Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Social norms and their negative effects
Social norms theory
Social norms and their negative effects
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Social norms and their negative effects
Norms are by definition general society guidelines and expectations of appropriate behavioral conduct in a particular environment or society. These guidelines could be formal and written such as laws that prohibit stealing or they could be implicit such as behavioral conduct or dress code. Every society has its own way of endorsing and enforcing certain norms and standards of proper behavior while renouncing and sanctioning improper behavior. In general, norms are of a significant importance because they guide our behavior and maintain order in society by providing conformity. Furthermore, norms render behavior predictable rather than random, thus allowing us to predict and understand other people’s actions and behaviors in different situations. On the other hand, divergence from norms is termed “deviance” and can lead to chaos and instability. It is noteworthy to mention, that the culture background and context play an important role as each culture processes its own norms, values, standards and expectations. For instance, in certain cultures shaking hands between opposite sexes is inappropriate, and this is the case in Yemen. Thus our perception of norms in different culture is critical: either we choose to understand an individual’s behavior according to his own culture context and set of norms (cultural relativity) or we choose to understand an individual’s behavior according to our own culture which we believe to be more superior (ethnocentrism). An example of ethnocentrism where norms and values of a certain culture have been imposed on another is the banning of the veil worn by muslim women in France. In contrast, cultural relativism appears in Lebanon where muslim women are perceived in terms of their own culture and are a... ... middle of paper ... ...us random behavior that challenges the norm such as nose picking in public can break this predictability and stability and chock or perhaps even offend some people who are not used to expecting such a behavior. Sanctions whether by law or by verbal reprimand and labeling appear to be necessary in order to reduce and discourage deviant behavior in a society. However, one of the limitations of my experiment was the inability to explore the link between norms and ethnocentrism as well as cultural relativism, and this is because all the participants in my experiment came from the same cultural and ethnic background. Thus it would be interesting in the future to conduct other experiments where there would be a mixture of cultures. Furthermore, it would also be interesting to see the power of breaking norms in order to produce change and evolution in a particular society.
In The Houses of History, selected and introduced by Anna Green and Kathleen Troup, the different theories of the twentieth century are broken down and specifics are introduced about each theory. Historians use these theories to study certain aspects of history and to be able to compare two theories to each other and the problems each theory addresses must be identified. With all aspects of history having some sort of connection, it would be better to take a holistic approach to the history of different eras. As we first read in Arnold earlier in the semester, "History is above all else an argument (Arnold 13)." Therefore, to compare two theories of history, the argument must begin with the facts of the theory and what that theory is used for, and then argue where it might have flaws or not connect history together.
The aspects that nativism focuses on the change throughout time. Nativism is the extreme opposition of a minority based on the majority’s perception of the minority being foreign and endangering their way of life. (Hingham, 2002) Nativism is based on the fears that the majority population has. If we were able to look into the future it is reasonable to believe that issues that Americans hold dearest and seek to protect would be much more different than the ones that we care about currently. It is important then to keep in mind these fears are often focused on minority groups that very rarely have anything to do with the issue and more importantly a way to protect themselves. As we look at nativism’s progress through American history we will
In the field of academia, ethnographic studies are often overlooked as a serious source and reviewed as literature for the mass populace. Because of the often common language, fluid writing styles, format, and production of typical ethnographies, it is much more appealing and attainable to popular culture than the research within a scholarly journal or anthology. Although, perhaps instead of deeming ethnographic work unworthy of a scholarly title due to the appeal it possess, historians should relish in this relativity new form of research for its popularity. Ethnographic studies provide readers with a rare and untarnished micro historic view of the customs of a particular culture or individuals within said culture. Opposing most academia, these studies can sometimes be void in political agenda and personal biases, providing the audience with more objective material. Ethnographies often allow readers to see private and intimate moments within the milieu of the subject which is not often reserved for public life, which is the typically sphere of scholarly study; because of this tendency, individuals and groups which lack a strong public voice are frequently the foci of ethnographic studies. Throughout history women have often been the victims of such marginalization, with a recent focus on Eastern and Islamic women. Considering the previous, Muslim women and gender have been the center of contemporary ethnographic studies, giving a voice to non-Westernized Muslim women and providing a natural research of gender relations with little bias or political agenda.
Growing up in an American society, we are surrounded by certain customs and mannerisms. We pay little attention to them, as they have been ingrained into our society and is apart of our everyday lives. It is when a new culture or society gets thrown into the mix that we notice the different customs. Our first reaction is to think their way is wrong or weird, but when you take a step back you realize that it’s not weird at all, in fact it is as natural as breathing. They are from a different country, therefore they have different customs and way of living. To them, our ways are just as strange.
