Comparing Theories Of Veblen And Bourdieu Sociology Essay

Comparing Theories Of Veblen And Bourdieu Sociology Essay In Turkey or in the world, we generally come across with the news about shopping line in front of the stores to buy the brand new model of a kind of good. Mostly, report people go to these lines and make interview with the persons waiting on line. For example, again in such a line for the opening day to be first to buy iPhone, a man was interviewed. He was in line to buy the new iPhone. He looked like he was in his 60s and had had a few facelifts. When he was asked, he said this was his second day of waiting in line: The day before he had waited 12 hours and finally got a phone for his daughter. He had returned and spent nine hours to get a phone for him. He said he had the 3G, and wanted to upgrade to a 4G. In society, one establishes a status, not only by what one does or says, but also by purchasing and being seen to possess certain types of car, house, or clothes, or by being seen to live in a certain neighborhood or suburb, shopping in certain stores, going to certain theaters, decorating ones apartment in a certain way, taking certain vacations etc.   All of these are social symbols to which society has attached certain connotations of a superior, different, or normal  status. Conspicuous consumption makes individuals desire to compete to buy the symbolic advantages. Thus, I want to compare Veblens conspicuous consumption concept with Bourdieus cultural capital, habitus and taste concepts. First, I will try to examine Veblens theory of leisure class. Then I will try to examine Bourdieus theory of capitals, taste and habitus. Finally, I compare both thinkers to understand the role of consumption in stratification in society. Veblens Theory of Leisure Class and Conspicuous Consumption: In The Theory of the Leisure Class  (1899), Thorsten Veblen thought up the phrase conspicuous consumption to designate the act of purchasing and using certain goods and services, not in order to survive, but rather to identify oneself to others as having superior wealth and social standing.   These possessions and services are extras that are to some extent wasteful as showed in the example above. They symbolize ones ability to waste whatever one wants. Veblen starts his examination by first demonstrating the pre-historical progression from savage to barbarian culture, and then claiming that the latter stages after barbarian culture to modern cultures characteristics were still seen in the modern capitalist society. Veblens Account of the Development of Society: Peaceable Æ’Â  Predatory Æ’Â  Quasi-Peaceable Industry Æ’Â  Modern Savages Æ’Â   BarbariansÆ’Â   Moderns Changes in society are generated by changes in the material facts of life. The change from peaceable society to predatory society requires enough accumulated stuff to be worth fighting for (tools, weapons, etc). Barbarian civilizations are different from the earlier stages of savage society. With their tendencies to martial and aggressiveness, it results in the appearance of a dominant leisure class. Thus, a new order occurs and that is made possible a new class which can produce beyond the minimum subsistence level. When this happens, a group of people redistribute the outcomes of other group of peoples productive labor in their own sake. Thus, this new class has the ownership of private property. According to Veblen, this creates envy that middle and lower classes desire to the same un-industrious lives. That allows the leisure class to form. Thus the accumulation of possessions is priority number one for the leisure class. The emergence of leisure class coincides with ownership. The motivation behind ownership is emulation. In The Theory of the Leisure Class, he wrote: The motive is emulation-the stimulus of an invidious comparison especially in any community in which class distinctions are quite vague, all canons and reputability and decency and all standards of consumption are traced back by insensible gradations to the usages and thoughts of the highest social and pecuniary class, the wealthy leisure class (p.81). In that sense, it can be claimed that men are led to accumulation of wealth because of pecuniary emulation. Veblen claims that the pecuniary struggle is the driving force behind the development of culture and society. The struggle for wealth (private property) is due to pecuniary emulation. It can be said that it is not a struggle for subsistence. If it were a struggle for subsistence, there would come a definite point after which the reason to gather goods would stop. But there is no such point. Veblen held that consumption is motivated by a desire for social standing as well as for the enjoyment of the goods and services per se: The proximate ground for expenditure in excess of what is required for physical comfort is a desire to live up to the conventional standard of decency (p.81) People compare consumption but not leisure, and that they refer upwards, choosing their work and spending activities in order to be more like a higher income group. He indicates that a major source of this conduct is due to the pressures of invidious comparison, a process of valuation of persons in respect of worth. Veblen defines as a comparison of persons with a view to rating and grading them in respect of relative worth or value (1899: 34). Under modern conditions consumption is a more visible form of display. Individuals should find the ways to show off their wealth in order for invidious comparisons. Veblen pointed out two main ways to do this, conspicuous leisure and conspicuous consumption. He argues that wasteful conspicuous leisure and consumption were most effective ways of displaying wealth. As a result, strategies of conspicuous leisure and conspicuous consumption affected the class structure, and soon penetrated among non-leisure classes, leading to lower class people t o engage in conspicuous leisure and consumption. The exigencies of the modern industrial system frequently place individuals and households in juxtaposition between whom there is little contact in any other sense than juxtaposition. Ones neighbors, mechanically speaking, often are socially not ones neighbors, or even acquaintances; and still their transient good opinion has a high degree of utility. The only practicable means of impressing ones pecuniary ability on these unsympathetic observers of ones everyday life is an unremitting demonstration of the ability to pay. (p.71) Conspicuous consumption emphasis pecuniary emulation even more so than leisure, because the working classes engage in wasteful expenditures in an attempt to appear wealthy, even when their employments are not of the leisurely point of view. Overgenerous dress, gluttonous banquets, grand mansions, and iPhones, etc are all examples of conspicuous consumption. Any item that is without a productive function, or that has a price well above what is indicated by its practical utility alone, constitutes a good that is valued predominantly for the social capital