Importance Of Sociology As A Field Of Study Essay Example for Free

Importance Of Sociology As A Field Of Study Essay Sociology as a field of study attempts to explain the relationship between an individual and society. Sociological theories are a tool used to explain sociological problems and social structures. (Blumer, 1969) Societies can be viewed as organic structures. This was first explained by Parsons and Durkheim as they developed structural theories. These theories can be applied in education i. e. how students view education. Societies can also be viewed as economic structures. Under this concept, falls the conflict theory developed by Carl Marx. Marx looked at a number of theories that attempt to explain how people’s lives are shaped by social structures. Other theories that share a similar perspective are the functionalist theories. Societies can also be looked as social action. This implies that society shapes how people view themselves. In line with this perspective, sociologists came up with the idea of symbolic interactionism. There are also other ideas that go hand in hand with this idea i. e. GH mead. Lastly, one must apply all the sociological theories stated above and many others that have not been mentioned. For example one can consider Medicalisation of society’s problems. This can be explained by a number of sociological theories like: Marx’s theories, interactionist theories and Durkheiman’ theories. Importance of sociology as a field of study Conflict theory Sociology assists in explaining social change. It helps us to understand what the role of the individual is in changing society. This is best explained by the Conflict theory. This theory does not have only one name connoted to it although the founder of the theory was Karl Marx. There are various regions in the world where sociologists elaborated on this theory. Some of these sociologists are; †¢ Ralf Dahrendorf – Germany †¢ Ludwig Gumpolvicz – Germany †¢ Lewis Coser and Collins – USA †¢ Max Gluchman and Rex – UK (Garfinkel, 1967) The conflict theory’s main idea is that there exists a constant struggle in society and every entity in society is trying to make the most of their reimbursement consequently bringing about social change. This change can come in form of revolutions or it may be political. It focuses on coercion by groups and individuals to alter or control others’ actions. The theory helps us to understand why ideologies like socialism and capitalism. There is a constant struggle within society for paybacks. This theory can be viewed from two angles. The first angle is a radical one; society will forever in conflict while the second angle is that conflict combines with struggle to make up society. This moderate angle is best explained by the functionalism. The latter mentioned theory postulates that every member of society has a specific role to play. Conflict theory can best be perceived as a pyramid. Influential people are at the top and they impose their will upon less powerful people who happen to be the majority. This implies that people in power are taken to be superior and they are the ones responsible for modern day laws, institutions and traditions. This theory can be stretched to explain how morality or deviance is defined. The powerful individuals in society label deeds or actions as immoral if those actions challenge their influence and power. Conflict theory also attempts to explain stratification in society but from an individualistic point of view. It looks at individuals needs instead of society’s needs as a whole. Every individual tries to struggle for respect, goods and services as well as power; these e all very scarce. In this light therefore, individuals belong to organisations that represent their own interests. The theory views organisations as entities that are mostly influenced by external rather than internal factors. (Goffman, 1958) In the theory, there are a number of conflicts that fall under. These include; †¢ Class †¢ Race and ethnicity †¢ Gender †¢ Religion Marx believed that class conflict was caused by differential ownership of property. However, this theory was later challenged by other sociologists who believed that there is more to class than property ownership. These sociologists believe that this is only one aspect. Racial conflict has its root cause in differential power. According to the theory, superior races are those one who are well endowed with power, prestige and education. There are four basic assumptions in this theory. The first is that there is inequality in society’s structures, secondly there is revolution as a result of struggle between a numbers of social classes, thirdly there is competition for resources and lastly war exists to unify or divide society. Conflict can take the form of a strike where workers struggle to gain back control after it has been taken from them by their employers. Another form of a conflict could be through wars. Wars usually represent clashes between social classes. Taking the case of military coups, this is an example of a conflict between the main population and the military. (Durkheim, 1915) Ethnomethodology Ethnomethodology is the study of how people interpret their social world. This theory has its history back in the mid twentieth century and was founded by Garfinkel who was an American sociologist. The theory is quite different form other well known theories. This theory is founded on the fact that there is no order in society; society is chaotic or has the potential to be chaotic. According to the theory, any semblance of order is created by the minds of actors within society it simply does not exist. This is in sharp contrast to other well known theories. Social order may be defined as the systematic pattern of behaviour within society. It opposes the fact that actions are not thought out and are simply haphazard. Ethnomethodologists believe that individuals encounter several experiences in their lives. These individuals try to make sense of these encounters by placing them into a form of organised system. They believe in a documentary method. Here, individuals simply pick out certain events within a social situation and try to make sense of them. After they have organised those events into a pattern, then they use that pattern as a template to explain other situations that may arise. Garnfinkel used an experiment to demonstrate this theory. He got a number of students and instructed them to ask a supervisor about a number of issues on their mind. The students could not see the advisor but could talk to him. They asked him a number of questions and this advisor could only say yes or no. What the students did not know was the advisor was reading out a list of responses that did not match their questions in any way. It was found that most of the responses did not make logical sense but most of the students tried to interpret them nonetheless. They did not question the integrity of the advisor but they tried to compare past responses with present ones in order to come up with an orderly pattern. For example one of the students thought that he should quit school and asked the advisor this. The advisor told him ‘no’ and out of disbelief the student repeated this same question after which the advisor said ‘yes’. It was found that this particular student did not dismiss the advisor but tried to make sense of the situation. According to the theory, the students were trying to form sense out of senselessness. They were trying to turn chaos into order. Garfinkel introduces the idea of indexicality. This means that human beings have a tendency to index things that occur to them i. e. they always try to put things within a certain social context. They must relate it to other things that have occurred to them before or during a particular scene. For example, the interaction that took place between the students and the advisor followed a certain path because the students held the advisor in high esteem. This implies that if the student could see what was happening with the advisor behind the screen that had covered him, or if their classmates asked answered their questions, then their reactions would have been totally different. This is because the students would simply have formed another documentary. People who adhere to this theory believe that all human beings have preconceived notions about their daily lives. This means that if a sudden change was brought into someone’s life their reactions are quite different. This is justified by the fact that it would be very chaotic if we looked at things differently at all times. We must become familiar with some aspects of our lives so as to be able to Symbolic interactionism This theory has its history in the late nineteenth century. It was pioneered by a sociologist from Germany called Marx Weber. The theory is best known for its subjectivity rather than its objectivity. Interactionists focus on individuals rather than on society as a whole. They perceive human beings as creatures whose behaviours are reactive or subject to the approval of others. This is because all actions, according to them, are like symbolic actions which are interpreted differently according to one’s perspective. This theory also looks at human beings as symbolic objects who can think and react to situations. This means that individuals within a society are active participants of their society. They determine what happens to them. Sociologists adhering to this theory believe that we are not passive entities who must mould themselves to society’s rules and standards. This theory focuses on external issues and simple interactions. It cannot be used to interpret deeper social settings like capitalism. It is also quite crucial to note that this theory perceives society’s norms as transient and constantly changing. Stability and order in society is determined by negotiations. The systems themselves are not stable but the means by which these systems in society are created is stable. (Merton, 1968) The theory therefore points one on the direction of roles played by people in society. The theory places importance in role making and role taking. This means that individuals must put themselves in a certain perspective in order to understand another person’s point of view. Studies on interactionism are therefore done through active role taking. This is because they believe that one must interact thoroughly with another party in order to understand the reason why they made their decision. However critics have claimed that the theory is too narrow and cannot be applied to macro situations. It has also been criticised for its impressionism during research methods. (George, 1964) Functionalism The theory was pioneered by a French sociologist called Emile Durkheim back in the mid to late nineteenth century. This theory compares the individual with his/her society and also scientific method of analysing society. This implies that one can be able to study the social world using observation and analysis. It also assumes that studies of society can be done freely and without any bias. Another crucial aspect of the theory is the organic aspect of society. It compares society to an organism. That there are various parts of the body that each has their own function. This is analogous to society and its members. It is also important to note the homeostatic nature of interactions. This theory looks at society as a system that must remain in equilibrium. Any deviation from this is corrected by a number of mechanisms like gossip or even imprisonment depending on the scenario. Conclusion Interactionists believe that social order is continuously remade as people interact. Social order is not static and changes with time. Functionalists believe that order within society exists as a result of an agreement between members of society. That is collective behavioural patterns that are regarded as the norm in society. Again, the theory strongly affirms that social order does exist. Marxists believe that social order is created from a struggle to gain control of limited resources while ethnomethodologists mould situations to fit into a certain behavioural pattern. All these theories attempt to explain why human beings behave the way the do either as individuals or as a group on a macro scale. This is the essence of sociology.

