Globalization is simply the "global diffusion of practices", as Ritzer (2003) puts it, and is the process by which different societies come under pressure from others to employ their practices, whether due to a better system or out of necessity. Following Ritzers' theories on globalization, connections were made with Marxist imperialist theories; creating the concept of “cultural imperialism”. Globalization as a process can be divided into two categories: each is further divided into three others. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essayOne aspect is globalization. This aims to enable nations, businesses and organizations to grow and expand their influence around the world. As Marx predicted, due to capitalist ideals, organizations had to continue to expand further or they would destabilize. Naturally, after expanding to all available locations in its own country, they look to other countries to continue expanding. Moreover, where these organizations, particularly American ones, already have such power, they can produce products with greater efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control. This is McDonaldization and its many benefits make capitalist expansion somewhat desirable in the eyes of those who benefit from it. Finally, Americanization can be seen as the “spread of American ideas, customs, social patterns, industry, and capital throughout the world” (Ritzer 2003). However, the least known aspect of globalization is glocalization. This process examines how individuals within a society influenced by globalization can influence the way practices are imposed on them. For example, McDonald's is at the forefront of the fast food industry, and although its stores have opened around the world, their menu still has slight differences depending on which country you are in. This therefore ties in with part of Giddens' (1990) definition of globalization; “Local events are shaped by events happening miles away and vice versa.” The idea is that even if there is a consistent and more efficient method of production; their culture will evolve in one form or another into something new. Les Back (1998) characterizes global and local cultures as a relationship rather than opposites, because although global pressures influence all societies, societies still have the ability to choose which parts of the culture they like, as if there was no demand for something. , organizations will have no interest in it. Although these organizations produce advertisements that target specific people, individuals in society ultimately choose. Globalization as a whole seems to be converging toward a set of global standards and single predominant industries, but the world has not reached that point and, to put it bluntly, whether McDonald's or any other form of McDonaldization has replaced traditional restaurants is a oversight. McDonald's offers fast, convenient, cheap food, but that doesn't mean people traveling to France will want to eat at McDonald's once they've made the drive to their permanent home. They will want to experience what that country specifically has to offer, otherwise there is no point in investing their time or money to go there. Of course, if an individual chooses, for his own reason or forany other reason, to avoid the local cultures of a region, it can to some extent. To what extent is the future of young people determined by society? Discuss the structural agency debate. There is enormous debate in a number of areas involving structure and agency. At one pole of the spectrum, everything that happens in a person's life is determined by external forces; the idea of ​​structure. On the other hand, there is the concept that each individual shapes their own future. There are scenarios in which one or the other can be argued more convincingly than the other; For example, something like choosing to dye your hair pink can be considered an act of free will, because even though certain factors led you to this choice, the final decision is ultimately yours. Meanwhile, the fact that you pay taxes is almost foolproof, except in the rare situations where people evade their taxes. Emile Durkheim, an esteemed structural theorist, says that "if they existed before you, it is because they exist outside of you" while referring to social facts. These are factors beyond the control of the individual, such as race, gender and class, into which you are integrated at birth and, as Marx said, "Men make their own history, but they do not do as they please" because we do not choose the circumstances. that we have lived by making choices, because the circumstances we find ourselves in are passed down from the past. However, structures are composed of many individual agents who occasionally change the structure in which they find themselves. Revolutions are examples of agents acting against their structures because they are unhappy with the situation. While action is concerned with how our decisions influence our lives; it does not claim that we can achieve anything with enough willpower. We can control what we do but not the consequences. Herbert Blumer theorizes that throughout our lives, our interactions create meanings associated with what we have interacted with. However, the connection to agency is that we understand these meanings and can then change them through interpretation, meaning that we each perceive things in our own way based on our previous interactions. However, a much more balanced view is that we create our structures as agents as well as the structures that shape our behavior; a view employed by Anthony Giddens. His view of individuals places them as knowledgeable agents and structures, not only as factors that constrain your options, but also as factors that enable your options. So, to evaluate all of this, I believe that young people experience greater capacity for action to influence their future, but much less action in their lives. their immediate impact. Your young life influences the extent to which you will be influenced by structures later in life. For example, the extent to which we try in school and spend less time on video games and the like will affect our knowledge and the less we have, the less we will be able to make conscious and rational decisions. Additionally, all the symbolic interactions we develop when we are young can stay with us until we die and impact every decision in our lives. For reference, while society associates obesity with poor health, if an officer encountered an obese person who seemed very happy when we were young, our view of obesity might be completely different for the rest of their lives . What isthe best way to study crime and deviance sociologically? Discuss the debate between positivism and interpretivism. The study of world problems can be done in different ways. These are known methodologies. When it comes to crime and deviance, there is a wide range of crimes that would require a different approach because the (socially constructed) motivations would be different. The methodologies are based on different philosophies that make it possible to conduct research and be more useful to the sociologists behind them. These include ontological and epistemological principles that show how research is carried out (Sarantakos 2005: 30). Positivism encompasses the ideology that everything we perceive is socially constructed and, therefore, personal accounts would be biased and not represent real life; a vision popularized by Durkheim. People's reasoning is normally explained by the social norms they experience. This means that the only valid form of data is that which can be measured objectively. Its epistemological principles are based on Auguste Comte's idea that “sociology must imitate the method of the natural sciences”. The goal of this type of research is to find innate laws of human behavior. This makes the findings of positivist research such as surveys and official statistics generalizable to other places under similar conditions. Graphs are drawn for the data from these to find correlations between certain factors. One criticism however is the obvious neglect of individual agency in all verified data. For example, while empirical data may show that an ethnic group is more likely to commit a certain crime; the correlative nature of this data means that a particular individual is neither certain nor uncertain of committing this crime at