Understanding Culture, Society, and Politics

Prepared by: Ms. Elijah Joy R. Tuazon

Module 4: Becoming a Member of Society – Week 4
Lesson 12-15
About this Module

For an individual to become a functional member of society, he or she

should have a meaningful interaction with the various social structures and
institutions of society—that is, a pattern of relationship among the basic
components of a social system.

The most potent representation is the process of socialization.

Socialization is a form of interaction by which people acquire personality and
learn the way of life of their society. It is considered the essential link
between the individual and society. In fact, socialization allows the individual
to learn the norms, values, languages, skills, beliefs, and other patterns of
thought and action that are essential for social living (Robertson, 1987: 115).
A non-concomitant and non-conformist attitude or behavior pattern of an
individual towards society produces deviance because it primarily violates
significant social norms and as a result disapproved by a large number of
people. Thus, social control is imposed as an effective means of ensuring
that people generally behave in expected and approved ways. It all starts on
the socialization process, which ideally ensures that every individual
internalizes and follows the norms of society.

Module Objectives:

By the end of this module, you are expected to:

• explain the development of one’s self and others as a product of

socialization and enculturation (UCSP11/12BMSIg-15);

• identify the context, content, processes, and consequences of

enculturation and socialization (UCSP11/12BMSIg-16);

• identify the social goals and the socially acceptable means of achieving
these goals (UCSP11/12BMSIh-17);

• advocate inclusive citizenship (UCSP11/12BMSIh- 18); and

• promote protection of human dignity, rights, and the common good

(UCSP11/12BMSIh-19).
Enculturation and Socialization

In Module 3, we learned that the human evolutionary background provided

an impetus to man’s social behavior as influenced by heredity and genetic
science. The so-called “nature” viewpoint galvanized the idea that human
instincts served as formidable references on how individuals relate to society.
Genetic explanations correlate a person's basic needs (such as food, water,
and sex) with his or her attitude and behavior in interacting with other
species in the planet.

This belief, however, became less popular during the 20th century as more
psychologists explained through empirical studies that changes in human
behavior are closely attributed to learning. For instance, the Russian
physiologist Ivan Pavlov noticed that dogs salivate in the presence of food
and when exposed to anything associated to feeding. If dogs could learn by
association and conditioning, then people would surely have an even greater
capacity to do so.

Picking up from where Pavlov started, American psychologist John B. Watson

argued that human behavior and personality are completely flexible and can
be molded in any direction. Similarly, American sociologist Charles Horton
Cooley's “the looking glass self ” views one’s self concept as derived from a
so-called “social mirror” in which we can observe how others react to us;
thus engaging us how to think and feel.

Enculturation

In pre-modern societies, learning often takes place through a non-

fragmented and integrated process of passing knowledge from one
generation to another. For instance, an Ifugao child learns how to plant rice
by becoming an apprentice to his father, a skilled farmer, not from a
structured and formalist agricultural school. In the same way, a child from
Bukidnon learns the treasured epics of his or her forebears by listening to the
stories of his or her elders in the community.

Enculturation, therefore, occurs when cultural knowledge is passed on to the

next bearer who will perpetuate and ensure the continuance of their tradition
and practices. Enculturation is also a diffusion of one’s culture to another
through diverse means, namely: learning, imposition by force, and conquest,
among others.

Meanwhile, socialization takes place when prospective culture bearers learn

their culture's body of knowledge and skills through education or
conscientization, training, exposure, and experience. In pre-modern
societies, socialization is an evolving process from apprenticeship to
expertise in handling a certain craft, e.g. pottery-making and metallurgy.
Overall, enculturation and socialization results to identify formation and
norms and values.

Identity Formation

An individual’s identity is formed through his interaction with other people. A

person's socialization with individuals or groups allows him or her to imbibe
certain characteristics and interests that contribute to his or her identity.
(Idea derived from Newman, 2012). For example, the centuries of Philippine
Chinese exposure to Filipino culture made them imbibe facets of Filipino
character in the same way Filipinos learned to love Chinese culture like food
(e.g. preference for noodle-based cuisine like pancit).

Norms and Values

On the one hand, norms are culturally determined rules that guide people
regarding what is right, wrong, proper, or improper. Norms create
predictability in daily affairs and interactions, making it easier to live with
other members of society (Newman, 2012). These norms are fundamental to
the establishment of social order in any society (Newman, 2012).

Norms did not exist out of thin air. They were initially designed and created
by people who benefitted from their existence or suffered from their absence
(Coleman, 2000). Through the practice of such norms, order was established
—an order which allows those who created the norms to benefit from the
resulting status quo.

