Lesson 2 - The Social Sciences:

Sociology, Anthropology, and

Political Science
Understanding Culture, Society, and Politics
 Activity No. 1: Picture Perfect (Acting
Out)

• Forming a group of 4. The group will be given each of a scenario that will act out.
Then remaining group must identify in which faces of social thus these scenarios
belong.
 Activity No. 2: Photo Essay

• Does the scene below qualify as a form of social engagement ? Why or why not?
 Activity No. 3: Definition of Terms/Concept
Define the following terms/concept
• Social fact
• Social change
• Cultural diversity
• Social inequality
• Power relations
• Social diversity
• Ethnography
• Symbolic interactionism
• Sociological imagination
 The Social as “Driver of Interaction”
• The study of society can be accomplished in three different ways:
• (1) by mapping the social forces impinging on social actors as their lives intersect in
society,
• (2) by rehearsing the structures and components of cultural practices and traditions;
and
• (3) by exposing the asymmetrical power distributions among members of social
communities and organizations.
• These attempts– different and unique in their basic assumptions about
what makes society possible and the network of relationships that define
and constitute it– are made due to a common concern: to understand the
dynamics of social interactions in society.
• These attempts are formally referred to, notably in in the
academe, as disciplines” because of their specific perspective or
focus.
• If the perspective highlights the external influences that facilitate or
constrain human actions, the discipline is called “sociology.”
• If the perspective underlies the role of the cultural structures in
organizing human interactions, the disciplines is referred to as
“anthropology.”
• And if the perspective zeroes in on power relations and how these
produce layered modalities of opportunities among social actors, then
the discipline is called “political science.”
• They are complementary perspectives as they provide different
ways of making sense of social dynamics.
 Sociology
• Sociology focuses on the ubiquity (or the “everywhere-ness”) of social forces in
unlikely forms: sex, gender, religion, class, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and the
like.
• Social forces represents a constellation of unseen yet powerful forces influencing the behavior of
individuals and institutions.
• In these sense, social forces can be interpreted as any human-created way of doing things that
influence, pressure, or force people to behave, interact with others, and think in certain ways.
• Social forces are considered remote and impersonal because mostly people have no
hand in creating them, nor do they know anyone who do, or did.
• People can embrace social forces, be swept along or bypassed by them, and most importantly
challenge them.
• Social forces are normally in the guise of rules (written and unwritten), norms, and
expectations. The influence of these three is normally taken for granted and assumed to be
natural.
• The constellation of these forces characterize social actors’ social maps,
which in turn determine the set of opportunities and life chances they can
expect in life.
• A social map refers to a person’s specific economic and political location. The
assumption here is that a person’s coordinates in his/her social map determine his/her
enduring opportunities and limitations in life.
• Social maps, therefore lock out any possibilities of social mobility.
• However C. Wright Mills (1959), an American social critic, argued that individuals can
still transcend the limitations posed by their respective social locations. They can do
this by imagining intersections of their life situations (or individual biographies) and the
events of their societies (or history).
• This state of mind, which Mills termed “sociological imagination,” allows social actors
discern opportunities where there is none by converting their personal troubles into
public issues.
• When successfully done, this makes people navigate the social world with much more
ease as they have these intersections points as opportunity makers.
 A Quick History of Sociology
• Sociology was born in Europe (especially in Germany, England, and France)
during the period of industrial revolution.
• It was the period that witnessed the rapid development of industry that occurred in Britain
in the late 18th and 19th centuries, brought about by the introduction of machinery.
• It was characterized by the use of steam power, growth of factories, and the mass
production of manufactured goods.
• The firs set of sociologists starting with
• August Comte (1798-1857), credited to be the father of the discipline for having coined the term
sociology,
• Karl Marx (1818-1883)
• Emile Durkheim (1858-1977)
• Max Weber (1864-1920)
• they were the first to raise critical questions about the deluge of changes brought about by the
mushrooming factories (and associated technologies) within and outside the major cities of England.
• The bulk of their critical reflections focused on the seen and projected
impacts of these changes on their traditional way of life, exacerbated by
the dissolution of the family as the basic unit of the society, construction of
new forms of social interactions, and emergence of new social identities.
• Their adherents swelled in number and with the increasing number of
famed members came the need to constitute a new discipline that would
formally explore ramifications of these changes for pragmatic purposes.
• Influential members were in disagreement as to how to proceed. One group
believed in the practical utility of science, hence they argued that explorations must
be guided by the basic principles and methodologies of science.
• Another group remained attached to the spirit of tradition, hence they embraced
the more literary approaches in the dissection of the state of affairs. Out of these
competing approaches emerged sociology with its positivistic leanings toward
researching the social climate of the period.
• Durkheim, a French social thinker, was exceptionally instrumental in the
formalization and later recognition of sociology as the new science of the study
of society.
• His landmark study of suicide enabled him to concretize the “niche problematique” of
sociology, apart and different from that of anthropology, psychology, philosophy, religion,
and literature.
• With his monumental work on suicide, he introduced the concept of “social fact,” which
later sealed the eventual institution and recognition of sociology (at least initially in France)
as a new social science.
• Social fact is another name for social phenomenon. It has distinctive characteristics and
determinants which are capable of holding an external constraint on the individual.
• Social fact, according to Durkheim, was a characteristic feature of the power of ideas to
create social realities for members of society. He proved the existence of social fact by
demonstrating that the three forms of suicides he observed from the different societies
were all triggered by the individuals’ assessment of their moral standing in relation to the
rules and norms of their perspective cultures. Social fact is a precursor to the concept of
social forces.
 Theoretical Perspectives
• Consistent with sociology’s conviction about the power of social forces,
Marx, Durkheim, and Weber’s theoretical positions were largely influenced
by their social locations and corresponding life chances.
• Karl Marx– poor and always hungry, exiled for several times and declared persona non grata by his
own country Germany– saw and felt the evils of social inequality. He produced the most scathing
critique of capitalist exploitation of the labor of the class for profit. He used this critique as the basis
for his conflict paradigm, later relabeled by succeeding sociologist as the “critical historical”
perspective given its historical rootedness.
• Despite being focused on struggles and conflict , the conflict paradigm was able to demonstrate the
role of conflict in the evolution of society.

