![](3D"whatissociology_files/image002.jpg")
Access Social Science
What is sociology?
Soc=
iology
teaches you to question the world around you. Sociology graduates go on to a hug=
ely
diverse range of careers. The=
y have
jobs in the media as researchers and journalists. Graduates may embark on teaching,
lecturing, police work, social work or health care. The list is endless.
What is sociology?
· The systematic study of societ=
ies
· The study of social institutio=
ns:
=
-&nb=
sp;
family
=
-&nb=
sp;
peer groups
=
-&nb=
sp;
education
=
-&nb=
sp;
work
=
-&nb=
sp;
religion
=
-&nb=
sp;
mass media.
Nature versus nurture
Int=
roduction
Sociology is the study of human behaviour and therefore the source =
of
human behaviour is of interest to sociologists. Many people just
accept the way the world is because they think it is natural. They think it is natural for two p=
eople
to fall in love, get married, live together and have children. It is natural for children to go to
school, sit at desks and obey the teacher.=
It is natural to then go to work and take orders from the manager.
Sociologists, however, challenge these taken-for-granted assumptions. They do this by investigating how things were in the past, how they have changed, how they differ between societies and how they might change in the future. <= o:p>
The first thing we need to investigate is whether social behaviour =
is
determined by our genes or by the society and culture =
in
which we live. This is known =
as the
nature versus nurture debate.
This debate is central to the study of sociology and socialisatio=
n. Before we look at the debate in de=
tail
it is important to define what we mean by the terms nature and nu=
rture.
Nat=
ure
When sociologists talk about nature they are referring to wh=
at a
person inherits through their genes. This is the gen=
etic
inheritance of a person. Each individual inherits 50% of their ge=
nes
from their mother and 50% from their father. Genes determine such thi=
ngs
as what sex you will be and the colour of your eyes.
However, biologists have argued that genetic influence can also exp=
lain
social behaviour and characteristics. For example, some have argued t=
hat aggression,
personality and intelligence are all inherited. If we u=
se
the term, instinct,=
this
means that behaviour is programmed in the genes.
Nur=
ture
When sociologists talk about nurture they are
referring to all the behaviours we learn through the socialisation
process. The things we do are a result of what we have learned=
. This means that our e=
xperiences
and our environment play a large part in shaping our behaviour.
Our social behaviours come from the expectations and guidelines found within
each society and culture.
Nat=
ure or
nurture
It can be difficult to know how much we are influenced by our ge=
nes
and how much by our environment.
We often say behaviour is natural or instinctive because we o=
ften
do things without thinking, or have done something for such a long time tha=
t it
seems natural. However, what we consider natural may in fact be behav=
iour
that is learned but, because we are socialised from an early =
age,
it seems natural.
Recent advances in science in the area of genetics have made=
a
strong case for the nature argument. However, sociologists sti=
ll
argue that genetics alone cannot explain the huge variations in social
behaviour between different cultures.
Sociologists acknowledge that we have basic drives
for food, shelter, comfort, and so on, but this does not explain the way we=
go
about getting these things. Each society does things in different ways
and this can be seen as the influence on the way we have been socialised=
and the behaviours that are seen as important and normal in our society.&nb=
sp;
Biologists, on the other hand, also acknowledge that th=
e environment
is important. For example, we may inherit the gene for a physi=
cal
characteristic or a specific behaviour, but the gene may only express itsel=
f in
a particular environment.
One example of this is if we look at the genetic
influence on height. We may inherit the gene for tallness, but we
would need protein in our diet as we are growing up for the gene to express
itself and actually make us tall. So, even though we may have the
possibility of behaving in a particular way, this is not determined just by
biology.
One way to test the influence of nature or nurture wo=
uld
be to study the way in which people develop without human/social contact.&n=
bsp;
However, researchers cannot do this as it would not be ethical. Howev=
er,
there are some case studies on wild children who seem to have gone
without social contact that we will have a look at a little later in this U=
nit.
For the most part we need to look at examples of behaviour in our o=
wn
society with people who have been brought up with social contact and try to
decide how far the behaviour is as a result of their genetic inheritance=
and in how far it is because they have learned it as part of the =
socialisation
process. That is, whether they behave the way they do because of their
genes, which they have inherited from their parents, or because of the way =
they
were treated when they were young.
Examples of the nature versus nurture debate
Given below are examples of different kinds of social behaviour.&nb=
sp;
Each can be explained through nature or nurture.
Fem=
ale
and male behaviour
Most of us would agree that in many situations we expect male and
female behaviour to differ.
Consider the following questions designed to test whether males and
females behave differently:
·
=
In
your experience, is a man or a woman more likely to cry at a sad film?
·
=
Is a
firefighter more likely to be a man or a woman?
·
=
Is a
man or a woman more likely to wear make-up?
·
=
When a
heterosexual couple are in a car together, is the man or the woman more lik=
ely
to be driving?
The nature versus nurture debate considers whether such
behavioural differences are genetic or learned.
