Life Is a Race Essay Example for Free

Life Is a Race Essay Family as a Primary Group Social Problems Garelick August 2010 Family plays an important role in the life of every person and society as a whole. It is no surprise that at every new stage of development in our society, with every revaluation of values, the interest in the issues of family, morality and spirituality spikes. At the present time, in the complicated environments through which we weave our lives, the family remains a unique mediator between the interests of the individual and society and is in the epicenter of a major social upheaval. The transition to current market relations and with them the related apathy, and with the mpoverishment of the general population drastically came the turnaround in the view affecting the well-being of our families and their stability and potential for proper upbringing of the young. These, along with many other social instabilities, have led to a crisis of family values. The consequences of this crisis are bifurcations between the generations, the prevalence of reduced lifetime fertility and the growing number of single parents in the United States. If marriage, parenthood and kinship are what constitute family relations, at the present time we are witnessing a decay of this little tiny trinity. The problem is complicated by the fact that at present time, the institution of marriage is going through a transitional period. There is a certain destruction of the old traditional values of marriage, and the new have yet to be formed. Marriage and family are increasingly becoming more about individuals and their need for intimate satisfaction and informal communication, and less about structure and support of one another. Let us pinpoint and define Just where the family lays its essence within the complicated world of social institutions and in which groups, as defined by our text. In a broad sense, the concept of a social group is any social association of people, anything from peer groups to a population of a particular country. In sociology, this concept is used in a narrower sense as any number of people with similar norms, values, and expectations who interact with one another on a regular basis (Schaefer, 2009, p. 107). In general, members of a society feel like they belong to a group, and are also perceived by others as members of said group. To analyze the social structure of a society there must be items explored that ppear in all elementary parts of the given society, which incorporate all of the social perspectives. For this, I have chosen what is generally accepted to be the primary group (Schaefer, 2009, p. 110). The most successful definition, and essentially creation of the term, was created by Charles Horton Cooley who coined the term o refer to a small group characterized by intimate, tace-to-tace association and cooperation (Scnaeter, 2 p. 110). In other words, primary groups are those in which individuals have personal interaction with one another. For example, classmates can be members of a primary roup, and the rest of the student body would then be members of a secondary group. From a social perspective of a functionalist for the normal operation of the human society we must consolid ate certain types of social relations so that they become mandatory for members of a particular social group (Schaefer, 2009, p. 4). This primarily refers to those social relations in which, in order to obtain entry, members of a certain group must satisfy the most vital requirements needed for the successful functioning of the given group as an integrated social unit. For example, or the production of material comforts, people tend to perpetuate and secure a level of financial cushioning; this is also done for the upbringing of children, for unstrained family relationships, as well as for education and training for everyone involved. A symbolic interactionist would view the family process as a consolidation of social relations and a way to establish a system of roles and statuses, prescribing certain rules of conduct in a social network, and in defining a system of sanctions in case of a default by any of the individuals in the process of living out and following he given rules of conduct (Schaefer, 2009, p. 16/111). Social roles, statuses and sanctions are implemented in the form of social institutions that define sustainable patterns of behavior, ideas and incentives. Social institutions are organized patterns of beliefs and behavior centered on basic social needs, such as replacing personnel in the family setting (Schaefer, 2009, p. 113). Social institutions dictate how ideas and goals are perceived and defined by the system of standard social values, such as patterns of public behavior and the complicated systems of various social ties, i. e. he sets of roles and statuses through which a range of behavior is carried out and kept within certain limits. So, within the concepts of social institution and social group there is a significant internal difference. While the social group, whether primary or secondary, is a collection of interacting individuals, the social institution is a system of social relationships and social norms that exist in a particular area of human activity. However, it should be noted that these concepts are inseparable from each other, because a social institution is a set of relationships and systems of behavior, and is etermined ultimately by the needs of people. In other words, although the social institution creates social relationships and norms, there are people for whom these relationships are linked and carried out; the family is the perfect example of a social group that puts the rules in to practice. People organize themselves into different groups using institutional rules. Each institution includes many social groups that provide the overall institutional behavior. Consequently, institutions and social groups are interrelated, and it would be completely meaningless to separate these otions and study them separately. So, based on the foregoing, I conclude that the family is a social phenomenon that combines the features of a social institution and a primary group. The idea of the modern family arises from the desire to satisfy purely personal needs and interests ot