Sorry I posted it so late but the damn blog was not working last night. It kept saying 'gateway timed out' or 'error'. Miles i have sent this to your uni email address, anyway have a look at it and if you think it needs editing then do so. I didnt really change anything except reorder the paragraghs. Didnt erase anything either.
Miles-red
Joanna-blue
Members within a society share a set of common goals, values and beliefs. In western societies there is the general belief that work is essential to life in order to provide for oneself and be a productive member of society.
An individual is expected to conform to certain expectations with norms of required behaviours attached, which are usually set by members within that society. For example: here in Britain, after finishing high school, a young person is expected to either seek further education or enter into employment. Those who do not do so are negatively labelled.
The individual must then ask themselves the question ‘What is expected of me by society?’ To answer this question they must consider what it is they are supposed to contribute to society in order to help the system to work.
David Riesman (1961) a sociologist, claims that these norms have been instilled into us from an early age and reinforced throughout our lives by community members. These then govern the choices we make in life. Even as adults we are influenced by the expectancies of our peers with rewards for conformity and some form of punishment for non-conformity through feelings of guilt or shame. The bad opinion of an individual by close community members will ensure conformity to a fixed social order.
Many of us have been asked that question ’What do you want to be when you get older?’ when you were younger. It is expected that we should all have some level of ambition. You are made to feel as though you are free to choose any profession you like; aim as high as you like. Work hard at school and anything is possible. Baudrillard claims that this is all an illusion: we are not as free to choose as we are led to believe. Firstly our aspirations are a function of social inheritance. Our ambitions are usually on a similar level to those within our community. We all hope to achieve our goals because we know we can hope, but truly our levels of aspiration are a compromise between reality and ideology.
There are three general choices that one has when it comes to contributing to society. Firstly, they can make an economical contribution. This basically means that the individual chooses to work. If they choose to work then they spend their life performing a service to society and contributing to the nation’s economy. They also pay a certain sum of tax money from their wage back to the government, who in theory go on to use the money to enhance society in various ways. Making an economical contribution is generally what is expected in society with the vast majority of the population in Britain making this choice.
The second option that the individual has is to make a cultural contribution to society. Many people will argue giving a cultural contribution is just as important as giving an economic one. A cultural contribution could be anything from producing a piece of art, music or even an idea. Many artists, musicians and philosophers do not believe in conforming to what is expected of them by society. They argue that if you are working full time you can not wholly devote your time to an idea.
French philosopher Jean Baudrillard states ‘We live in a culture which strides to return to each of us full responsibility for his own life.’ Baudrillard’s views reflect the theory that each individual will get from their lives exactly what they put into it. If an individual works hard and conforms economically then they will have a life that is more comfortable than those who do not contribute to society. If that individual should choose to make a cultural contribution then there is a small chance that they will live as comfortably as someone who conforms economically but there is also a chance that they will make a considerable amount of money and live a substantially comfortable life.
The final choice that the individual has is to not contribute to society whatsoever. This means a person chooses not to work but also chooses not to make a cultural contribution and therefore an individual who does not contribute to society lives on an allowance of funding from the government which comes out of the tax money of those who are working.
Nietzsche states “Make friends with only the industrious as the idle man is a danger to his friends.” He claims that the idle man will concern himself with other people’s affairs as he himself does not have enough to do, eventually making a nuisance of himself.
Individuals who choose not contribute to society by not working will have funding from the Government for things such as accommodation, child support and food but the money they are given will rarely stretch far enough to purchase luxury items. The minority that does not contribute to society by working are far more likely to commit crimes such as robbery in order to allow themselves to afford the luxury items they desire.
But not all share this belief on idleness. Tom Hodgkin’s who wrote How to be idle points out that it is the richest countries in the world that work the hardest and with all the technology we have would it not mean less work for us. He also states because of overwork our creativity (which is increased through idleness) is being "squeezed at both ends". People simply do not have the time to be creative any more. He also claims that spending a good portion of the day being idle is very good for a person’s mental and physical health.
Clive Jenkins and Barry Sherman are two trade unionists who argue that he need for work is an ingrained attitude of mind and to work is not necessary to human survival. They also claim that the education system, which maintains the idea of work as its main objective has failed to teach us about leisure and how to use it. We are all led to believe that if we are out of work we will become bored and useless, so we do.