Using Caffeine is a Sin Against God :: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

Using Caffeine is a Sin Against God One of the most widely misunderstood commandments in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the Word of Wisdom.   The question that seems to trouble many members of the church is whether or not caffeine is part of the Word of Wisdom.   In this paper, we will find that as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, we cannot drink caffeinated beverages and say that we keep the Word of Wisdom.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   President Hinckley asked and answered a question in General Conference on October 4th of 1997. "Are we moving to mainstream America as some observers believe? In this, I fear we are." The comment came due to the increasing amount of shopping that is being done on sundays in LDS communities, and the increasing amount of disobedience to the Word of Wisdom. His tone was one of concern and love.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   We have a great responsibility to be an example of virtuous thought and deed. We have been blessed exceedingly with knowledge, that combined with wisdom will give us understanding. Why then, as a whole, do we seem to be regressing and becoming more like the world, as our Prophet has stated, instead of like the savior of all mankind, even Jesus Christ.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   We have been counseled heretofore by prophets of old, "to seek learning, even by study, and by faith". We have an obligation to search the scriptures and to learn what the Lord is teaching us and warning us of. We must go forward with faith, and not backward. We must come unto the Lord, and not expect the Lord to come unto us.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Of   the many dangers in this world, the greatest danger that we have is an uninformed citizenry. Being informed is an obligation that each of us has to ourselves. Brigham Young said that "Education is the ability to think clearly, to act well in the days work, and to appreciate life".   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   By this definition, and after knowing the effects of caffeine upon the human body, I have come to the conclusion that drinking caffeine is a sign of a lack of respect for oneself, and of an unappreciative attitude toward the life that each of us has been blessed with. Furthermore, it shows of either our inability, or unwillingness to learn to think clearly.

