Social change may not refer to the notion of social progress or sociocultural evolution, the philosophical idea that society moves forward by evolutionary means. It may refer to a paradigmatic change in the socio-economic structure, for instance the transition from feudalism to capitalism, or hypothetical future transition to some form of post-capitalism.
Social Change By Steven Vago Pdf
Download Zip: https://ssurll.com/2vCKuC
Accordingly, it may also refer to social revolution, such as the Socialist revolution presented in Marxism, or to other social movements, such as women's suffrage or the civil rights movement. Social change may be driven through cultural, religious, economic, environmental, scientific or technological forces.
Change comes from two sources. One source is unique factors such as climate, weather, or the presence of specific groups of people. Another source is systematic factors. For example, successful development generally has the same requirements, such as a stable and flexible government, enough free and available resources, and a diverse social organization of society. On the whole, social change is usually a combination of systematic factors along with some random or unique factors.[2]
Many theories attempt to explain social change. One view suggests that a theory of change should include elements such as structural aspects of change (like population shifts), processes and mechanisms of social change, and directions of change.[3]
From a systems perspective, change in a system can be organized based on whether it is internally- or externally-driven and non-structural or structural.[15] As a result, a living (ecological, social) system can undergo four types of change:[16]
In much of the developed world, changes from distinct men's work and women's work to more gender equal patterns have been economically important since the mid-20th century. Both men and women are considered to be great contributors[18] to social change worldwide.[19]
For centuries, social scientists, historians, and philosophers have tried to describe, account for, and predict change. Despite these efforts, questions about how changes in society come about, the trajectories and forms that they take, and the consequences they have remain unresolved (Vago 1999). It may be obvious that, to make sense of change, it is necessary to go beyond a chronology of events or sweeping laws of evolution. We need to critically assess the ways in which we analyze change as researchers, relying on theory and/or our personal expectations, and pay attention to how people live through, experience, desire, create, and challenge change. But how can we, at the same time, gain a longue durée perspective on societal transformation and give a truthful account of the ways our different interlocutors describe, name, perceive, and understand the changes they are living through and the kinds of futures they expect (Pels 2015; Stephan and Flaherty 2019)? This question is all the more central since the study of societal transformation necessarily entails taking into account broader structuring dynamics which are hard to understand through immersion in the field alone (Burawoy 2009).
Narratives about both change and stability are thus linked to instruments of rule that can have different significations depending on the historical and regional context (see also Martin and Soucaille 2014). In Morocco, for instance, while the new young king symbolized the beginning of a new era in 1999 via a rupture with the past (represented by his father), the monarchy as an institution was nevertheless still presented as the immutable guarantor of stability that must therefore remain unchanged (Berriane 2005). This kind of compromise between a consensus on the urgent need for institutional change and a deep concern with stability, political unity, and social order can be found in different times and places. Likewise, although market-oriented reforms and the introduction of neoliberal logics and practices have undeniably brought about major changes for the people of countries such as China, Vietnam, and Cuba, they did not necessarily require a break with the socialist past but rather a reconfiguration and remaking of socialist relations, practices, and forms of governmentality (Schwenkel and Leshkowich 2012; see also Trémon, Chapter 2, and Gold, Chapter 4 in this volume).
In this book, we present concrete examples of methodological approaches and analytical frameworks for researchers who are studying issues involving social change. The case studies presented depart from the same questions: what kind of data enables us to assess social change when conducting qualitative research? How should we approach the ways in which the actors we are studying conceptualize change? And how do we position our research in relation to different temporalities and scales of change? Each contribution thus articulates and questions, in different ways, these three key issues as it addresses the question of change: the unit of analysis, the empirical data, and the metanarratives of change that are used to make sense of the observed phenomenon.
In his extended case study model, Michael Burawoy (2009) reminds us of the importance of theory. According to him, researchers need to rely on theory to step beyond the limitations of the field, as this is the only way to account for the broad structural constraints shaping the situations they are interested in. While theories play a central role in our attempts to go beyond the observed case, they are themselves embedded in mundane struggles and not only abstract efforts to provide a general understanding of the world (Castoriadis 1975, 8). In the social sciences, the non-reproducibility of historical situations further increases the difficulty of considering theory as the ultimate framework of knowledge, as there are no means for creating the same setting twice as in a laboratory. Therefore, comparisons necessarily exclude dimensions of reality that could be of great importance for understanding current evolutions (Passeron 1991). Should we then abandon any attempt to gain an understanding of change which would go beyond what is immediately graspable from our fieldwork or formulated by our interlocutors?
This book aims to show that as social scientists we can neither reach for the Bergsonian ideal of a complete appraisal of change processes, nor abandon continuity as Bachelard suggests. Thus we need to rely on what is at hand: snapshots of change, sketching a movement whose end will always remain unknowable. This book is a reflexive exercise with practical goals. It tries to find the best ways to combine a longue durée perspective with the experiences and interpretations of our interlocutors. We prefer to avoid bombastic claims that this book will revolutionize the ways people do field research, but we nevertheless hope that it is a fruitful attempt to make the best of the fundamental epistemic conditions of our knowledge about change.
The inheritance of ethnic cultures is an important subject in the field of educational anthropology. As the most important conduit for the passing along of ethnic cultures, education strongly impacts that inheritance. Today, however, the rate of globalization is rapidly increasing. Whether in domestic or foreign education, or whether for primary or higher education, increasingly severe challenges in education are yielding profound changes. One of the most important developments in education at the present time is the cultivation of diversity. Increased diversity in education will have a profound impact on the inheritance of ethnic cultures. In light of the current age and contemporary social changes, the significance of the inheritance of ethnic cultures within the process of globalization is magnified. The current work uses the characteristics of educational development toward diversity to analyze the relationship between education and the inheritance of ethnic cultures, and suggests necessary changes in education to promote that inheritance.
Indeed, cultural choices and cultural heritage yield a tremendously complex process. A rational understanding and criticism of the traditional culture of a nation serves as the starting point for handling traditional culture. Cultural anthropologists maintain that ethnic traditional cultures are formed from the different levels of institutional culture, conceptual culture, artifact culture, and folk culture. The important functions of a traditional ethnic culture for a modernizing nation primarily include guiding ethics and morals, forming cultural communities, and increasing ethnic cohesion and the sense of identity. The traditional ethnic culture maintains the cultural and ethical identity of the social community, its etiquette, and moral conscience, while influencing the direction of social development and the understanding of the meaning of life (Vago 2007). Every ethnicity has its own customs, including traditional festivals, etiquette for living, and art. The inheritance of traditional culture can compensate for the alienation, spiritual and emotional loss, and psychological instability that inevitably appear in the cultural identity of people undergoing modernization. Such traditional cultures propagate the history of the civilization of a nation, yet, some ethnic cultures will have components that do not adapt to the flow of human progress and possibly even hinder that progress. Passing along traditional culture is an important mission for a nation. Societal changes will have an impact on the traditional cultures of a given nation, but, conversely, these changes give a deeper insight of the significant role that traditional ethnic cultures play in human life.
Inevitably, the changes in social life will be integrated into education. Education itself is influenced by the diversity present in a society, and must adapt as that diversity morphs. Concurrently, changes in education will promote greater diversity in society. Education and diversity are intertwined, each constantly affecting the other. In this era of globalization, where economic and social exchange are becoming increasingly common and connected and the characteristics of social diversity are becoming increasingly pronounced, the features of a diverse education are becoming increasingly obvious. 2ff7e9595c
Comments