans, society, and the relationships between them, however, these ideologies are not diametrically opposing since both are essential towards balancing beliefs from becoming extremes. The first source represents the idea of collectivism and suggests that the society must focus on moving their viewpoint from ‘me’ into ‘we’ in the interest of survival and progression. This perspective presents the idea that the individual’s advantage belongs not only to the person, but to the group or society of which he or she is a part of, and that the individual’s values and goals are for the group’s “greater good.” Likewise, Karl Marx’s principle of communism emphasizes in the elimination
It is human nature to see those who are different and group them into distinct categories. The distinction of Individualism versus Collectivism is one that is currently being studied extensively. On one side, individualism sees individuals as the fundamental unit of a society. Individuals are supposed to be unique, independent, and most importantly, willing to put their own interests above all others. On the other hand, collectivism views the basic building block of society as social groups, stressing the interpersonal bonds between people. Collectivist values dictate that group goals and values have higher precedence than an individual’s. Due to the seemingly polar opposite nature of these ideologies, it is inevitable that they will be compared to see which is more beneficial to the country and its people. Some might point to the success of the US, an extremely individualistic country, in support of individualistic values. They will point to the freedom of choice and diversity that individualism boasts of. Others stress the flaws of the US in response, and while both sides do have their truths, the costs that come with individualistic values are too great to be ignored. Highly individualistic attitudes have caused many large scale problems which have long been identified as difficult to resolve issues. These problems include, but are not limited to, promoting aggressive acts, creating an obsession with social power, and allowing a system of injustice to be born.
Citizenship is something that largely defines many of us. Our citizenship comes with a community, a group of people and land to which we belong, as well as a sense of pride. Citizens of a community must coexist and cooperate with one another for the community to thrive and prosper. The idea of individuals within a community forming a mutual trust and respect for one another, is a concept Danielle Allen introduces as “political friendship.” Political friendship extends beyond the immediate reaches of one’s community, but to strangers entering one’s own community, or to those of another community with which you seek to enter. It is not friendship in the sense that a bond is formed or that there is deep rooted affection present, but rather one
Judd Owen, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Emory University, attempts to defend the liberal interpretation of Hobbes’s political philosophy by demonstrating his promotion of a “liberal politics of toleration” (pg. 133). Owen begins by asking the following question: “How can Hobbes’s political philosophy be directed to a tolerant regime, and yet be hostile to the granting of unconditional freedoms or rights?” (pg. 134). In truth, those who enter into a commonwealth via the social contract forfeit almost all of the rights and liberties that they possessed in the state of nature (except the right to self-defense). However, Owen proceeds to explicate how the aim of Hobbes’s civil society is not the alienation of individual liberties (although individual rights are in fact alienated). Rather, this forfeiture of rights is only a means by which to secure the greatest amount of liberty that can actually be enjoyed by the individual. In other terms, human beings possess unrestricted liberty rights in the state of nature, but they are neither free enough nor secure enough to enjoy them without constant threat of violence or death. Thus, individuals consent to engage in civil society because it is the only condition in which they can enjoy a modicum of liberty and true freedom of will. Although the subjects of a commonwealth must give up their claims to absolute liberty, the sovereign authority and civil law allow for a great deal of individual toleration. For example,
Consequently, since all human beings have certain moral rights to health, liberty, and possessions; they also have the right to enforce the protection of those rights by way of punishing violators. And it is in this maintaining of ones own rights that it is necessary for man to initially come together and form a social contract. By forming a social contract they are agreeing to sustain from living purely in a state of nature. According to Locke, living in such a state of nature is ‘inconvienent’, for there is no common ground by which to appropriately judge an individual who infringes upon another person natural rights (Christman 43). Therefore, one can not ‘effectively enjoy’ their own rights until they join under a ‘common political authority’ (44).
Silva, E. B. (2009). Chapter 7. Making Social Order. In: Taylor, S., Hinchliffe, S.,Clarke, J. and Bromley, S. (eds.) (2009). Introducing the Social Sciences. Making Social Lives. Milton Keynes: The Open University.
A community is comprised of a group of goal oriented individuals with similar beliefs and expectations. Currently the term is used interchangeably with society, the town one lives in and even religion. A less shallow interpretation suggests that community embodies a lifestyle unique to its members. Similarities within the group establish bonds along with ideals, values, and strength in numbers unknown to an individual. Ideals and values ultimately impose the culture that the constituents abide by. By becoming part of a community, socialization...
This chapter began by introducing the concept of a civil society. Chirico (128) described it as people organising outside of government channels to meet social objectives. She pointed out that social movements in the past have focused on communities within nations while the current movements focus more on involving people from diverse parts of the world in order to promote human welfare regardless of where in the World they happen to be. Chirico shared a quote from Simmel (128) that really resonated with me and, in my opinion, captured such a complex concept into a short and simple sentence. He said that “Humanity is the collective life, the same people who from other perspective are organized into societies, polities economies, families, and so on”. I take this to mean that we are all, basically, the same; we are all humans who are trying to make it through whatever life we have been given to live. People are just people. I think the concept of civil society is one that I wish more people would understand and embrace instead of holding on to prejudice, judgement, and ignorance. According to Chirico (128), individuals who help do so out of a sense of shared experience by recognising that everyone is a victim of global problems and that anyone can help. There are endless ways to participate whether it be through a formal organisation such as NGO’s, The Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, and The Peace Corps, through non-profit organisations and advocacy, or more individually by making donations, sponsoring a child, mentoring, volunteering in their communities. These are regular people who volunteer, and sometimes risk their lives, to fight for equal rights and treatment for all.
A Community can be defined as a group of people who don’t just live in the same area, but also share the same interests, experiences and often concerns about the area in which they live. Often when individuals have lived on a street or in an area for a while they become familiar with each other and the issues surrounding them. Children often attend the same schools and grow up together, again sharing similar experiences. In some instances adults may work together, and quite commonly all community members will share the same doctors, dentists, hospitals, health visitors and other public services and facilities.
Should the most selfish elite individual take heed and meditate on the ideology behind community, he/she may awaken to the fact that many persons looking after one person has more advantages and a better survival rate than one trying to preserve one. The needs of the one will never outweigh the needs of the collective group. In the end individuality inevitably leads to self-destruction; therefore, commitment to community is a requirement for contemporary Americans and vital to its survival.
Fulcher, J. and Scott, J. (2003) Sociology, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Giddens, A. (1992) Human Societies: A reader, Polity Press: Cambridge. Giddens, A., ed., pp. 113-117.