Name of Student: (Write your full name here)

Understanding Culture Study Guides: The following are divided into 9 study guides and students are required to answer
each activities provided.

STUDY GUIDE 1: Defining Culture and Society

Defining Culture and Society

At the end of this module, the student should be able to:

1. Define and explain what culture is

2. Describe culture and society a complex whole
3. Identifies aspects of culture and society as a complex whole

4. Discuss cultural diversity and human differences.

Motivation:

List all things that make Filipino culture unique and different from other cultures. Then explain why
Filipinos behave the way they do. Are these cultural traits unchangeable or are they subject to historical
and social changes? Do all Filipinos share the same traits? Explain

The complexity of Culture

Culture is a people’s way of life. This classic definition appears generic, yet prefigures both the
processes and structures that account not only for the development of such a way of life, but also for
the inherent systems that lend it its self-perpetuating nature.

According to British literary scholar, Raymond Williams, the first thing that one has to acknowledge in
defining culture is that culture is ordinary. This means that all societies have a definite way of life, a
common way of doing and understanding things.

Culture consists of patterns, explicit and implicit, of and for behavior acquired and transmitted by
symbols, constituting the distinctive achievement of human groups, including their embodiment, in
artifacts , ideas and their attached values.

Elements of Culture

To understand culture, it is necessary to understand the different elements that compose it:

Knowledge – It refers to any information received and perceived to be true.

Beliefs—The perception of accepted reality. Reality refers to the existence of things whether material
or nonmaterial

Social Norms-- These are established expectations of society as to how a person is supposed to act
depending on the requirements of the time, place, or situation.

Different forms of Social Norms

Folkways—The patterns of repetitive behavior which becomes habitual and conventional part of living.

Mores—The set of ethical standards and moral obligations as dictates of reason that distinguishes
human acts as right or wrong or good from bad.

Values—Anything held yo be relatively worthy, important, desirable, or valuable.

Technology—The practical application of knowledge in converting raw materials into finished products.
Aspects of Culture

Since culture is very complex, there are important aspects of culture that contribute to the development
of man’s social interaction.

 Dynamic, flexible and adaptive

 Shared and contested
 Learned through socialization or enculturation
 Patterned social interactions
 Integrated and at times unstable
 Transmitted through socialization
 Requires language and other forms of communication

Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism

The range of variations between culture is almost endless and yet at the same time cultures ensemble
one another in many important ways. Cultural variation is affected by man’s geographical set-up and
social experiences. Cultural Variation refers to the differences in social behaviors that different culture
exhibit around the world. There are two important perceptions on cultural variability namely
ethnocentrism and cultural relativism.

Ethnocentrism- It is a perception that arises from the fact that cultures, differ and each culture defines
reality differently. Judging another culture solely by the values and standards of one’s own culture.

Cultural Relativism- The attempt to judge behavior according to its cultural context. The principle that
an individual person’s beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual’s
own culture.

Xenocentrism and Xenophobia

Xenocentrism refers to preference for the foreign. In this sense it the opposite of ethnocentrism. It is
characterized by a strong belief that one’s own products, styles, or ideas are inferior to those which
originate elsewhere.

Xenophobia- is the fear of what is perceived as foreign or strange.

