Writing Forums

Writing Forums is a privately-owned, community managed writing environment. We provide an unlimited opportunity for writers and poets of all abilities, to share their work and communicate with other writers and creative artists. We offer an experience that is safe, welcoming and friendly, regardless of your level of participation, knowledge or skill. There are several opportunities for writers to exchange tips, engage in discussions about techniques, and grow in your craft. You can also participate in forum competitions that are exciting and helpful in building your skill level. There's so much more for you to explore!

A Bridge Over Social Facts (1 Viewer)

grant-g

Senior Member
[h=3]A Bridge Over Social Facts[/h]

“… human life in so far as it is actively engaged in doing something, is always rooted in a world of men and of man-made things which it never leaves or altogether transcends.”
-Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Doubleday, Anchor:1959)



America is at an impasse, a predicament with no obvious way of escape. I believe we have the ability to forge our destiny if we can pave a future beyond the new found limitations of our digital era. In an attempt to bring on the next historical dynasty, a golden age really, I want to bridge some facts of social science that seem to leave off around the time of my birth, in 1979. You see, I am nestled between generation X and Y. I am just a little younger than people who would fashion themselves as X and quite a bit older than the next batch. Here’s my bridge.



Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) was a French Social Theorist. Durkheim explained how society is held together by a system of beliefs. Social facts, outside influences such as unemployment, constrain the individual. Sociology is responsible for the organic union of people in a society. When a political system collapses on its citizens, there is no better solution than social science. From Durkheim we can get to Talcott Parsons (1902-1979). Parsons was a major contributor to the sociological framework, functionalism. To Parsons, the social system is intertwined with smaller social systems and smaller parts of society which are intertwined further forming the wheel that we often tag ‘national.’ He died the same year I was born, isn’t that neat!



Functionalism started with Durkheim. It’s the analysis of society in its parts, and their individual contributions to its stability. Many of today's problems seem to be rooted in the deconstruction of this framework. The “Dot Com” crash was nothing more than a takeover. As the Internet rooted itself in the lives of America, the entrepreneurial edge was the distribution of this technology. Technologists spread out to offer customers Digital Subscriber Lines and Web Hosting packages at competitive rates. Thousands of small businesses opened to provide their own versions of DSL. The telecommunication giants, who really were hampered by laws obligating them to perform duties for Carrier Local Exchange Companies (middle men for the small ISP) eventually took down these networks dedicated to bridging the small ISP into the Local Loop, so data could travel across your phone line. When these CLECs were gobbled up, the small ISP no longer had a basis for their services. They began closing their doors systematically, causing a somewhat moderate, if not short lived, economic slump. But when the Banks failed, we were not able to rebound without the Governments help. To me, there is no worse combination, adding to our current financial problems, than it being an election year. Late June we would have seen a huge return to stability but the President is too busy trying to remain in office. If we can put Barack Obama back in the driver seat for four more years And, when he terms out in 2016, if we could possibly fill the Presidency with, get this prediction, Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey, American historians would be plenty busy documenting our latest Golden Age. Prosperity brought on by Obama’s final four years as well as a passing of the torch to a Republican that is not trying to instigate some sort of Biblical fall of Civilization.



So it’s back to Hegel’s Universal Idea, Aurelius’ Universal Reason, the creative and collective trend, like personal computing in the 90’s and 00’s, like the ‘Survivor’ reality show, the national quo, that individual parts of society can appreciate together creating stability, giving room for these parts successful individuality.



The worlds not going to end…



The only thing that’s over is the productive lifespan of a post war generation, that controls their country and sees correlation between their successive generation and letters that sometimes signify elimination (‘X’) or sound like a dismissive question. I see X and Y as coordinates, created before America by thinkers whose messages are still true, and can see me past this attack sequence of self destruction laid down by my predecessor.

They are too young to be war heroes, with a bent, to see that history ends with them. These man made failures of the social system were designed to keep their children at their feet. I, for one, am going to be examining these ideas more deeply in an attempt to see through this sabotage of prosperity.
 
Hi grant, some notes in red below then I'll make a couple comments.

A Bridge Over Social Facts



“… human life in so far as it is actively engaged in doing something, is always rooted in a world of men and of man-made things which it never leaves or altogether transcends.”
-Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Doubleday, Anchor:1959)



America is at an impasse, a predicament with no obvious way of escape. I believe we have the ability to forge our destiny if we can pave a future beyond the new found [hyphenate] limitations of our digital era. In an attempt to bring on the next historical dynasty vocab, a golden age really, I want to bridge some facts of social science that seem to leave off around the time of my birth, in 1979. You see, I am nestled between generation X and Y. I am just a little younger than people who would fashion themselves as X and quite a bit older than the next batch. Here’s my bridge.
You need to define your issues more clearly in the first paragraph.


Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) was a French Social Theorist. Durkheim explained how society is held together by a system of beliefs. Social facts, outside influences such as unemployment, constrain the individual. Sociology is responsible the study of for the organic union of people in a society. When a political system collapses on its citizens, there is no better solution than social science. From Durkheim we can get to Talcott Parsons (1902-1979). Parsons was a major contributor to the sociological framework, functionalism. To Parsons, the social system is intertwined with smaller social systems and smaller parts of society which are intertwined further forming the wheel that we often tag ‘national.’ He died the same year I was born, isn’t that neat! I see you trying to relate this to your own life, but it's not clear how, other than the coincidence of your birth year, or what the significance is. In addition - who is your audience here?