that it brings. Take foie gras as an example. Suppose a group of people likes the taste of beef more than the taste of foie gras. Of course, foie gras is much more expensive than beef. It is not that people eat foie gras despite the fact it provides less utility than beef; rather, foie gras provides more utility, because utility is not based on taste alone. So what is providing the utility? The money was spent by this class with little regard for utility. Veblens theory was that people want to buy things because they want to signal wealth, power and taste to others in other words, signals about social status. People would not want to buy something which gave signals of a lower social status; they always want to aim higher. The idea is that you consume like the upper classes in order to be the upper classes, consciously or not. It can be stretched to apply to almost any example of consumption. I agree with the idea that people buy things as a display to others. I think it is also true that people buy things to identify with a particular idea of class or culture. Another aspect of leisure class is that it loses its contact with labor and its characteristic becomes conspicuous exemption from all useful employment. Leisure connotes non-productive consumption of time. Having the information about the past, antiques, ancient languages and sciences to know, horses, dogs, home decoration, these are all indicative of the industry that you do not do a job. Conspicuous leisure has the greatest vogue as a mark of reputability. The consumption of the more desirable things becomes honorable. Luxuries and the comforts of life belong to leisure class. Industrious class should consume only what may be necessary to their subsistence. The consumption of luxuries is a consumption directed to the comfort of the consumer himself and is a mark of the master. Women should consume only for the benefit of their masters. Master man consumes of the best food, drink, weapons, narcotics, shelter, ornaments. This kind of consumption is an evidence of wealth and it becomes honorific. As wealth accumulates the leisure class develops further in function and structure and there arises a differentiation within the class. This differentiation is furthered by the inheritance of wealth and the consequent inheritance of gentility. Veblens explanation of emulation has the root of ownership; in other words once our immediate material needs are met, we buy items for their conspicuous nature, to emulate those in higher earning strata, status. Veblen conceives of status among humans as a stratification system. Ownership became associated to power and dominance, and originated a new sort of social division: that separating owners from non-owners. Veblen asserts Wealth is now itself intrinsically honorable and confers honor on its possessor (Veblen, 1899: 18). Thus the struggle for survival became a struggle for pecuniary respect. In other words, competition for the accumulation of goods envisaged gaining the esteem of the community and enhancing ones reputation. Veblen established an objective relationship between social structure and class lifestyles, cultural values and ultimately, consumption practices. The acquisition of social repute and honour depended upon primarily by the ability to waste economic resources that had been acquired without effort. Some eighty years later, Pierre Bourdieu ([1979] 1984) a French sociologist also examined the relationship between social structure and economic and cultural dimensions of social life. Bourdieu analyzed consumption practices and taste to show how social position and lifestyles are related. In this account, instead of a dominant class culture, one finds class cultures. P. Bourdieu: Habitus, Field, Capital and Taste: Max Weber (1978) discussed the term social class to grasp the idea that, in addition to the economic conditions discussed by Marx, hierarchical social structure are also established and reproduced through styles of life. In that sense, it can be said that societies separate into different groupings based not only on economic conditions, but also on non economic criteria such as morals, culture, and lifestyle, etc. In that sense, it was  ¬Ã‚ rst analyzed in Veblens (1899) theory about the leisure class and Simmels theory of trickle-down status imitation (Coleman, 1983). In Distinction (Bourdieu, 1984), Bourdieu describes how these various capitals operate in the social  ¬Ã‚ elds of consumption. In Distinction, (Bourdieu, 1984) consumption practices and taste engender and maintain social relationships of dominance and submission (Campbell, 2005). Bourdieus views on taste and preferences are more complex than those of Veblens (Guimaras et all, 2010: 8). Despite bearing some similarities with Veblen (1899), Bourdieu built a broader and more complex theory secured with three primary concepts: habitus, capital, and field. The concept that Bourdieu proposed in order to connect his depiction of systemic structuration and his accounts of individual action is habitus (King, 2000). Thus, the habitus may be defined as the mental or cognitive structures through which people deal with the social world; a system of dispositions. The dispositions, produced by the habitus, are passed on through the generations, inculcated from an early age and socially reinforced through education and culture. Habitus refers, in Bourdieus own words, an acquired system of generative schemes objectively adjusted to the particular conditions in which it is constituted. In other words, habitus is thinking and acting in an innate way; is not a set of rules one consciously learns. Therefore, Bourdieu claims that habitus helps to transmit distinct culture of a class and reproduce that culture. It constitutes a component of a field of objective relations, which is independent of the individuals consciousness and will. The objectivity of fields is provided by the distribution of different species of power, which Bourdieu characterizes as economic, cultural, and social capital. Each field corresponds a tacit struggle over these resources. Fields determine relational positions which impose present and future situations on their more or less powerful occupants. A given population may occupy positions in multiple fields. Multiple fields may impose more or less consolidated relations of domination and subordination. (The Cambridge Dictionary of Sociology, 2006). It reflects divisions in the class structure, age groups, genders and social classes. A habitus is required a long term occupation of a position within the social world. People who occupy the same position within the social world tend to have similar habitus. Habitus is both produced by the social life and also produces it. It is a structured structure; it involves both the internalization of external structures, and also the externalization of things internal to individual. It is because regularities are inherent in an arbitrary condition; tend to appear as necessary and natural. Bourdieu (1984: 170) states: The habitus is both the generative