Sociology Essays Risk Society Theory

Sociology Essays Risk Society Theory Risk Society Theory What are the main features of Ulrich Beck’s ‘Risk Society’ theory? To what extent does it challenge the explanations of inequality based upon class, gender and race? This essay will give brief context to the term coined by Ulrich Beck (1992), ‘risk society’, before it discusses the main characteristics of Beck’s theory; risk, individualisation and reflexive modernity, characteristics that all intertwine with one another. Demonstrates a realist approach to risk, throughout some of his writings however he demonstrates a weak version f social constructionalizm. (lupton) â€Å"Society is increasingly preoccupied with the future (and also with safety), which generates the notion of risk† (Giddens 1999: 3). Ulrich Beck (1992) coined the term ‘risk society’, which is used to describe the type of risks that have primarily been created as a result of the industrialisation and modernisation processes. Beck (1992) examined the hazards of pre-industrial society to see whether they are just as damaging as the risks that we are facing in modernity. He concludes that we are not progressing towards a post-modern society as Baudrillard and Lyotard argue, but instead we are moving into an era that he calls ‘the second modernity’. He continues to say that ‘manufactured risks’ (Giddens, 1999), which are products of human activity, have possibly become more ‘deadlier,’ than the epidemics which plagued our society in the pre-modern epoch. However it is Elliot (2002) who states that Beck is not implying that we now live in a more hazardous society, but that he acknowledges the types of risks in society have altered. Beck et al (2003) states that modernity has not been replaced but that it has become more problematic. Beck (1992) however is not as pessimistic as other theorists such as Weber, Foucault or Adorno; he states that for society to evolve then modernisation must become ‘reflexive’. Therefore introducing ‘Reflexive modernity’ as a central feature of Beck’s ‘risk theory’, which is a process whereby development is attained through reform. At this point questions begin to arise because the concepts of post-modernity and reflexive modernity tend to overlap and thus it is necessary to explain the differences between postmodernism and second-modernity. Although post-modernity and second-modernity share some similarities, they have one clear distinction; second-modernity is focused more on evolutionary advances, thus reforming the society; rather than the radical idea that postmodernist put forward, the idea of revolution. ‘Risk’ itself, Beck argues has become increasingly central to our global society: â€Å"Indeed, in a world that could literally destroy itself, risk managing and risk monitoring increasingly influence both constitutions and calculations of social action† (Elliot, 2002: 8) He, like most of society uses the term ‘risk’ as a synonym for danger, a danger that is caused through the need of ‘controlling’ certain aspects of society, in aid of heightening social security (Elliot, 2002). However Beck (1999) had previously stated that ‘ultimate security’ is unattainable to human beings. This ‘new risk’ according to Beck differs from the ‘risk’ experience by pre-modern society; instead of ‘risk’ being generated by natural disasters, which were seen as a ‘stoke of fate’, it has derived through the evolution of technology, and individual choice. The latter is seen as crucial to Beck’s debate, as it â€Å"is societal intervention, in the form of decision-making that transforms incalculable hazards into calculable risks† (Elliot, 2002: 3) thus Beck’s theory of risk society has become a political debate. For Beck the â€Å"production of risk has become more important than the production of wealth† (Albrow, 1996: 9). Here Beck introduces another key element to his debate, the idea of ‘globalisation’. He argues that the risk of nuclear radiation, many modern technologies, the greater mobility of diseases, global warming, and invasive species affects everyone, globally. Supported by Elliot (2002) who points out; that Beck mention even; the rich and powerful are unable to avoid hazards such as global warming. Thus creating what Beck (1992) describes as the ‘boomerang effect’, which simple means that even those who produced or once profited from certain risks, will sooner or later be effected by them, thus, in effect, eliminating the element of class inequalities. Bringing the essay back to a more political content; class, race and gender have conventionally been seen as the main political conflicts within society; however Beck argues that this has been replaced with ‘new globalising conflicts’ (Elliot, 2002: 11). This universal theory that Beck has created states that no one is safe from the harmful risk that new-modernity predicted, it has emerged on a global scale, making boundaries seem irrelevant, and for Beck this global scale was a by-product of ‘reflexive modernisation’. Thus seen as a positive step forward on dissolving social inequalities, however