The problems of ethnocentrism tend to manifest themselves in the philosophy of history, when philosophers attempt to interpret empirical history in teleological terms. Ethnocentrism arises whenever the researcher attempts to universalize the Western subject-position. In sociological terms that have been widely popularized since Sumner, ethnocentrism involves one first identifying with an in-group, with whom one shares certain observable characteristics (culture, language, physical features, or customs, for example).[1] The belief in shared characteristics leads to an assertion of identity, and this belief in turn influences attitudes. Our attitude toward the in-group is one of favouritism, whereas our attitude toward the out-group is one of
While race is a social construct, it has historically been used as a tool to maintain and perpetuate institutional racism that inherently creates social inequities for people of color (Huber, 2010). Nativism is an act of assigning values to perceived real or imagined differences in an attempt to justify superiority of the native, and to validate the “natives” right to superiority at the expense of non-natives (Huber, 2010). According to Huber (2010) racist nativism a conceptual framework researchers use to help them understand how the historical racialization of immigrants of color has shaped their experiences in the U.S. Nativism can be approached in numerous ways, but there are three critical
Communists and persuaded Hindenburg to suspend civil liberties, such as free speech. Things worsened when Hindenburg died in August 1934 and Hitler was named Fuhrer, the supreme commander. The Nazis worked quickly to gain more support by raising German patriotism and feelings of nationalism among the German people. Nazi propaganda displayed Hitler as a figure of “true Germanic virtues,” a true German hero. The Nazis also began rebuilding the German army, with world conquest in mind. Defying the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler invaded and conquered Austria in 1938, followed by Czechoslovakia. Hoping to avoid war, Great Britain and France didn’t intervene. When Germany invaded Poland in 1939, however, war was declared.
In this day and age we like to say that we thrive on being ourselves and embracing our individuality, while this may be true in my social experiment I found that more often than not we tend to keep to ourselves and follow the social norms of day to day life. Social norms are behaviors and cues most everyone learns throughout their lives. These norms teach us what is and is not acceptable. To fully understand and analyze how norms serve to regulate behavior in our social world, I decided to breach a social norm of my own.
Webster’s dictionary defines ethnocentrism as “The tendency to evaluate other groups according to the values and standards of one's own ethnic group, especially with the conviction that one's own ethnic group is superior to the other groups.” When first reading this definition, one would naturally agree that ethnocentrism does exist in our world and society, often confusing it with patriotism. However, many do not realize that ethnocentrism is, has been, and continues to be a leading cause for violence in America. Different ethnic groups such as African Americans and Native Americans have suffered through years of violent crimes against them because of the white man’s ethnocentric views of themselves when compared with other races and cultures.
Nisan, M. (1987). Moral norms and social conventions: A cross-cultural comparison. Developmental Psychology, 23(5), 719-725.
In explaining Cultural Relativism, it is useful to compare and contrast it with Ethical Relativism. Cultural Relativism is a theory about morality focused on the concept that matters of custom and ethics are not universal in nature but rather are culture specific. Each culture evolves its own unique moral code, separate and apart from any other. Ethical Relativism is also a theory of morality with a view of ethics similarly engaged in understanding how morality comes to be culturally defined. However, the formulation is quite different in that from a wide range of human habits, individual opinions drive the culture toward distinguishing normal “good” habits from abnormal “bad” habits. The takeaway is that both theories share the guiding principle that morality is bounded by culture or society.
Prejudices and stereotypes are rooted in our culture, tradition and habits and people with unwillingly can manifest signs of discrimination. It does not necessarily mean that the person has negative intension. Sometimes people simply cannot behave differently. Issuing negative judgments about foreign culture and own culture idealization often stem from tradition, and culture. Stereotypes are common in every society, and often unaware they guide our behavior. However, stereotypical views can lead to prejudice, and turn to discrimination or stigmatization.
The problems of ethnocentrism tend to manifest themselves in the philosophy of history, when philosophers attempt to interpret empirical history in teleological terms. Ethnocentrism arises whenever the researcher attempts to universalize the Western subject-position. In sociological terms that have been widely popularized since Sumner, ethnocentrism involves one first identifying with an in-group, with whom one shares certain observable characteristics (culture, language, physical features, or customs, for example).[1] The belief in shared characteristics leads to an assertion of identity, and this belief in turn influences attitudes. Our attitude toward the in-group is one of favouritism, whereas our attitude toward the out-group is one of
Ethnocentrism is when someone judges other peoples cultures, values, or ideas for their own culture. Ethnocentrism is found everywhere, all around us. We are surrounded by people who judge others by their race, religion, and culture which leads to hatred. A negative effect of ethnocentrism is when someone just wants to keep judging others for their beliefs or religion not caring how others might feel about his judging, they are egocentric.
Ethnocentrism, group identification, and labeling are all counterproductive to creating a positive culture of diversity in the United States. Group identification and labeling promote discrimination and prejudice. Ethnocentrism prevents us from growing as a nation. The United States is a diverse melting pot of cultures, and we need to practice pluralism if we are to prosper.