principle of objectively classifiable judgments and the system of classification (principium divisionis) of these practices. It is in the relationship between the two capacities which define the habitus, the capacity to produce classifiable practices and works, and the capacity to differentiate and appreciate these practices and products (taste), that the represented social world, i.e. the space of life styles, is constituted. Habitus is the way society becomes deposited in persons in the form of lasting dispositions, or trained capacities and structured propensities to think, feel and act in determinant ways, which then guide them (Wacquant, 2005: 316, cited in Navarro 2006: 16). In this sense, life styles are defined as the products of habitus and, perceived in their mutual relations to the systems of the habitus, they become sign systems which are socially considered such as distinguished, vulgar and alike (Bourdieu, 1984: 172). Habitus is not a direct reflection of the conditions of existence of a class, but a sensibility acquired through a life-time and an upbringing in those conditions and the possibilities they include or exclude. Different from Veblen, Bourdieu claims that people acquired a culture of habitus based on both economic and cultural capital instead of Veblens concept of emulation. Thus, whether a person actually has money, skills, education or family, in practice turns out to be secondary to the habitus they have acquired, which may be at odds with the life-style and attitudes, the way of using the body, command of language, friends and contacts, preferences in art and aspirations, etc., which are normally associated with those conditions. Action, in Bourdieus perspective, is a product of class dispositions intersecting with the dynamics and structures of particular fields (Swartz, 1997: 141). To have economic capital is not enough as it does in Veblen, in Bourdieus theory, you should also have the cultural capital for it. Bourdieu attempted to explain the relationship between peoples practices and the context that is institutions, values and rules, in which these practices occur. This attempt led him to the idea of the field, which is a series of contexts which constitute an objective hierarchy and which produce and authorize certain discourses and activities (Webb, 2002: 21-22). Bourdieu classifies two aspects of a field: first of all that people in a specific field have its specific dispositions imposed upon them; and secondly fields can be characterized as area of struggle through which agents and institutions seek to preserve or overturn the existing distribution of capital (Wacquant, 2008: 268). Through capital Bourdieu understands both the material things and the symbolic and culturally significant attributes such as prestige, honour and status, in other words anything that is considered by an agent valuable enough to attempt to obtain it. Bourdieus field theory describes the field as a domain where specific activities are produced. This is to say that each field entails a specific game and specific interests, which are not reducible to the interests and to the game of other fields. Thus, to enter a field is to accept the rules of the game and to share the fields main goals. The notion of field is even more powerful when equated with capitals and habitus. In other words, the habitus is strongly related to ones position in the social structure. Across different studies, Pierre Bourdieu has synthesized Weberian, Marxist, Durkheimian to argue for a theory of social status, and that for which is competition for various types of capital within social  ¬Ã‚ elds. With Weber, Bourdieu based his theory on the idea that culture is a field like the economic world, in which some actors compete to get various types of resources or capital. While in the economic level actors fight over economic capital, in cultural level they contend to apt cultural capital goods and practices that are socially defined as distinctive and hence let individuals an impression of superiority. But Bourdieu points out that the cultural struggle for distinction is connected to the economic distribution of material goods, which it both legitimates and reproduces. An individuals material conditions of subsistence, determined by her economic capital, establish a habitus o r set of dispositions, which in turn produces cultural tastes. Gartman (2002) claims that the right tastes make possible the accumulation of cultural capital, which makes the individual look distinctive and hence justifies the economic capital that determined her cultural tastes to begin with. Consequently, culture is closely related with the economy that Bourdieu considers society as a social field that is the intersection of the economic and cultural fields. The positions in the social field are classes, each defined by its relative balance of economic and cultural capital and its overall volume of the two kinds of capital combined (Bourdieu, 1984: 169-75). Taste is a component of the habitus, thus, given the relationship between tastes and social structure. Bourdieu examines the taste and life-style in relation to social classes and class fractions and he analyses the economic and social determinants of tastes (1984: 101). In this sense, taste is a marker of social class or of class position, because tastes place individuals in relation to other tastes which express social divisions. Such divisions also express social distinction and reflect the struggle for social distinction. Moreover, Taste is an acquired disposition to differentiate and appreciate à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ to establish and mark differences by a process of distinctionBourdieu (1984: 466). Taste is therefore a way of ensuring social recognition and status. Different from emulation, taste is, nonetheless, also linked to necessity. The existence of an upper class culture and upper class taste does not supersede lower class values and tastes. Instead, he argued that while material need is dominant to the definition of higher-class taste, lower-class taste is born because of necessity. This is to say that lower class taste has restrictions caused by material deprivation. Such restrictions have limited access to cultural objects and practices that are highly valued and constitute the very realm of upper-class taste. As such, Bourdieu stresses that taste is the practical affirmation of difference; it is materialized class culture that unites all those who are the product of similar conditions. What is more, Bourdieu observed that the rich justified and naturalized their economic advantage over others not only by pointing to their bank accounts, but by being the arbiters of taste.   