with globalisation occurring, and the blurring of boundaries it led to social agents becoming more individualised. In pre-modern society it was stated that our lives were pre-destined, based on the chances given at birth. However under the notion of Beck’s ‘risk society’, he argues that society is reshaping its social structure and thus creating more individualised social agents, as he concludes: â€Å"individuals must then, free of these structures, reflexivity construct their own biographies†(Beck, 1992: 3), making individualisation another main feature of Beck’s theory. Individualisation, as Lupton mentions is the ‘private side of globalisation’ (2002: 83). Individualisation was seen as a positive step forward into post-modernity. However it is Elliot (2002) who states that individualisation itself has become problematic because what may be seen as beneficial to individuals today, can become problematic tomorrow. This is supported by advance technology being able to test the genetic health of the unborn, seen as a positive advancement, however it was argued by Beck and Beck-Gernsheim that it became problematic for the parents, as they saw it as a compulsory to use ‘such technologies’ in order to give their offspring the best possible start in life (1995). Individualisation leads to an increasing demand upon individuals, as well as increasing choice, especially as there has been a breakdown of traditional certainties that were originally structured through age, gender and social class, enabling society to be set free from the social forms of industrial society. Generating more risk including â€Å"unemployment or underemployment, marital instability and family breakdown, accompanied by high levels of anxiety and insecurity.† (pg 85). Therefore beginning to answer the second part of this question ‘†¦to what extent does it challenge the explanations of inequalities†¦?’ Inequality within society has always been a widely controversial issue; for Beck it is part of every day society, and thus is a feature for his theory of risk. As questions have been raised such as; are certain types/groups of people more affected by these ‘new risks’? Does that differ from the inequality found in pre-modernity? Beck does state that certain groups of people are affected more than others by the distribution and growth of risk. However ‘risk’ has not surpassed problems of inequality and distribution of goods, it has intensified them. For Marxist theoreticians the situation has became ambivalent; on the one hand income inequalities have remained unaltered, however the importance of the social class system seems to have been significantly reduced. He spoke of a new kind of capitalism; ‘capitalism without class,’ focusing more on the capitalism of the individual, the result is the problems of the system have lessened politically and transformed into a ‘novel of personal experimentation’ (Elliot, 2002: 7) allowing the ‘risk’ personal failure. Gender, Beck (1992) argued has also altered within society, there has been a breakdown of the strict stereotypical ideologies. This is primarily reflected through the increasing acceptance of divorce within society, which Beck argues is the ‘trap door’ through which women fall into ‘new poverty’ as their support and in essence stability is being reduced, and as a result; ‘risk’ has become part of ‘family life’. Equality therefore, is challenged by ‘risk’ because as a result of more decision making within the family, there has become more of a need for the correct balance of their desires of autonomy and self-expression, with their need for dependence and emotional stability that is established through the dependence of a secure relationship. For Beck refers to the ‘omni-dimensional’ (1992: 103) inequality of genders; arguing that the ‘epochal changes’ that we have encountered regarding law and education, are more apparent ‘on paper’ than the behaviour and beliefs of society, and rather than increasing equality, the paradoxical effect has intensified inequalities, with that new ‘personal risks’, like that of the insecurities related to employment and economy within new modernity. Individualization is therefore burdened with risk (ibid.).With the breakdown of many of the traditional certainties structured through age, gender and social class, a plurality of new risks are generated, including unemployment or underemployment, marital instability and family breakdown, accompanied by high levels of anxiety and insecurity. Life becomes less certain even while it is placed more under one’s control. This move towards individualization does not mean that social inequalities or structuring of opportunities through such attributes asclass, gender or ethnicity have disappeared. Rather, in the face of individualization the influence of these structures have become less obvious and acknowledged as affecting life chances. Inequalities have become primarily viewed as individualized, perceived as ‘psychological dispositions: as personal inadequacies, guilt feelings, anxieties, conflicts, and neuroses’ (Beck 1992b:100).

