Difference between revisions of "Society" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
(Started)
 
(48 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Started}}{{Claimed}}
+
{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}{{Approved}}{{Paid}}{{copyedited}}
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Sociology]]
 
[[Category:Sociology]]
 
[[Category:Anthropology]]
 
[[Category:Anthropology]]
  
 +
[[File:Sna large.png|right|300px|thumb|A social network diagram ]]
  
[[Image:Diversity of youth in Oslo Norway.jpg|right|350px|thumb|Young people interacting within an [[ethnic group|ethnically]] diverse society.]]
+
A '''society''' is a [[group (sociology)|grouping]] of [[individual]]s, which is characterized by common interest and may have distinctive [[culture]] and [[institution]]s. A "society" may refer to a particular [[ethnic group]], such as the [[Nuer]], to a [[nation state]], such as [[Switzerland]], or to a broader cultural group, such as [[Western society]]. An organized group of people associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes may also be considered a society.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
Human beings are essentially social creatures, with the desire and need to be in close contact with others. Beginning with the [[family]], human life is one of interdependence and sharing of physical, mental, and spiritual items. While [[conflict]] both within and between societies has been the dominant feature of human history, all societies strive to maintain harmony within (to ensure the [[happiness]] and safety of their members) and, at least in more recent times, many now seek harmony among diverse societies in efforts to establish a world of peace and prosperity for all.
  
 +
== Origin and usage ==
 +
{{readout||right|250px|The term "society" is from the Latin "societas" which can be translated as "a friendly association with others"}}
 +
The term '''society''' emerged in the fifteenth century and is derived from the French ''société''. The French word, in turn, had its origin in the [[Latin]] ''societas'', "a friendly association with others," from ''socius'' meaning "companion, associate, comrade or business partner." Essential in the meaning of society is that its members share some mutual concern or interest, a common objective or common characteristics, often a common [[culture]].
  
 +
Society and culture are similar concepts, but their scopes are different. A society is an interdependent [[community]], while culture is an ''attribute'' of a community: the complex web of shifting patterns that link individuals together. For example, [[Clifford Geertz]] suggested that "society" is the actual arrangement of social relations while "culture" consists of [[belief]]s and [[symbol]]ic forms. [[Edward Burnett Tylor]] wrote in 1871 that "culture or civilization, taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes [[knowledge]], belief, [[art]], [[morality|morals]], [[law]], [[custom]], and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society."
  
A '''society''' is a [[group (sociology)|grouping]] of [[individual]]s, which is characterized by common interest and may have distinctive [[culture]] and [[institutions]]. In a society members can be from a different [[ethnic group]]. A "Society" may refer to a particular people, such as the [[Nuer]], to a [[nation state]], such as [[Switzerland]], or to a broader cultural group, such as [[Western society]]. Society can also be explained as an organized group of people associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes.
+
In the study of [[social sciences]] "society" has been used to mean a group of people that form a semi-closed [[social system]], in which most interactions are with other individuals belonging to the group. According to [[sociology|sociologist]] [[Richard Jenkins]], the term addresses a number of important existential issues facing people:
 
 
== Origin and usage ==
 
 
 
''society'' emerged in the 15th century and is derived from the French ''société''. The French word, in turn, had its origin in the [[Latin]] ''societas'', a "friendly association with others," from ''socius'' meaning "companion, associate, comrade or business partner." Implicit in the meaning of society is that its members share some mutual concern or interest, a common objective or common characteristics.
 
  
In political science, the term is often used to mean the totality of human relationships, generally in contrast to ''[[state|the State]]'', i.e., the apparatus of rule or government within a territory:
+
# How humans think and exchange information. The sensory world makes up only a fraction of human experience, so in order to understand the world, we have to conceive of [[human]] interaction in the abstract, namely society.
 +
# Many phenomena cannot be reduced to individual behavior. In order to explain certain conditions, a view of something "greater than the sum of its parts" is needed.
 +
# Collectives often endure beyond the lifespan of individual members.
 +
# The human condition has always meant going beyond the evidence of our senses. In other words, every aspect of our lives is tied to the collective sense.<ref>Richard Jenkins, ''Foundations of Sociology'' (London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2002, ISBN 0333960505).</ref>
  
{{quotation|I mean by it [the State] that summation of privileges and dominating positions which are brought into being by extra-economic power... I mean by Society, the totality of concepts of all purely natural relations and institutions between man and man...|<ref>[http://www.opp.uni-wuppertal.de/oppenheimer/st/state0.htm] Franz Oppenheimer, ''The State.''</ref>}}
+
In [[political science]], "society" is often used to mean the totality of human relationships, generally in contrast to the ''[[nation-state|State]]'', the apparatus of rule or [[government]] within a territory:
 +
<blockquote>I mean by it [the State] that summation of privileges and dominating positions which are brought into being by extra-economic power…I mean by Society, the totality of concepts of all purely natural relations and institutions between man and man…—Franz Oppenheimer|<ref>Franz Oppenheimer, [https://www.franz-oppenheimer.de/state0.htm ''The State''] 1922. Retrieved November 8, 2022. </ref></blockquote>
  
In the [[social sciences]] ''society'' has been used {{Fact|date=February 2007}}to mean a group of people that form a semi-closed [[social system]], in which most interactions are with other individuals belonging to the group.  
+
It should be noted, however, that some theorists, particularly [[Marxism|Marxist]]s, have argued that there is no [[entity]] that we could call "society." The concept of a society as the sum total of '''social relations''' among members of a community contrasts with the perspective where society is simply the sum total of '''individuals''' in a territory, having no independent existence or characteristics beyond that which can be described on another level.  
  
According sociologist Richard Jenkins, the term addresses a number of important existential issues facing people:
+
In the view of [[Karl Marx]], human beings are intrinsically, necessarily, and by definition social beings who—beyond being "gregarious creatures"—cannot survive and meet their needs other than through social co-operation and association. Their social characteristics are therefore to a large extent an objectively given fact, stamped on them from birth and affirmed by [[socialization]] processes; and, according to Marx, in producing and reproducing their material life, people must necessarily enter into [[relations of production]] which are "independent of their will."
  
1. How humans think and exchange information – the sensory world makes up only a fraction of human experience.  In order to understand the [[world]], we have to conceive of [[human]] interaction in the abstract (i.e., society).
+
By contrast, the sociologist [[Max Weber]] defined human action as "social" if, by virtue of the subjective [[meanings]] attached to the action by individuals, it "takes account the behavior of others, and is thereby oriented in its course." In this case, the "social" domain really exists only in the [[intersubjective]] relations between individuals, but by implication the life of these individuals also exists in part outside the social domain. "Social" is thus implicitly also contrasted with "[[Privacy|private]]."
2. Many phenomena cannot be reduced to individual behavior – to explain certain conditions, a view of something "greater than the sum of its parts" is needed.
 
3. Collectives often endure beyond the lifespan of individual members.
 
4. The human condition has always meant going beyond the evidence of our senses; every aspect of our lives is tied to the collective. <ref> Jenkins, R. 2002. ''Foundations of Sociology.''</ref>
 
  
== Evolution of societies ==
+
In the [[positivist]] sociology of [[Emile Durkheim]], a social fact is an abstraction external to the individual which constrains that individual's actions. In his 1895 work ''Rules of Sociological Method'', Durkheim wrote:
 +
<blockquote>A social fact is every way of acting, fixed or not, capable of exercising on the individual an influence, or an external constraint; or again, every way of acting which is general throughout a given society, while at the same time existing in its own right independent of its individual manifestations.</blockquote>
 +
Durkheim gave a non-individualistic explanation of social facts arguing that social phenomena arise when interacting individuals constitute a reality that can no longer be accounted for in terms of the properties of individual actors. He distinguished between a traditional society–"mechanical solidarity"–which prevails if individual differences are minimized, and the modern society-"organic solidarity"–that develops out of cooperation between differentiated individuals with independent roles. In Durkheim's view, sociology as the study of society and human social interaction is "the science of social facts."
  
[[Gerhard Lenski]], a [[sociologist]], differentiates societies based on their level of technology, communication and economy: (1) hunters and gatherers, (2) simple agricultural, (3) advanced agricultural, (4) industrial.<ref>Lenski, G. 1974. ''Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology.''</ref> This is somewhat similar to the system earlier developed by [[anthropologists]] [[Morton H. Fried]], a conflict theorist, and [[Elman Service]], an integration theorist, who have produced a system of classification for societies in all human cultures based on the evolution of [[social inequality]] and the role of the [[state]]. This system of classification contains four categories:
+
==Types of societies==
 +
[[Social science|Social scientists]] differentiate societies based on a variety of factors. [[Gerhard Lenski]], a [[sociology|sociologist]], differentiates societies into six levels based on their level of [[technology]], [[communication]], and [[economy]]: (1) hunters and gatherers, (2) simple horticultural, (3) advanced horticultural, (4) simple agrarian, (5) advanced agrarian, and (6) industrial.<ref>Patrick Nolan and Gerhard Lenski, ''Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology'' (Oxford University Press, 2014, ISBN 978-0199382453).</ref> This is somewhat similar to the system earlier developed by [[anthropology|anthropologists]] [[Morton H. Fried]], a [[conflict theory|conflict theorist]], and [[Elman Service]], an integration theorist, who produced a system of classification for societies in all human cultures based on the evolution of [[social inequality]] and the role of the [[state]]. This system of classification contains four categories:
  
* [[Hunter-gatherer]] bands, which are generally [[egalitarianism|egalitarian]].
+
* [[Hunter-gatherer]] [[band society|band]]s, which are generally [[egalitarianism|egalitarian]].
* [[Tribe|Tribal]] societies in which there are some limited instances of [[social rank]] and prestige.
+
* [[Tribe|Tribal]] societies, in which there are some limited instances of [[social rank]] and prestige.
* [[Social stratification|Stratified]] structures led by [[chieftain]]s.
+
* [[Chiefdom]]s, stratified structures led by [[chieftain]]s.
 