individuals. According to structure-tunctionalists, tn patterns of reciprocal obligations among people and between structures of people and the greater society define family. The greater society has needs that must be met; in order to meet those needs, society creates subsets of people structured to elp meet the needs of society. The family is one of those structures. The definition of family changes as the needs of the greater society change. When the greater society needs rapid population growth † after a time of war, for example † societys definition of family emphasizes heterosexual bonding, procreation and child rearing; but when the greater society is faced with over-population and the need to limit population growth, societys definition of family may be modified to include homosexual bonding and may be more supportive of childless couples (Diem, 1997, As a primary group, the family connects the personal needs of the public interest, adapting to social relations, norms, and values that are accepted in our society. In other words, the familys personal needs are sorted and organized on the basis of accepted societal values, norms and behavior patterns and, eventually, acquire the character of the social functions such as the regulation of sex, procreation, socialization, emotional satisfaction, status, safety, and economic security. From what I have gathered, the definition of family from a conflict perspective has een a highly discouraged and slightly controversial subject since family is considered a sacred institution. As a result, support for research on conflict in the family has been discouraged (Werner-Wilson, 1993, p. 6). And it would seem that a social institution of such prominence would not have a dark side from which can leap and bound toward freedom suppressed minorities. But for the sake of this essay, let us assume that if Karl Marx were to look at the institution of marriage, he would wave his well bearded nugget side to side disapprovingly. The idea of a traditional family as roots in male supremacy, and suppression of womens rights. If only Karl Marx was not a man of the nineteenth century, but lived in present time. The ideal family includes: 1) a set of social values (love, for children), 2) public procedure (for the care of children, family rights and obligations), and 3) interlacing of roles and statuses (status and role of husband, wife, child, teenager, mother-in- law, brothers, etc. ), with the aid of which the family exists. Thus, the institution of family is a collection of certain bonds, rules and roles, which in practice are manifested into the activities of this individual primary group. We all know how great the importance of family is in everyday life, society and even in the political arena. After all, it is the family of each person that provides them with an inexhaustible source of love, devotion and support. The family lays foundation for morality, spirituality and tolerance. And it is the family that is recognized as the major reason for why cultural beliefs survive, are inherited and passed from generation to generation. It is a prerequisite for socialization and the lifelong study of social roles, basic education, skills, and behavior. A healthy, strong family is the basis of stability and prosperity of any society. The family is the foundation of all social institutions vis- ¤-vis the development of the family is ultimately the progress of society as a whole. But the world does not stand still, in its ever-changing atmosphere social institutions take on new meanings and the ideas ot marriage and tamily change witn the times. Marriage has ceased to be life-long and is losing its legitimacy: divorce, single parent families, broken hearts and bank accounts used to be exceptions, and are now becoming the norm. The vast majority of professionals such as philosophers, sociologists, psychologists, economists, and students of the modern school of thought, all agree that the family is going through a real crisis. The strength of family is being tested under the weight of total catastrophic failure that our society is facing; the deep nature of which is characterized by our flailing civilization. As a primary element of society, it gives a miniature image of the same contradictions that are inherent in our cultures. One of the most remarkable properties of the family is its flexible and dynamic orm of structural organization. Thanks to the universal ability to adapt to the peculiarities of the ever-changing world, the family has developed an enormous variety of types of family structures, sometimes adapting itself beyond recognition, but while keeping unchanged its essence as a social institution and a primary group. In addition, the family is created to meet any number and range of essential human needs. The family, therefore, in contrast to other social groups defines the very meaning of integrity and adaptability. Because of its multifunctional ability to ameliorate the physiological and sychological human needs, and its inclination toward self-organization and self- development the idea of family is able to combine all personal, collective and public interests into one little amiable ball with a gigantic potential for explosive cataclysm. The world is not static, it changes, and with it change its social institutions, and thus the family. Clearly, the family today, like society in general, is in deep cow dung. The strength of the family, its charm and vitality lie in the integrity that is inherent in the family idea and in the definition of the primary social group and social nstitution. The present era in which we have had this great pleasure of existing is different from any other in recorded history. Todays complex economic and social situations require a modern approach, which can often cause stress and depression, which have already become integral parts of our existence. Today is the time when the need is particularly great in having a safe retreat, a place of spiritual comfort. This safe retreat can be our family, its stability and strength can be built to withstand the widespread variability of the painful world. The family is something worth elebrating, and in celebrating ourselves we can go on further to build everything else that will try to destroy it.

