You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Sociology’ tag.
Tag Archive
The Nine Most Common Cognitive Distortions
March 12, 2022 in Culture, Psychology, Social Science | Tags: Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, Cognitive Distortions, Psychology, Sociology, The Coddling of the American Mind | by The Arbourist | 2 comments
Reading a new book called the Coddling of the American Mind by Gregg Lukainoff and Jonathan Haidt. Just started, but it has been very interesting so far as describes some of the less than ideal strategies we have have for making our way through society. Some of the maladaptive strategies can be countered through consciously acknowledging the mental track being taken and making conscious effort to change said track. Of course, it is easier to diagnose these problems in other people (because we are all-good amiright?), but being able to see and react to these tracks in yourself is the end goal (aka cognitive behaviour therapy, CBT).
1. Emotional Reasoning: Letting your feelings guide your interpretation of reality. “I feel depressed; therefore my marriage is not working out.”
2. Catastrophizing: Focusing on the worst possible outcome and seeing it as most likely. “It would be terrible if I failed.”
3. Overgeneralizing: Perceiving a global pattern of negatives on the basis of a single incident. “This generally happens to me. I seem to fail at a lot of things.”
4. Dichotomous Thinking: Viewing events or people in all-or-nothing terms. “I get rejected by everyone,” or “It was a complete waste of time.”
5. Mindreading: Assuming that you know what people think without having sufficient evidence of their thoughts: “He thinks I’m a loser.”
6. Labeling: Assigning global negative traits to yourself or others. “I’m undesirable,” or “He’s a rotten person.”
7. Negative Filtering: You focus almost exclusively on the negatives and seldom notice the positives. “Look at all the people who don’t like me.”
8. Discounting Positives: Claiming that the positive things you or others do are trivial, so that you can maintain a negative judgement. “That’s what wives are supposed to do – so it doesn’t count when she’s nice to me,” or “Those successes were easy, so they don’t matter.”
9. Blaming: Focusing on the other person as a source of your negative feelings; you refuse to take responsibility for changing yourself. “She’s to blame for the way I feel now,” or “My parents caused all of my problems.”
“[…] It’s easy to see how somebody who habitually things in such ways would develop schemas that revolve around maladaptive core beliefs, which interfere with realistic and adaptive interpretations of social situations.”
-The Coddling of the American Mind. p.38
It has been a good read so far, will keep you updated. :)
Meritocracy – A Few Downsides
March 19, 2019 in Social Science | Tags: Meritocracy, Sociology | by The Arbourist | Comments closed
The hardest ideology to examine critically is your own. Meritocracy is a social norm in Canada and the United States, woven through the fabrics of our societies. It is a belief that supports much of the status quo and reinforces some of the harmful myths that cause suffering in society. Is it all bad? Of course not, but it can lead one down a path of making moral assessments of other people’s worth based on the material or social goods that they have ‘won’ in society. It can be easy to overlook the role luck plays in achieving and getting ahead within our social systems.
Clifton Mark, writing for Aeon Magazine writes about the place meritocratic ideology occupies in our society. This is the juicy part, but I’d encourage you to go read the entire article.
“Perhaps more disturbing, simply holding meritocracy as a value seems to promote discriminatory behaviour. The management scholar Emilio Castilla at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the sociologist Stephen Benard at Indiana University studied attempts to implement meritocratic practices, such as performance-based compensation in private companies. They found that, in companies that explicitly held meritocracy as a core value, managers assigned greater rewards to male employees over female employees with identical performance evaluations. This preference disappeared where meritocracy was not explicitly adopted as a value.
This is surprising because impartiality is the core of meritocracy’s moral appeal. The ‘even playing field’ is intended to avoid unfair inequalities based on gender, race and the like. Yet Castilla and Benard found that, ironically, attempts to implement meritocracy leads to just the kinds of inequalities that it aims to eliminate. They suggest that this ‘paradox of meritocracy’ occurs because explicitly adopting meritocracy as a value convinces subjects of their own moral bona fides. Satisfied that they are just, they become less inclined to examine their own behaviour for signs of prejudice.
Meritocracy is a false and not very salutary belief. As with any ideology, part of its draw is that it justifies the status quo, explaining why people belong where they happen to be in the social order. It is a well-established psychological principle that people prefer to believe that the world is just.
