Week 6: Technology and Isolation

             Americans today seem to be more isolated due to technology. However, since I grew up in the 1990s, when the internet was just starting to become really popular, it is difficult for me to really make a comparison between how people interacted socially before and after the age of technology. I think one thing technology has done that is negative is make people less responsible for what they say to others. On so many sites, people can make comments about a video, an article, or another person. Many times they can make these comments anonymously. I think this creates a situation where people can say thoughtful or cruel things and not be held responsible for what they are saying. In a normal face to face interaction, people will monitor and even change what they are saying based on the other person’s reaction. With increased technology, people are more isolated from the rest of society and do not have to observe the rules of polite and respectful interaction.  

         On the other side, however, technology has done wonderful things to unite people from all walks of life all across the globe. People are becoming more aware of other cultures and societies, as well as problems occurring throughout the world. It is very easy now to have a conversation with someone on another continent as though they are in the same room with you. In this sense, technology can serve to bring people together and diminish isolation. In fact, I believe I read somewhere that there is almost no group of people on the earth that are truly isolated anymore because of the global economy and widespread access to internet services. I think this can be seen as a good thing as the world can learn to see each other in the ways we are similar rather than feel separated and isolated from one another.

Week five: Penal system reform

       The criminal justice system is constantly under scrutiny by researchers and sociologists who are looking to see if the system actually deters crime and is able to rehabilitate criminals. I have heard many arguments about whether the prison system is the correct way to punish criminals. Sociologists tend to believe that expanding the penal system or having harsher punishments for criminals will not help reduce crime rates. I do not entirely agree with this argument, but I do understand the reasoning behind it. I do not believe that the penal system always works to rehabilitate criminals, but I also do not believe that this means prisons are not able to do this. I think that by adding more educational classes, actively discouraging gang activity and other violent behavior, and by providing rehabilitation programs, prisoners can greatly benefit from the penal system and the rate of recidivism may drop. This costs quite a large amount of money, but as the text says it already costs over $25,000 a year to hold a person in the penal system. If recidivism rates dropped, the criminals would be less likely to re-enter the prisons, and this would save states money so paying for these programs would be well worth it.

Week 4: Nature Vs. Nurture Debate

      Many classes such as intro to psychology, anthropology and biology have students study the context and ideas of the nature vs. nurture debate. It is a very highly debated subject that has far reaching implications. After reading about why people agree with one side or the other, I have decided that my opinion is that I do not understand why it is a debate at all. From my perspective, neither side can ever provide evidence that human behavior and personality are entirely determined by one factor, and not by any other. There simply is too much evidence pointing to it being a complex interaction of both nature and nurture that socializes human beings. It is an interaction so complex that sociologists, biologists, psychologists, and geneticists still cannot fully explain how a certain trait will be revealed if a person is exposed to a certain environment. They can make conjectures, such as that a person with a genetic tendency towards addiction will be more likely to become addicted to alcohol or drugs if they are raised by alcoholic parents. However, even in this case, there are too many exceptions to make this conjecture with any real certainty. 

      I believe debating whether nature or nurture has more impact is not as important as trying to figure out how certain environments can trigger certain traits, or possibly how certain inherited characteristics can affect a person’s surrounding environment. Neither side can be deemed more important when the two are so co-dependent on one another.  The textbook suggests that currently, there is more support for the idea that biology (nature) has more influence on human behavior. I still believe, however, that ultimately neither nature nor nurture can have definitively greater influence in a persons life.

Week 3 Culture

        The comedy sketch performed by Hugh Laurie on the BBC channel pointed out some interesting aspects of British culture and their perspective on American culture. This sketch is obviously not necessarily indicative of what ALL people belonging to British culture find funny or what they think of Americans. However, it can be used as a sort of snapshot reference into how Americans may be perceived in Great Britain, and how humor can be conveyed there. In this sketch Hugh Laurie attempts to imitate what seems to be most likely an American country singer. He has a sort of somewhat southern accent, a very patriotic outfit and a song that only says three words; ‘America’ and ‘the States’. This may suggest that British view American culture as being extremely patriotic and perhaps even overly zealous about their patriotism. It also suggests that the British may view American (country) songs as lacking substance and being overly repetitive. 

      The end of the sketch occurs when another actor comes in and shrugs as if to say “he asked for it” and punches Hugh Laurie (the patriotic country singer) in the face, ending the song. The audience seems to enjoy the end of the skit which could convey their appreciation for simple or uncomplicated humor such as this sketch that conveys a lot of meaning with just a few words and one large gesture. Although after watching some of the other skits where many puns and figures of speech were used to convey the humor, I doubt that simplistic sketches are their main source of comedy. This ending to the skit also may have reflected how some British have felt towards certain American country singers when they hear their songs. It is unclear whether the sketch is making fun of American culture in general or a specific sect of American culture; that is the American patriotic country music culture. 

    Often humor tends to be an oversimplification or generalization of some stereotype or aspect of culture to make something seem humorous. Many comedians do this to make their skits/ comedy routines funnier and more entertaining for the audience. Culture is much more complicated than what comedy often reveals. For example, many Americans are extremely patriotic, but dislike songs -- similar to the one Hugh Laurie sang -- that they might perceive to be pandering. All cultures are complicated and have many diversities within them which is why it is always interesting to see what the general stereotypes or generalizations are for that culture. This skit is definitely revealing as to what some British people may think of as American culture.