People are subjected to norms when they become part of society. As such,
they are also subjected to the sanctions and rewards of a society’s norms—
whether rewards for adherence to a norm or punishment for a violation of a
norm (Coleman, 2000). On the other hand, values are standards people use
to determine desirable goals and outcomes (Hewitt and Hewitt, 1986 in
Newman, 2012). Values are criteria on which people base their judgments
regarding behaviors and decisions. In the Philippine setting, values are often
used as parameters in separating what is considered normal and moral from
taboo and predatory.

Some examples of Filipino habits and practices that are considered normal
and moral include the following: respect for elders; caring for one's parents
during old age; praying the rosary and attending mass during Sundays (for
Catholics); observing the five pillars of Islam (for Muslims); and a sense of
volunteerism during emergencies and disasters in the community.

Meanwhile, examples of taboos and predatory practices include the

following: engaging into pre-marital sex and extra-marital affairs; involving
one’s self to crime and illegal activities, such as drug pushing and trafficking;
stealing a neighbor’s property; and testifying falsely in court proceedings.

In the Philippines, there are two most popular norms. First is the norm of
appropriateness and wearing decent and appropriate clothes for a particular
occasion or event. For example, do not wear shorts when you attend mass or
church services. Instead, wear decent clothes like a Sunday dress. Second is
the norm of tact and courtesy. When somebody makes a mistake or slips in
his or her words and actions, we do not laugh or make fun of the person in
order not to embarrass him or her and, at the same time, express our
respect and courtesy. Filipinos are also noted for their excellent handling of
human relations because they significantly value personhood and human
goodness. On the other hand, the two most important values that Filipinos
poses are: first, value of industry and, secondly, utang na loob (reciprocity or
debt of gratitude). Value of industry is shown when Filipinos take pride in
their work because they toiled hard for it, regardless whether in some
instances, they fail along the way. Filipinos credit success to love of one's
work and hardwork.

Meanwhile, utang na loob is shown through good will and thoughtfulness and
being mindful and helpful to someone during trying times. For Filipinos,
utang na loob cannot be repaid by money or any treasure. Utang na loob is a
priceless value that sustains and strengthens human relations beyond the
individual, family, society, and even nation.

Values are created and shaped in the community through time. It does not
happen overnight. As standards to determine desirable outcomes and goals,
values are experimented by a particular society to check its relevance and
appropriateness to existing norms and laws. Acceptable and widely practiced
values (as well as norms) are called conventions. Some conventions become
dogmatic through time. For example, Filipino religiosity goes beyond
spirituality, which also include facets of fanaticism, such as dancing and
shouting on the streets, walking barefoot on fire, and wearing of amulets to
get rid of evil spirits and diseases.

Statuses and Roles

Status is any position that an individual can occupy in society (Newman,

2012). It is not a ranked position, but simply a label that implies certain roles
that must be performed (Newman, 2012). For example, one can be a
student, a singer, or a computer genius at the same time. While it is true
that some statuses are acknowledged and recognized as prestigious (e.g.
chief justice, Hollywood star, etc.), there are of course exceptions to the rule.
During the Chou dynasty in China, court scholars were admired and
respected for their contributions in the development of Chinese civilization;
and yet court scholars were considered a liability and even charged of
causing instability in the succeeding Ch’in dynasty that unified China into an
empire. Although some statuses are generally recognized as prestigious,
prestige like beauty is certainly relative or subjective (for example, a pre-
schooler may think that being a fireman holds a lot of prestige; or a comic
book fan may see an illustrator with tremendous prestige).

Every person can simultaneously hold various statuses at any point in time.
For instance, a person can be a sibling, student, citizen of a country, and fan
of basketball all at the same time. (Kottak, 2000; Newman, 2012). In a
specific situation, when a person’s different statuses require him or her to
perform different roles, his or her actions will reflect which status is more
important in that certain circumstance at that given time. (Newman, 2012).

However, there are times when people find it difficult to decide which of their
different statuses is the most important. This is especially true when multiple
statuses provide numerous benefits to the individual. Thus, role conflict
occurs when two statuses, both applicable to the situation, require distinct
and divergent roles from the individual. For example, being a politician is a
prestigious status because it gives recognition to the individual as a public
leader, who is respected and obeyed by his or her constituents. Nonetheless,
he or she is also expected to be a public servant who is willing to share his or
her resources to his or her constituents, so he or she could maintain his or
her status and power in society.