Barilla Spa (A) Case Study Essay

Executive Summary Sales representatives at the Barilla SpA, world’s largest pasta producer, are seeing customers changing due to long re-order lead-time and frequent stock-outs. Even with a high inventory levels, Barilla is still not able to cope with the fluctuating demand. The fluctuation in demand is seen as the bullwhip effect that is caused by sales strategies that have been put into place that is very product focused. This causes excessive demand from week to week depending on the product that the promotion or incentive is been aimed towards. There is also a lack of data sharing and poor communication throughout the whole supply chain which does not bring visibility for production forecast. With the Just-in-Time Distribution (JITD) that was brought in from the logistics manager, neither internally nor externally is supporting the new system. With the lack of understanding of the new system and the positive results it will bring, it will be hard to convince buy-ins from different angles. The initiative should be tested first from Barilla’s own facilities and prove out the methods and be able to visualize the improvements to the rest of its supply chain. During the implementation and test phase, there should be dedicated teams which monitor the data and metrics coming from the new system. Daily meetings should be held to discuss issues and resolve them as quickly as possible. As inventory levels drop, issues with the distribution system will arise which provides a priority of issues to resolve. Once the system has been proven, the results will be the biggest selling points to have the implementation through the whole supply chain and for everyone to understand its benefits. Issues Identification Barilla is experiencing issues to meet their fluctuating demand from the distribution centers even when carrying additional inventory throughout the supply chain. Brando Vitali has came with a proposal of a Just-in-time Distribution (JITD) but neither the sales team in Barilla or the buyers at the distribution centers are agreeing with the approach. At the same time, these teams are already noticing that our customers are leaving due to the lack of servicing we are able to provide. Distribution centers were asked to carry more inventories to prevent occurrences of stock outs but the suggestion was not accepted. In return, they issued a complaint regarding the number of SKUs Barilla has which makes it impossible to manage and the long manufacturing lead-time due to the tight heat and humidity specifications. Environmental and Root Cause Analysis Fluctuating Demand: The fluctuation in demand is caused by a combination of reasons. The trade promotions and volume discounts that Barilla uses as sales strategies are one of the biggest influences. There were also no limits to the quantities that the distributors are allowed to order per each â€Å"canvass† period. The incentive program for Barilla’s sales representatives is also causing inconsistency to the demand; they would be pushing for the SKU’s that would bring them a higher incentive. Barilla is also experience a growth in their export market; it was expected to reach 20-25% per year. With this increasing growth, Barilla does not have any sophisticated forecasting technique that would prepare them to meet the demand. There is a minimal visibility for Barilla to see where the volatility is in the demand is coming from. This is creating the Bullwhip Effect throughout their whole supply chain. The poor communication and cooperation between retailers, distribution centers and manufacturer is the reason that they all are maintaining higher inventory than required. Resistance to Changes: There were many resistances to this new initiative when it was being brought up internally and externally. When there is a lack of understanding of the results that a new initiative will bring, there will always be resistance to change. Sales team fears that that they would see a reduction of responsibilities and distribution centers were defensive when they misinterpret the approach as saying they don’t know what they are doing. Alternative and/or Options Alternative #1 – Continue to promote the Just-in-time Distribution (JITD) initiative To be able to eliminate the Bullwhip Effect, there must be an increase in visibility through the whole supply chain. With better communication and an understanding and trust between vendors, it will eliminate the volatility in demand. This will improve the service levels from distributors to retailers and at the same time reduce the inventory carrying cost. With the visibility, it will better Barilla to forecast their demand and improve their production planning process. While achieving this, it will reduce their manufacturing cost and their inventory cycle. Alternative #2 – Eliminate product focus sales strategies Instead of promoting particular products in each canvass period that will cause excessive demand, Barilla should maintain a constant competitive pricing through the year. Barilla should also eliminate their product-focus incentive policy for their sales representative and create incentive programs that will not allow them to focus on a particular SKU. Recommendations and Implementation Barilla should continue to promote the Just-in-Time Distribution initiative. As this is a new concept for the distributors and retailers, Barilla should prove out this initiative at their own facility. With the results, they can then have bigger bargaining power to promote this idea to its whole supply chain. As for anything else to be successful in a company, it is important for top management to be actively involved. Employees need to be aware of the importance of this project in order for it to be successful and for them to understand positive results it will bring to the company. During the implementation, there would be decrease in inventory levels. Before, the inventory levels were used as a buffer to hide the problems that prevents us from working with a lower inventory level. As we decrease the inventory levels, the problems will arise and it will identify for us what issues we need to resolve as a priority. If the problem requires a longer time to resolve, then the inventory levels can be raise to prevent affecting customers from stock-outs. Then the focus would be to resolve the issue and the inventory levels can be lowered again. With this approach, it will help prioritize the issues that need to be address and which ones will help lower our inventory levels. Monitor and Control To monitor the affects of this initiative, there are a few key performance indicators that need to be set-up. Stock Out Rate – This will immediately show the trend with the current system and be able to visualize that JITD will increase service levels. Inventory Levels – Visualize inventory levels at all firms to demonstrate the win-win scenario that this initiative will bring. Re-order Lead-time – To show with the increase communication, it helps for manufacturers to respond faster There should be daily meetings held with the key departments to ensure that the information is communicated in an effective manner. The meeting should be held at the same time in the same form to create a drum-beat system that will create a habit for the stakeholders to inform of any issues that they have encounter and to gather as a group to resolve.