* [[Civilization]]s, with complex social hierarchies and organized, institutional governments.
 
* [[Civilization]]s, with complex social hierarchies and organized, institutional governments.
* [[Humanity]], mankind, that upon which rest all the elements of society, including society's beliefs.
 
  
Over time, some [[cultures]] have progressed toward more-complex forms of [[organization]] and control. This [[cultural evolution]] has a profound effect on patterns of community. Hunter-gatherer tribes settled around seasonal foodstocks to become [[Neolithic Revolution|agrarian village]]s. Villages grew to become towns and cities. Cities turned into [[city-state]]s and [[nation-state]]s.<ref>Effland, R. 1998. [http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/dept/d10/asb/anthro2003/glues/model_complex.html The Cultural Evolution of Civilizations].</ref>
+
[[Image:Coloured-family.jpg|thumb|400px|Extended family in South Africa]]
 +
Societies consist minimally of a large [[extended family]], and generally as groups of families connected either by [[kinship]] or by [[geopolitics|geopolitical]] factors (location, resources, common enemies, and so forth). Over time, some [[culture]]s progressed toward more complex forms of [[organization]] and control. This [[cultural evolution]] has a profound effect on patterns of community. Hunter-gatherer tribes settled around seasonal food supplies eventually become [[Neolithic Revolution|agrarian village]]s. Villages grew to become towns and cities. Cities turned into [[city-state]]s and [[nation-state]]s. Ultimately, there is the level of all [[humanity]], humankind.  
  
== Characteristics of society ==
+
The fundamental unit of human society is the [[family]]. [[Margaret Mead]], based on her [[anthropology|anthropological]] research, affirmed the centrality of the family in human society:
 +
<blockquote>As far back as our knowledge takes us, human beings have lived in families. We know of no period where this was not so. We know of no people who have succeeded for long in dissolving the family or displacing it ... Again and again, in spite of proposals for change and actual experiments, human societies have reaffirmed their dependence on the family as the basic unit of human living&mdash;the family of father, mother and children.<ref> Margaret Mead and Ken Heyman, ''Family'' (New York, NY: Macmillan, 1965,  ISBN 0025836900), 77-78.</ref></blockquote>
  
The following three components are common to all definitions of society:
+
===Band===
 +
A [[band society]] is the simplest form of human society. A band generally consists of a small [[kinship]] group, often no larger than an [[extended family]] or small [[clan]]. Bands have very informal leadership; the older members of the band generally are looked to for guidance and advice, but there are none of the written [[law]]s and [[law enforcement]] like that seen in more complex societies. Band [[custom]]s are almost always transmitted orally. Formal social institutions are few or non-existent. [[Religion]] is generally based on family tradition, individual experience, or counsel from a [[shaman]]. Bands are distinguished from tribes in that tribes are generally larger, consisting of many families. Tribes have more social institutions and clearly defined leadership such as a "chief," or "elder." Tribes are also more permanent than bands; a band can cease to exist if only a small group walks out. Many tribes are in fact sub-divided into bands, in the [[United States]], for example, many [[Native Americans in the United States|Native American]] tribes are made up of official bands living in specific locations.
  
* Social networks
+
===Clan===
* Criteria for membership, and
+
A [[clan]] is a group of people united by [[kinship and descent]], which is defined by perceived descent from a common ancestor. Even if actual lineage patterns are unknown, clan members nonetheless recognize a founding member or "apical ancestor." As kinship based bonds can be merely [[symbol]]ic in nature some clans share a "stipulated" common ancestor, which is a symbol of the clan's unity. When this ancestor is not human, this is referred to a [[totemism|totem]]. Generally speaking, kinship differs from biological relation, as it also involves [[adoption]], [[marriage]], and fictive genealogical ties. Clans can be most easily described as sub-groups of tribes and usually constitute groups of seven to ten thousand people.
* Characteristic patterns of organization
 
  
Each of these will be explored further in the following sections.
+
===Tribe===
 +
A [[tribe]], viewed historically or developmentally, consists of a social group existing before the development of, or outside of, [[nation-state|state]]s, though some modern theorists hold that "contemporary" tribes can only be understood in terms of their relationship to states. The term is often loosely used to refer to any non-Western or indigenous society.  
  
== Social networks ==
+
In common understanding the word "tribe" is a social division within a traditional society consisting of a group of interlinked [[family|families]] or [[community|communities]] sharing a common [[culture]] and [[dialect]]. In the contemporary western mind the modern tribe is typically associated with a seat of traditional authority (tribal leader) with whom the representatives of external powers (the governing state or occupying government) interact.
{{Main | Social network}}
 
  
Social networks are maps of the relationships between people. Structural features such as proximity, frequency of contact and type of relationship (e.g., relative, friend, colleague) define various social networks.
+
For various reasons, the term "tribe" fell into disfavor in the latter part of the twentieth century. For many anthropologists, when the term was clearly defined it became an "ideal" concept, with no basis in reality. Thus, it was replaced with the designation "ethnic group," which defines a group of people of common ancestry and language, shared cultural history, and an identifiable territory. Nevertheless, the term tribe is still in common use and the term used for recognized [[Native Americans in the United States|Native American]] governments in the [[United States]].
  
== Organization of society ==
+
===Ethnic group===
{{main | Social organization}}
+
An [[ethnic group]] is a human population whose members identify with each other, usually on the basis of a presumed common [[genealogy]] or [[lineage]]. Ethnic groups are also usually united by common [[culture|cultural]], behavioral, [[language|linguistic]], or [[religion|religious]] practices.<ref>Anthony D. Smith, ''The Ethnic Origins of Nations'' (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1988, ISBN 0631161694).</ref> In this sense, an ethnic group is also a cultural community. This term is preferred over tribe, as it overcame the negative connotations that the term tribe had acquired under [[colonialism]].
  
Human societies are often organized according to their primary means of [[subsistence]]. As noted in the section on "[[Society#Evolution of societies|Evolution of societies]]", above, social scientists identify [[hunter-gatherer]] societies, nomadic [[pastoralism|pastoral]] societies, [[horticulture|horticulturalist]] or simple farming societies, and [[agriculture|intensive agricultural]] societies, also called [[civilization]]s. Some consider [[Industry|industrial]] and [[Post-industrial society|post-industrial]] societies to be qualitatively different from traditional agricultural societies.
+
===Chiefdom===
 +
A [[chiefdom]] is any community led by an individual known as a chief. In [[anthropology|anthropological theory]], one model of human social development describes a chiefdom as a form of social organization more complex than a tribe, and less complex than a [[nation-state|state]] or a [[civilization]]. The most succinct (but still working) definition of a chiefdom in anthropology belongs to Robert Carneiro: "An autonomous political unit comprising a number of villages or communities under the permanent control of a paramount chief."<ref>Robert L. Carneiro, "The Nature of the Chiefdom as Revealed by Evidence from the Cauca Valley of Colombia" in A. Terry Rambo and Kathleen Gillogly (eds.), ''Profiles in Cultural Evolution'' (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1991, ISBN 978-0915703234).</ref> Chiefdoms have been shown by anthropologists and [[archaeology|archaeologists]] to be a relatively unstable form of social organization. They are prone to cycles of collapse and renewal, in which tribal units band together, expand in power, fragment through some form of social stress, and band together again.
  
One common theme for societies in general is that they serve to aid individuals in a time of crisis. Traditionally, when an individual requires aid, for example at birth, death, sickness, or disaster, members of that society will rally others to render aid, in some form&mdash;symbolic, linguistic, physical, mental, emotional, financial, medical, or religious. Many societies will distribute largess, at the behest of some individual or some larger group of people. This type of ''generosity'' can be seen in all known cultures; typically, prestige accrues to the generous individual or group. Conversely, members of a society may also shun or [[scapegoat]] members of the society who violate its [[Norm (sociology)|norms]]. Mechanisms such as [[Reciprocity (cultural anthropology)|gift-giving]] and scapegoating, which may be seen in various types of human groupings, tend to be [[Institution|institutionalized]] within a society.
+
An example of this kind of social organization would be the Germanic Peoples who conquered the western Roman Empire in the fifth century C.E. Although commonly referred to as tribes, the Germanic Peoples were by anthropological definition not tribes, but chiefdoms. They had a complex social hierarchy consisting of [[king]]s, a warrior [[aristocracy]], common freemen, [[serf]]s, and [[slavery|slaves]].
  