Balancing the status of a public leader or powerful politician and public

servant sometimes create a role conflict. In some situations, statuses do not
have to compete for importance as only one or a few may be relevant to the
situation (Kottak, 2000). For example, a girl in geometry class will not
consider her being a member of the school’s swimming team to be of much
help in answering her teacher’s question about the perimeter of a building.
In the same way, a math geek will not mind being called an introvert or anti-
social by his peers every time he prepares for the school’s much anticipated
Math Olympiad.

The two types of status are ascribed and achieved. Ascribed status is given
at birth or assigned later in life (Kottak, 2000; Newman, 2012). Some
examples of ascribed status include age, sex, ethnicity, and membership in a
family, among others. Meanwhile, achieved status is acquired willfully and
consciously through effort, talent, decisions, and accomplishments (Kottak,
2000; Newman, 2012). Some examples of achieved status include being
someone’s girlfriend or boyfriend, being the top student in one’s class, and
being a black belter in karate.

However, the distinction between ascribed and achieved statuses is not

always clear (Newman, 2012). For example, although winning an election
could be considered as an achieved status, those who won because they
belonged to a politically elite family may have won because of their family
name, not through their efforts to seek election.

Also, a person's ascribed status may help achieve or hinder one to acquire
an achieved status. In earlier times, for example, being a woman is simply
equated with the craft of homemaking; thus, women were deprived of the
right to education. In ancient Greece, women were also prohibited to enter
politics and the military.

Assessment

Click true if the statement is correct; false, if not.

___________1. Since we are in the age of Social Media/Social Networking Sites,

the interaction that’s happening everyday became part of each individuals’
way of life – this is a solid example of enculturation.

___________2. Applying the theory of the looking glass self, likes and reactions
that people gather in their social media accounts sometimes make them feel
valuable they are to other people.

___________3. Grace is a mother of two children. The status of Grace being a

mother falls on ascribed type of status.

___________4. Statuses and roles are directly related to each other. The status
you acquired corresponds a certain set of roles.

___________5. Being a female falls on the acquired type of status.

Understanding Conformity and Deviance

Many books in sociology define deviance in broad terms, ranging from

defiance or violation of societal norms to breakage of conventions and
realms of morality. However, deviance centers on occurrences that violate
mores. Mores are one of the components of norms that are often taken very
seriously by society and sometimes codified as laws (Newman, 2012).

Mores are strong norms that are regarded as morally significant and
violations of them are considered a serious matter (Robertson, 1987: 62).
The word “mores” originated from a Roman term that means the “most
respected and sacred custom.” For instance, an individual who walks down
the street wearing nothing is considered violating one of the most important
universal mores—the requirement that people should cover their genitals
and buttocks in public. In a way, this applies to most modern societies where
decency is equated with appropriate clothing. But in the pre-modern world
society valued nakedness as a manifestation of beauty and even strength. As
a whole, mores are crucial in the maintenance of a decent and orderly
society.

So far, there is no existing list of universal deviant behaviors across cultures

because deviance is basically socially constructed and only determined by
members of society (Newman, 2012). In short, deviance is characterized for
its contextualized nature and relativity.

Within a particular culture, deviance may be perceived and interpreted

according to circumstances or preconditioned notions. Take sexual
intercourse for example. The act is considered deviant in many cultures in
Europe and Asia, especially those which strictly adhere to Judeo-Christian
precepts, if it is done outside the formal rite of matrimony. In contrast, pre-
modern societies in Africa and some parts of northern Sahara practice
“deflowering” ceremonies to prospective brides prior to marriage. In the
same way, sexual treatises like the famous Kama Sutra that are legally and
religiously read in India can appear pornographic and deviant
representations of sex for other cultures.

The most popular form of deviance is the commitment of crime, which is

defined as the violation of norms that have been formally enacted into
criminal law. Criminal deviance itself is varied ranging from minor violation of
traffic rules to serious offenses like murder and rape. In modern societies,
juvenile delinquency is also considered a deviant crime, being a violation of
legal standards by children or adolescents.

Even within a culture itself the definition of a deviant behavior may change
over time. For example, in Great Britain, the English mathematician Alan
Turing was tried for homosexual acts and even prescribed drugs to possibly
“cure” his homosexuality, considered a disease in Europe then. After his
death, however, Turing was bestowed with numerous laurels for his
monumental work in World War II. Years later, the British government even
apologized for prosecuting Turing for being a deviant and esteemed him as
role model for the British youth.

Sociologists view deviance as rooted in society, and very evident in three

ways.