Bourdieu shows us that taste is not stable and peaceful, b ut a means of strategy and competition. Discuss: Comparing Veblen and Bourdieu: When we examine the concept of conspicuous consumption, Veblen stresses the function of it as the status symbols in order to show off ones social standing in the society. He focused on upper and unproductive classes which are not directly involved in economic production activities. Thus, Veblen talked about valued practices of upper classes and emulation by the other classes. To spend lots of money on wasteful products is the result of the conspicuous consumption as being a member of the leisure class. On the other hand, Bourdieu discussed about not only conspicuous consumption but also all kind of consumption. As it is discussed above, according to him, both economic and cultural capitals reinforce the class positions. In that sense, tastes and practices are determined by the position of somebody in social structure. Tastes are related to ones habitus which is related with ones social class. Another issue related to both thinkers is the trickle down and trickle up effect. Trickle down effect is, in its simplest way, emulation of upper class culture or taste by lower class. For example, many lower class people in Turkey have the brand new model of cellular phones although their monthly salary does not afford this kind of consumption. On the other hand, tickle up effect means that there can also be impression from bottom to up. For example, some women from upper class started to wear yemeni or Ã…Å ¸alvar which are signs of lower class culture. However, in Veblen theory, leisure classes use consumption in order to distinguish themselves from both lower classes and new money people. In that sense, they have accumulated culture which upper class people inherent it from the family that they belong to as a way of distinction like taste in Bourdieus theory. Bourdieu claims that lower classes also have taste. However, this taste is different from the upper classes since lower class taste is born out of necessity. Because of this necessity, lower class people, for Bourdieu, do not pay attention some cultural practices such as going to opera or museum, buying books, etc. Different from Veblen wasteful conspicuous consumption, for Bourdieu, lower class people avoid consuming because of necessity. Moreover, as it is in the example of Yemeni, upper classes can move down to popular taste. Another point should be mentioned. In Bourdieus theory, upper classes try to maintain their status as a distinction from the tastes of lower classes. Thus, they turn the popular taste. The artist agrees with the bourgeois in one respect: he prefers naivety to pretentiousness. The essentialist merit of the common people is that they have none of the pretensions to art (or power) which inspire the ambitions of the petit bourgeois. Their indifference tacitly acknowledges the monopoly. That is why, in the mythology of artists and intellectuals, whose outflanking and double-negating strategies sometimes lead them back to popular tastes and opinions, the people so often play a role not unlike that of the peasantry in the conservative ideologies of the declining aristocracy. (Bourdieu, 1984: 62) Thus, in Bourdieu theory, there is a struggle for good taste and bad taste which make people distinct from each other through cultural consumption. In Veblens theory, emulation is the possession of the certain goods but does not lead them to have the knowledge of the goods such as a work of art. On the other hand, upper classes have developed this kind of knowledge. In that point, for Bourdieu, key concept is cultural capital. The positions of individuals in the field are determined by the amount of and relative weight of the capital they posses. Bourdieu discusses 4 types of capitals. Economic capital: the economic resources possessed by an actor. Cultural capital: the various kinds of legitimate knowledge possessed by an actor. Social capital: the extend of the valued social relations possessed by an actor. Symbolic capital: the amount of honor and prestige possessed by an actor. According to Trigg (2001), cultural capital is the accumulated knowledge which is learned trough education and social upbringing. Through the practical applications and implications of taste, people classify objects and also classify themselves. In this frame, culture is a kind of economy, a marketplace that utilizes cultural rather than economic capital. This capital is usually peoples social class origin and educational experience. Thus, cultural capital is correlated to high-status class positions and makes them distinct from other classes. Thus, distinction is a broader notion than Veblens conspicuous consumption. Consequently, instead of a single dominant upper class lifestyle that lower classes try to emulate, in Bourdieu we find different class tastes and lifestyles. To sum up, according to Bourdieu, different consumption practices and the taste behind of them make distinction among classes and create hierarchical social relations. On the other hand, Veblen pointed on wealth and emulation of wealth as a source of distinction. Bourdieu did not concern on wealth as much as Veblen. He emphasized on cultural capital. Veblen used wealth as a source of social stratification with the display of wealth. In Bourdieu, however, the competition for status takes place within the fields. Conclusion: In this paper, my main aim is to compare and contrast the theory of Veblen and Bourdieu by examining of their main concepts such as conspicuous consumption, leisure class, emulation, habitus, field, cultural capital and taste. In that sense, first of all, I discussed Veblens theory which he concerns that consumption is a way of displaying wealth. He uses conspicuous consumption as a way of stratification. He describes emulation to examine the stratification among upper classes and lower classes. Secondly, I try to examine Bourdieus theory by focusing on the book of Distinction. Different from Veblen, he deals with all kinds of consumption and does not focus on wealth as much as Veblen does. He emphasizes the concept of taste in different classes. He uses cultural capital to distinct different classes. Finally, in the last part, I compare both thinkers. Briefly, I found the following ones: When we examine the concept of conspicuous consumption, Veblen stresses the function of it as the status symbols in order to show off ones social standing in the society. Bourdieu discussed about not only conspicuous consumption but also all kind of consumption. In Veblen, emulation moves down words. In Bourdieu, taste moves up and down words. Veblen discussed that accumulated culture is a way of social prestige which distinct upper classes from lower classes and new money. In his theory, he focused on individuals who caused the distinction by conspicuous consumption and social hierarchy. In Bourdieus theory, consumption and taste are involved which they help the reproduction of class structure. Bourdieu studied beyond the individual and pointed out that the habitus creates the class position with the help of accumulated knowledge, aka cultural capital. Taste is a marker of social class in Bourdieu and not just of wealth as Veblen thought. Veblens focused on the significance of economic capital. On the other hand, Bourdieu highlighted on the cultural capital.