The nature side of the debate emphasises that males and fema=
les do have genetic
differences that influence both physical and behavioural characteristics.&n=
bsp;
These biological differences mean that males and females are, theref=
ore,
suited to different behaviours and roles. Some people who adhere to this side of the debate have
argued that biological differences make females more suited to raising
children.
The nurture side of the debate emphasises that there is a wh=
ole
range of social institutions (work, family, religion, mass media,
education) that teach children their gender roles. Within the family males and
females are treated differently from the moment they are born. Baby boys are often dressed in blu=
e and
baby girls in pink. When talk=
ing to
a young child people often refer to the girl’s prettiness and clothin=
g,
while they refer to a boy’s size and mischievousness. Adults tend to speak to girls in a
softer, more nurturing voice. Boys
are given more active and technical toys that encourage competitiveness whi=
le
girls’ toys are more passive.
Teachers as well as carers also expect boys and girls to behave
differently. It is perceived to be less acceptable for girls to be
fighting in the playground than it is for boys. Teenage boys achieve status among =
their
peer group for sexual promiscuity while teenage girls are condemned for the
same behaviour. In adulthood,=
the media
judge women on their appearance, while they judge men on their power and
success. Why does this happen=
?
Aggression
The source of aggression may be either innate or=
environmental.
The nature side of the debate argues that aggression is pass=
ed
on through the genes. It emphasises that biological fac=
tors
such as hormones play a part. For example, males are more
aggressive than females because of higher testosterone levels.
Aggression also may have been necessary for survival as humans were evolvin=
g,
as part of the evolutionary process.
On the nurture side of the debate, it is pointed out that
aggression is not found in every society, therefore it is not natural.
There are varying degrees of aggression between and within different=
cultures. Children who have aggres=
sive role
models (such as parents, frie=
nds
and/or celebrities) are more likely to become aggressive as t=
hey
learn through observation and imitation, eg. if a popular singer demonstrat=
es
aggressive behaviour and is rewarded with fame, popularity and wealth then
children may adopt similar behaviour.
Cri=
minal
behaviour
Criminal behaviour, it is argued, may be either inhe=
rited
or learned.
On the nature side of the debate, it is argued that it is pa=
rt
of the genetic make up of the criminal. There was a case in the
United States where genetic arguments were used in the defence of someone
accused of murder. Brain size and other physical features have been
associated with the criminal personality. Hormone imbalance has
also been given as a reason for criminal behaviour.
On the nurture side of the debate, it is argued that we learn
criminal behaviour from our society. It could be from adults who are
copied. It could be part of peer group pressure or rebellion
against society. Society values material goods and if people cannot g=
et
them in legal ways then they will use illegal ways to obtain them in order =
to
achieve status.
Ach=
ievement
in school
Girls are obtaining more qualifications than boys. Middle-class children leave school=
with
more qualifications than working-class children. Are these differences genetic or learned?
The nature side of the debate argues that intelligence is
Those who support the nurture side of the debate reject the =
idea
that intelligence is inherited. They would argue that someone's IQ si=
mply
shows how good a person is at doing IQ tests and says nothing about the
person's actual intelligence. They would argue that a person with a l=
ow
IQ may not have been exposed to a stimulating environment where they
could learn. Some school pupils fail because of social factors
such as poverty, expectations of teachers or discrimination. Also, bo=
ys
may gain more status from peers by failing rather than succeeding.
Tutor Guide: Student activities on
nature versus nurture
In the Student Activities on ‘nature
versus nurture’ the students are invited to complete boxes with
appropriate statements. The t=
utor
may use her/his discretion whether or not to provide one statement as an
example.
Nature versus Nurture (Intermediate 1)
For example:
|
Two statements that support the nature side of the de=
bate
are: |
|
1 Humans have basic drives that are
determined by their genes. |
|
2 |
=
Two statements that support the nurture side of the
debate are: |
|
1 There ar=
e many
differences in social behaviours between societies and cultures. |
|
2 |
=
|
Aggressive behaviour |
||
|
|
|
|
|
Nature &n=
bsp;
|
1 |
Due to higher levels of testosterone boys are
more aggressive than girls. . |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Nurture |
1 |
Little boys are encouraged to play more
aggressive games than little girls. |
|
|
2 |
|
=
;
Nature versus nur=
ture
(Intermediate 2)
=
|
Nature
|
1 |
Inherited characte=
ristics
or behaviour that comes through our genes. |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Nurture |
1 |
Social behaviour learned through our experie=
nce. |
|
|
2 |
|
=
=
=
|
Male/female
behaviour |
||
|
Nature
|
1 |
Women are naturally
more caring than men so should be responsible for looking after children =
and
elderly relatives. |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Nurture |
1 |
Girls are more likely to cry at sad films
because little boys are taught that ‘boys don’t cry’. |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Criminal behaviour=
|
||
|
Nature |
1 |
People living in u=
nderprivileged
areas are born with a criminal gene. |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Nurture |
1 |
Crime rates are higher in underprivileged ar=
eas
because of a lack of opportunities and biased policing. |
|
|
2 |
|