Some societies will bestow status on an individual or group of people, when that individual or group performs an admired or desired action. This type of [[recognition]] is bestowed by members of that society on the individual or group in the form of a name, title, manner of dress, or monetary reward. Males, in many societies, are particularly susceptible to this type of action and subsequent reward, even at the risk of their lives. Action by an individual or larger group in behalf of some cultural ideal is seen in all societies. The phenomena of community action, shunning, scapegoating, generosity, and shared risk and reward occur in subsistence-based societies and in more technology-based civilizations.
+
Chiefdoms are characterized by pervasive inequality of peoples and centralization of authority. At least two inherited [[social class]]es (elite and commoner) are present, although social class can often be changed by extraordinary behavior during an individual's life.  A single lineage/family of the elite class will be the ruling elite of the chiefdom, with the greatest influence, power, and prestige. [[Kinship]] is typically an organizing principle, while marriage, age, and gender can affect one's social status and role.
  
Societies may also be organized according to their [[political]] structure. In order of increasing size and complexity, there are [[band society|bands]], [[tribe]]s, [[chiefdom]]s, and [[state]] societies. These structures may have varying degrees of [[political power]], depending on the [[culture|cultural]] [[geography|geographical]], and [[history|historical]] environments that these societies must contend with. Thus, a more isolated society with the same level of technology and culture as other societies is more likely to survive than one in closer proximity to others that may encroach on their resources (''see'' history for examples}. A society that is unable to offer an effective response to other societies it competes with will usually be subsumed into the culture of the competing society (''see'' [[technology]] for examples).
+
===State===
 +
A [[state]] is a political [[Social contract|association]] with effective [[sovereignty|dominion]] over a geographic [[area]]. It usually includes the set of [[institution]]s that claim the [[authority]] to make the rules that govern the people of the society in that territory, though its status as a state often depends in part on being recognized by a number of other states as having internal and external sovereignty over it. In [[sociology]], the state is normally identified with these institutions: in [[Max Weber]]'s influential definition, it is that organization that has a "monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory," which may include the [[armed forces]], [[civil service]], or state [[bureaucracy]], [[court]]s, and [[police]].  
  
=== Shared belief or common goal ===
+
A [[city-state]] is a region controlled exclusively by a [[city]], usually having [[sovereignty]]. Historically, city-states have often been part of larger cultural areas, as in the city-states of [[ancient Greece]] (such as [[Athens]], [[Sparta]] and [[Corinth]]), the [[central Asia]]n cities along the [[Silk Road]] (which included [[Samarkand]] and [[Bukhara]]), or the [[Italian city-states|city-states of Northern Italy]] (especially [[Florence]] and [[Venice]]). Among the most creative periods in human history are those in which humanity organized itself in small independent centers. However, these small creative groupings usually survived for only short periods of time because they lacked the size and strength to defend themselves against the onslaught of larger social entities. Thus, they inevitably gave way to larger organizations of society, the empire and eventually the [[nation-state]].<ref> Sri Aurobindo, "Ideal of Human Unity" in ''Social and Political Thought'' (Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1970).</ref> Today, only [[Singapore]], [[Monaco]], and [[Vatican City]] arguably remain autonomous city-states.
  
Peoples of many nations united by common political and cultural traditions, beliefs, or values are sometimes also said to be a society (such as Judeo-Christian, Eastern, and Western). When used in this context, the term is employed as a means of contrasting two or more "societies" whose members represent alternative conflicting and competing worldviews (''see'' [[Secret Societies]]).
+
The modern [[nation-state]] is larger and more populous than the city-states of ancient Greece or Medieval Europe. Those states were governed through face-to-face relationships of people that often lived within the walls of the city. The nation-state also differs from an empire, which is usually an expansive territory comprising numerous states and many nationalities which is united by political and military power, and a common [[currency]]. The language of an empire is often not the mother tongue of most of its inhabitants.
  
Some [[academic]], learned and scholarly [[Voluntary association|associations]] describe themselves as ''societies'' (for example, the [[American Society of Mathematics]]. More commonly, professional organizations often refer to themselves as societies (e.g., the [[American Society of Civil Engineers]], [[American Chemical Society]]). In the [[United Kingdom]] and the United States, learned societies are normally nonprofit and have [[charitable organization|charitable]] status. In [[science]], they range in size to include national [[scientific societies]] (i.e., the [[Royal Society]]) to regional natural history societies. Academic societies may have interest in a wide range of subjects, including the [[arts]], [[humanities]] and science.
+
There are two directions for the formation of a nation-state. The first&mdash;and more peaceful way&mdash;is for responsible people living in a territory to organize a common government for the nation-state they will create. The second, and more violent and oppressive method&mdash;is for a ruler or army to conquer a territory and impose its will on the people it rules.
  
In some countries (for example the [[United States]] and [[France]]), the term "society" is used in [[commerce]] to denote a partnership between [[investor]]s or to start a [[business]]. In the [[United Kingdom]], partnerships are not called societies, but [[cooperative]]s or [[mutual]]s are often known as societies (such as [[friendly society|friendly societies]] and [[building society|building societies]]). In [[Latin America]], the term society may also be used in commerce denoting a partnership between investors, or anonymous investors; for example: "Proveedor Industrial Anahuac S.A." where [[S.A.]] stands for Anonymous Society (Sociedad Anónima); however in [[Mexico]] in other type of partnership it would be declared as [[S.A. de C.V.]]
+
The modern nation-state is relatively new to human history, emerging after the [[Renaissance]] and [[Reformation]]. It was given impetus by the throwing off of kings (for example, in the [[Netherlands]] and the [[United States]]) and the rise of efficient state bureaucracies that could govern large groups of people impersonally. [[Frederick the Great]] in [[Germany]] is frequently cited as one of the originators of modern state bureaucracy. It is based on the idea that the state can treat large numbers of people equally by efficient application of the law through the bureaucratic machinery of the state.
  
== Ontology ==
+
== Characteristics of society ==
 
+
The following components are common to all definitions of society:
As a related note, there is still an ongoing debate in sociological and anthropological circles as to whether there exists an [[entity]] we could call society. Some [[Marxist]] theorists, like [[Louis Althusser]], [[Ernesto Laclau]] and [[Slavoj Zizek]], have argued that society is nothing more than an effect of the ruling [[ideology]] of a certain class system, and shouldn't be used as a sociological notion. Marx's concept of society as the sum total of [[social relations]] among members of a community contrasts with interpretations from the perspective of [[methodological individualism]] where society is simply the sum total of individuals in a territory.
 
[[Social security]]
 
 
 
==Social relation==
 
'''Social relation''' can refer to a multitude of [[social interaction]]s, regulated by [[social norm]]s, between two or more people, with each having a [[social position]] and performing a [[social role]]. In sociological [[hierarchy]], social relation is more advanced then [[behavior]], [[Social action|action]], [[social behavior]], social action, [[social contact]] and social interaction. Social relations form the basis of concepts such as [[social organization]], [[social structure]], [[social movement]] and [[social system]].
 
 
 
=== Specific meaning ===
 
 
 
Although [[Harvard]] University has featured a [[Harvard Department of Social Relations|Department of Social Relations]] (in which [[Talcott Parsons]] played a prominent role), and although the term "social relations" is frequently used in social sciences, there is in fact no commonly agreed meaning for this concept (see also the entry [[social]]). "Social" connotes association, co-operation, mutual dependence and belonging.
 
 
 
It could be argued that a social relation is, in the first instance, simply a relation between people, but more specifically
 
 
 
*a relation between [[individuals]] insofar as they belong to a [[group (sociology)|group]],
 
*a relation between groups of people, or
 
*a relation between an individual and a group of people.
 
 
 
The group could be an [[ethnic]] or [[kinship]] group, a [[social institution]] or [[organisation]], a [[social class]] or [[social stratum]], a [[nation]], a [[population]], or a [[gender]] etc.
 
 
 
This definition contrasts with the relationship between people and inanimate objects.
 
 
 
===Examples===
 
 
 
In this sense, a social relation is therefore not necessarily identical with a unique [[interpersonal]] relation or a unique individual relation of some type, although all these kinds of relations presuppose each other; a social relation refers precisely to a condition which groups of people have ''in common'' or share.
 
 
 
For example, the simple statement "Jack and Jill love each other" might refer to a unique interaction between two people, the meaning of which might be difficult to define for an outsider. Yet, Jack and Jill may also be ''socially'' related in many different ways, insofar as they both are, as a matter of fact, members of the same or different social groups, and thus their ''identity'' is shaped in good part by the fact that they belong to those groups. If we wanted to understand and explain their behaviour, we would need to refer to those social relations. We might establish the milieu they grew up in, their ancestors, the jobs they do, where they lived, who their friends are, and so on, all of which helps explain why they necessarily interact in the way that they do, and not in some other way.
 
