Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
Instructions: Please respond to at least three other students. Responses should be a minimum of 100 words (total 300 words all 3 responses together) and include direct questions, to each student. Res
Instructions: Please respond to at least three other students. Responses should be a minimum of 100 words (total 300 words all 3 responses together) and include direct questions, to each student.
Responses Due: Sunday, by 11:55pm ET
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gunner Finlay
I do agree with Durkheim that deviance is a necessary part of a successful society, and I think that this is another topic in which political science and sociology intertwine.
According to Durkheim, deviance is necessary in a successful society for two reasons, the first of which being that deviance is a driver of social progress and the second being that deviance that is negative solidifies in the minds of members of society which behaviors are reprehensible. Generally, it is in the first of these that I see the relationship with political science. As a driver of social progress, one could attribute deviance to the liberal side of the political spectrum. The role of the liberal side of the political spectrum is to drive social progress, one of the examples from the text is relevant in this case. At the time that Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat in the front of a bus, her behavior was deviant, in fact she faced a formal sanction for her behavior. But her actions led to progression in racial integration in the south.
I would not say that I have had to use informal sanctions often, especially not in a way that was a conscious act of chastisement. But I do think that my role as a parent is to prepare my children to function properly in society in a way that makes society accepting of them so as to, to the best of my ability, ensure they lead successful lives. Because of this, I have had to use informal sanctions on my three year old when she misbehaves in public so she understands which behaviors are appropriate and which are not. This could a time that my daughter was throwing a tantrum at the mall that I had to remind her that it is not appropriate to stomp and scream in the middle of Macy's. A reaction like this to a child who is throwing a tantrum I believe reinforces social norms of which behaviors are acceptable in a public environment.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jerome Machynski
Hello class! Groups are entities of two or more people who all have an alignment of their identities within the group. The two of several groups that I am a part of in my life that I will be discussing is my friends group, and my co-workers. Both of these groups are primary groups, because they have a big impact on my life, and both are of a small amount of people. My workplace has twelve people and my friends group has five. In addition, these two dynamics are something almost everyone has in their life.
Both of these groups have a lot of expressive functions in my life, because my friends group is something that brings my emotions up, and my workplace naturally has a big control of my emotions because it consumes over a third of my day, everyday.
There are multiple differences between the two social groups I am in. For my friends group, I choose to be a member of it. I would consider it an in-group, because I feel like I belong to it, and I am able to leave at any time. For my workplace, I am in the military. This matters because I cannot just up and leave the job. In a simplistic way of putting it, I have no choice in the matter of whom I work with. Not everyone in my work group is my friend, nor do I get along with everyone either. I don’t necessarily feel pride in my job, and I want to get out of the military, so in some ways I would consider it an out-group because I feel like I don’t belong.
I have to present myself in a professional matter to those I work with, whereas I joke around and act freely with my friends group. As far as leadership goes, my work has a legitimate chain of command, where I fall at the bottom of. My friends group has no real leader, but everyone takes turns controlling the conversation or picking where or what we should do when we hang out. Everything we do at my workplace serves the mission of the command we serve in, and the purpose of my friends group is to have a good time and bond with each other. This leads to activities being conducted to be more boring at work, and more fun with my friends group. Those are some of the many major differences between my work group and my friends group.
----------------------------------------------------------------
William Finkbiner
1. Using what you have learned about groups, organizations, and bureaucracies this week, compare and contrast two different groups or organizations of which you are a member. Describe the two groups. How do they differ in terms of leadership, membership, purpose, and activities? What is your role in the group? Provide examples in your discussion.
The military seems to provide very obvious examples of the concepts delivered in this weeks material. My department consists of approximately 700 personnel and a handful of smaller groups, called divisions or sections. In my department I am most comparable to a shift manager at a business, as there are several layers of supervisors above me. I handle the day to day operations and they handle the long term and more administrative tasks. My section consists of ninety six people, on average, and is split into four platoons, each consisting of three squads. If one were to sever my section into its own autonomous entity, I would be in the triad group at the top of the pyramid. I would describe my primary group as my section and my secondary group as my department. The relationships with the majority of the people outside my section are usually professional in nature, while the relationships within my section are normally personal and invested. Departmental leadership tends to me exclusively transactional. Through the lessons explanation of transactional vs. transformational, I believe my leadership is also transactional, but transformational in nature. I was actually intrigued when I was reading about social capital. A concept I've taught Sailors for a while now, is leadership capital, which I define very close to that of social capital.