An application of Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to Carl Rogers 10 Principles of Learning

An application of Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs to Carl Rogers 10 Principles of LearningIntroduction The objective of this paper is to explore the relevance of applying Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to the 10 principles of learning put forward by Carl Rogers in ‘Freedom to Learn’ (1969).Rogers was one of the founders of the humanistic approach to psychotherapy and he was also a fervent educationalist. ‘Freedom to Learn’ (Rogers,1969) and ‘Freedom to Learn for the 80’s’ (Rogers,1983) were both a direct challenge to the education system in the United States. His introduction starts: ‘Our education system is, I believe, failing to meet the needs of our society’ (Rogers,1983).He questioned those who were saying ‘We must tell children what is right and wrong, that we must teach and they must follow’ (Rogers,1983). He noted that large and powerful groups were  insisting that students must not read certain books and believed teachers operated in a climate of fear, unable to encourage children to grow to their full potential. The very title ‘Freedom to Learn’ was a statement of discontent with the system.Maslow, in contrast to looking at the educational system, focused on the individual. His theory of human motivation was published towards the end of the World War II (1943). Maslow was heavily influenced by Freud (but did not consider himself a Freudian). In simple terms, Maslow took an optimistic view of life in contrast to Freud’s pessimism.Maslow’s views in many ways mirrored Jung and Adler but again, he did not consider himself a Jungian or an Adlerian. He formed his own theory that all humans are motivated to achieve their true potential providing that their basic psychological needs are met.He took a holistic view of life that the human creature begins as a kind of acorn, with all the characteristics of a fully grown tree inside it. His theory of human motivation became known as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.In this essay I point out the congruence of the two psychologists’ theories – Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Rogers’ 10 principles of learning. What is learning?  Ã¢â‚¬ËœHuman beings have a natural potential for learning’ (Rogers first principle,1969). Rogers (1994) puts learning along a continuum, whereby at one end learning is not experiential and there is little or no meaning, with ‘syllables’ quickly forgotten. At the other end, ‘significant, meaningful experiential learning’ occurs. A very simple explanation of the two would be, one can read a book on swimming or, talk to a coach, but until any meaningful experiential work has taken place (i.e. one gets into the water)  learning will not commence.Rogers furthered his argument by saying that the education system had traditionally thought of learning as an orderly type of cognitive, left-brain activity w hich could be measured, ranked and ordered. However in his view, if a student is conditioned or even forced under threat to learn in this way then he may be capable of ‘regurgitating’ knowledge but not necessarily understanding it. Rogers believed that also utilising the right side of the brain was required in order to involve the whole person in the learning process. This would appear to be a more complete understanding of learning.Maslow stated that theory separated from experience and practice could be very dangerous. ‘On the other hand, the practical person who does not understand theory is also handicapped’(Goble,1970). It is clear Maslow supports Rogers view of experiential learning.Our Basic Needs Maslow perceived the human as driven, motivated and propelled by potent forces and called these forces human needs: ‘Human needs arrange themselves in hierarchies of pre-potency, that is to say the appearance of one need usually rests on the prior sat isfaction of another, more pre-potent need. Man is a perpetually wanting animal’ (Maslow,1943). He also added that no need or drive could be treated as if it were isolated or discrete and that every drive was related to the state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the other drives.Maslow presented his theory of motivation as a pyramid-like structure covering five levels of need; psychological, safety, love and belonging, esteem and – at the pinnacle – self-actualisation.  The psychological needs are somatic (i.e. they relate to the body not the mind) and as such are not strictly motivated actions. Maslow defines the somatic drives as: air, food, water, sex and secretion. Once the somatic drives are met, motivated drives will follow.Significantly, Maslow was the first to expound the premise that learning can only commence once the psychological needs have been satisfied and that at least part of each stage of learning must be achieved before progressing up t he pyramid.He was particularly concerned that once the basic needs have been met, children need to ‘learn to be responsible for each other, to care for each other, not only for the sake of others but for their own sake’ (Goble,1970).Maslow also believed there was no fast track route to self-actualisation and that learning could slip backwards if circumstances changed. For example, the child when frightened clings to his mother or the child berated by parents for not getting the grades brings fear and insecurity, leaving him to scurry anxiously back down the stairs to relative safety and security.With the above point in mind let us continue our focus on Rogers’ principles and explore where there are similarities in approach. ‘Those learnings which are threatening to the self are more easily perceived and assimilated when external threats are at a minimum’ (Rogers’ fourth principle,1969). Conversely when external threats are present, learning st ops and we seek safety and comfort.Rogers’ example is of a boy with reading difficulties being forced to read aloud in class and then ridiculed by his peers. Another would be the school bully who exploits the weaknesses of their classmates. This stops learning and may even lead to retreat to a lower level of Maslow’s hierarchy where such threats are at a minimum. Life has changed  considerably. Special needs schools and provision within schools for dyslexia and the less able are further examples.