• Emile Durkheim and Max Weber, on the other hand, grew up in affluent
families, hence the reality of oppression, poverty, and exploitation
‘escaped’ their perspective theoretical musings.
• In its stead, they produced powerful analyses about religion, economics, and
bureaucracy. Both saw society as a system with parts and functions.
• The optimum health of the system is defined by the parts performing their
assigned tasks and working in coordination with the other parts of the system.
• Functions are either latent (i.e., hidden) or manifest (i.e., obvious). The tasks sociologists is
to explore these functions, which may explain the tenacity of social phenomenon, both
positive and negative.
• In this light, deviance is seen as something functional as they endure despite the operation
of social control. These are the basic assumptions of the structural functional perspective in
sociology.

• Symbolic interactionism takes a rather different approach in the analysis of

social realities.
• Charles Horton Cooley, Herbert Blumer, and George Herbert Mead produced the
foundational principles of this school of thought.
• For them, social interactions are governed by the meanings shared and co-created by social
actors in every interaction or encounter. These meanings are lodged on objects, events,
and persons and are seen as symbols, the interpretation of which shape and influence the
emerging interactions.
 Anthropology
• The American Anthropological Association describes anthropology as a science seeking
to “uncover principles of behavior that apply to all human communities.”
• To an anthropologists, diversity itself– seen in body shapes and sizes, customs, clothing speech,
religion, and worldview– provides a frame of reference for understanding any single aspects of life in
any given community.
• Instead of looking for a “universal culture”– cultural artifacts that appear the same or similar
everywhere they are found– anthropologists are looking for a “culture universe,” patterns of similarity
within array of differences.
• This approach is faithful to the principle of “equal but different” enshrined in the motto of the
discipline.

• As social sciences, anthropology focuses on human diversity around the world.

