Winston presents two approaches to cultural determinism. The first is Cultural Determinist Account A which “implies an examination of the circumstances into which the technology is introduced and diffused through society.” (Winston 791) This account resists the idea of invention and what will happen instantly. This account also focuses on economics, a social factor. The second account Winston discusses is Cultural Determinist Account B, his ultimate position between the accounts, which attempts to bring together all the social elements and insist that it was that combination that led to the creation of a given technology. This account looks at economics, gender, politics, science, race, class etc.
He is influenced by writings under the faculty of sociology of science, as their methodology is the basis of social constructivism, the concept that the critique is focused one (Collins, 1983). Additionally, Winner’s article is influential in future writings considering the ethics of technological development. This very article can be seen as a stepping-stone or pivot point into consideration on the morality of technological developments and affects on society or societal groups. Winner’s evaluation on social constructivism commends theorists for opening the “Black Box” of technological development, but critiques them in a way that opens up a new field of ethical and moral consideration in regards to technological development (Winner, 1993). One of the influencing texts on Winner is The Sociology of Scientific Knowledge by H. M. Collins.
Ideologies unite groups of people and promote the collection of ideas necessary for operation of a properly varnished society. E.K. Hunt and Jared Diamond are two well known authors who discuss the scrupulous importance of ideologies within society. Their books, Property and Prophets and Guns, Germs, and Steel, discuss the success of certain ideologies throughout history, while also integrating the commendable relevance of economics. In determining the correlation of the two novels, one must assess the social, political, and economic factors associated with their viewpoints.
Aristotle described politics as the ‘master science’, ‘the activity through which human beings attempt to improve their lives and create the Good Society.’ Through the tragedy of the commons and the problem of collective action we can see how politics is essentially the ‘search for conflict resolution’ (heywood) and aims to create a cohesive society benefiting all. Elinor Ostrom p186 goes so far as to say ‘The theory of collective action is the central subject of political science’ . The idea of collective action is essentially when a group of individuals with common interests work together to further those common interests benefitting all. Indeed problems of collective action permeate all aspects of politics, ranging from local neighbourhood level to international level. (ostrom) Collective action can be seen at work in international relations, public bureaucracies and also explains voting, lobby group formation and how citizens control their governments in a democracy (ostrom presidential) Cerny (site) states that ‘the state has been the key structural arena within which collective action has been situated and undertaken.’ However collective action can prove difficult for groups to achieve.
The function of ideology using Marx's perspective would be that continual reproduction of the means of production. This, in turn, ensures the continuous dominance of the ruling class. Weber's overarching question was “why do rational rules result in a double-bind? Verstehen or “interpretive understanding” is a method of empathy that relies on the sociologist's ability to subjectively understand the meanings and motives of th... ... middle of paper ... ...ling' in modern society, it is still important to study Weber. His thinking about the nature of developments like rationalizations in the modern Western world led to the development of critical theory, which remains a vital philosophical tradition in normative discipline of social and political philosophy.
Both approached these developments by introducing a theory of their own to shed light on the effects that modern capitalism had on solidarity and on society’s ability to reproduce itself. More so, to understand and solve the problems arose as the societies in which they lived moved from a pre-industrial to an industrial state. For Marx, one of the serious problems arose in this was what he termed alienation. On the other, for Durkheim it was what he called anomie. The purpose of this essay is to examine the underlying differences of these two notions and in hope that it may help us to better understand the different visions of society developed by these two great social thinkers.
A class will be considered as hegemonic if it had been legitimized its dominance through concessions and institutions. The class if become dominant in this very automatically forms strong political structural of the state, which creates historic bloc. As the world is moving to globalization so the Neo Gramsicans state that neo-historical bloc exists in the world. This is the essential key feature of the Neo Gramsican that can change the circumstances. This theory in contrast with the other previous mainstream theories broadens the aspect of hegemony.
Obviously, they are extremes conceived to illustrate the various points the author intended to make about the benefits and drawbacks of each scenario. Likely, reality will produce a mixture and overlapping of the scenarios. Nevertheless, the article highlights an important point, namely that ideologies from both ends of the extreme (leftwing hippies and conservative Tea Party) favor the “do-it-yourself state” for similar and opposing reasons (Meijer, 2012). Reviewing potential directions participatory democracy may take, will aid in developing my dissertation topic by creating awareness of the impacts of technological advancements. Moreover, arguments concerning the impact of technological advancements on citizens’ ability to organize and participate represent an integral part of my dissertation topic.
A social scientist tries to organize a set of facts into systemic theoretical passion. The Social scientists are trying to accomplish the facts they create can be used to explain a theory that can be applied to other sets of facts. The importance of these frameworks helps people gather important information and compare and contrast their different strengths and weaknesses. The first traditional and most dominant framework to examine is Pluralism. Pluralism can generally be defined as group politics in a free market society.
The educative function of politics reveals important insights into the human condition and allows one, for example, to see postmodernity in the context of historical events, such as the resourceful relationship between reason and capitalism, the transition from living law to positive law (cf. Northrop 1960), and the shaping of thought through liberalism and nihilism. An important feature of postmodern thought is its acceptance of multiplicities of viewpoints. By entertaining disparate claims for truth that originate in diverse methodological and historical origins, postmodernitsts learn to employ creative strategies to solve conceptual disjunctions much like anthropologists must learn to cope with the collapse of their worldviews when 'going native.' Such experiences, however, can be fertile ground wherein new scientific methodologies might have a chance to blossom.