any given time. Furthermore, positivist views cannot be considered neutral in terms of theory or values, because they are always constructed by a person who sees the world in their own way. to act and does not only respond to external social forces. This methodology takes into account the complexity of an individual and their own understanding of the same “objective reality” while respecting the fact that the reasons which push them to act are unique. This type of research aims to better understand the reasons for people's actions on an empathetic level, that is, the methods involved are not scientific; allowing the world to be seen from the people's point of view. This is used because, as Weber said: "social reality is not objective and determining but constructed and reconstructed through social action" therefore "sociology must proceed from the point of view of social actors". This methodology, however, is extremely specific and will struggle to paint a broader picture, but is much better at examining smaller groups. In conclusion, basing government policy changes on quantitative data alone seems to be a mistake because there are many other sociological factors. this will have summarized these statistics as opposed to whether or not the person just committed the crime. For example, saying that because of a correlation between the baby's health and whether or not the baby was breastfed, breastfeeding should be enforced because it contributes to good health has other ramifications and cannot never be objectively better for anyone without taking into account everything that happens in the How to understand health from a sociological point of view? Discuss the debate over biological versus social determinism. Our health is something we often take for granted until it isquestioned. A purely biological definition of good health means being free from disease or illness, while a sociological definition of health looks at social health and also places more emphasis on mental health. The NHS and other medical organizations are moving towards a more dualistic system that involves both social and biological analyzes and procedures. The definition of health as seen by (WHO, 2006) is “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease and infirmity”; however, this amounts to neglecting aspects of health such as spiritual, emotional and sexual health and is clearly very difficult to acquire. Sociology argues that the definition of health is much more flexible and depends on factors such as time, place and culture. This is seen in health magazines where the standard of good health is set at muscular, toned men or slim, accentuated curves. These shift awareness away from the social causes of mental health problems and focus people's attention more on the biological and aesthetic aspects of health. This culture focused on biological health and reliance on clinical trials to find your problem and then fix it also leads to a culture in which if your problem does not fit the objective criteria that the biological approach offers; your problem should be resolved. The social causality approach helps prevent social problems and medical illnesses and thus saves money on the treatment of long-term incurable illnesses like dementia. For example, families of people at risk of dementia (perhaps older people who receive fewer than a certain number of visits to a nursing home) can be notified of how often they visit them. Social causation involves examining quantitative data showing how individuals sharing a common social factor are more or less likely to suffer or contract a certain disease, and then taking steps to reduce the impact of that social factor or the number of people concerned. this demographic group. According to the stress process model, stress predisposes people in marginalized groups (such as long-term poverty) to poor health. Much of the bias in our current medical systems comes from our recent history, where technological advancements have heavily influenced society since industrialization and its evolution. rapid improvement would only further spread public support and lead to increased funding and a focus on the biological aspect. Furthermore, biology is a science founded a long time ago and is much easier to relate to because we can see the effects of biological problems, whereas sociology is a relatively new science and based on the functioning of the people's brains, which is much more difficult. To summarize, there is a clear disparity in prioritization between biological and sociological approaches to health, based on biased health histories, despite the clear benefits of recognizing social causation; perhaps because recognizing such a thing earlier might compromise the power of those in high social status. How can social class help us understand conflict in contemporary Britain? Discuss the conflict/consensus debate. Marx and Durkheim view society in similar, yet different ways in that their theories both say that society functions in a similar way to a machine: eachcomponent being subject to the same causal laws but still working together to function like a machine. entire; and then, on the other hand, seeing societies operating under completely different laws. These different laws are classified into different systemic theories known as the conflict and consensus approach. These are essentially structural approaches to sociology and suggest that an individual's actions can be described by social forces. Durkheim's description of society assumes that individuals share a consensus on the norms and values ​​followed. This approach means that the global social order converges to a point of stability and is propagated by institutions that form conventions and moral codes; leading in turn to the reproduction of behaviors across generations of people within said institutions. It also explains how simple societies become a more complex version of themselves, where their values ​​vary more. As these societies become more complex and prosperous over time, the population increases and their needs diversify, leading to an increased division of labor. However, Durkheim also warns against excessive division of labor, because when work is so divided that it no longer has meaning, society suffers "anomie"; the collapse of norms and values. Parsons, however, went on to explain that any social system needs four functional preconditions. He must be able to change to adapt to new situations and then set and achieve goals. Its constituent elements must remain in good relations and must continually ensure the existence of motivating cultural models for individuals to continue working. On the other side completely lies the conflict approach which explains the interactions of people within society. Marx examines the norms and says that they are based on socio-economic relationships, which legitimizes the exploitation of one class by another under the ideology of capitalism. Max Weber also looked at conflict and added class, status and party stratification. He says that power is the probability that a person will get what they want despite the resistance of others. In his works, he also argues that those who wield power justify their actions by assuming that their ideas must be important. Looking at Britain from the perspective of conflict you can see that there is a difference of opinion within the country and its democratic system of government reflects this, otherwise all votes would be the same. For example, the country was so deeply divided over whether to leave the EU that the vote was 48% to 52%, taking power away from expats and giving it to citizens. There is clearly no consensus on this issue and politics revolves around people from certain social classes not being comfortable with the power they have. On the other hand, society generally considers speaking in a library wrong. Dahrendorf approaches society in a much more balanced way, arguing that perhaps we need to look at aspects of both in order to report on society rather than assuming one or the other is 100% accurate. Should the Internet be understood as part of the modern project? Discuss the debate between modernity and postmodernity. The impact of the Internet on society is widely debated within the sociological community. It's our most effective method of delivering information to date, but can we really say it's had more of an impact on people than.?