 
 
At a higher level of abstraction, we might consider two groups which are socially related, for example, although they live in different places, they depend on each other in trading goods and services.
 
 
 
At an even higher level of abstraction, we might consider the relationship between an individual and the whole of the world population, or the relationship of the world population to itself.
 
 
 
Some might indeed argue that a social relation exists between mortals and [[God]] (or the Gods), though others would regard this more as an imaginary relation. In flights of fancy, we could extend the analysis to the relation of all sentient organisms in the universe.
 
 
 
===Theorists===
 
 
 
However, the difficulties only start here, because now it needs to be established ''how'' these social relations exist, how we ''know'' they exist, ''what kinds'' of social relations there are, and how we can ''find out'' about them, verify them or identify them. About these questions researchers often disagree and debate, proposing different kinds of [[methodology]] to obtain [[knowledge]] of social relations.
 
  
At one end of the spectrum, [[Karl Marx]] approvingly quotes [[Giambattista Vico]]'s argument that humans can understand their [[society]] in its totality because "they made it themselves"; the limits to what humans can know are mainly practical in nature. At the other end of the spectrum, [[Karl Popper]] rejects the possibility of objective knowledge about society as a whole, suggesting that methodological [[holism]] must lead to [[totalitarianism]]; progressive [[social change]] can only be achieved through the small steps of piecemeal [[social engineering]].
+
* Criteria for membership, related to purpose or common goal
 +
* Characteristic patterns of organization, defining relationships among members
 +
* Social norms of acceptable behavior within the society
  
===Understanding social relations===
+
=== Criteria for membership ===
 +
Generally the members of a society have a shared belief or common goal that binds them together. On the most basic level, that of a [[family]] or [[extended family]], they share a common blood [[lineage]]. Some larger social groups, such as [[clan]]s and [[ethnic group]]s also share a common lineage, although the connections may be more distant.
  
There are at least three problems in understanding social relations.  
+
[[Ferdinand Tönnies]] argued that social groups can exist as personal and direct social ties that either link individuals who share values and belief ''([[gemeinschaft]])'' or impersonal, formal and instrumental social links ''([[gesellschaft]])''. In reality, though, all societies contain some elements of both types.
  
*many social relations are not directly [[observable]] by an individual, and can only be inferred with the aid of [[abstractions]]. This raises the question of how we know they exist, and how they exist.
+
There are also "[[secret society|secret societies]]," organizations that conceal their activities and membership from outsiders. The term "secret society" is also often used by the general public to describe a wide range of organizations, including college [[fraternity|fraternities]] and [[fraternal organization]]s that may have non-public ceremonies. [[Freemasonry]] has often been called a "secret society" although Freemasons themselves argue that it is more correct to say that it is an [[Esotericism|esoteric]] society, in that certain aspects are private.<ref>United Grand Lodge of England, ''Constitutions of the Antient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons'' (Forgotten Books, 2017, ISBN 978-1330365311). </ref>
  
*[[reflexivity]]: in the case of social science, the scientist is in a very obvious way himself or herself part of the social world being studied (this occurs also in natural sciences; not just in the sense that a biologist is also a biological being, but also even in theoretical physics - cf. the reflections of [[David Bohm]]).  
+
The most common phrasing being that Freemasonry has, in the twenty-first century, become less a secret society and more of a "society with secrets."<ref> Reynold S. Davenport, [https://www.grandlodge-nc.org/freemasonry-revealed Freemasonry Revealed: The Secrets of Freemasonry] Grand Lodge of North Carolina, 1980. Retrieved November 8, 2022.</ref> 
  
*[[animal]] and [[insect]] populations for example also display a kind of "social" behaviour, so that social relations are not necessarily uniquely [[human]] relations (cf. the insights of [[sociobiology]]), and social relations might exist between humans and animals (though some dispute this; they argue that ''associative'' relations are confused here with true ''social'' relations; a human being could associate with all sorts of things or organisms, without a social relation being involved).
+
Some academic, learned, and scholarly [[Voluntary association|associations]] describe themselves as "societies" (for example, the [[American Society of Mathematics]]. More commonly, professional organizations often refer to themselves as societies (for example, the [[American Society of Civil Engineers]] or the [[American Chemical Society]]). In the [[United Kingdom]] and the United States, learned societies are normally nonprofit and have [[charitable organization|charitable]] status. In [[science]], they range in size to include national scientific societies (such as the [[Royal Society]]) to regional natural history societies. Academic societies may have interest in a wide range of subjects, including the [[arts]], [[humanities]], and science.
  
===Types of social relations===
+
Peoples of many nations united by common political and cultural traditions, beliefs, or values may be said to be a society (such as Judeo-Christian, Eastern, and Western). When used in this context, the term is employed as a means of contrasting two or more "societies" whose members represent alternative conflicting and competing [[worldview]]s.
  
In broad terms, we can distinguish six basic levels of human awareness:
+
=== Organization ===
 +
Human societies are often organized according to their primary means of [[subsistence]]. As noted above, social scientists identify [[hunter-gatherer]] societies, [[nomad]]ic [[pastoralism|pastoral]] societies, [[horticulture|horticulturalist]] or simple farming societies, and [[agriculture|intensive agricultural]] societies, also called [[civilization]]s. Some consider [[Industry|industrial]] and [[Post-industrial society|post-industrial]] societies to be qualitatively different from traditional agricultural societies.
  
*un-conscious awareness (studied by e.g. [[Sigmund Freud]], [[Carl Jung]], and [[Milton Erickson]]).
+
Societies may also be organized according to their [[politics|political]] structure. In order of increasing size and complexity, there are [[band society|bands]], [[tribe]]s or [[ethnic group]]s, [[chiefdom]]s, and [[state]] societies. These structures may have varying degrees of political power, depending on the [[culture|cultural]] [[geography|geographical]], and [[history|historical]] environments that these societies must contend with. Thus, a more isolated society with the same level of technology and culture as other societies is more likely to survive than one in closer proximity to others that may encroach on their resources. A society that is unable to offer an effective response to other competing societies will usually be subsumed into the culture of the more successful, competing society.
*conscious subjective awareness (dissociated, focusing inward on the inner world, or expressing an inner state outwards) (studied e.g. in [[phenomenology]] and general [[psychology]]).
 
*intersubjective awareness (an awareness which occurs in association with other people and is internal to that association) (studied e.g. in [[social psychology]] and [[sociology]]).
 
*objective awareness (dissociated, focusing outward to a world that exists mind-independently, as is developed e.g. in [[science]] to a high level).
 
*reality-transforming awareness (transitions in practical action [[reframing]] the boundaries of different forms of awareness and changing consciousness, or connecting different forms of awareness - occurring in [[employment|work]], [[play]], [[love]], [[activism]], [[politics]] etc.  
 
*transcendent awareness (going beyond personal knowledge or experience - some would include [[Intuition (knowledge)|intuition]] and [[spirituality]] under this heading; it is the subject of much writing in [[religion]] and [[New Age]] thought).
 
  
Corresponding to these levels of human awareness, we could also define different kinds of social relations, i.e. the different ways in which humans might experience the connections among their own kind:
+
One common theme for societies is that they serve to aid individuals in a time of crisis. Traditionally, when an individual requires aid, for example at birth, [[death]], sickness, or disaster, members of that society will rally others to render aid, in some form&mdash;symbolic, linguistic, physical, mental, emotional, financial, medical, or religious. Many societies will distribute largess, at the behest of some individual or some larger group of people. This type of generosity can be seen in all known cultures; typically, prestige accrues to the generous individual or group. Conversely, members of a society may also shun or [[scapegoat]] members of the society who violate its [[Norm (sociology)|norms]]. Mechanisms such as [[gift exchange]] and scapegoating tend to be institutionalized within a society.
  
*subconscious social relations (for example at the level of the [[collective unconscious]] or between [[parents]] and [[children]],
+
Some societies will bestow status on an individual or group of people, when that individual or group performs an admired or desired action. This type of [[recognition]] may be bestowed by members of that society on the individual or group in the form of a name, title, manner of dress, or monetary reward.
*social relations which exist only in subjective awareness or subjective perceptions (a person might act as though a social relation exists),  
+
[[Image:social-network.svg|right|400px|thumb|An example of a simple social network diagram]]
*intersubjective social relations involving shared meanings conveyed through communication,  
 
*objective social relations which exist whether someone is aware of them or not (they might nevertheless be communicated insofar as we communicate with everything we are and do);
 
*social relations in the process of being transformed from one kind into another, or being interrelated with each other;
 
*[[spirituality|spiritual]] or intuitive social relations of some kind.
 
  
As illustration, we can apply the foregoing to the notion of a group.  
+
Social networks are basically maps of the relationships between people. Structural features such as proximity, frequency of contact, and type of relationship (such as relative, friend, colleague) define various social networks.
  