What You Should Know About Unequal Treaties

During the 19th and early 20th centuries, stronger powers imposed humiliating, one-sided treaties on weaker nations in East Asia. The treaties imposed harsh conditions on the target nations, sometimes seizing territory, allowing citizens of the stronger nation special rights within the weaker nation, and infringing on the targets sovereignty. These documents are known as unequal treaties, and they played a key role in creating nationalism in Japan, China, and also Korea.   Unequal Treaties in Modern Asian History The first of the unequal treaties was imposed on Qing China by the British Empire in 1842 after the First Opium War. This document, the Treaty of Nanjing, forced China to allow foreigner traders to use five treaty ports, to accept foreign Christian missionaries on its soil, and to allow missionaries, traders, and other British citizens the right of extraterritoriality. This meant that Britons who committed crimes in China would be tried by consular officials from their own nation, rather than facing Chinese courts. In addition, China had to cede the island of Hong Kong to Britain for 99 years. In 1854, an American battle fleet commanded by Commodore Matthew Perry opened Japan to American shipping by the threat of force. The U.S. imposed an agreement called the Convention of Kanagawa on the Tokugawa government. Japan agreed to open two ports to American ships in need of supplies, guaranteed rescue and safe passage for American sailors shipwrecked on its shores, and allowed a permanent U.S. consulate to be set up in Shimoda. In return, the U.S. agreed not to bombard Edo (Tokyo). The Harris Treaty of 1858 between the US and Japan further expanded U.S. rights within Japanese territory and was even more clearly unequal than the Convention of Kanagawa. This second treaty opened five additional ports to US trading vessels, allowed U.S. citizens to live and to purchase property in any of the treaty ports, granted Americans extraterritorial rights in Japan, set very favorable import and export duties for U.S. trade, and allowed Americans to build Christian churches and worship freely in the treaty ports. Observers in Japan and abroad saw this document as a portent of the colonization of Japan; in reaction, the Japanese overthrew the weak Tokugawa Shogunate in the 1868 Meiji Restoration. In 1860, China lost the Second Opium War to Britain and France and was forced to ratify the Treaty of Tianjin. This treaty was quickly followed by similar unequal agreements with the US and Russia. The Tianjin provisions included the opening of a number of new treaty ports to all of the foreign powers, the opening of the Yangtze River and Chinese interior to foreign traders and missionaries, allowing foreigners to live and establish legations in the Qing capital at Beijing, and granted them all extremely favorable trade rights.   Meanwhile, Japan was modernizing its political system and its military, revolutionizing the country in just a few short years.  It imposed the first unequal treaty of its own on Korea in 1876.  In the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1876, Japan unilaterally ended Koreas tributary relationship with Qing China, opened three Korean ports to Japanese trade, and allowed Japanese citizens extraterritorial rights in Korea. This was the first step toward Japans outright annexation of Korea in 1910. In 1895, Japan prevailed in the First Sino-Japanese War. This victory convinced the western powers that they would not be able to enforce their unequal treaties with the rising Asian power any longer. When Japan seized Korea in 1910, it also nullified the unequal treaties between the Joseon government and various western powers. The majority of Chinas unequal treaties lasted until the Second Sino-Japanese War, which began in 1937; the western powers abrogated most of the agreements by the end of World War II. Great Britain, however, retained Hong Kong until 1997. The British handover of the island to mainland China marked the final end of the unequal treaty system in East Asia.