Graduation Speech: Prime Time :: Graduation Speech, Commencement Address

The age of reality TV has arrived. There's a different show on every night of the week. And I hate to admit it, but once you get started on a series, it becomes pretty addictive. They should have a disclaimer when they roll the credits or something. Now don't deny it, I know you've all fallen into the trap, too. You promise yourself you're only going to watch for ten minutes to see what all the craze is about, and 45 minutes later you're still watching, but wondering why you just wasted your time. That happened to me when "Married By America" came out. I honestly think that was one of the worst reality shows yet! I didn't watch it religiously, but there were a few episodes that I got suckered into. So which show is your favorite? Let's take a look at our TV Guide. ... It's Monday night. You just got home from practice and finished dinner. It's 8:00, so... naturally you turn on the TV to channel 5, because it's time for "Fear Factor." We all could have been on an episode of "Fear Factor." Four years ago we entered these halls as fearful freshmen. What were we afraid of? The typical rumors: getting stuffed in a trash can or taped to the flagpole, or maybe getting lost in this huge campus, which we could now find our way around blindfolded. From watching "Fear Factor," we've learned that eating maggots and sheep eyeballs on a pizza won't kill you. Apparently, living off of cafeteria food for four years won't kill you either. We've been fearful of finals and failing our CE's, but we made it. All of us here tonight have conquered those fears. Hey, we may not walk away with $50,000, but hopefully a diploma will get us where we want to go. So it's Tuesday night and you just finished your homework. You need to relax, so you flip the TV on to channel 13 just in time to catch "American Idol." You listen to the music and wait for your favorite budding rock star to perform. When the show is over, you cast your vote along with 24 million other Americans who want their own voice to be heard. Now there's a lesson here for all of us, Grads. It would seem that the American population gets more excited about voting after watching an hour of "American Idol" than they do about voting for President.

Buddhism& Religion

These were the lines the Buddha was believed to have said before he passed away at 80 years old (Boeree, 1999) after founding a way of thinking that would become one of the world’s biggest religions. Prince Siddhartha had everything in life: a loving family and riches beyond imagining. However, in spite of such abundance, Siddhartha had a lingering discontent. As Hesse (trans. Rosner, 1971) wrote in is his book, â€Å"†¦He still lacked all joy in his heart. Dreams and restless thoughts came into his mind†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Such restlessness compelled him to leave the comforts and safety of his kingdom to search for life’s purpose.Thus began Prince Siddhartha’s journey to enlightenment. After achieving the awakening that he desired, Siddhartha called himself Buddha or the Enlightened One, whose teachings became the foundations of Buddhism. WHAT I LIKE ABOUT BUDDHISM I can honestly say that my previous knowledge of Buddhism was limited to what I witnessed in the m usical The King and I, which isn’t much if you have seen it. So reading about this particular religion was really fascinating and an eye-opener as well. As I learned more about Buddhism, I realized it is not an organized religion; more of a way of thinking.As Keown (1996) once said, â€Å"Problems of the kind just mentioned confront us as soon as we try to define what Buddhism is. Is it a religion? A philosophy? A way of life? A code of ethics? It is not easy to classify Buddhism as any of these things, and it challenges us to rethink some of these categories. † Indeed, it is not for us to classify or label Buddhism, or any other philosophy for that matter. I suppose it should just be taken for the way it is and for the ideas that is espouses. In Buddhism, you are welcome to come and leave as you wish.The path of Buddha is a simple, ethical life, and awareness of thoughts and actions, that leads to wisdom and understanding. Buddhists pay respect to Buddha not to worshi p him; but to thank him for showing them the path to enlightenment. A major aspect of Buddhism is meditation. Buddhists believe that by going into your own thoughts, you cleanse and purify your soul. Meditation, while relaxing the body, sharply focuses the mind, thus enabling us to purge negative energy and achieve clarity of thought. Meditation is a keystone in Buddhism; without which one cannot achieve the awakening that they are looking for.For Buddhists the mediation technique can calm them, but it does not lead entirely away from all of our sufferings. There are a number of different approaches to Buddhism meditation. Meditation as keystone of meditation came from the fact that Buddha himself attained enlightenment during a long period of mediation. The first approach is samatha or calm meditation. The idea here is to calm the body and mind and bring one’s self into a state of perfect concentration. To attain this, breathing is very important; there has to be consciousne ss of one’s breath as it drifts in and out of the body.To the Buddhists, concentrating this way leaves no room for disruptive mental thoughts, known as the five hindrances: sensual desire, ill-will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and work, and skeptical doubt. When all these disruptions have been removed, this kind of calm meditation leads to a blissful state known as jhanas. But regardless of the benefits that calm meditation offers, it does not provide a complete pathway to enlightenment. Many Buddhists merge the calm meditation with or insight meditation. This type of meditation is intended for developing within us awareness of the world as it really is.It asks us to be aware of what we are doing at the precise moment we are doing it. Some people call this process metacognition, or awareness of our awareness. I have been practicing meditation for some months now. And studying Buddhism, I am able to appreciate the process even more. It is amazing how I find so much peace ju st by closing my eyes and be aware of every breath that I take. I agree with the Buddhists, meditation definitely brings inner peace and contentment. It renews the spirit and gives me the strength to cope with life’s uncertainties.WHAT I DON’T LIKE ABOUT BUDDHISM It’s hard to think of something that I would like to change about Buddhism. It has withstood the test of time, and deserves respect for that. Religion, if Buddhism is one of them, is one of the things that must abide in this world. Buddhism must be constant, a stronghold for people who are looking for peace and meaning in their lives. Buddhism advocates non-violence and respect for all living creatures. The ultimate goal of a Buddhist is to reach a state of sustained self-enlightenment or Nirvana, which is liberation from the bonds of reincarnation.This can be achieved through constant meditation and consciousness of thought and action. Buddhists are fierce vegetarians and are known for their stark, sim ple lifestyles and pacifist beliefs. They welcome anyone who wants to espouse their ways and do not impose that you forsake your own religious beliefs. The Buddha said that it did not matter what a person’s status in the world was, or what their background or wealth or nationality might be. All were capable of enlightenment, and all were welcome into the Sangha or community of followers. (Boeree, 1999)If I were a leader of Buddhism, I will resolve to remain faithful to the spirit in which Buddhism has been founded. Perfection can lead to complacency. The very philosophy of Buddhism renders it imperfect because it is always striving to attain awakening and enlightenment. The desire to change and better ourselves is the impetus that will keep us searching in life and within ourselves. However, if I were to choose something I don not like about Buddhism, it would have to be their stubborn refusal to make a stand and fight for their way of life.This refusal to fight in defense of their own has been the cause of their oppression. In the highlands of Tibet and Nepal, where Buddhism has established an unbroken, traditional way of living, there has been an upheaval because neighboring countries have been trying to take over these majestic lands and rule them. I believe that Buddhism has earned the right to keep their way of living, and no country has the right to come in and take that away, all in the name of progress. And Buddhist, in defense of their right to keep their traditions and simple living should fight for it.Of course I understand that fighting goes against the very grain of Buddha’s teachings of non-violence. But if the espousal of non-violence threatens their very existence, and will change their way of life to the very core, then that justifies fighting by all means. By fighting, I don’t mean the aggressive kind, but the kind of fighting that one needs to do when there is a clear and present danger that threatens your territory and life. Everyone, regardless of creed or color has the right to defend himself.That is a basic human right that everyone should respect and protect. Indeed, there is room for righteous fighting; even in the non-violent world of Buddhism. REFERENCES: Boeree, G (1999). The Life of Siddhartha Gautama. Shippensburg University http://webspace. ship. edu/cgboer/siddhartha. html Keown, D (1996). Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Hesse, H (1971). Siddhartha. (H. Rosner, Trans). Bantam Books. (Original work published 1922). Hopfe L. M. & Woodward. M. R. (2007). Religions of the World. Pearson Education Inc. New Jersey.