Anthropologists look at cross-cultural differences in social institutions, cultural beliefs, and
communication styles.
• They often seek to promote understanding between groups by “translating” each culture to the other, for
instance by spelling out common, taken-for-granted assumptions.
 The Social in the Guise of Inequality
• Social diversity is an ever-present and enduring feature of all known
cultures around the world, from the most primitive to the most highly
urbanized. Explanations for social diversity are plenty and mixed, each of
which offer justifications as to why it persist over time.
• Sociologist refer to it as social inequality (or social stratification). Social inequality
occurs when resources in a given society are distributed unevenly, typically through
norms of allocation that engender specific patterns along the lines of socially
defined categories of persons. It is normally the end result of social diversity.
• The concept has gained mutual currency in the vocabulary of political
science literature as well, but curiously, not in anthropology.
• As a matter of fact, anthropology does not have an equivalent term of concept as
the discipline’s starting points is dovetailed on the premises of cultural diversity
described earlier.
 • And even if anthropological counterparts exist, the terminologists
would lack the evaluative tone exemplified by the takes of sociology
and political science.
• Seen as modalities (or forms) of social inequality, cultural
diversity and social diversity have been the perennial subjects of
theoretical musings of sociologists, anthropologists, and
political scientists.
• Sociologists attributed the persistence and omnipresence of social
inequality to the beneficial functions it provides for the overall
operation of society. This exemplified by the merit system (of giving
incentives) and division of labor (of diverse skills and expertise).
• The merit system is the system of providing incentives and rewards depending
on the qualifications of the social actors involved. It is based on the assumption
that will perform better if given rewards.
• Political scientists, on the other hand, explain social inequality as a product of an
asymmetrical distribution of power in society.
• The distribution of power, nonetheless, is seen as contingent to and necessary for the
governance of social relations. So for political science, the clearest manifestation of power
relations is the existence of the state, which may be seen as a legitimate mediator of
societal tensions, as well as of social integration.
• Anthropologists take account of the “equal but different ways” of how people live in
the world. The “difference dimension” is seen as representing the culture’s inherent
value, hence it is essential to the appreciation of the culture sui generis, while the
“equal dimension” is interpreted on the basis of the logic that the same appraisal can
be used to judge even influential and renowned cultures.
• For example, social arrangements however exotic/familiar (e.g., rituals and system of
symbols, values) or idiosyncratic/normative (e.g., cultural traits and practices, norms) can
be seen as practical since they provide directions and instructions for a hassle-free life in
their perspective societies.
 An Unofficial Story of Anthropology
• Anthropology has been pejoratively called “a child of colonization” because discoverers
of new territories were always accompanied by missionary documenters (a.k.a
ethnographers). The primary function of these documenters was to record, to the
minutest details, all their observations and reflections about the conquered territories,
their people, practices, language, rituals, and idiosyncrasies.
• These so-called “scribes of cultures” became instruments of the colonizers in achieving their ultimate
yet oftentimes undisclosed, goals– the subjugation of native cultures.

