speaking as an American i've noticed that in terms of the common definition of "society" we don't really seem to have one. I mean there are many different cultures within our 'culture' which basically negates it. We have no real common ground. So what is society? Is it the media? It can't be because i know many americans who don't watch tv or read the news. If society only encapulates 'the general population' with no common distinctive properties then how can society affect me? How can we possibly blame society for anything when it doesn't exist. Where does blame land in so much diversity and multiplicity?
speaking as an observer from the uk, you do. society doesn't 'exist' in the sense that it is a solid physical object like a stone or a piece of wood. but then the economy doesn't exist in that sense either and you certainly have an economy. Society is a mental construct which allows us to discuss and analyse the phenomenon of people living in groups. Think of society as a community of communities. Society can be used in such ways as; "I blame society for the poverty in our urban slums" etc because the fact that people live together in groups affect things. The way people interact, the way information is spread, the dependance of us all on money to buy goods to assist our survival. All products of society. We are born into society just like a fish is born into water. It provides the ground for our life, we cannot exist (the way we exist now) without it.
To continue from the last post I've heard it said that often you are as blind to your own culture as a fish is to water. It's one of those things that comes up in my Anthropology classes a lot. If you step outside of our society we tend to look a lot more cohesive than from within. Try travelling abroad and NOT getting tagged as an American, more than likely it just won't happen. Also we're a low integration society as opposed to Japan which is the opposite. Thats why things like patriotism, nationality, etc. are so important to us. If we didn't have them the common bond we have WOULD be greatly lessened. But as far as I can tell we absolutely do have a society.
The easiest/most straightforward way of recognizing American society is to look at the political system that we all use and realize the social effects it has on every one of us. It is a social contract, and much of our society- like the right to bear arms, limited access to abortion, etc.- comes directly from this system. All citizens (in theory) pay taxes, and consequently have rights. This, imo, is a society.
i really like this definition i found - "...a closely intergrated grouping of organisms of the same species held together by mutual dependance and showing division of labour..." okay so it is meant to be used more for the study of Ecology, ("...the branch of biology that deals with the relations between organisms and their environment..." - in case you were wondering!!!), but isn't that basically what we are? I like that the phrase "showing division of labour" doesn't imply that it may or may not be an even division of labour. or even that the mutual dependance is either for that matter!
You've picked an issue that is a pet peeve of mine. I personally think that most people misunderstand Civil Disobedience and take it to mean something other than it is, like selfishly indulging a desire/stance. Civil Disobedience, from the time of Plato on, has meant purposefully breaking the law and then accepting the punishment, no matter what it is. Socrates did it, Nelson Mandella did it... Oliver North did not. [/rant] I was going to say that your definition didn't sound like a social or political difinition, but you actually beat me to it. It is an okay definition, but is kind of limited, don't you think? Society today means much more than just a group of cohabitating organisms.
uh - not so sure that society has really become much more than organisms with levels of mutual dependance and division of labour to be honest! (i have a tendancy to simplify things down to its most basic level, but i find that the more specific terms used to define something can instead over-complicate things which in turn becomes limiting and allows less creative thought to occur. okay, it probably only works for me.......) the mutual dependance could be anything ie desire for knowledge or power, economic stability, cultural identity, work environment etc. there are societies within societies - if you are part of a group or society it would be "us" or if you were on the outside looking in (so to speak) a group or society would be "them". we only blame society for something when we are feeling secluded not included when by our very existance as part of the human species we are part of it regardless. there is no point in trying to lay blame, but if you want to change society you start small, within your own group or society and eventually if enough people want that change to happen also then this can occur. a stone will hit only a tiny part of a body of water, but it may be strong enough to make some wicked ripples accross the entire surface!
From wordweb (Webster's dic) Society (noun) 1. An extended social group having a distinctive cultural and economic organization 2. A formal association of people with similar interests 3. The state of being with someone 4. The fashionable elite Hope this helps
I like number 3 only i'd change to interactive state of being "a stone will hit only a tiny part of a body of water, but it may be strong enough to make some wicked ripples accross the entire surface!" Influence never dies. "..sometimes it falls on a generation to be great..." - Nelson Mandela