Recreating the Brain :: Biology Essays Research Papers

2001: Recreating the Brain Perhaps one of the most interesting and least understood aspects of neurobiology is human consciousness. For many, this "experience of self" (an aspect of consciousness which will be used interchangeably with consciousness in this particular paper) defines what it means to be human. Personality and emotion, and their connection to the experience of self, can yield insight into creating artificial intelligence that can mimic conscious human brain function. By discussing the implications of consciousness in computers with artificial intelligence, the significance of the experience of self within humans becomes clearer. The challenge of understanding personality may be more easily surmounted by studying the significance of personality in relation to something else, in this case alcoholism. Alcoholism is a disease that affects millions of people and is influenced by both environmental and genetic factors (1). Low self esteem and abusive relationships can lead to alcoholism in individuals who do not show a genetic tendency towards the disease. However, it is not necessarily the alcoholic's fault, or his/her family's fault, that the individual displays alcoholism. No one is destined to become an alcoholic, but it is true that a tendency towards alcoholism can be inherited. Alcoholism is twice as likely to appear in homozygous twins than in heterozygous twins (1). Children born to alcoholic parents, but brought up by non alcoholic adoptive parents, are three times more likely to develop alcoholism than the natural children of the adoptive parents (1). However, many children of alcoholic parents never have to battle alcoholism themselves (1). Therefore, it should be viewed as a disease that individuals can be predisposed towards, much like diabetes or hypertension (1). Personality traits also seem to have a role in inheriting a tendency towards alcoholism (2). Some researchers believe that, using personality traits, they can predict with 80% accuracy which individuals have the capacity to develop alcoholism (2). This implies that individuals who manifest these personality traits are most likely genetically predisposed to develop alcoholism at some point in their life. So individuals are genetically predisposed toward personality traits as well. This interplay between genetics and personality traits brings up an important point, the exact definition of the word "personality". Careful inspection of the common use of the word "personality" illustrates that it holds different meanings at different times. When an individual refers to someone else's personality, they refer to that person's tendency to behave in a certain way.

“Good People” Essay

Love is one of the only words in this world that can’t be adequately described in words. Yet it is the strongest human emotion and most powerful force in the universe that conquers all, makes our lives worth living, and chooses our direction. In the two short stories the authors use their style, symbolism and point of views to best portray two different scenarios that both revolve around love. In â€Å"Good People† by David Foster Wallace 19 year old college student impregnates a girl he’d been seeing and is plagued with many uncertainties of life and love and is forced to make a difficult decision in the case of an abortion. In â€Å"What We Talk About When We Talk About Love† by Raymond Carver two couples sit around a table and attempt to discuss which knows more about true love while they drink gin. In the end, they both share a common theme; that love is ambiguous. In the stories, the author’s style of writing delivers the tones for which the ch aracters are feeling. Read more: Good people david foster wallace essay Effectively you also share some of the same emotions the characters are facing. In â€Å"Good People† there is a dense and intentionally clumsy style which adds to the story’s depth to portray the uncertainty and anxiousness that Lane is feeling. This style greatly immerses you into the circulating mind of teenaged Lane’s ambivalence of his love, religion, and self. Wallace uses the means of a third person narrator telling the story to capture Lane’s struggle and introverted thoughts. It is when he first told his girlfriend Sheri that he would go to the appointment with her to console her that his guilt starts to eat away at him†¦ â€Å"The worse he felt, the stiller he sat. The whole thing felt balanced on a knife or wire; if he moved to put his arm up or touch her the whole thing could tip over. He hated himself for sitting so frozen.† (Wallace 891). In the other story the authors tone is one of a darker, more mature subject matter with a fee l of â€Å"dirty realism†. Carver uses mainly dialogue to tell the story in a way that feels like an ordinary conversation but at the same time pries deeper into the unpleasant truths of the mundane world. Half way through the story, Mel makes a comment which changes the direction from the casual to the more dense subject matter. â€Å"And the terrible thing, the terrible thing is, but the good thing too, the saving grace, you might say, is that if something happened to one of us tomorrow, I think . . . the other person, would grieve for a while,  you know, but then the surviving party would go out and love again, have someone else soon enough.†(Carver 852) In the first story, Lane is constantly beating himself up and questioning himself of whether or not he’s making the right decision throughout the story at every turn. He even asks â€Å"What would even Jesus do?