Culture And SocialisationClass 11 Introducing Sociology NCERT Solutions

The understanding of culture in social science differs significantly from its everyday use. In common conversation, 'culture' is often used in a limited sense to refer to refined tastes in arts like classical music, dance, or painting. It can also allude to the specific way of life of certain elite classes or entire countries. This everyday use often implies a hierarchy, distinguishing the 'cultured' from the 'uncultured'.

In contrast, sociologists and anthropologists use the term 'culture' in a much broader and more neutral sense. They view culture not as something that distinguishes individuals, but as the total way of life in which all members of a society participate. As defined by anthropologist Edward Tylor, culture is a “complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.” Therefore, for social scientists, every society has a culture, and the focus is on understanding the social contexts and the relationships between its various aspects, rather than ranking them as superior or inferior.

The different dimensions of culture—cognitive, normative, and material—are deeply interconnected and comprise a whole. We can demonstrate this by showing how they rely on each other for meaning and function.

These dimensions do not exist in isolation. For instance, our understanding of material culture is incomplete without knowledge from the cognitive and normative dimensions. A religious idol (material aspect) is meaningless without the beliefs, stories, and ideas associated with it (cognitive aspect) and the rituals and rules for worshipping it (normative aspect).

Similarly, a technological tool like a mobile phone (material) requires knowledge of how to operate it (cognitive) and an understanding of the social etiquette for its use, such as not speaking loudly in a quiet place (normative). When these dimensions are out of sync, for example when technology (material) changes faster than the values and norms (non-material) that govern it, a situation of 'culture lag' can arise. This demonstrates that for a culture to function as an integrated whole, its different dimensions must work together.

Comparing two cultures, such as the urban culture of a metropolitan city in India and the culture of a traditional village, reveals significant differences in their normative, cognitive, and material aspects.

It is indeed difficult not to be ethnocentric when making such comparisons. Ethnocentrism is the tendency to evaluate other cultures using the standards of one's own. A person from the city might view village customs as 'backward' or 'inefficient', while a person from the village might see city life as 'impersonal' and a 'breakdown of family values'. This happens because we are socialised into our own culture's norms and values, which we tend to see as the 'natural' or 'correct' way of life. Overcoming ethnocentrism requires a conscious effort to understand that different cultures are simply different ways of adapting to social and natural conditions, not inherently better or worse.

The chapter outlines different ways to understand cultural change. Two key approaches are based on the source of the change and the pace of the change.

Yes, cosmopolitanism is strongly associated with modernity. A cosmopolitan outlook values other cultures for their differences and does not judge them by the standards of one's own culture. It promotes cultural exchange and borrowing to enrich one's own culture. This is a key feature of modern, globalised societies where modern means of communication and transportation shrink distances between cultures, allowing for diverse influences.

The chapter provides examples that link cosmopolitanism with modernity:

Examples of Ethnocentrism: Ethnocentrism is the opposite of cosmopolitanism, involving the application of one's own cultural values to evaluate others, often with a sense of superiority. The chapter provides a clear example:

For my generation, the mass media, particularly the electronic and digital media (television, internet, social media), is arguably the most effective agent of socialisation. While family, school, and peer groups remain important, the media's influence is pervasive and constant. It shapes opinions, tastes, and worldviews by providing access to a vast amount of information and exposing individuals to experiences and lifestyles far beyond their immediate environment. The chapter notes the amazing expansion of media and its ability to reach even remote areas, making its influence more democratic and widespread than ever before.

This is significantly different from previous generations. Before the media explosion, the most effective agents of socialisation were:

In the past, the world of a child was largely confined to these primary groups. Today, the media introduces a diversity of socialising influences from a very early age, sometimes creating conflict with the values taught by the family or school, and profoundly shaping the identity and cognitive culture of the younger generation.