Sociology

After re-reading Chapters 8, 9, 10 in Kraybill’s The Upside-Down Kingdom, answer the folowing questions in 300-325 Words: (NOTE-This forum is NOT for discussing questions posed in your Kraybill paper) “In what sense might Christians today be Sadducees?  Pharisees?” “What types of persons in our contemporary world might represent the Samaritan in the parable of the Good Samaritan?” “In what ways does the “birds of a common feather” principle operate in your own life?”

Identify two to three primary groups, secondary groups and reference groups that have been important in your life. Have there been any changes in these groups over time? Give some examples. Have you found yourself in a situation where your groups were in direct conflict with each other, or you had doubts about them regarding your lifestyle and choices? For example, have you found yourself in a situation where the advice/choice given by your primary group members contradicted the ones from your secondary groups? How did you resolve the conflict(s)? reference: Henslin, J.M. (2019). Essentials of sociology: A down-to earth approach (13th ed.). Pearson, Inc.

View the 15 minute Ted Talk video on America’s Native Prisoners of War which is in Learning Module 6. (Will be uploaded as file) Then write a minimum 4-page essay on this video that addresses the following questions.  What do you see as the main differences between the cultural perspective presented in this video on the settling of the American Continent and that which is presented in our history books? How can the American Indian culture legitimately view itself as prisoners of war living confined in a prisoner of war camp and simultaneously the mainstream American culture views its actions toward the Indians and reservations as justified and even helpful? Which do you think is the more accurate perspective? What is our real responsibility toward the American Indian population now given the legacy that our actions in the settling of the American Continent has left with them. What, if any, do you see as your personal responsibility toward the American Indian culture today? Important!!!  In answering these questions, demonstrate knowledge on the theoretical perspectives of Sociology, any social research that relates to this video and the current American Indian situation, and which Sociological concepts you have studied so far that apply to the video.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: How does the context in which deviance takes place affect whether a behavior is defined as deviant? In the reading, the authors describe how college students frame their cheating behavior. While they recognize and acknowledge that cheating is ‘wrong,’ their statements are heavily qualified: “Yes, it is wrong, but…” “I know it’s not OK, but…” The authors argue that these statements serve to add context to the behavior, context that is meant to ‘soften,’ ‘reduce,’ or otherwise lessen the relative ‘wrongness’ of the behavior. For this discussion, respond to the following points: What sort of factors did the students point to in their efforts to ‘neutralize’ the deviance and stigma associated with cheating? How do these change the context of the cheating? Are there people you would openly discuss cheating with but others you would not? What is different about these groups? Can you think of other actions or behaviors that are viewed differently depending on context? What is different about the social settings or contexts where a behavior is considered ‘deviant’ and ‘not deviant’? (e.g., buying marijuana is legal in some states, not in others; smoking marijuana is acceptable among some friend, but not others; etc.)