*A person might almost out of [[instinct]] identify with a group or relate to it;
+
Research in a number of academic fields has shown that social networks operate on many levels, from families up to the level of nations, and play a critical role in determining the way problems are solved, organizations are run, and the degree to which individuals succeed in achieving their goals.  
*s/he might imagine being a member of a group, regardless of whether this is really the case;
 
*a group might exist only in the form of intersubjective relations among its members;
 
*a group might exist as an objective description, or as an objective reality, even regardless of whether one was aware of belonging to it;
 
*a group might be forming or dissolving, or both at once, and it might be changing its boundaries of inclusion and exclusion, perhaps overlapping with other groups; 
 
*a group might also exist at the level of a common spiritual affinity or identification (Cf. the notion of a [[noosphere]]).  
 
  
However the group may exist, or be perceived to exist at some level - with the obvious consequences that has for the ''kinds'' of social relations involved - it is clear that understanding different kinds of group relations require different methods of inquiry and [[verification]].
+
[[Georg Simmel]], writing at the turn of the twentieth century, was the first scholar to think directly in social network terms. His essays pointed to the nature of network size on interaction and to the likelihood of interaction in ramified, loosely-knit networks rather than groups. Looking at societies in terms of social networks allows a number of understandings of the way in which a society may function:
  
Precisely ''because'' social relations may be experienced at different levels of awareness, they are not necessarily [[Transparency (humanities)|transparent]] at all. Indeed, [[Karl Marx]] wrote ironically in this respect that "science would be superfluous if the outward appearance and the essence of things directly coincided".
+
:There is no assumption that groups of people must be in physical proximity in order to be the building blocks of society: less-bounded social systems, from nonlocal [[community|communities]] to links among [[Internet]] sites become potential origins of societies.
  
==Social==
+
:Individuals (persons, organizations, states) are not the most important features; the structure of their relationships become more significant.
{{cleanup|October 2006}}
 
Although the term "'''social'''" is a crucial category in [[social science]] and often used in [[public discourse]], its meaning is often vague, suggesting that it is a [[fuzzy concept]]. An added difficulty is that social attributes or relationships may not be directly observable and visible, and must be inferred by abstract thought.  
 
  
Thus the sociologist [[C. Wright Mills]] invented the expression "the [[sociological imagination]]", which referred to the need to think imaginatively beyond what an individual can empirically observe in order to grasp the social domain in all its dimensions - connecting, for example, "private troubles" and "public issues".  
+
:The process of becoming a fully accepted member of a society may not depend on [[socialization]] into a fixed set of [[norm]]s, but rather the structure and composition of relationships among members of the society affect the norms of appropriate behavior.
  
A similar point is made in the context of architecture by Ole Bouman and Roemer van Toorn in their groundbreaking work Invisible in Architecture. General problems concerning the nature of social reality and what (or how) we can know about it are the object of [[social theory]].
+
===Norms===
 +
Social [[norm]]s are rules or standards of behavior shared by members of a social group. A norm is an expectation of how people will behave, and generally it takes the form of a rule that is socially rather than formally enforced. Norms may be internalized—incorporated within the individual so that there is conformity without external rewards or [[punishment]]s, or they may be enforced by positive or negative sanctions from without.  
  
===Some different definitions===
+
There are two schools of thought regarding norms. One view maintains that norms reflect a consensus, a common value system developed through [[socialization]], the process by which an individual learns the [[culture]] of his group. Norms contribute to the functioning of the social system and are said to develop to meet certain assumed “needs” of the system. On the other hand, [[conflict theory]] holds that norms are a mechanism for dealing with recurring social problems. In this view, norms are imposed by one section of a society as a means by which it can dominate and exploit others.  
 
 
In the absence of agreement about its meaning, the term "social" is used in many different senses, referring among other things to:
 
 
 
* [[attitude (psychology)|attitudes]], orientations or behaviours which take the interests, intentions or needs of other people into account (in contrast to [[anti-social]] behaviour);
 
* common characteristics of people or descriptions of collectivities ([[social fact]]s);
 
* relations between people ([[social relations]]) generally, or particular associations among people;
 
* interactions between people ([[social action]]);
 
* membership of a group of people or inclusion or belonging to a [[community]] of people;
 
* [[co-operation]] or co-operative characteristics between people;
 
* relations of (mutual) dependence;
 
* the [[public sector]] ("social sector") or the need for [[governance]] for the good of all, contrasted with the [[private sector]];
 
* in [[existentialist]] and [[postmodernist]] thought, relationships between the [[Self (philosophy)|Self]] and the [[Other]];
 
* interactive systems in communities of [[animal]] or [[insect]] populations, or any living organisms.
 
 
 
In one broad meaning, "social" refers only to [[society]] as "a system of common life", but in another sense it contrasts specifically with "[[individual]]" and [[individualist]] theories of society. This is reflected for instance in the different perspectives of [[liberalism]] and [[socialism]] on society and [[public affairs]].
 
 
 
The adjective "social" implies that the verb or noun to which it is applied is somehow more communicative, cooperative, and moderated by contact with human beings, than if it were omitted. That is, it implies that larger society has played some role in defining the idea or the principle. For instance terms like social realism, social justice, [[social constructivism]], social psychology and social capital imply that there is some social process involved or considered, a process that is not there in regular, "non-social", realism, justice, constructivism, psychology, or capital.
 
 
 
The adjective "social" is also used often in political discourse, although its meaning in such a context depends heavily on who is using it. In left-wing circles it is often used to imply a positive characteristic, while in right-wing circles it is generally used to imply a negative characteristic. It should also be noted that, overall, this adjective is used much more often by those on the political left than by those on the political right.
 
 
 
For these reasons, those seeking to avoid association with the left-right political debates often seek to label their work with phrases that do not include the word "social". An example is quasi-empiricism in mathematics which is sometimes labelled social constructivism by those who see it as an unwarranted intrusion of social considerations in mathematical practice, which is supposed to be "objective" and "above" social concerns.
 
 
 
===Social theorists===
 
 
 
In the view of [[Karl Marx]], human beings are intrinsically, necessarily and by definition social beings who - beyond being "gregarious creatures" - cannot survive and meet their needs other than through social co-operation and association. Their social characteristics are therefore to a large extent an objectively given fact, stamped on them from birth and affirmed by [[socialization]] processes; and, according to Marx, in producing and reproducing their material life, people must necessarily enter into [[relations of production]] which are "independent of their will".  
 
 
 
By contrast, the sociologist [[Max Weber]] for example defines human action as "social" if, by virtue of the subjective [[meanings]] attached to the action by individuals, it "takes account of the behaviour of others, and is thereby oriented in its course". In this case, the "social" domain really exists only in the [[intersubjective]] relations between individuals, but by implication the life of these individuals also exists in part outside the social domain. "Social" is thus implicitly also contrasted with "[[Privacy|private]]".
 
 
 
In the [[positivist]] sociology of [[Emile Durkheim]], a social fact is an abstraction external to the individual which constrains that individual's actions. In his 1895 work ''Rules of Sociological Method'', Durkheim writes: "A social fact is every way of acting, fixed or not, capable of exercising on the individual an influence, or an external constraint; or again, every way of acting which is general throughout a given society, while at the same time existing in its own right independent of its individual manifestations." In Durkheim's view, sociology is 'the science of social facts'.
 
 
 
===Socialism and social democracy===
 
 
 
The term "[[socialism]]", used from the 1830s onwards in France and England, was directly related to what was called the [[social question]], in essence the problem that the emergence of competitive [[market]] societies did not create "liberty, equality and fraternity" for all citizens, requiring the intervention of [[politics]] and [[social reform]] to tackle social problems, injustices and grievances (a topic on which [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] discourses at length in his classic work ''[[The Social Contract]]''). Originally the term "socialist" was often used interchangeably with "[[co-operative]]", "[[mutualist]]", "[[associationist]]" and "[[collectivist]]".
 
 
 
The term [[social democracy]] originally referred to the political project of extending [[democratic]] forms of association to the whole of society, substituting [[popular sovereignty]], the [[universal franchise]] and [[social ownership]] for the rule of a propertied class which had exclusive voting rights.
 
 
 
===Modern uses===
 
 
 
In contemporary society, "social" often refers to the [[redistributive]] policies of the government which aim to apply resources in the [[public interest]], for example, [[social security]]. Policy concerns then include the problems of [[social exclusion]] and [[social cohesion]]. Here, "social" contrasts with "[[Privacy|private]]" and to the distinction between the public and the private (or privatised) spheres, where [[ownership relations]] define access to resources and attention.
 
 
 
The social domain is often also contrasted with that of physical nature, but in [[sociobiology]] analogies are drawn between [[humans]] and other [[living]] species in order to explain [[social behavior]] in terms of [[biology|biological]] factors. The term "social" is also added in various other academic sub-disciplines such as [[social geography]], [[social psychology]], [[social anthropology]], [[social philosophy]], [[social ontology]], [[social statistics]] and [[social choice theory]] in mathematics.
 
