A Reflection On Social Institutions

The great strong standing United States of America is known today as one of the most power houses in the world. The principles she was founded on included on freedom and prosperity for some. In the founding years of an entity the most work is done in laying down the foundation. America chose to complete the task of building a beautiful nation of freedom and prosperity through the exploitation of slaves. Today, blacks in America are still healing from the scars that slavery in America has written on African American DNA. The fruits of slavery produced the internalization of negative: mentalities, inferiority of identity, and images in black media.

I grew up in a very small, tight knit, and Christian community. Most people, had the same moral views as myself and if not the same very close to the same. There has always been people around me encouraging me to make “good” decisions that based on my moral views would be a correct decision. I think that a community has a huge impact on your moral worldview. These are the people who you are going to school with, seeing around town and in many cases the people with you when you are making a decision. They are the people, in my eyes, that are shaping your decisions and morals tremendously. They are your peers encouraging your decisions and the people who are affected by your

Misfit. Rebel. Troublemaker. These are all names that may be given to people who go against the social norm. According to Andersen, Taylor, and Logio, the authors of Sociology: The Essentials, norms are defined as the specific cultural expectations for how to act in a given situation (2016). When someone disrupts the expectations, they commit a norm violation and may display deviant behavior. Since norms are so automatically built into our everyday lives, the rules of social interaction can be subtle and may be imperceptible to the people who participate in them. Therefore, sociologists often purposefully commit a norm violation in order to study what the rules or norms are. This approach, known as ethnomethodology, interprets society as being

Social validity was introduced by Wolf (1978), in which the need to measure the acceptability and impact of a programmed intervention in the society by the consumers. Since then, there have developed several models with different components of social validity (Carter, 2011). For example, Reimers, Wacker, and Koepple (1987) conceptualized a “decision-making” model of social validity, which focused on the level of understanding of an intervention. They created a six-level flow chart with numerous potential outcomes related to the implementation of an intervention to evaluate the acceptability of the intervention. Later, Schwartz and Baer (1991) described a model that was based on Wolf ‘s (1978) social validity, which emphasized the most significant variables influencing intervention acceptability. Despite the various models of social validity, the assessment of social validity in current studies rarely matches with one specific model to take into account as a scientific tool (Schwartz & Baer, 1991). Therefore, the purpose of the current paper is to critique how social validity was evaluated in Towery, Parsons, and Reid (2014) article using the models of social validity in Reinmer et al (1987), and Schwartz and Baer (1991). In addition, suggestions to improve their social validity assessment are discussed.

Sociology can be used to explain the social norms and sanctions that are associated with everything that we do. In order to examine social norms, we must use the sociological imagination to make the familiar strange. To do that, we must critically think about the social interactions that take place around us and look at them from different points of view. I observed students interacting with each other and with dining hall employees in Campus Center Dining Hall (CCDH) in order to determine the social norms and sanctions that occur there.

My topic is gender roles in society the social institutions which influence to the stigmatization of gender are:

The church that we used to attend -Wooddale Baptist- was a mega church just outside of St. Paul, Minnesota. Every Sunday, I had the same schedule consisting of Sunday School, snack time, and then “Big Church,” which was with the adults. Due to the unthinkable amount of kids, I was never given the opportunity to make anything more than acquaintances. Every Sunday it felt like I met someone new, plus I only got to know their surface layer identity. Once we started at my new church, Aldersgate Church, my social and religious outlook improved. Starting on the first Sunday, my family and I had made plenty of good friends. We even had dinner plans with two strange families after church that night! Little did we know that these two families became the most supportive and trusted people we would ever meet. Also, the small community within the church and the pastor inspired me to grow in my faith than ever before. I began to enjoy Sunday school, and understand the lessons. Exchanging churches changed the way I worshipped God, and gave me the chance to meet new

Major religions dating back 4,000 years have served as institutions that bring individuals together in the form of communities that share similar morals, ideals, and customs. Religion greatly affects individual behavior both positively and negatively because of how important of a role it plays in many lives. Smidt (1999) notes that religious institutions act as a societal framework that provides a variety of services such as guidance, physical care, and social networks. It is at these institutions where individuals are first introduced to ideas about ethics, values, and customs. Thus, officials within each religion have an important role in shaping how their congregates view the world. Many religious institutions serve as the center of a particular

There are several theories created by many thinkers of our time that believes that societal, financial, and social arrangements and/or structures as the main cause of criminal behavior. In society, depending on where you are, there are usually some unwritten norms that are expected to be followed. It can be in a business corporation, out in the streets, at home. Usually there will be two sets of norms that is expected to be followed that causes an individual to feel torn. However, the feeling of being torn is the inner battle of doing the right thing, conscience or keeping yourself alive.

The link between morality and human nature has been a progressive reoccurring theme since ancient times (Prinz, 2008). Moral development is a characteristic of a person’s general development that transpires over the course of a lifetime. Moral development is derived by a wide variety of cultural and demographic factors that appear to influence morally relevant actions. Turiel (2006) defined morality as an individuals “prescriptive judgments of justice, rights, and welfare pertaining to how people ought to relate to each other.” Individuals’ moral judgments are frequently considered to be a product of culturally specific controls that provide a framework for behavioral motivations that are sensitive to the effects of gender, education, religion and politics (Banerjee, Huebner & Hauser, 2010). While several approaches have been utilized to examine the interaction of multivariate contributors to fundamental moral differences such as: disputes about family life, sexuality, social fairness, and so on, research has suggested that ideological considerations have provided a potent and diverse explanation for the polarization of contrasting views (Weber & Federico, 2013).

Three broad models of criminal behaviors are the following: psychological, sociological and biological models. Actually, it is difficult to completely separate them and it is generally accepted, that all of them play a role in the interpretation of behavior. Though psychological principles can be applied across all the three models, they all have some specific ones, which would help in implementing across different crime control policies.

Throughout the course of this semester, I have learned there are many different terms and theories about society that I feel like I can relate to and have a much better understanding about the concept of sociology. For the last paper of this class I would like to talk about the last three sociological concepts that I feel have helped me improve my understanding of the relationship between society and myself. The three concepts that I will talk about are: fictive kin, agenda setting theory, and lastly, bystander effect or diffusion of responsibility.

At the beginning of the semester, I knew very little about sociology or even what it was about. I just knew I needed to take the class for my degree plan to transfer to a four-year university and that I would be doing a lot of reading about different terms and theories of society. However, this first month of class has helped me improve my understanding of what sociology is about and shown me how my personal society has impacted the way I view society. Not only did I learn about the relationships between society and myself, but I have also learned different concepts that have helped me gain a better understanding of how society works. There are three specific sociological concepts that has helped me improve my understanding of the relation

When we are young our morality is shaped as we learn from our family and the environment. “Psychologists say a child must develop a sense of values by the age of seven to become an adult with a conscience” (Rosenstand 4). Children experience a plethora of information and subsequently build their personalities based on what they learn from growing up in their given culture. We are a product of our environment in the sense that we

The most important agent of socialization is family, which helps mold an individual. The family values, beliefs, and religious inclinations shape