However, in addition to legitimation, meritocracy also offers flattery. Where success is determined by merit, each win can be viewed as a reflection of one’s own virtue and worth. Meritocracy is the most self-congratulatory of distribution principles. Its ideological alchemy transmutes property into praise, material inequality into personal superiority. It licenses the rich and powerful to view themselves as productive geniuses. While this effect is most spectacular among the elite, nearly any accomplishment can be viewed through meritocratic eyes. Graduating from high school, artistic success or simply having money can all be seen as evidence of talent and effort. By the same token, worldly failures becomes signs of personal defects, providing a reason why those at the bottom of the social hierarchy deserve to remain there.”
It is fascinating how quickly we convert material success into also meaning good moral standing. There is no reason for the linkage as we all are aware of people who disregard social norms and leave a trail of destruction in their quest for personal glory and achievement.
Our Families, Technology, and Having the ‘Right’ Experience
July 30, 2015 in Culture, Gaming, Social Science, Technology and Computers | Tags: Community, Generations, social media, Sociology, Video Games | by The Arbourist | 4 comments
We can lump this video in with the others that attempt to shed light on issues in society that matter while discreetly hawking their wares in the background. The best form of advertising? I’m not sure, but the commercial makes space for some thinking about how generational experiences are becoming increasingly stratified and foreign to one another.
Are today’s youth doomed to be nothing but cloistered vid-heads who only know nature through what they have seen on the screens of their tablets? Possibly but I’m thinking that much of the fuss we see about losing out youth to technology is a direct result of our societies ruthless quest for economic productivity, seemingly at all costs.
Productivity has ever increased, but at what social cost? Remember when only one bread-winner was required to live a reasonable life and raise children? Successive generations have had to work harder for less money, just to stay in place. Community life has taken a back seat to the lifestyle focused the individual and consumption – social technology directly feeds into our atomization and separation from others.
The leaders of our society have learned the lessons of the past. All that New Deal/Civil Rights/ Second Wave Feminist scared them shitless and having witnessed what an organized community of like minded people can accomplish are doing their best to ensure that it (social change benefiting the masses) does not happen again. People with common interests, common community and commitment to bettering their own interests change society. Isolated lone-wolves mired in consumptive practices do not. Hence witness the trajectory of our society in which the ‘tailored-experience’ is all the rage; the idea that making choices (ones that are carefully circumscribed mind you) is empowering; and sadly the idea that social power resides in competition and being ‘unique’. These are all hallmarks of society geared toward preserving a status-quo that benefits a particular segment of society.
The video is playing up the same fears every generation has about the next. Are some of the concerns valid? I think so, but nothing that cannot be overcome with realization that social media friends are not the same as having friends in real life. Sharing (not the facebook variety) your life with others is a necessary part of healthily existing in society and cannot be replaced by social media. Can social media/technology be used to enhance and facilitate our social interactions? Of course, but it is not a replacement for the attachment and community humans need to be healthy and happy.
Societal analysis aside,I for one am glad that video games have come as far as they have. Video games are an immersive experience for me that allow me to spend some time outside of the real-world. At the same time I do realize that video gaming is just one aspect of life and must be balanced with other pursuits/activities/interests.
Admittedly, one must be careful in allocating time to video gaming as hours seem to disappear, especially when playing with your friends . It is very easy to lose yourself in the experience and come out bleary-eyed on the other-side wondering why the hell it is 2am and why you’re not sleeping. :)
The Opposite of Addiction is Connection
July 20, 2015 in Education, Social Science | Tags: Addiction, Connection, John Hari, Rat Park, Sociology | by The Arbourist | 5 comments
Recently I posted a quote from John Hari on addiction. See it here. I’ve also updated the post to include the video below as well. What is detailed in this TED talk is idea that we should punish and isolate addicts from society. This idea, according to Hari is about 100 years old and also, more importantly completely wrong.
The methodology we base the current “War on Drugs” and how we treat people who are addicted is based on poor experimental design. When we control for environmental factors – addiction mostly disappears.
This TED talk was too important to bury in an update of an old blog post. So please enjoy John Hari and his important ideas on addiction.
Michael Kimmel – On Gender and Privilege
February 24, 2015 in Social Science | Tags: Gender, Privilege, Sociology | by The Arbourist | 2 comments
RSA Animate – The ABC’s of Persuasion
January 21, 2015 in Social Science | Tags: ABC's of Persuasion, RSA Animate, Sociology | by The Arbourist | Comments closed
Social Maps of Cities – David Troy
December 15, 2014 in Social Science | Tags: Maps, Sociology | by The Arbourist | Comments closed
Your opinions…