First, it exists only in relation to cultural norms. Any thought or action cannot
be considered deviant unless it is correlated to a particular norm; and a norm
varies from one society to another. For instance, traditional villages in
Southern Italy, particularly Sicily, support the use of physical violence to
avenge the insult for the honor of one’s family. In this case, vengeance is
regarded a norm and not a deviance. But this is not the case in the US and
the rest of Europe. What is considered an honorable ac in Sicily will result to
arrest and prosecution in other parts of the world.

Second, people become deviant as others define them that way. In short,
being deviant is in the eye of the beholder and largely depends on the
perception, preconditioned notion, and definition of the situation of other
people. For instance, a Korean celebrity like Rain can dress like a female on
stage to the praise of adorning fans, but another man doing the same thing
in another place can be branded homosexual or receive a negative response.

Third, both norms and the way events are defined are related to patterns of
social power. This idea has been advanced by Karl Marx who considered
cultural norms, especially the laws, are likely to protect and uphold the
interest of the powerful at the expense of the powerless. For example, a theft
in a soap factory is frequently blamed by the owner to workers, whom he
looked down as possible perpetrator of a crime. In the same way, displaced
and homeless individuals who marched on the streets denouncing
government’s failure to grant them decent shelters are likely be considered
deviants by those in power, charging them of lawlessness and disturbing
peace.

Mechanisms of Social Control

Deviance is checked through social control to ensure that norms and

conventions are safeguarded and order preserved. Society controls individual
ideas and behaviors through the following mechanisms: labeling theory,
gossip, and laws.

Labeling theory. This theory states how members of society label others,
whether they are deviant or not. (Newman, 2012). People label others as
deviant when they defy or do not conform to social norms. Non-conformity
provides offensive signals to holders of norms; non-conformity is often
tantamount to disagreement and disapproval.

Being labeled a deviant entails numerous consequences throughout an

individual’s life. After a group of people has labeled an individual as a
deviant, members of a community or society often treat the individual
negatively and with feelings of hate, mistrust, or fear. (Cohen, 1966 in
Newman, 2012). Moreover, a person’s chance of acquiring socially
acceptable roles and relationships with other people becomes limited when
he or she is labeled as a deviant.

Gossip. This is often practiced in small-scale communities where people

know each other personally. Because small-scale communities heavily rely on
“getting along” with each other, outbursts or confrontational situations are
not ideal. By gossiping or talking behind someone’s back and spreading
rumors about him or her, society reinforces what norms should be followed
and punishes the deviants by putting them to shame. Lastly, gossip is also
used to level the playing field—especially when the subject of gossips are
successful people—by putting achievers to shame or putting them to the
same level as others (Haviland, Prins, Walrath, and McBride, 2008).

Laws. Laws are formal codes of conduct that are met with negative
sanctions (i.e. punishment) when violated (Haviland, Prins, Walrath, and
McBride, 2008). Laws are meant to guide the daily lives of members of
society by providing clear definitions of relationships among individuals,
including expectations on how people should behave in particular contexts.
Importantly, the law dictates to whom authority is given. Only those who
exercise authority are recognized by the members of society to practice
coercion in the exercise of sanctions (Haviland, Prins, Walrath, and McBride,
2008). Lastly, laws change as well. Old laws can be revised or discarded
according to the changing needs of a society. For example, the Hammurabi
laws codified for Babylonian citizenry underwent revisions in the succeeding
laws imposed by Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Persians in the Mesopotamian
city-states.

Human Dignity, Rights, and the Common Good

Whether the individual conforms to the norms imposed by the majority of the
society or otherwise, he or she should be given the appropriate space to
express himself or herself and possibly participate in democratic processes.
Societies through the years have crafted political or legal mechanisms to
protect its members. One of these mechanisms is the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (UDHR) of 1948, which states in its Preamble that “the
inherent dignity” of all members of the human family is “the foundation of
freedom, justice, and peace in the world.”

Thereafter, the idea of human dignity has been at the heart of the major
human rights instruments, beginning with the two international covenants on
human rights adopted in 1966: the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights (ICECSR), as well as in most treaties banning torture,
slavery, inhuman and degrading treatments, and discrimination of all sorts
(Andorno).

In the pursuit of understanding human dignity, rights and common good,

three main ideas are offered from the perspective of international law
(Andorno, 2009).: Dignity is “inherent... to all members of the human family”
(UDHR, Preamble). The word “inherent” in the UDHR Preamble means
“involved in the constitution or essential character of something,” “intrinsic,”
and “permanent or characteristic attribute of something.”