Pressure Definition and Examples (Science)

Pressure is defined as a measure of the force applied over a unit area. Pressure is often expressed in units of Pascals (Pa), newtons per square meter (N/m2 or kg/m ·s2), or pounds per square inch. Other units include the atmosphere (atm), torr, bar, and meters sea water (msw). In equations, pressure is denoted by the capital letter P or the lowercase letter p. Pressure is a derived unit, generally expressed according to the units of the equation: P F / A where P is pressure, F is force, and A is area Pressure is a scalar quantity. meaning it has a magnitude, but not a direction. This may seem confusing since its usually obvious the force has direction. It may help to consider pressure of a gas in a balloon. There is no obvious direction of the movement of particles in a gas. In fact, they move in all directions such that that the net effect appears random. If a gas is enclosed in a balloon, pressure is detected as some of the molecules collide with the surface of the balloon. No matter where on the surface you measure the pressure, it will be the same. Usually, pressure is a positive value. However, negative pressure is possible. Simple Example of Pressure A simple example of pressure may be seen by holding a knife to a piece of fruit. If you hold the flat part of the knife against the fruit, it wont cut the surface. The force is spread out of a large area (low pressure). If you turn the blade so the cutting edge is pressed into the fruit, the same force is applied over a much smaller surface area (vastly increased pressure), so the surface cuts easily.