(A) In my lecture (see reading and viewing assignments for Unit 1), I argued that perspectives – ways of seeing – both facilitate and constrain what we see when we examine the world. In so doing I presented the analogy that perspectives function like flashlights in a dark room: they illuminate restricted – and therefore incomplete – segments of a dark room. Since no one perspective can either describe or explain the totality of the world, there will always be a plurality of perspectives, each with their distinctive strengths and blindspots.
To highlight this, I presented materials focused on four different key points: (1) The Burke Theorem: “A way of seeing is also a way of not seeing - a focus upon object A involves a neglect of object B,” (2) Maslow’s Hammer: “It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail,” and the phenomena of (3) “believing is seeing,” and (4) “seeing could often be deceiving.”
Briefly discuss each of these and, after being certain to define each one, use sociological examples discussed in the lecture notes to illustrate how each might affect one’s analysis of the social world.
___________________________________________________________________
(B) I have argued that the different disciplines that attempt to explain the behavior and actions of human beings, drawing upon different perspectives, each conceptualizes or thinks about human beings in fundamentally different ways. A biologist might think of us as bundles of genes with innate biological tendencies, an economist might think of us as rational and utilitarian decision-makers, a psychologist might think of us as a “learning machine” or as a complex bundle of unconscious and repressed emotions, a sociologist might think of us as someone who occupies specific social positions (i.e., upper class, African-American, female).
Perhaps most important, I have argued that since each perspective has something of interest to contribute and that their ideas are complementary to one another rather than being contradictory. In other words, to say that one is greatly affected by rewards and punishments – as do behaviorists – doesn’t invalidate the fact that one’s social class – whether one is rich or poor – also contributes greatly to how one behaves. What does differ – and this is important – is how one might go about trying to modify an individual’s behavior and the policy implications that follow.
For this summary – response paper you will compare and contrast the sociological way of thinking about human beings with that presented by two other disciplines discussed in the class lecture notes. What are the main assumptions of each and how do they differ in their recommendations to change peoples’ behavior?
____________________________________________________________________
(C) Having read materials concerning the eugenics movement in the U.S., you know that the“menace of the feebleminded” was a major concern during the first three decades of the twentieth century and that IQ tests were developed to identify these “defective” individuals.
For this response paper you will look at two IQ tests: the first (click here) was given in 1917 to Army recruits who could not read or write English. Variations of this test were used in the courts. In some cases, if you were certified as feebleminded you could be sterilized (how’s that for test anxiety!).
The second test, the Mensa Workout, is a current test developed by Mensa, an organization that “welcomes people from every walk of life whose IQ is in the top 2% of the population.” The three stated purposes of Mena are “to identify and foster human intelligence for the benefit of humanity, to encourage research in the nature, characteristics and uses of intelligence, and to promote stimulating intellectual and social opportunities for its members.”
After taking each test, discuss the following: (1) In your view, do these exams provide an accurate measure of intelligence? (Hint: being "knowledgable" is not necessarily the same as being "intelligent.") (2) Will social backgrounds – rather than innate “intelligence” – affect your ability to answer correctly? If so, how? (Hint: if poor people have never seen a phonograph, would they be able to identify the missing part?) (3) Next, what is your opinion about the use of IQ tests by eugenicists in the past? (4) Last, what do you think about current researchers who, relying on current tests, argue that racial and ethnic differences in intelligence exist today, that they are innate, and that these differences explain why these groups have different rates of success in society?
___________________________________________________________________