When the term “intrinsic” is accompanied by the word “human,” it expresses

the idea that dignity cannot be separated from the human condition. This
means that dignity is a universal quality of people, regardless of their age,
race, or skin color, simply because they are human beings.

All human beings are “free and equal in dignity and rights” (UDHR, Article 1).
This means that all people have equal basic rights. Discrimination, racism,
and unjust treatment of different people directly oppose the concept of
human dignity and equality.

“These rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person” (ICCPR
and ICESCR, Preambles). This means that basic human rights are inherent to
every person. Thus, basic human rights cannot be taken away by authorities
or governments. In the Philippines, the government has devised various
mechanisms to advance human dignity and protect the rights of every
Filipino. In fact, a department has been instituted to perform its mandate to
put forward the common good of every Filipino.

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) of the Philippines was created in

1987 through Executive Order No. 163. An independent national human
rights institution, the CHR ensures that the human rights of individuals,
especially the marginalized and vulnerable, are protected, promoted, and
fulfilled—based on equality and non-discrimination (CHR).

Human dignity is also recognized by the Philippine government as

manifested in Section 11 of Article II of the 1987 Constitution. Section 11
notes that the state values the dignity of individuals and guarantees that
human rights will be upheld. Moreover Section 12 of Article III of the
Constitution “prohibits the use of torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation,
or any other means which vitiate the free will and mandates the
compensation and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices and
their families”
(http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10368_2013.html).

The Philippines also follows international human rights laws and conventions
and the UDHR, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10368_2013.html).

Moreover, the Philippine government has also passed laws that ensure the
protection of human rights of people. These laws include the Expanded Anti-
Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012 or Republic Act (RA) No. 10364 and Human
Rights Victims Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013 or Republic Act (RA)
No. 10368, among others.

On the one hand, RA 10364 aims to eliminate the trafficking of people,

especially women and children. It gives protection and support to victims of
trafficking and punishes those who commit the crime. It also aims to protect
people from violence, exploitation, stop involuntary migration and servitude.
More importantly, it aims to rehabilitate victims of illegal trafficking and
exploitation (http://www.gov.ph/2013/02/06/republic-act-no-10364/).

RA 10368, on the other hand, “provides for the the reparation and
recognition of victims of human rights violations” during the dictatorship of
Ferdinand E. Marcos, from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986
(http://www.gov.ph/2013/02/25/republic-act-no-10368/). This law recognizes
the “heroism and sacrifices” of Martial Law victims who were tortured,
summary executed, and experienced enforced or involuntary disappearance,
among others. Aiming to restore the dignity and honor of Martial Law victims,
RA 10368 acknowledges the moral and legal duty of the government to give
reparations to the victims and/ or their families “for the deaths, injuries,
sufferings, deprivations and damages they suffered under the Marcos
regime” (http://www.gov.ph/2013/02/25/ republic-act-no-10368/).

Strain Theory is one of the most well-known explanations about deviant

behavior. This was advanced by sociologist Robert Merton who claimed that
the operation of society actually encourages crime and other types of
deviance, especially by people in certain situations. This theory states that
deviant behavior occurs when people experience strain or tension when
culture imposes goals that individuals should achieve, but the social
environment makes it hard or challenging for individuals to meet such goals
through a legitimate manner. Put in another way, when a society’s cultural
goals and the socially accepted means to achieve those goals are out of
balance, deviant behavior occurs.

A good example is the popular notion that “poverty breeds crime.” This
presupposes that the very existence of poor people within the social
structure leads to deviance. In the Philippines, for instance, lawlessness is
often incorrectly blamed to poor people because the prevailing social
conditions force them to commit crimes in order for them to meet their daily
needs (for example, paying bills and buying food).

Merton’s theory was further expanded by the study of Richard Cloward and
Lloyd Ohlin who pointed out that the criminal type of deviance can result not
only from the lack of culturally approved means to achieve success but also
from the availability of unconventional means to do so. For instance, a youth
who has substantial opportunities to achieve success through legitimate
means can be expected to do so, while those who have relatively more
illegitimate opportunities are likely to use them. Thus, Cloward and Ohlin
attempted to explain delinquency in terms of the relative opportunity
structure available to various categories of the youth.

Assessment

Answer the following questions.

1. As the Philippines experience a nationwide community quarantine,

many are seen to be deviant about the protocols of this regulation,
some example was going outside and still doing their job (this applies
to the lower -lower class of the society). How can you explain these
behaviors in the light of Strain Theory?
2. As a youth, what do you think is the importance of human dignity,
human rights and the common good?