† (Wallace 893), revealing that this dilemma is one too complex for a mere human to make a proper judgment. The story is almost one long repeated question, where at the end even still the answer isn’t definitively answered. In the second story, Mel stumbles over his words often when discussing â€Å"love† not from the gin but from the complexity of pinpointing the meaning of love. When he tries to come to a coherent conclusion to the meaning of love he instead digresses into a convoluted meditation and becomes angered in trying to wrap his head around it. He too looks towards a higher power for guidance due to a lack of comprehension. Symbolism comes into play within these two stories where the adequacy of words isn’t enough. It gives more depth to the stories without being too blatantly obvious, keeping the reader thinking. In â€Å"Good People† there is symbolism carefully hidden throughout which Lane notices but doesn’t quite seem to entirely pick up on, it is more there for the reader to make an inferred decision at the end. The geography around him and the lake are the symbols which apply to his life and relationship with God, himself, and Sheri. It is when they are both sitting on the picnic table at the park near the lake when after realizing he was unintentionally praying with his hands that he notices the lighting has changed and it resonates with him. â€Å"†¦everything seemed distinctly lit, for the circle of the pin oak’s shade had rotated off all the way, and they sat now in sun with their shadow a two-headed thing in the grass before them† (Wallace 893). Likewise in the second story, symbolism is used for the same reason to enhance the plot, except in a more negative way. When the story begins the bottle of gin is full and the sun is bright and everyone is in a great and giddy mood. As the story progresses, the bottle of gin diminishes along with the brightness of the sun, leaving them at the end with a complex and increasingly dark conversation figuratively and a dark room literally. â€Å"He’s depressed,† Terri said. â€Å"Mel, why don’t you take a pill?† â€Å"Listen,† Mel said. â€Å"Let’s finish this fucking gin. There’s enough left here for one shooter all  around. Then let’s go eat. Let’s go to the new place.† (Carver 853) Mel sees finishing the bottle of gin as a way to finally end the conversation brought up on love and get him out of the frustration that the conversation had provoked within him. In this story the sun set and the gin was all drank yet th ey still hadn’t been able to conclude the true meaning of love from a relationship standpoint. In â€Å"Good People† the symbolism leads me to decide that Lane didn’t go through with the abortion, however in the end the two are still unsure whether or not things will work out for them and if it was the smart choice. The personal point of views of the authors feelings on love are reflected through the mediums of the characters in their stories. For example, in â€Å"Good People† Lane is a kid who is struggling with the challenge of understanding his place in the world and is constantly questioning the unknown. He wants to think of himself as a good person, but his skepticism of his belief in God, the questioning of his morals, and his â€Å"love† for Sheri weighs him down. Similar to the story, David F. Wallace was a writer known for taking the challenge of communicating what it meant to be human through writing whilst battling clinical anxiety and depression. When in deep thought, Wallace’s personal views and struggles with the belief in God are voiced through Lane’s inner thoughts†¦ â€Å"He promised God he had learned his lesson. But what if that, too, was a hollow promise, from a hypocrite who repented only after, who promised submission but really only wante d a reprieve?† (Wallace 894). Likewise in the second story, some of the rougher experiences of Raymond Carver’s life shine through directly in parallel to the story. Carver presents Mel’s heavy drinking in an understanding way, the way that only one who has witnessed the inner workings of alcohol and how it unknowingly deteriorates oneself can. Mel represents Carver in the story, his second wife Terri represents Raymond Carver’s real second wife (Tess Gallagher) who had a first husband herself both in the story and in real life, only in the story his name was Ed and in life was (Larry Edward Gallagher). In the story Terri claims Ed and she loved each other, Mel claims she is wrong, but Terri persists despite the fact he hit her sometimes and was disturbed and shot himself. In real life, Larry was MIA in the Vietnam War as a pilot and must have meant a lot to his wife seeing how  she kept his last name. The bigoted representation of Ed in Carver’s story represents the jealousy he had of his wife’s never ending love of her first husband. Carver’s first wife is also presented abstractly into the story. Carver had two kids with his first wife, (MaryAnn), who he later fought with and disliked. In the story MaryAnn’s name is Marjorie and he voices his dislike for her while still wanting to see his kids. As you can see the author’s lifetime experiences greatly influence their perspectives which is presented and passed down through their works of literature. Both writers struggle to capture the meaning of love in their own sentimental ways, however neither come up with a definitive answer. How true it is today that love really is ambiguous no matter how well we try to capture it in its natural human habitat. No matter how many years go by or how technologically advanced a society we become, the question will always at its roots remain.

Which States Have Had No Women in Congress