  
 +
Norms may take the form of [[custom]]s, the society's web of cultural rituals, [[tradition]]s, and routines. These may not be punished severely. Norms that involve moral judgments that define wrong and right behavior, the allowed and the disallowed, what is wanted and not wanted within a culture—the [[taboo]]—these are more serious. Violation of such norms is usually considered by society as a threat to social organization and harshly sanctioned. Examples of this type include sexual promiscuity, and extreme styles of dress.
  
 +
In highly organized societies, norms are formalized and precisely delimited. Certain types of rules or customs may become [[law]], and regulatory [[legislation]] may be introduced to formalize or enforce the convention (such as laws which determine which side of the [[road]] vehicles must be driven). The breaking of legal norms invokes procedures and judgments through formal, legal institutions, such as [[police]] or the [[court]]s, set up to enforce them. These norms generally relate to individual violations of mores or to the adjustment of proprietary relationships. In a social context, a convention may retain the character of an "unwritten law" of custom (such as the manner in which people greet each other—by shaking each other's hands, bowing, and so forth).
  
 +
In early, non-specialized societies, people pooled their [[labor]] for the production of the necessities for survival. They tended to behave and think alike as they worked to achieve group-oriented goals. When societies became more complex, work became more specialized, and social bonds grew more impersonal as the culture shifted from [[altruism]] to economic where labor was exchanged for [[money]]. Individuals found it difficult to establish their [[social status|status]] and role in society without clear norms to guide them. If conditions changed quickly, say during great prosperity or a great [[depression (economic)|depression]], the social system came under pressure and the erosion of existing norms without clear alternatives led to dissatisfaction, [[conflict]], and deviance.
  
 +
[[Emile Durkheim]] introduced the concept of ''[[anomie]]'' to describe an emerging state of social deregulation, one in which the norms or rules that regulated people's expectations as to how they ought to behave were eroding and so people no longer knew what to expect from one another. This creates a society in which individual desires are no longer regulated by common norms becomes one where individuals are left without moral guidance in the pursuit of their goals, both on the individual level or in service to the society as a whole. In such a situation, the society inevitably fails.
  
 
== Notes ==
 
== Notes ==
 
<div class="references-small">
 
 
<references/>
 
<references/>
</div>
 
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==
 +
*Aurobindo, Sri. ''Social and Political Thought''. Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1970. {{ASIN|B00T12PHRO}}
 +
*Durkheim, Emile. ''The Division of Labor in Society''. The Free Press, 1997. ISBN 0684836386
 +
*Durkheim, Emile. ''Rules of Sociological Method''. The Free Press,  1982. ISBN 0029079403
 +
*Jenkins, Richard. ''Foundations of Sociology''. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2002. ISBN 0333960505
 +
*Mead, Margaret, and Ken Heyman. ''Family''. New York, NY: Macmillan, 1965. ISBN 0025836900
 +
*Nolan, Patrick, and Gerhard Lenski. ''Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology''. Oxford University Press, 2014. ISBN 978-0199382453
 +
*Rambo, A. Terry and Kathleen Gillogly (eds.). ''Profiles in Cultural Evolution''. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1991. ISBN 978-0915703234
 +
*Simmel, Georg. ''Sociology: Investigations on the Forms of Sociation''. 1908.
 +
*Smith, Anthony D. ''The Ethnic Origins of Nations''. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1988. ISBN 0631161694
 +
*Tönnies, Ferdinand. ''Community and Civil Society''. Cambridge University Press, 2001. ISBN 0521561191
 +
*Tylor, Edward B. ''Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, language, art, and custom''. Gordon Press, 1976. ISBN 087968464X
 +
*United Grand Lodge of England. ''Constitutions of the Antient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons''. Forgotten Books, 2017. ISBN 978-1330365311
 +
*Weber, Max. ''Economy and Society''. University of California Press, 1978. ISBN 978-0520035003
  
* [http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/society Definition of Society] from the [[Oxford English Dictionary|OED]].
+
{{Credits|Society|112029159|Social|110564069|}}
* [http://core.ecu.edu/soci/juskaa/SOCI2110/Lectures/Lect1 Lecture notes on "Defining Society"] from East Carolina University.
 
* [http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vcwsu/commons/topics/culture/glossary/society.html Learning Commons - What is Culture ? - Glossary Item - Society]
 
* Effland, R. 1998. [http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/dept/d10/asb/anthro2003/glues/model_complex.html The Cultural Evolution of Civilizations] Mesa Community College.
 
* Jenkins, R. 2002. ''Foundations of Sociology.'' London: Palgrave MacMillan. ISBN 0-333-96050-5.
 
* Lenski, G. 1974. ''Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology.'' New York: McGraw- Hill, Inc.
 
* Raymond Williams, "Society", in: Williams, Key Words: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Fontana, 1976.
 
 
 
 
 
* [[Dick Houtman]], ''Class and Politics in Contemporary Social Science: Marxism Lite and Its Blind Spot for Culture''
 
* [[Benedict Anderson]], ''Imagined Communities''
 
* [[Karl Marx]], ''The German Ideology''
 
* [[Karl Popper]], ''The Open Society and its Enemies''
 
* [[Frank Furedi]], ''Where have all the intellectuals gone?''
 
* [[Piotr Sztompka]], ''Socjologia''
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
{{Credits|Society|112029159|Social_relation|109314136|Social|110564069|}}
 

Latest revision as of 19:52, 8 November 2022


A social network diagram

A society is a grouping of individuals, which is characterized by common interest and may have distinctive culture and institutions. A "society" may refer to a particular ethnic group, such as the Nuer, to a nation state, such as Switzerland, or to a broader cultural group, such as Western society. An organized group of people associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes may also be considered a society.

Human beings are essentially social creatures, with the desire and need to be in close contact with others. Beginning with the family, human life is one of interdependence and sharing of physical, mental, and spiritual items. While conflict both within and between societies has been the dominant feature of human history, all societies strive to maintain harmony within (to ensure the happiness and safety of their members) and, at least in more recent times, many now seek harmony among diverse societies in efforts to establish a world of peace and prosperity for all.

Origin and usage

Did you know?
The term "society" is from the Latin "societas" which can be translated as "a friendly association with others"

The term society emerged in the fifteenth century and is derived from the French société. The French word, in turn, had its origin in the Latin societas, "a friendly association with others," from socius meaning "companion, associate, comrade or business partner." Essential in the meaning of society is that its members share some mutual concern or interest, a common objective or common characteristics, often a common culture.

Society and culture are similar concepts, but their scopes are different. A society is an interdependent community, while culture is an attribute of a community: the complex web of shifting patterns that link individuals together. For example, Clifford Geertz suggested that "society" is the actual arrangement of social relations while "culture" consists of beliefs and symbolic forms. Edward Burnett Tylor wrote in 1871 that "culture or civilization, taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society."

In the study of social sciences "society" has been used to mean a group of people that form a semi-closed social system, in which most interactions are with other individuals belonging to the group. According to sociologist Richard Jenkins, the term addresses a number of important existential issues facing people:

  1. How humans think and exchange information. The sensory world makes up only a fraction of human experience, so in order to understand the world, we have to conceive of human interaction in the abstract, namely society.
  2. Many phenomena cannot be reduced to individual behavior. In order to explain certain conditions, a view of something "greater than the sum of its parts" is needed.
  3. Collectives often endure beyond the lifespan of individual members.
  4. The human condition has always meant going beyond the evidence of our senses. In other words, every aspect of our lives is tied to the collective sense.[1]

In political science, "society" is often used to mean the totality of human relationships, generally in contrast to the State, the apparatus of rule or government within a territory:

I mean by it [the State] that summation of privileges and dominating positions which are brought into being by extra-economic power…I mean by Society, the totality of concepts of all purely natural relations and institutions between man and man…—Franz Oppenheimer|[2]

It should be noted, however, that some theorists, particularly Marxists, have argued that there is no entity that we could call "society." The concept of a society as the sum total of social relations among members of a community contrasts with the perspective where society is simply the sum total of individuals in a territory, having no independent existence or characteristics beyond that which can be described on another level.

In the view of Karl Marx, human beings are intrinsically, necessarily, and by definition social beings who—beyond being "gregarious creatures"—cannot survive and meet their needs other than through social co-operation and association. Their social characteristics are therefore to a large extent an objectively given fact, stamped on them from birth and affirmed by socialization processes; and, according to Marx, in producing and reproducing their material life, people must necessarily enter into relations of production which are "independent of their will."

By contrast, the sociologist Max Weber defined human action as "social" if, by virtue of the subjective meanings attached to the action by individuals, it "takes account the behavior of others, and is thereby oriented in its course." In this case, the "social" domain really exists only in the intersubjective relations between individuals, but by implication the life of these individuals also exists in part outside the social domain. "Social" is thus implicitly also contrasted with "private."