Do professionals have ethical obligations that ordinary citizens don’t? In addressing this question you should think about: how do we define a professional, over and above a person who makes money doing what they do?  What sorts of ethical obligations do ordinary citizens have? What sorts of ethical obligations do professional have just because they are professionals? And then, finally, do professionals have ethical obligations that ordinary citizens don’t? Written assignments are due by 11:59 pm Eastern time on Sunday. They need to be 2 pages double spaced, include citations where appropriate and refer to and incorporate the material in the text book and other sources. Written assignments draw on the topics raised in the forum discussions and you may refer to and use the material in your posts in your written assignments. However, a written assignment may not be a simple recycling of your posts but needs to go further to bring in additional materials and to elaborate on, respond to, or refute points made in discussion posts. Finally, writing is a component part of your grade and I will grade down for grammatical errors or poor writing. I have posted a handout called “The Sinful Seventeen” in the week 1 materials that outlines some of the most common grammatical mistakes and their corrections. Im posting below An article we had to read,  PLAYING IN THE MAJORS Herbert J. Keating, M.D. “What does it take to be a professional?” The year was 1980. Dr. Ralph Reinfrank, chief of medicine at Hartford Hospital, was running “morning report,” a time-honored teaching method in medical training programs. Each morning, second- and third-year residents, people two or three years into their postmed-school training, would assemble in a circle in a Spartan conference room, Styrofoam cups of bad coffee close at hand. There the “on call” resident would present cases, essentially telling patients’ clinical stories from the night before. The chief doctor, in this case, Ralph, would help provide instructive feedback, which he did in a Socratic style. Except for the case that prompted this memorable question, most of the feedback concerned nuances of internal medicine diagnosis and therapy — not critical “life and death” stuff. (Ralph is now, himself, dead, which is sad. Although he was diminutive and bespectacled, and wore off-white hush puppies, which were distinctly uncool, we residents were profoundly respectful of Ralph’s brainpower.) “Tell me exactly what you were thinking,” Ralph said to the admitting resident, a petite, self-confident, brown-eyed woman with straight black hair. A three-headed silver stethoscope draped around her neck like a tribal necklace. “Are you telling me, Doctor, that you started heparin last night on a patient who was bleeding from the GI tract?” “Yes, I started the heparin, ” she answered. “I thought he might have pulmonary embolism. And the blood was only on the Hemoccult slide.” (Heparin, a blood thinner, interferes with the generation of clot –a good idea if there is pulmonary embolism, but a bad idea if there is bleeding.) Ralph took a loud, deep breath, and then exhaled as if he were in pain. Some of us near him could smell the tobacco from cigarettes he would sneak and smoke sometimes, a weakness he was not proud of. “Let me recap,” he said, his face deadpan. “How old was this man?” “Forty,” she muttered. “What precisely were his risk factors for a pulmonary embolism?” Silence. Then, she said, “He had chest pain, worse when he took a deep breath, and he was short of breath.” Ralph paused a moment, then asked quietly, “Did I ask you what his symptoms were?” The resident looked confused. Then came the point of Ralph’s blade: “Please pay attention, Doctor. These words have meaning. Medical words mean something. I said risk factors, not symptoms.” The admitting resident flushed red and seemed as if she might cry. Then she regrouped, almost as if she were telling herself, “Buck up, you went to Vassar and UVA, you can handle this.” “He was obese.” Ralph looked around. “He was obese,” Ralph restated, tersely. “Forty and obese. Hmmm.” Ralph looked at each of the rest of us residents, one at a time, as if his eyes could look into the gray matter of our brains. Some of us squirmed a bit. “What are the established risk factors for pulmonary embolism?” he asked. Several voices shouted out responses: Virchow’s triad, post-op state, drugs that promote clotting such as estrogens or birth control pills, etc. Ralph returned to the resident. “Did your patient have any of these, Doctor?” “No.” Her answer came with an edge to it, a bit defiant. “And yet, you started him on heparin knowing that he had blood in his stool?” No answer for a while. Then a reluctant “Yes.” At this Ralph paused. Evenly, without a touch of irony, he said, “Doctor, at the end of our little conference, I should like you to go back to your patient and check and see if he has not yet bled to death.” The admitting resident looked down at her lap, and closed her eyes, as if she were feeling sick. And then Ralph posed the question. “What does it take to be a professional?” It seemed like an odd question; no one spoke. Ralph ended the silence. “I don’t care what kind of professional. Any professional. Let’s take Ted Williams. Or Joe DiMaggio. What made Joe a professional baseball player?” The surprise reference to a ballplayer eased the tension, and several of us nervously laughed. “‘Cause he got paid to play?” one of us offered. “No, that’s not it,” Ralph said. “Plenty of people get paid to do jobs that they cannot do. Even ballplayers.” Silence followed, and then Ralph answered the question. “Joe was a professional for many reasons. He didn’t waste a lot of energy. He showed a special “economy” in his movements; he had `good moves.'” “But most importantly,” Ralph continued, “Joe was a professional because he was selfconscious about his craft, constantly analyzing what it was that he was doing. He didn’t just hack away at it.” The room was totally quiet. No one moved a muscle. “What you, ladies and gentlemen, are doing — taking care of complicated problems in human beings — needs professionals. Like Joe DiMaggio. Don’t just hack away at it.” Ralph allowed a few more seconds of silence and then concluded. “An automatic decision that pleuritic chest pain and shortness of breath equals heparin is the medical equivalent of hacking away.” Suddenly, the admitting resident got white in the face, bolted out of her chair and flew out of the conference room, the tails of her white lab coat trailing after her. We learned later that her patient had pneumonia, not pulmonary embolism. As a result of the heparin, he had, indeed, bled significantly from what turned out to be a colon polyp. But he did OK. And from then on, the rest of us, the residents, did better. Dr. Keating practices internal medicine and geriatrics and is clinical professor of medicine at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine. Patients’ identities are concealed for confidentiality. You can e-mail Dr. Keating at hkeating@prohealthmd.com