‘When threat to the self is low, experience can be perceived in differentiated fashion and learning can proceed’ (Rogers’ fifth principle, 1969). It is this point that also underpinned Rogers humanistic approach to psychotherapy.He, the teacher, facilitator and the therapist must have: regard to the serious and meaningful problem, he must demonstrate congruence, show unconditional positive regard to his client or student and give empathic understanding. Wh ile I have condensed these four significant statements into a single sentence, together, they form part of the foundation stones of Rogers Humanistic and Person-centered approach to learning and understanding.Following these foundation stones has enabled many teachers, managers and therapist alike to help facilitate learning and assist the student or client reach the third level of Maslow’s hierarchy, love and belonging.Maslow stated that love was not to be confused with sex which is a psychological need. He likened Carl Rogers’ definition of love to ‘that of being deeply understood and deeply accepted’ (Goble,1970). He rejected Freud’s tendency to assert that love derived from sex. Maslow also felt the absence of love stifled growth. Crucially both Rogers and Maslow saw love and acceptance as a pivotal point in both learning and the path to self discovery.Humans who reach this stage carry with them an awareness of life. I have introduced Carl Jung (1955) as he described this awareness or imprint as containing: ones collective unconscious, their personal unconscious (which  includes social conditioning) and their ego.It is likely that this presents the most difficult stage in the learning process. ‘Learning which involves a change in self organization in the perception of oneself is threatening and tends to be resisted ’(Rogers’ third principle,1969).There is a whole new genre of ‘self help’ books designed to address this very challenge. A simple example, ‘It is through the pain of confronting and resolving problems that we learn’ (Scott Peck,1983). The writings of Aldous Huxley, Eckhart Toll and Ken Wilber are but a few of the many teachers who’s books have assisted parents, students and clients alike take the next step from love and acceptance to self-esteem along Maslow’s hierarchy.To change ones perception of life is for many the first stage of determining just what ‘self’ represents. Early adulthood is often a time to challenge parents, religious beliefs and much of the social conditioning one has accepted as ‘truth’ for much of one’s life.Once the student/client can believe in him/herself, be willing to break through past conditioning, great discovery and learning is possible.  Ã¢â‚¬ËœSignificant learning takes place when the subject matter is perceived by the student as having relevance for his own purposes†¦and [when] relevant to the goal, learning takes place with great rapidity’ (Rogers’ second principle,1969). Maslow would appear to concur. His concept of the ‘peak experience’, a moment of oneness with self and the universe is a breakthrough moment in the journey. To have such a moment and rush to a higher level of existence is a ‘moment of selfactualisation without the recipient becoming self actualised’ (Maslow,1970). It does provide a key motivator to continue.These peak experiences motivate and provide renewed energy and confidence, ‘Much significant learning is acquired by doing’ (Rogers’ sixth principle,1969). As the student grows, motivated by peak experiences, feeling safe and solving problems are an effective builder of self-esteem.Maslow extended his ideas in later years and found that people have two ‘categories’ of esteem needs; self-esteem and esteem from other people. It was the development of esteem from others which caused concern to Maslow in his later life and its impact upon his hierarchy. Even up to his death in 1970 he was reformulating and refining his opinions of the concept of self-actualisation. He held the view, esteem for many had become the only or most important goal. He believed the individual who allows his desires to distort his perception of self, diminishes his psychological health.This concurred with Rogers’ ninth principle, ‘Independence, creativity a nd self-reliance are all facilitated when self criticism and self-evaluation are basic and evaluation by others is of secondary importance’(1969). Rogers’ eighth principle makes a similar point, ‘Self-initiated learning which involves the whole person of the learner – feelings as well as intellect, is the most lasting and pervasive’ (1969). In the current economic climate, status and esteem from others appears to be the ultimate goal for many. Maslow noted, ‘The commonly seen hatred or resentment of or jealousy of goodness, truth, beauty†¦is largely†¦determined by threat of loss of self-esteem’ (Maslow 1968). As such, self criticism and evaluation by others will be resisted, the very opposite of Rogers’ ninth principle. ‘and evaluation by others is of secondary importance’ (1969).Openness to such higher learning requires responsibility. ‘Learning is facilitated when the student participates responsibl y in the learning process’ (Rogers’ seventh principle,1969). The opinions of Maslow would indicate protection of self-worth, ego and opinion of others to block a willingness to continue learning. At this stage the student/client remains at the level of esteem or may even retreat down the hierarchical stairs for love and comfort.Maslow saw rising above esteem to self actualisation as the most difficult steps to climb. He believed that even if all the lower needs are met, a new discontent and restlessness will follow unless ‘ the individual is doing what he is fitted for†¦ if he is to be ultimately happy’ (Maslow 1943). This statement dovetails perfectly into Rogers’ tenth and last of his principles:- ‘The most socially useful learning in the modern world is the learning of the process of learning, a continuous openness to experience and incorporation into oneself of the process of change’.Conclusion Having applied Maslow’s hi erarchy of needs to Rogers ten principles, I am able to see the obvious synergy, the seamless way that all learning must follow the five stages of needs and the benefit to any education system that using his theory of motivation would bring.Maslow's basic needs could therefore underpin an education syllabus that teaches everyone (rich and poor) that we live on a planet of limited resources for food, water and the energy to provide shelter and warmth.Maslow has always called for freedom to speak, freedom to do what one wishes  as long as no harm is done to others. In his later life Maslow questioned his theory that if the entire human species is growth orientated, why do so many fail to reach their full potential?He concluded that there was an innate human tendency towards inertia, which he explained as being psychological – the need for rest and recovery and to conserve energy. Perhaps he saw an unsustainable world, tired and exhausted, the body scrambling down his hierarch y to a place of safety. I think so. The tired exhausted body retreats, takes shortcuts. Add to this recession, political uncertainty and fear. Ultimately we remove our freedom to learn and indeed our freedom to reach our highest natural potential.A combination of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Rogers 10 Principles of Learning provide the perfect templates for a 21st century education system. Clear for all who wish to embrace it.