In the positivist sociology of Emile Durkheim, a social fact is an abstraction external to the individual which constrains that individual's actions. In his 1895 work Rules of Sociological Method, Durkheim wrote:

A social fact is every way of acting, fixed or not, capable of exercising on the individual an influence, or an external constraint; or again, every way of acting which is general throughout a given society, while at the same time existing in its own right independent of its individual manifestations.

Durkheim gave a non-individualistic explanation of social facts arguing that social phenomena arise when interacting individuals constitute a reality that can no longer be accounted for in terms of the properties of individual actors. He distinguished between a traditional society–"mechanical solidarity"–which prevails if individual differences are minimized, and the modern society-"organic solidarity"–that develops out of cooperation between differentiated individuals with independent roles. In Durkheim's view, sociology as the study of society and human social interaction is "the science of social facts."

Types of societies

Social scientists differentiate societies based on a variety of factors. Gerhard Lenski, a sociologist, differentiates societies into six levels based on their level of technology, communication, and economy: (1) hunters and gatherers, (2) simple horticultural, (3) advanced horticultural, (4) simple agrarian, (5) advanced agrarian, and (6) industrial.[3] This is somewhat similar to the system earlier developed by anthropologists Morton H. Fried, a conflict theorist, and Elman Service, an integration theorist, who produced a system of classification for societies in all human cultures based on the evolution of social inequality and the role of the state. This system of classification contains four categories:

  • Hunter-gatherer bands, which are generally egalitarian.
  • Tribal societies, in which there are some limited instances of social rank and prestige.
  • Chiefdoms, stratified structures led by chieftains.
  • Civilizations, with complex social hierarchies and organized, institutional governments.
Extended family in South Africa

Societies consist minimally of a large extended family, and generally as groups of families connected either by kinship or by geopolitical factors (location, resources, common enemies, and so forth). Over time, some cultures progressed toward more complex forms of organization and control. This cultural evolution has a profound effect on patterns of community. Hunter-gatherer tribes settled around seasonal food supplies eventually become agrarian villages. Villages grew to become towns and cities. Cities turned into city-states and nation-states. Ultimately, there is the level of all humanity, humankind.

The fundamental unit of human society is the family. Margaret Mead, based on her anthropological research, affirmed the centrality of the family in human society:

As far back as our knowledge takes us, human beings have lived in families. We know of no period where this was not so. We know of no people who have succeeded for long in dissolving the family or displacing it ... Again and again, in spite of proposals for change and actual experiments, human societies have reaffirmed their dependence on the family as the basic unit of human living—the family of father, mother and children.[4]

Band

A band society is the simplest form of human society. A band generally consists of a small kinship group, often no larger than an extended family or small clan. Bands have very informal leadership; the older members of the band generally are looked to for guidance and advice, but there are none of the written laws and law enforcement like that seen in more complex societies. Band customs are almost always transmitted orally. Formal social institutions are few or non-existent. Religion is generally based on family tradition, individual experience, or counsel from a shaman. Bands are distinguished from tribes in that tribes are generally larger, consisting of many families. Tribes have more social institutions and clearly defined leadership such as a "chief," or "elder." Tribes are also more permanent than bands; a band can cease to exist if only a small group walks out. Many tribes are in fact sub-divided into bands, in the United States, for example, many Native American tribes are made up of official bands living in specific locations.

Clan

A clan is a group of people united by kinship and descent, which is defined by perceived descent from a common ancestor. Even if actual lineage patterns are unknown, clan members nonetheless recognize a founding member or "apical ancestor." As kinship based bonds can be merely symbolic in nature some clans share a "stipulated" common ancestor, which is a symbol of the clan's unity. When this ancestor is not human, this is referred to a totem. Generally speaking, kinship differs from biological relation, as it also involves adoption, marriage, and fictive genealogical ties. Clans can be most easily described as sub-groups of tribes and usually constitute groups of seven to ten thousand people.

Tribe

A tribe, viewed historically or developmentally, consists of a social group existing before the development of, or outside of, states, though some modern theorists hold that "contemporary" tribes can only be understood in terms of their relationship to states. The term is often loosely used to refer to any non-Western or indigenous society.

In common understanding the word "tribe" is a social division within a traditional society consisting of a group of interlinked families or communities sharing a common culture and dialect. In the contemporary western mind the modern tribe is typically associated with a seat of traditional authority (tribal leader) with whom the representatives of external powers (the governing state or occupying government) interact.

For various reasons, the term "tribe" fell into disfavor in the latter part of the twentieth century. For many anthropologists, when the term was clearly defined it became an "ideal" concept, with no basis in reality. Thus, it was replaced with the designation "ethnic group," which defines a group of people of common ancestry and language, shared cultural history, and an identifiable territory. Nevertheless, the term tribe is still in common use and the term used for recognized Native American governments in the United States.

Ethnic group

An ethnic group is a human population whose members identify with each other, usually on the basis of a presumed common genealogy or lineage. Ethnic groups are also usually united by common cultural, behavioral, linguistic, or religious practices.[5] In this sense, an ethnic group is also a cultural community. This term is preferred over tribe, as it overcame the negative connotations that the term tribe had acquired under colonialism.

Chiefdom

A chiefdom is any community led by an individual known as a chief. In anthropological theory, one model of human social development describes a chiefdom as a form of social organization more complex than a tribe, and less complex than a state or a civilization. The most succinct (but still working) definition of a chiefdom in anthropology belongs to Robert Carneiro: "An autonomous political unit comprising a number of villages or communities under the permanent control of a paramount chief."[6] Chiefdoms have been shown by anthropologists and archaeologists to be a relatively unstable form of social organization. They are prone to cycles of collapse and renewal, in which tribal units band together, expand in power, fragment through some form of social stress, and band together again.

An example of this kind of social organization would be the Germanic Peoples who conquered the western Roman Empire in the fifth century C.E. Although commonly referred to as tribes, the Germanic Peoples were by anthropological definition not tribes, but chiefdoms. They had a complex social hierarchy consisting of kings, a warrior aristocracy, common freemen, serfs, and slaves.

Chiefdoms are characterized by pervasive inequality of peoples and centralization of authority. At least two inherited social classes (elite and commoner) are present, although social class can often be changed by extraordinary behavior during an individual's life. A single lineage/family of the elite class will be the ruling elite of the chiefdom, with the greatest influence, power, and prestige. Kinship is typically an organizing principle, while marriage, age, and gender can affect one's social status and role.

State

A state is a political association with effective dominion over a geographic area. It usually includes the set of institutions that claim the authority to make the rules that govern the people of the society in that territory, though its status as a state often depends in part on being recognized by a number of other states as having internal and external sovereignty over it. In sociology, the state is normally identified with these institutions: in Max Weber's influential definition, it is that organization that has a "monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory," which may include the armed forces, civil service, or state bureaucracy, courts, and police.

A city-state is a region controlled exclusively by a city, usually having sovereignty. Historically, city-states have often been part of larger cultural areas, as in the city-states of ancient Greece (such as Athens, Sparta and Corinth), the central Asian cities along the Silk Road (which included Samarkand and Bukhara), or the city-states of Northern Italy (especially Florence and Venice). Among the most creative periods in human history are those in which humanity organized itself in small independent centers. However, these small creative groupings usually survived for only short periods of time because they lacked the size and strength to defend themselves against the onslaught of larger social entities. Thus, they inevitably gave way to larger organizations of society, the empire and eventually the nation-state.[7] Today, only Singapore, Monaco, and Vatican City arguably remain autonomous city-states.

The modern nation-state is larger and more populous than the city-states of ancient Greece or Medieval Europe. Those states were governed through face-to-face relationships of people that often lived within the walls of the city. The nation-state also differs from an empire, which is usually an expansive territory comprising numerous states and many nationalities which is united by political and military power, and a common currency. The language of an empire is often not the mother tongue of most of its inhabitants.

There are two directions for the formation of a nation-state. The first—and more peaceful way—is for responsible people living in a territory to organize a common government for the nation-state they will create. The second, and more violent and oppressive method—is for a ruler or army to conquer a territory and impose its will on the people it rules.

The modern nation-state is relatively new to human history, emerging after the Renaissance and Reformation. It was given impetus by the throwing off of kings (for example, in the Netherlands and the United States) and the rise of efficient state bureaucracies that could govern large groups of people impersonally. Frederick the Great in Germany is frequently cited as one of the originators of modern state bureaucracy. It is based on the idea that the state can treat large numbers of people equally by efficient application of the law through the bureaucratic machinery of the state.

Characteristics of society

The following components are common to all definitions of society:

  • Criteria for membership, related to purpose or common goal
  • Characteristic patterns of organization, defining relationships among members
  • Social norms of acceptable behavior within the society

Criteria for membership

Generally the members of a society have a shared belief or common goal that binds them together. On the most basic level, that of a family or extended family, they share a common blood lineage. Some larger social groups, such as clans and ethnic groups also share a common lineage, although the connections may be more distant.

Ferdinand Tönnies argued that social groups can exist as personal and direct social ties that either link individuals who share values and belief (gemeinschaft) or impersonal, formal and instrumental social links (gesellschaft). In reality, though, all societies contain some elements of both types.