Part 1 -Please watch all three videos and share your thoughts, reactions, and reflections with the rest of the class. A few questions to get you thinking: Are any of the concepts presented new to you? Do you see any other connections between these various ideas? Do you disagree with anything presented? Why or Why not? How would you apply any of these ideas to your life?  Here are three TedTalks that I think provide very interesting perspectives on aggression and violence. The first one is an epidemiologist that looks to solve the problem of violence by treating as disease. Gary Slutkin: Let’s treat violence like a contagious disease (abt 14 mins) Gary Slutkin Let’s treat violence like a contagious disease The second one is from famed psychologist Steven Pinker who argues that we are actually living in the most peaceful time in our species existence. Steven Pinker: The surprising decline in violence (abt 19 mins) Steven Pinker The surprising decline in violence And finally, social psychologist Paul Piff studies how social hierarchy, inequality and emotion shape relations between individuals and groups. Does money make you mean? (abt 17 mins)  This talk actually combines a great many concepts we have covered I believe ties it together for you very well.  Paul Piff Does money make you mean? (This talk really is NOT about money making you mean, it’s about how social hierarchy, inequality, emotion, and many other aspects of social psychology shape relations between individuals and groups as part of the human condition.)

List the key characteristics of bureaucracy as explained by Max Weber. What was it about bureaucracy that Max Weber saw as a positive? What did he see as negative? A minimum of 2 double-spaced pages per case and no larger then 12 size font. Include a work cited page that has a minimum of one outside sources and you must use your textbook as well (2 sources in total). Make sure you cite the essay appropriately with limited spelling and grammatical errors. Your grade will be based in large part on the originality of your ideas and your written presentation of these ideas. Presenting the words, ideas, or expression of another in any form as your own is plagiarism. Student who fail to properly give credit for information contained in their written work are violating the intellectual property rights of the original author. For proper citation of the original authors, you should reference the appropriate publication manual for your degree program or course (APA, MLA, etc.)

Write no more than five pages on BTBP (Black Theology & Black Power) and GOO (God of the Oppressed) both written by James H. Cone. How do the books complement each other? Why are they pertinent to MM (Martin & Malcolm & America: A Dream or a Nightmare)

Using information gathered from the “Begay Family Case Study,” Complete the Topic 3 chart that is attached to this assignment. Write 50-100 words per section in the chart. The chart will include four family members for whom you will identify the following: Role in the family Tasks associated with specific roles How roles may have been established Rules (covert and/or overt) that maintain the roles APA format is not required, but solid academic writing is expected. Refer to the scoring guide, “Family Roles, Tasks, and Rules,” prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Read Gorski & Pothini (2018) Chapter 8: Cases on (Dis)ability and select one of the mini cases.  Provide a reflection of how issues of privilege, power, and inequality converge on race within the mini case that you selected.   How do you think your own personal ability identity will affect your view of those who identify as the same and different than yours will impact your work as a social worker?   Discuss how ableism is demonstrated within the case and what are some of the barriers that the student/family experience.  Discuss the intersection of ableism with other multicultural identities (ie. sex, class, age, race etc.) and how does this impact the child/family.   Lastly, discuss what micro, macro, and mezzo recommendations/interventions might a social worker utilize to address ableism (disability oppression) that a client, community and/or organization may be experiencing or have experienced.