A People's Way of Life
A People's Way of Life
A People's Way of Life
Culture refers to the beliefs, values, behavior and material objects that, together, form
a people’s way of life.
Culture has two basic components: nonmaterial culture, or the intangible creations of
human society, and material culture, the tangible products of human society. Together,
these two components describe a people’s way of life. Culture also plays an important
role in shaping the human personality. Culture shock occurs when an individual suffers
personal disorientation when experiencing an unfamiliar way of life.
Only humans depend on culture rather than instincts to ensure the survival of their kind.
Culture is very recent and was a long time in the making. What sets primates apart is
their intelligence. Human achievements during the Stone Age set humans off on a
distinct evolutionary course, making culture their primary survival strategy. The concept
of culture (a shared way of life) must be distinguished from those of nation (a political
entity) or society (the organized interaction of people in a nation or within some other
boundary). Many modern societies are multicultural, meaning that their people follow
various ways of life that blend and sometimes clash.
1
Robin Williams (1970) identified ten key values of U.S. culture:
a. Equal opportunity
b. Achievement and success
c. Material comfort
d. Activity and work
e. Practicality and efficiency
f. Progress
g. Science
h. Democracy and free enterprise
i. Freedom
j. Racism and group superiority
Values within one society are frequently inconsistent and even opposed
to one another. In general, the values that are important in higher-
income countries differ somewhat from those in lower-income countries.
D. Norms are rules and expectations by which a society guides the behavior of its
members. They may be either proscriptive or prescriptive.
There are two special types of norms that were identified by William Graham
Sumner (1906):
a. Mores are norms that are widely observed and have great moral
significance.
b. Folkways are norms for routine, casual interaction.
Material Culture
Material culture reflects a society’s values and a society’s technology, the knowledge
that people apply to the task of living in their surroundings. Many rich nations have
entered a postindustrial phase based on computers and new information economy.
2
Cultural Diversity: Many Ways of Life in One World.
The United States is the most multicultural of all industrial countries. By contrast, Japan
is the most monocultural of all industrial nations.
High culture refers to cultural patterns that distinguish a society’s elite; in contrast,
popular culture designates cultural patterns that are widespread among a society’s
population. High culture is not inherently superior to popular culture.
Supporters of multiculturalism argue that it helps us come to terms with our diverse
present and strengthens the academic achievement of African- American children. Some
call for Afrocentrism, the dominance of African cultural patterns in people’s lives.
Cultural change.
3
Some evidence suggests that a global culture may be emerging. Three key factors are
promoting this trend:
- Global economy: the flow of goods.
-Global communications: the flow of information.
- Global migration: the flow of people.
1. Global culture is much more advanced in some parts of the world than others.
2. Many people cannot afford to participate in the material aspects of a global culture.
Different people attribute different meanings to various aspects of the global culture.
Theories of Culture.
The Sociobiology is a theoretical approach that explores ways in which human biology
affects how we create culture. Sociobiology has its roots in the theory of evolution
proposed by Charles Darwin.
Critical review.
Sociobiology may promote racism and sexism.
Research support for this paradigm is limited.
4
Student Exercises
Case Study
Linguistics, the academic study of human language, has undergone a series of profound
shifts in recent decades. Until the late 1950s, most linguists believed that humans as a
species developed language from a blank slate in infancy. The behavioristic principles of
seeking pleasure and avoiding pain provided the theoretical basis to these views of
language development. Most linguists rejected the notion that any type of internal,
biological mechanism was hardwired into the brains of infants, steering them inevitably
in any particular developmental path. And because there was no fundamental basis to
human language in the brain, linguists rarely tried to compare widely divergent
languages — such as English and any of the indigenous languages of the Amazonian
basin — as they viewed these languages as essentially lacking in any meaningful
connections to a particularly “human” structure.
Noam Chomsky, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology linguist, fundamentally
changed many of these basic tenets of linguistics. According to Kathryn Hirsch-Pasek, a
psychologist at Temple University, “Up until the late 1950s, linguists had always focused
their efforts on describing the differences between languages and dialects. What Noam
Chomsky did was point out that beneath the differences, languages were amazingly
similar.” With extensive cross-cultural studies of the structures or “universal grammar”
underlying all languages, Chomsky had found striking evidence of the importance of
5
instinctive behavior to language in humans. Children don’t so much “learn” language as
they developmentally “grow” into language, much like the refinement of spatial skills or
the changes leading to sexual maturity.
And because language is so deeply hardwired into humans, we are born with a
grammar that is sophisticated enough to handle complex language. In fact, the actual
“learning” that children pursue with language is often the set of exceptions to this basic
grammar. As linguist Judy Kegl points out, English-speaking children must learn the
often confusing set of rules for plural words, such as “feet” instead of “foots.” Children
often resist these exceptions, trying to make the language more consistent.
There are numerous important implications from these findings, especially to the
millions of Americans who still hold views of language that derive from behaviorism-
based linguistics. It is common, for instance, for Americans to believe that language is
the most important “invention” of humans, but language itself is not so much an
invention as a highly flexible but genetically programmed and instinctual behavior.
Furthermore, many consider slang or the languages of technologically primitive
cultures to be less expressive, evolved, or powerful than languages such as English or
Russian. But because all languages share the same basic structure, no language is more
primitive or less expressive of human feeling than another. And slang itself — perhaps
to the disdain of numerous English teachers — cannot erode or “corrupt” a language or
the quality of thinking
of its speakers. English is certainly not in decline because so many speakers incorporate
lower-status “street” words and phrases into their vocabulary.
Perhaps the most controversial set of implications drawn from Chomsky’s research
concern the instinctive nature of language. If language — one of the most important
bases for human culture — is an instinctive behavior that is genetically controlled, then
perhaps many other types of human behavior are also preprogrammed. Behaviorism
assumed that consciousness and culture can always override and control instinct, but
Chomsky has led linguists to think otherwise. And many researchers and thinkers are
suggesting that such characteristics as criminal behavior and intelligence may also be
hardwired. Certainly a great deal more research will have to be explored to see how far
the implications of language development can be extended.
Source
Bowden, Mark. “Speaking of Language, Linguists Have Big News.” Philadelphia Inquirer
(February 13, 1995): D1–D5.
Discussion Questions
1) Do you agree with the contention that the slang or street language of Harlem or the
Bronx is as expressive as Shakespeare’s English? Why or why not?
6
2) How might our view of intelligence change if research provides convincing evidence
that an IQ may be hereditary and genetically determined? What social policy changes
might this view lead to?