There are also "secret societies," organizations that conceal their activities and membership from outsiders. The term "secret society" is also often used by the general public to describe a wide range of organizations, including college fraternities and fraternal organizations that may have non-public ceremonies. Freemasonry has often been called a "secret society" although Freemasons themselves argue that it is more correct to say that it is an esoteric society, in that certain aspects are private.[8]

The most common phrasing being that Freemasonry has, in the twenty-first century, become less a secret society and more of a "society with secrets."[9]

Some academic, learned, and scholarly associations describe themselves as "societies" (for example, the American Society of Mathematics. More commonly, professional organizations often refer to themselves as societies (for example, the American Society of Civil Engineers or the American Chemical Society). In the United Kingdom and the United States, learned societies are normally nonprofit and have charitable status. In science, they range in size to include national scientific societies (such as the Royal Society) to regional natural history societies. Academic societies may have interest in a wide range of subjects, including the arts, humanities, and science.

Peoples of many nations united by common political and cultural traditions, beliefs, or values may be said to be a society (such as Judeo-Christian, Eastern, and Western). When used in this context, the term is employed as a means of contrasting two or more "societies" whose members represent alternative conflicting and competing worldviews.

Organization

Human societies are often organized according to their primary means of subsistence. As noted above, social scientists identify hunter-gatherer societies, nomadic pastoral societies, horticulturalist or simple farming societies, and intensive agricultural societies, also called civilizations. Some consider industrial and post-industrial societies to be qualitatively different from traditional agricultural societies.

Societies may also be organized according to their political structure. In order of increasing size and complexity, there are bands, tribes or ethnic groups, chiefdoms, and state societies. These structures may have varying degrees of political power, depending on the cultural geographical, and historical environments that these societies must contend with. Thus, a more isolated society with the same level of technology and culture as other societies is more likely to survive than one in closer proximity to others that may encroach on their resources. A society that is unable to offer an effective response to other competing societies will usually be subsumed into the culture of the more successful, competing society.

One common theme for societies is that they serve to aid individuals in a time of crisis. Traditionally, when an individual requires aid, for example at birth, death, sickness, or disaster, members of that society will rally others to render aid, in some form—symbolic, linguistic, physical, mental, emotional, financial, medical, or religious. Many societies will distribute largess, at the behest of some individual or some larger group of people. This type of generosity can be seen in all known cultures; typically, prestige accrues to the generous individual or group. Conversely, members of a society may also shun or scapegoat members of the society who violate its norms. Mechanisms such as gift exchange and scapegoating tend to be institutionalized within a society.

Some societies will bestow status on an individual or group of people, when that individual or group performs an admired or desired action. This type of recognition may be bestowed by members of that society on the individual or group in the form of a name, title, manner of dress, or monetary reward.

An example of a simple social network diagram

Social networks are basically maps of the relationships between people. Structural features such as proximity, frequency of contact, and type of relationship (such as relative, friend, colleague) define various social networks.

Research in a number of academic fields has shown that social networks operate on many levels, from families up to the level of nations, and play a critical role in determining the way problems are solved, organizations are run, and the degree to which individuals succeed in achieving their goals.

Georg Simmel, writing at the turn of the twentieth century, was the first scholar to think directly in social network terms. His essays pointed to the nature of network size on interaction and to the likelihood of interaction in ramified, loosely-knit networks rather than groups. Looking at societies in terms of social networks allows a number of understandings of the way in which a society may function:

There is no assumption that groups of people must be in physical proximity in order to be the building blocks of society: less-bounded social systems, from nonlocal communities to links among Internet sites become potential origins of societies.
Individuals (persons, organizations, states) are not the most important features; the structure of their relationships become more significant.
The process of becoming a fully accepted member of a society may not depend on socialization into a fixed set of norms, but rather the structure and composition of relationships among members of the society affect the norms of appropriate behavior.

Norms

Social norms are rules or standards of behavior shared by members of a social group. A norm is an expectation of how people will behave, and generally it takes the form of a rule that is socially rather than formally enforced. Norms may be internalized—incorporated within the individual so that there is conformity without external rewards or punishments, or they may be enforced by positive or negative sanctions from without.

There are two schools of thought regarding norms. One view maintains that norms reflect a consensus, a common value system developed through socialization, the process by which an individual learns the culture of his group. Norms contribute to the functioning of the social system and are said to develop to meet certain assumed “needs” of the system. On the other hand, conflict theory holds that norms are a mechanism for dealing with recurring social problems. In this view, norms are imposed by one section of a society as a means by which it can dominate and exploit others.

Norms may take the form of customs, the society's web of cultural rituals, traditions, and routines. These may not be punished severely. Norms that involve moral judgments that define wrong and right behavior, the allowed and the disallowed, what is wanted and not wanted within a culture—the taboo—these are more serious. Violation of such norms is usually considered by society as a threat to social organization and harshly sanctioned. Examples of this type include sexual promiscuity, and extreme styles of dress.

In highly organized societies, norms are formalized and precisely delimited. Certain types of rules or customs may become law, and regulatory legislation may be introduced to formalize or enforce the convention (such as laws which determine which side of the road vehicles must be driven). The breaking of legal norms invokes procedures and judgments through formal, legal institutions, such as police or the courts, set up to enforce them. These norms generally relate to individual violations of mores or to the adjustment of proprietary relationships. In a social context, a convention may retain the character of an "unwritten law" of custom (such as the manner in which people greet each other—by shaking each other's hands, bowing, and so forth).

In early, non-specialized societies, people pooled their labor for the production of the necessities for survival. They tended to behave and think alike as they worked to achieve group-oriented goals. When societies became more complex, work became more specialized, and social bonds grew more impersonal as the culture shifted from altruism to economic where labor was exchanged for money. Individuals found it difficult to establish their status and role in society without clear norms to guide them. If conditions changed quickly, say during great prosperity or a great depression, the social system came under pressure and the erosion of existing norms without clear alternatives led to dissatisfaction, conflict, and deviance.

Emile Durkheim introduced the concept of anomie to describe an emerging state of social deregulation, one in which the norms or rules that regulated people's expectations as to how they ought to behave were eroding and so people no longer knew what to expect from one another. This creates a society in which individual desires are no longer regulated by common norms becomes one where individuals are left without moral guidance in the pursuit of their goals, both on the individual level or in service to the society as a whole. In such a situation, the society inevitably fails.

Notes

  1. Richard Jenkins, Foundations of Sociology (London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2002, ISBN 0333960505).
  2. Franz Oppenheimer, The State 1922. Retrieved November 8, 2022.
  3. Patrick Nolan and Gerhard Lenski, Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology (Oxford University Press, 2014, ISBN 978-0199382453).
  4. Margaret Mead and Ken Heyman, Family (New York, NY: Macmillan, 1965, ISBN 0025836900), 77-78.
  5. Anthony D. Smith, The Ethnic Origins of Nations (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1988, ISBN 0631161694).
  6. Robert L. Carneiro, "The Nature of the Chiefdom as Revealed by Evidence from the Cauca Valley of Colombia" in A. Terry Rambo and Kathleen Gillogly (eds.), Profiles in Cultural Evolution (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1991, ISBN 978-0915703234).
  7. Sri Aurobindo, "Ideal of Human Unity" in Social and Political Thought (Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1970).
  8. United Grand Lodge of England, Constitutions of the Antient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons (Forgotten Books, 2017, ISBN 978-1330365311).
  9. Reynold S. Davenport, Freemasonry Revealed: The Secrets of Freemasonry Grand Lodge of North Carolina, 1980. Retrieved November 8, 2022.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Aurobindo, Sri. Social and Political Thought. Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1970. ASIN B00T12PHRO
  • Durkheim, Emile. The Division of Labor in Society. The Free Press, 1997. ISBN 0684836386
  • Durkheim, Emile. Rules of Sociological Method. The Free Press, 1982. ISBN 0029079403
  • Jenkins, Richard. Foundations of Sociology. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2002. ISBN 0333960505
  • Mead, Margaret, and Ken Heyman. Family. New York, NY: Macmillan, 1965. ISBN 0025836900
  • Nolan, Patrick, and Gerhard Lenski. Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology. Oxford University Press, 2014. ISBN 978-0199382453
  • Rambo, A. Terry and Kathleen Gillogly (eds.). Profiles in Cultural Evolution. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1991. ISBN 978-0915703234
  • Simmel, Georg. Sociology: Investigations on the Forms of Sociation. 1908.
  • Smith, Anthony D. The Ethnic Origins of Nations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1988. ISBN 0631161694
  • Tönnies, Ferdinand. Community and Civil Society. Cambridge University Press, 2001. ISBN 0521561191
  • Tylor, Edward B. Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, language, art, and custom. Gordon Press, 1976. ISBN 087968464X
  • United Grand Lodge of England. Constitutions of the Antient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons. Forgotten Books, 2017. ISBN 978-1330365311
  • Weber, Max. Economy and Society. University of California Press, 1978. ISBN 978-0520035003

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.