Functionalism started with Durkheim. It’s the analysis of society in its parts, and their individual contributions to its stability. Many of today's problems seem to be rooted in the deconstruction vocab of this framework. The “Dot Com” crash was nothing more than a takeover. As the Internet rooted itself in the lives of America, the entrepreneurial edge was the distribution of this technology. Technologists spread out to offer customers Digital Subscriber Lines and Web Hosting no caps on these terms packages at competitive rates. Thousands of small businesses opened to provide their own versions of DSL. The telecommunication giants, who really were hampered by laws obligating them to perform duties for Carrier Local Exchange Companies (middle men for the small ISP) eventually took down these networks dedicated to bridging the small ISP into the Local Loop, so data could travel across your phone line. When these CLECs were gobbled up, the small ISP no longer had a basis for their services. They began closing their doors systematically, causing a somewhat moderate, if not short lived, economic slump. But when the Banks failed, we were not able to rebound without the Governments help. new paragraph or cut everything after this, relevance isn't clear To me, there is no worse combination, adding to our current financial problems, than it being an election year. Late June we would have seen a huge return to stability but the President is too busy trying to remain in office. If we can put Barack Obama back in the driver seat for four more years And, when he terms out in 2016, if we could possibly fill the Presidency with, get this prediction, Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey, American historians would be plenty busy documenting our latest Golden Age. Prosperity brought on by Obama’s final four years as well as a passing of the torch to a Republican that is not trying to instigate some sort of Biblical fall of Civilization. This last sentence is a fragment.



So it’s back to Hegel’s Universal Idea, Aurelius’ Universal Reason, the creative and collective trend, like personal computing in the 90’s and 00’s, like the ‘Survivor’ reality show, the national quo, that individual parts of society can appreciate together creating stability, giving room for these parts successful individuality.



The world[apostrophe]s not going to end…



The only thing that’s over is the productive lifespan of a post war generation, that controls their its country and sees correlation between their successive generation and letters that sometimes signify elimination (‘X’) or sound like a dismissive question. I see X and Y as coordinates, created before America by thinkers whose messages are still true [which ones?], and can see me past this attack sequence of self destruction laid down by my predecessor. on what graph and who is your predecessor?

They are too young to be war heroes, with a bent, to see that history ends with them. These man made failures of the social system were designed to keep their children at their feet. I, for one, am going to be examining these ideas more deeply in an attempt to see through this sabotage of prosperity.

You need a clear thesis statement to show precisely what it is you're trying to argue, and you need to make that line of argumentation clear throughout your essay. The connections between your paragraphs are not clear at all. Be careful about your vocab, too, words like "deconstruction" have specific uses I don't think you intend.

If you're interested in the ways that financial institutions and social structures constitute culture, you might try reading Marx and Foucault. If you want to think about how media constitutes culture, you might try Kittler.

Best of luck with the piece.
 
Last edited:

grant-g

Senior Member
Hi, Thank you for your help. As I read the red I thought back to an early mental block where I really couldn't develop what I was itching at. Somehow as I was stumbling on these names, what they were saying seemed relevant and I was trying to take the blame (in a way, still that doesn't explain it) hmm...

My closing sentence was there to admit that I haven't even really studied Durkheim or Parsons. My target audience were G + users, people who are not well read but enjoy to. Like me :) Thanks for Marx, Foucault and Kittler. I'm reading The Human Condition and Hannah Arendt has studied Marx.
 

playingthepianodrunk

Senior Member
Society will be the downfall of man. Not the other way around. The world is too far gone to be fixed. The social sciences, I believe, are a corrupted field. Such study is what gave men like Hitler power. Each individual must learn for themselves, outside the levels of society, what is right and wrong. More importantly they must train themselves to be able to make those decisions. Society is a structure based on the principle that most people are too stupid to be left to their own devices. Humanity must learn to operate without the punishment reward system that has powered civilized people since we had towns. Read some Nietzsche, particularly On the Genealogy of Morality.
Our political structure is an elaborate show created to give the illusion that we have a say in the matter. And that's how it's been forever if you ask me. On the scale you're speaking of each and everyone of us is meaningless. But in the world I live in every single individual is important. I don't worry about these things any longer. I used to but it only leads to unhappiness. You see I didn't even know NASA landed another rover on the moon. I'm not sure why it matters but that's for another subject. I live under a big rock and I like it a lot.
 

grant-g

Senior Member
Thank you for the reply. sometimes I post my blogs on here because I get more specific reactions. its funny, the day I wrote this I had a little bit of writers block and so I dug up a couple of books that I got recently and in brief did some quick summaries to get the ball rolling. I really don't know very much about the stuff I was talking about and I see it shows. it goes back to the methodology of writing and that I didn't revise, revise, revise. i think if I spent very much more time on it, it may have been scrapped.

I'll have to read Genealogy of Morality, i think I have sections of it in a couple textbooks. I enjoy the section of Beyond Good and Evil that I had read. I do find the turn of the 20th century and up to about WWII very interesting. Science and Philosophy were at a particular peak and whatever can be said about atrocity just blocks people from learning about many different masters of the universe. thanks again :peaceful:
 

Ddesmond

Senior Member
Well written. I like Lasm's critique and the only thing I can add is to tell you to look again at your use or not of apostrophes.

For example: creating stability, giving room for these parts{'} successful individuality.
The world{'}s not going to end…
 
Top