• This somewhat the informal story of anthropology suggests two essential things about
the discipline and its capacity to represent the social: (1) its “methodology” of
documenting one’s engagement with a different culture, and (2) its fascination with the
ways of life in different societies.
• The former is referred to in anthropological jargon as the “ethnographic method” (ethnography),
while the latter points to the “niche subject” of the discipline.
• Ethnography can either be a
research design or a specific
research method where people are
observed in their natural
environment rather than in a
formal research setting. As
mentioned in the previous
paragraphs, the fascination to
understand familiar and exotic
cultures gave the discipline a
distinctive take on the issue of
equality and difference when
applied to cultural taxonomy.
 Forms of Diversity: Social and Cultural
• The phrase “cultural diversity” means a range of different societies or people of
different origins, regions, and traditions all living and interacting together.
• Social diversity refers to the gaps between people as measured by the presence or absence
of certain socially desirable traits. Although ideally this should be seen as a neutral term, in
reality the specific bases of what makes humans diverse become the basis of their
assessment with regards to rewards and social standing in the society.
• The bases of diversity are culturally dictated such as skin color, language, and ethnicity.
They represent ways of life that are determined by their respective geographies,
environments, and ecologies. The food that we eat, the words that we use to
communicate, and even the lifestyle that defines our individual personalities are but
manifestations of the richness of cultural influences.
• Cultural diversity is not only a situation between and across nations as is usually the case; it
can also be a stark demographic phenomenon in countries characterized by pan-
nationalities.
 Political Science
• Political science is the systematic study of government and politics. It makes
generalization and analyses about political systems and political behavior
and uses these results to predict future behavior (as in elections and similar
processes where predicting behaviors are important.
• Political science includes the study of political philosophy, ethics, international
relations, foreign policy, public administration, and the dynamic relations between
different parts of the government.
• As such, it deals extensively with the theory and practice of politics which is
commonly thought as the determining factor in in the distribution of power and
resources. Political scientists “see themselves engaged in revealing the relationships
underlying political events and conditions, and from these revelations they attempt
to construct general principles about the way the world of politics works.”
• In its most generic sense, political science assumes the
asymmetrical power relations of members of society but
problematizes the unjust and unfair effects of such relations
manifested in matters related to governance.
• Power relations are forms of interaction mediated by the use of and
deployment of authority and political influence.
• They have different layers ranging from the personal to the
group/organizational, to the institutional and governmental. Political
science is fascinated by the variety of their manifestations; hence, its
goal is to document these manifestations and map the constellations of
power relations within the different layers.
• Their political analysis is sharpened by the diverse issues and concerns
debated within and across the layers.
 The Social as a Tool of Change
• The term social change is used to indicate the changes that take place in human
interactions and interrelations. Social change may be defined as the alteration of
mechanisms within the social structure, characterized by changes in cultural symbols,
rules of behavior, social organizations, or value systems.
• Society is a web of social relationships and hence, social change means change in the systems of
social relationships. This is understood in terms of social processes, social interactions, and social
organizations. Sociology is both the consequence and the cause of change given its historical
development as a result of wide-ranging changes in Europe from the Renaissance and Industrial
Revolution periods.
• Just as change sparked the development of sociology, so does sociological thought provoke
more change. This is not to say that all sociologists agree on exactly what changes are most
desirable.
• It is also the case that some sociologists are more activist than others. But simply doing
sociology is becoming involved in change.
• This observation is true because becoming aware of the structure of society– a
consciousness we call the sociological imagination (Mills, 1959)– is a powerful tool that
allows us to ask not only “What is going on here?” but also “Should things be as they
are?” The moment we ask these questions, the political dimension of our engagement
becomes imminent.
• This means that we are already attempting to change the state of things in ways we see fit given
our specific social locations. But such an attempt to alter the equation of interactions in relation to
specific issues like labor, health care, environment, elections, and business strikes the power
components more than anything else.
• Social activisms consist of the effort to promote, inhibit, or (re)direct social, political, economic, or
environmental issues with the desire to make improvement in society and correct social injustice.
• Forms of social activism range from writing letters to newspapers or politicians, to political
campaigning, to taking part in economic boycotts and preferential patronizing of businesses.
• One can also express social activism through different forms of art or simply acknowledging
privileges and oppressions on a daily basis. The nonviolence and often personal features of social
activisms make it a suitable substitute for other militant forms of activisms that promote cultural
disenfranchisements and social disorder.
 The Story of Political Science: A Crib Version
• Political science is the discipline that problematizes the nature of power
and studies how possession and exercise of power can shape individual
actions and collective decisions for that matter.
• The latter are, in essence, a form of “social agreement” because they have futuristic
and lasting effects in people’s collective lives. In view of this, the discipline was
traditionally believed to have emerged from the works of “social contract”
theorists.
• This social thinkers, in different degrees and sophistication, argued for the
existence of the state in order to create a community of citizens free from the
brutalities of the state of nature, where every man is enemy to each one.
• The contract requires the people to surrender, completely or in part, their rights to
whoever (a persona) or whatever (an office) who or which in return exercise the
same for the protection of everybody. The state emerged out of the contract.
• Thus, the first political task that confronted political theorists was the
establishment of a political community that would protect the collective
good, which in this context was born out of the social contract.
• However, this is not the end of the task of the political science. A second task became
the necessary due to the failure of the social contract, seen in failed states or in states
in crisis. It is here were issues of legitimacy, reform, and resistance/revolution emerge.
The focus is on how to keep each party fulfilling its side of the contract.

