Groups

Sorry for skipping some of our readings and chapters. I'm now back to the blog. Which reminds me about our latest discussion on ch.6 Interaction in Groups.

This is a really important chapter to understand because groups are the basic element of society. As we learned last week in socialization, no human being can become a social person with both an objective and subjective self if he is alone, (Mead). When one person interacts with just one other they are a dyad, and a triad if one more is added, (Simmel). Dyads are primary groups and are the most intimate groups in society. As Kornblum asks, just imagine if your significant other decided to bring a third person into your relationship. As more people are introduced into the group, it becomes more complex, meaning that more relationships are possible. As a group includes more members, the likelihood that it will break up [into smaller groups] increases. Thus, the number of people is a significant variable in understanding group cohesion. For larger groups like bureucracies to stay together, they must rely on formality (rules, contracts). Large organizations, which consist of many secondary groups, are rational whereas primary groups are emotional. On Thursday (CO1 and DO1) and Monday (GO1) we'll go over the readings in more detail as they give shape to the basic concepts in ch.6.

I thought that it was interesting to hear what people had to say about the relationship between socialization and interaction in groups. For example, we discussed which primary and secondary groups each of us belongs to right now, and then we elaborated by breaking down group membership by the three main stages of socialization: primary, secondary, and adult. Of course family remained a primary group in people's lives throughout the life course, the only difference being that most adults have both a family of orientation and a family of procreation. The child in primary socialization associates mainly in primary groups, usually limited to family, maybe some playdates, and daycares which provide individualized attention (so different from the college lecture hall). At the secondary stage adolescents continue to associate with family, but friends they meet at school or church or other activities become an increasingly important primary group, and their association in secondary groups increases with more time spent at school or in club/ sport activities. Finally, many American adults increasingly spend most of their time in secondary groups (commuting, workplace, grocery store, PTA, ad infinitum). For example, most American adults work in a formal environment. We learn that as people age, more time is spent in secondary groups. This is a positive correlation. As a result, important close relationships often start out as secondary groups relations. Marriage partners and friends are often people we once worked with or associated with in gesellschaft/ formal environments held together by severe structures, rules and contracts.
Wednesday's class involved a discussion of social categories and how a person or group's marginalized status in society may encourage people to identify more with social categories such as ethnic or "racial" groups rather than desire to assimilate into the host/dominant culture. Many of you explained that you are Americans with cultural heritage from another country. Given socialization, how could we not inherit the logic and traditions of our parents? Some of you said that you understand that many adults plan to return to countries of origin, for example the Philippines and the Dominican Republic. This desire to return to a country of origin suggests that some minorities identify as part of a social category (minority, Latino, etc.) rather than assimilated American residents. How interesting it is to think about their experiences as transnational- being part of two countries at the same time.