Miles-red
Joanna-blue
Members within a society share a set of common goals, values and beliefs. In western societies there is the general belief that work is essential to life in order to provide for oneself and be a productive member of society.
An individual is expected to conform to certain expectations with norms of required behaviours attached, which are usually set by members within that society. For example: here in Britain, after finishing high school, a young person is expected to either seek further education or enter into employment. Those who do not do so are negatively labelled.
The individual must then ask themselves the question ‘What is expected of me by society?’ To answer this question they must consider what it is they are supposed to contribute to society in order to help the system to work.
David Riesman (1961) a sociologist, claims that these norms have been instilled into us from an early age and reinforced throughout our lives by community members. These then govern the choices we make in life. Even as adults we are influenced by the expectancies of our peers with rewards for conformity and some form of punishment for non-conformity through feelings of guilt or shame. The bad opinion of an individual by close community members will ensure conformity to a fixed social order.
Many of us have been asked that question ’What do you want to be when you get older?’ when you were younger. It is expected that we should all have some level of ambition. You are made to feel as though you are free to choose any profession you like; aim as high as you like. Work hard at school and anything is possible. Baudrillard claims that this is all an illusion: we are not as free to choose as we are led to believe. Firstly our aspirations are a function of social inheritance. Our ambitions are usually on a similar level to those within our community. We all hope to achieve our goals because we know we can hope, but truly our levels of aspiration are a compromise between reality and ideology.
There are three general choices that one has when it comes to contributing to society. Firstly, they can make an economical contribution. This basically means that the individual chooses to work. If they choose to work then they spend their life performing a service to society and contributing to the nation’s economy. They also pay a certain sum of tax money from their wage back to the government, who in theory go on to use the money to enhance society in various ways. Making an economical contribution is generally what is expected in society with the vast majority of the population in Britain making this choice.
The second option that the individual has is to make a cultural contribution to society. Many people will argue giving a cultural contribution is just as important as giving an economic one. A cultural contribution could be anything from producing a piece of art, music or even an idea. Many artists, musicians and philosophers do not believe in conforming to what is expected of them by society. They argue that if you are working full time you can not wholly devote your time to an idea.
French philosopher Jean Baudrillard states ‘We live in a culture which strides to return to each of us full responsibility for his own life.’ Baudrillard’s views reflect the theory that each individual will get from their lives exactly what they put into it. If an individual works hard and conforms economically then they will have a life that is more comfortable than those who do not contribute to society. If that individual should choose to make a cultural contribution then there is a small chance that they will live as comfortably as someone who conforms economically but there is also a chance that they will make a considerable amount of money and live a substantially comfortable life.
The final choice that the individual has is to not contribute to society whatsoever. This means a person chooses not to work but also chooses not to make a cultural contribution and therefore an individual who does not contribute to society lives on an allowance of funding from the government which comes out of the tax money of those who are working.
Nietzsche states “Make friends with only the industrious as the idle man is a danger to his friends.” He claims that the idle man will concern himself with other people’s affairs as he himself does not have enough to do, eventually making a nuisance of himself.
Individuals who choose not contribute to society by not working will have funding from the Government for things such as accommodation, child support and food but the money they are given will rarely stretch far enough to purchase luxury items. The minority that does not contribute to society by working are far more likely to commit crimes such as robbery in order to allow themselves to afford the luxury items they desire.
But not all share this belief on idleness. Tom Hodgkin’s who wrote How to be idle points out that it is the richest countries in the world that work the hardest and with all the technology we have would it not mean less work for us. He also states because of overwork our creativity (which is increased through idleness) is being "squeezed at both ends". People simply do not have the time to be creative any more. He also claims that spending a good portion of the day being idle is very good for a person’s mental and physical health.
Clive Jenkins and Barry Sherman are two trade unionists who argue that he need for work is an ingrained attitude of mind and to work is not necessary to human survival. They also claim that the education system, which maintains the idea of work as its main objective has failed to teach us about leisure and how to use it. We are all led to believe that if we are out of work we will become bored and useless, so we do.
posted by joanna snow at 11:54 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home