• A third task became more evident during the period of modernity. This is
due to the fact that in the desirable to establish order, that much focus was
given on the political collective.
• The individual, which Aristotle considered as a “political animal,” disappeared as focus.
It is well-documented that the desire to establish a political community took its toll on
individual rights. The third and final task of the political science aimed at bringing back
the individuals to the political domain, focusing on what has been labeled as “identity
politics” that celebrated the saying “the personal is also political.”
 Activity No. 4: Me and My Social Map
• Starting with your present situation as a student, list down five important factors that
you think are responsible for the kind of person you are right now. Start with what is
unique in you as a social person (not necessarily focusing on your biophysical traits).
Link each feature with a societal, cultural, or political force. Then evaluate each in
terms of opportunities and constraints it provides in pursuing your present and future
plans. Use the table below as a template for your assessment.
My unique features as a social Types of social forces responsible for Assessment of effects (Does it
person (may include but are not these features (Is it societal/ provide opportunities or serve as
limited to sex, religion, residence) cultural/ political? constraints?)
 Performance Task #2: Editorial Essay Writing

The class will be divided into four (4) members each. Each group must write
an editorial essay that explains the social, political, and cultural contexts of
a particular phenomenon, issue or problem faced by the Filipinos at the
present time. The student should be able to explain how the social sciences
disciplines, namely Sociology, Anthropology and Political Science can help
understand the issue. At the end of the performance task, the student
should demonstrate an open and critical perspective on the importance of
studying issues/phenomenon through the use of observation and reflection.
The student should also explain how issues/problems can be understood
through the use of the social, political and cultural lens.
Mechanics:
1. Group must think of a phenomenon/issue/problem that they want to explore for
their editorial essay.
2. Once the topic is approved by the teacher, the students must gather data and
relevant information about the social, political and cultural contexts of the topic.
3. When writing the editorial essay, the group must synthesize the data gathered by
all the three members. Use the following guide questions in writing the group’s
editorial essay:
a. What is the issue/problem/phenomenon that you chose?
b. What is the nature of the issue/problem/phenomenon? Why is it an issue/problem/phenomenon
in the Philippines? Can you statistics or give relevant data about the nature of the
issue/problem/phenomenon?
c. Can you explain the social context of the issue/problem/phenomenon? How can Sociology help
understand and address the issue or problem
 d. Can you explain the cultural context of the issue/problem/phenomenon? How can
Anthropology help understand and address the issue or problem?
e. Can you explain the political context of the issue/problem/phenomenon? How can
Political Science help understand and address the issue or problem?
f. Based from your analysis, how can the social sciences help explain and/or address the
issue/problem/phenomenon?
4. At the end of the editorial essay discuss your conclusion or
recommendations.
5. Present your group editorial essay in class and seek the comments of your
teacher and classmates.
6. Revise the editorial essay if necessary before submitting it to your teacher.
 a. What is the issue/problem/phenomenon that you chose?
b. What is the nature of the issue/problem/phenomenon? Why is it an
issue/problem/phenomenon in the Philippines? Can you statistics or give relevant
data about the nature of the issue/problem/phenomenon?
c. Can you explain the social context of the issue/problem/phenomenon? How can
Sociology help understand and address the issue or problem?
d. Can you explain the cultural context of the issue/problem/phenomenon?
How can Anthropology help understand and address the issue or problem?
e. Can you explain the political context of the issue/problem/phenomenon?
How can Political Science help understand and address the issue or problem?
f. Based from your analysis, how can the social sciences help explain and/or
address the issue/problem/phenomenon?
4.At the end of the editorial essay discuss your conclusion or
recommendations.
 Rubric for Editorial Essay
Criteria Excellent Very Good Good Poor
Quality of Editorial essay is well- Editorial essay is Editorial essay is Editorial essay does
Writing written. It discussed the interesting. The poorly organized. not provide any
social, political, and discussion of the The discussion of discussion about
cultural context of the social, political, and the social, political, the social, political,
issue/problem/phenome cultural context of and cultural context and cultural context
non in a well-written the of the of the
organized manner. issue/problem/phen issue/problem/phen issue/problem/phen
omenon is omenon is not omenon.
somewhat informative and
informative and poorly organized.
organized.

Grammar and The editorial essay has The editorial essay The editorial essay The editorial essay
Mechanics no grammatical, has few has a number has many
spelling, or punctuation grammatical, grammatical, grammatical,
errors. spelling, or spelling, or spelling, or
punctuation errors. punctuation errors. punctuation errors.
 Criteria Excellent Very Good Good Poor
Clarity of The editorial The editorial The editorial The editorial
Discussions essay is very essay is clear. essay is essay is
clear. acceptable. vague.

Depth of The editorial The editorial The editorial The editorial

Discussions essay is very essay is clear. essay is essay lacks
thorough. acceptable. depth and
thoroughness
.