Lord Of The Flies By William Golding - 2226 Words

The island in William Golding’s novel, Lord Of The Flies, is one of wonder and a great deal of natural resources. However what develops on this oasis is war, bloodshed and cruelty. This could also be said for Earth, as the same traits occur in the global society as well. Therefor, the island symbolises the entire outside world in three key ways, social relationships, war, and politics. First, in Lord Of The Flies, Golding uses the social relationships between each of the boys to tell us more about our own relationships. The first of these roles would be the one Piggy played. Throughout the novel Piggy dispenses intelligent ideas to the leader, Ralph, yet he was very rarely listened to. One example that appears on page 45, goes as follows,†¦show more content†¦Beyond them the tribe and the twins were a loud and writhing heap. Piggy crouched again. Then the twins lay, astonished, and the tribe stood round them. Jack turned to Ralph and spoke between his teeth. See? They do what I want. This quote toward the end of the novel shows Jack in full control of his hunting band. He is the one true leader they have, and Ralph has fallen from the top of the pyramid. This is shown in the world in almost any group of people, as it is a role that needs to be filled by a primal instinct. The final example of a social dynamic are those who do not appear to fit in, and are more introverted, and within this story that character would be Simon. Throughout the story Simon is a good worker, but he is much more content in his green space. This is shown in the following quotation on page 56, Soon high jungle closed in... The air here was dark too, and the creepers dropped their ropes like the rigging of foundered ships. His feet left prints in the soft soil and the creepers shivered throughout their lengths when he bumped them. He came at last to a place where more sunshine fell. Since they had not so far to go for light the creepers had woven a great mat that hung at the side of an open space in the jungle; for here a patch of rock came close to the surface and would not allow more than little plants and ferns to grow...Then he bent down and wormed his way into the center ofShow MoreRelatedLord Of The Flies By William Golding869 Words   |  4 PagesLord of the Flies Psychology Sometimes people wear fake personas like a cloak over their shoulders, used to hide what is really underneath. This harsh reality is witnessed in William Golding’s classic Lord of the Flies, a novel that is famous for not only its sickening plot, but also for the emotional breakdowns all of its characters experience. These issues are akin to those shown in certain real-world psychological experiments. A summary of Golding’s Lord of the Flies, combined with the evidenceRead MoreThe Lord Of The Flies By William Golding1347 Words   |  6 Pages The theme of The Lord of the Flies, by William Golding, is the reason society is flawed is because people are flawed. Although Piggy is knowledgeable, he has many flaws including his laziness and physical inabilities. Ralph is an authority seeker. He sets rules and laws, yet does little to enforce them. Ralph wants to be the ruler, without doing the work to enforce his laws. Jack is persistent. He is rude, harsh and violent in or der to get what he wants. He wants to be supreme. Piggy’s flaws areRead MoreLord Of The Flies By William Golding1123 Words   |  5 PagesIn the novel Lord of The Flies by William Golding, the characters Ralph, Piggy, and Jack represent important World War II leaders Franklin Roosevelt, Adolf Hitler, and Winston Churchill. Golding, who had served in World War II, was well aware of the savagery created, and used it to base his book on. Ralph represents Franklin Roosevelt , Jack represents Adolf Hitler, and Piggy represents Winston Churchill. Ralph being of the novel’s main protagonist is important in the outcome of the story becauseRead MoreThe Lord Of The Flies By William Golding1065 Words   |  5 PagesThe Lord of the Flies Essay The Lord of the Flies written by William Golding and published on September 17, 1954 is a story told about a group of stranded boys and their fight for survival against the wilderness and themselves. In this story many signs of symbolism are used by Golding to point out certain aspects of society that Golding thought strongly of. This story on first read may just seem to be a survival- esque piece of literature but, on a deeper look one can find Golding’s true motiveRead MoreLord of The Flies by William Golding619 Words   |  2 PagesGovernments are no different; they fight for power just like the rest of us do. They just do it on a much bigger scale. Qualities from Oligarchy, Totalitarianism, Democracy, Dictatorship, and Anarchy governments are used in several parts of Lord of The Flies that represent different characters and different situations. An Oligarchy is a small group of people having control of a country or organization. A Totalitarianism government is a form of government that permits no individual freedom and thatRead MoreThe Lord of the Flies by William Golding1306 Words   |  5 PagesIn The Lord of the Flies, William Golding creates a microcosm that appears to be a utopia after he discharged from the British Royal Navy following World War II. After an emergency landing, Golding places a diverse group of boys on the island that soon turns out to be anything but utopia. The island the boys are on turns out to be an allegorical dystopia with inadequate conditions (Bryfonski 22). The boys reject all lessons they learned from their prior British society, and they turn towards theirRead MoreLord of the Flies by William Golding932 Words   |  4 Pagesdiscussing two particular themes from a novel called Lord of the Flies by William Golding. Lord of the Flies was written in 1954 after World War II. Ruler of the Flies is a purposeful anecdote about something that many readers can’t really describe. Individuals cant choose precisely what. Its either about the inalienable underhanded of man, or mental battle, or religion, or personal inclination, or the creators emotions on war; however William Golding was in the Navy throughout World War II, or perhapsRead MoreLord Of The Flies By William Golding1383 Words   |  6 PagesAccording to Lord of the Flies is still a Blueprint for Savagery by Eleanor Learmonth and Jenny Tabakoff, the words â€Å"I’m afraid. Of us† first appeared in Golding’s novel 60 years ago. Lord of the Flies by William Golding follows a group of schoolboys trapped on an island after a plane crash during a world war. At the beginning, they celebrate as the y have total autonomy as there are no adults around. They attempt to establish a civilization but when order collapses, they go on a journey from civilizationRead MoreLord of the Flies, by William Golding1055 Words   |  5 Pages In William Goldings Lord of the Flies a group of English school boys crash land onto an uninhabited island somewhere in the Mid Atlantic ocean. Ralph, the protagonist and also the elected leader, tries to maintain peace and avoid any calamity on the island. However, Jack is neither willing to contribute nor listen because he is jealous of Ralph and has a sickening obsession with killing boars. Ralph has some good traits that help him maintain peace and balance for a period of time. He is charismaticRead MoreLord Of The Flies By William Golding Essay1475 Words   |  6 Pages Outline Introduction Short intro for Lord of the Flies Short intro on Gangs The bullying and group mentality demonstrated in gangs has resemblances to the characters in Lord of the Flies. II. Bullying/Group mentality Gangs Drugs/Loyalty B. Lord of the flies Jack kills the pig/Jack and Ralph fight III. Effects B. Lord of the flies Jack killing the pig aftermath Violence IV. Conclusion Gangs are considered a group of people that have a common link together

Complex Sentences in English Grammar

In traditional grammar, a complex sentence is a sentence that contains an independent clause  (or main clause) and at least one dependent clause. Put another way, a complex sentence is made up of a main clause with one or more dependent clauses joined to it with an appropriate conjunction or pronoun. The complex sentence is conventionally regarded as one of the four basic sentence structures in English. The other structures are the simple sentence, the compound sentence, and the compound-complex sentence. For an alternative definition, see  Holger Diessels remarks in Examples and Observations below.   Examples and Observations [I]n the complex sentence John left when his sister arrived, the clause when his sister arrived is a dependent clause because it is preceded by the word when, which is a subordinating conjunction. Dependent clauses are not complete sentences; they cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. For example, *When his sister arrived cannot stand alone. Dependent clauses must be attached to independent clauses in order to form a complete sentence. In the complex sentence above, John left is the independent clause.—Denise E. Murray and Mary Ann Christison, What English Language Teachers Need to Know. Routledge, 2011Martina laughed when her mother dropped a pie upside down on the floor.Because he was so small, Stuart was often hard to find around the house.—E.B. White, Stuart Little, 1945I learned a valuable lesson about cheating after I changed a mark on my report card in the third grade.—Making the GradeIf a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is beca use he hears a different drummer.—Henry David Thoreau, Walden, 1854He was like a cock who thought the sun had risen to hear him crow.—George Eliot, Adam Bede, 1859[W]hen my brother got his pants leg caught on the top of a high fence and hung upside down, weeping and muttering curses because his pants were newly torn and Mother would spank him for sure, no angel was with him.—Gary Soto, A Summer Life. University Press of New England, 1990The Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman stood up in a corner and kept quiet all night, although of course they could not sleep.—L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, 1990)Although volume upon volume is written to prove slavery a very good thing, we never hear of the man who wishes to take the good of it by being a slave himself.—Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Slavery, July 1854 Relative Clauses and Adverbial Clauses A complex sentence has a main clause, and one or more subordinate clauses, which come in various kinds. One kind is a relative clause, as in the [bold] parts of Jack knew the kid who shot Kennedy. They can be piled up as in Jacks the guy who shot the kid who killed Kennedy...One more common kind of subordinate clause is an adverbial clause, often stating when, how, why, or if something happened, as in the [bold] parts of these sentences: If John comes, Im leaving, or He left because he felt ill. None of the examples just given were particularly exotic, and they could all easily have occurred in conversational speech. All were, in a technical sense, complex sentences, because they contained subordinate clauses.—James R. Hurford, The Origins of Grammar: Language in the Light of Evolution II. Oxford University Press, 2012 Positioning Clauses in Complex Sentences [D]ependent clauses cannot be sentences on their own. They depend on an independent clause to support them. The independent clause in a complex sentence carries the main meaning, but either clause may come first.—A. Robert Young and Ann O. Strauch, Nitty Gritty Grammar: Sentence Essentials for Writers. Cambridge University Press, 2006 The Need for Complex Sentences Most of the sentences we use in writing or in continuous speech are complex...There is a recurrent need to expound facts or concepts in greater elaboration than the structure of the simple sentence permits.—Walter Nash, English Usage: A Guide to First Principles. Routledge, 1986 Four Features of Complex Sentences Complex sentences are traditionally divided into two basic types: (i) sentences including coordinate clauses, and (ii) sentences including subordinate clauses. The former consist of two (or more) clauses that are functionally equivalent and symmetrical, whereas the latter consist of two (or more) clauses that constitute an asymmetrical relationship: a subordinate clause and a matrix clause do not have equal status and equal function (cf. Foley and Van Valin 1984: 239)...I suggest that prototypical subordinate clauses carry the following features: they are (i) syntactically embedded, (ii) formally marked as a dependent clause, (iii) semantically integrated in a superordinate clause, and (iv) part of the same processing and planning unit as the associated matrix clause.—Holger Diessel, The Acquisition of Complex Sentences. Cambridge University Press, 2004 Complex Sentences and Metaphors Complex sentences can offer dramatic development, extending a metaphor, as Melvilles Captain Ahab reminds us: The path to my fixed purpose is laid on iron rails, on which my soul is grooved to run.—Philip Gerard, Creative Nonfiction: Researching and Crafting Stories of Real Life. Story Press, 1996