Diversity of Cultures

Traditionally, many anthropologists believed that culture is a seamless whole that is well-integrated with
the rest of social system and structures. Hence, many students of culture believed that within a given
society there is little room for cultural diversity. However it did not take long for students of culture to
realize that culture is not merely body of well-integrated beliefs and symbols. The culture in a given
society is also diverse. There is no single culture but plural cultures. In the sixties, the term “subculture”
became prominent among scholars of culture. The fieldworks done by the sociologists from the Chicago
University highlighted the unique character, if not, the fundamental differences between mainstream
American culture and subgroups within American society such as migrants, homeless, “deviant” groups,
black ghettoes, minorities, and those who dwell on slum areas. In response to the growing unrest
among youth, many sociologists used the term subculture to define the unique character of youth
culture. Subculture is used to denote the difference between the parent and dominant culture from the
way of life of the younger generation. In particular, Milton Yinger (1960) defines subculture “to
designate both the traditional norms of a sub-society and the emergent norms of a group caught in a
frustrating and conflict-laden situation. This indicates that there are differences in the origin, function,
and perpetuation of traditional and emergent norms, and suggests that the use of the concept contra-
culture for the latter might improve sociological analysis.” In other words, subculture is a response to
the conflict between the values of the dominant culture and the emerging values and lifestyle of the
new, younger generation. In England, the works of Birmingham Center for Contemporary Cultural
Studies, led by Stuart Hall and Jefferson, argue that in modem societies the major cultural configurations
are cultures based on social class, but within these are subcultures which are defined as: “smaller, more
localised and differentiated structures, within one or other of the larger cultural networks” (Hall and
Jefferson 1975,p. 13). The larger cultural configuration is referred to as the ‘parent culture’. Subcultures,
while having different focal concerns from the parent culture, will share some common aspects with the
culture from which they were derived. To distinguish subculture from the dominant culture, one has to
look into the language or lingo and symbolic elements of the group. Subcultures coalesce around certain
activities, values, uses of material artefacts, and territorial space. When these are distinguished by age
and generation, they are called ‘youth subcultures’. Some, like delinquent subcultures, are persistent
features of the parent culture, but others appear only at certain historical moments then fade away.
These latter subcultures are highly visible and, indeed, spectacular (Burke and Sunley 1998, p. 40). Some
examples of subcultures include the “skinheads,” “punks”, “heavy metal,” and gay subculture.
Spectacular subcultures that appear only during certain historical moments would include some fans
club around certain pop icons or artists. They have to be distinguished from “fads” and “fashions” that
are regular part of social life. Fads are short-lived collectively shared fascination with being cool such as
playing the Japanese electronic pet Tamaguchi during the 1980s. Fads may also cover the popularity of
certain songs and hairstyles of certain artists among young people like Michael Jackson and Madonna in
the 1980s, Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga most recently. The popularity of the language jejemon (popularly
known for typing jejejeje in social networking sites) is also a fad. Usually, these fads are short-lived.
While subcultures may co-exist with the parent culture peacefully, sometimes they become radical and
extreme. They are called counter- culture or contraculture. The term counterculture is attributed to
Theodore Roszak (1969), author of The Making of a Counter Culture. Typically, a subculture may expand
and grow into a counterculture by defining its own values in opposition to mainstream norms. In the
early 1970s, the young college Americans who rejected the dominant values of American society, and
championed antiVietnam war sentiments, advocated free love and psychedelic experience through
drugs could be considered as expressions of counterculture. Other than the dominant or parent culture,
a certain type of culture tends to be widespread and appreciated by a large mass of people beyond
geographical confines. This is popular culture. The term “popular culture” is a controversial concept in
social sciences. An obvious starting point in any attempt to define popular culture is to say that popular
culture is simply culture that
is widely favored or well-liked by many people (Storey 2009). This definition separates popular culture
from “high culture” or the culture that is shared only by an elite group within the wealthy echelons of
society. Hence, popular culture is often seen as inferior or a product of mass production for people with
bad artistic taste. In the Philippines, those who patronize popular culture are often labeled as jologs or
bakya crowd. Their taste is supposed to be “baduy” —originally referring to the promdi (a person from
the province) way of combining clothing style in a wrong way: Ang baduy manamit. Popular culture is
often equated with cheaply made box-office movies, while better taste is reserved for those who watch
Oscar-winning films or movies shown in Cannes festival. So, somebody who watches Jolina Magdangal’s
movie is a jolog, but someone who wears green shirt with red pants is baduy. So, popular culture is
controversial. But many students of media studies and culture now realize the value and importance of
popular culture. Many scholars believe that popular culture cannot easily be distinguished from high
culture. For instance, many people from the lower class also enjoy the music of the late Luciano
Pavarotti, an Italian operatic tenor. And many middle class persons enjoy popular culture. This is the
postmodern analysis of popular culture. According to postmodern analysis of culture, the distinction
between what is low and high in culture cannot be rigidly established. With the advent of mass
production —music, CDs, DVDs, used clothing’s (ukay), Internet, YouTube, torrents, file sharing, etc.—
many elements and cultural styles once enjoyed by the middle and upper classes are now easily
accessible to the people from lower classes and vise versa.

Evaluation/Activity for Study Guide 1

A. My Culture My Heritage

Identify two Philippine cultural heritage under threat—one tangible and one intangible. For both,
identify the threats and their sources, and then come up with a plan of action on how to to deal with
these threats. Write your output on the table.

Heritage Threats Plan of Action

B. Genocide Events

List down 3 notorious genocide events and killings in history. You may consider past and recent
events.
 Event, Time and Place Perpetrators Targets Justification for
Victimization

Study Guide 2: Looking back at Human Biocultural and Social Evolution

Looking back at Human Biocultural and Social Evolution

At the end of this module, the student can

- analyze the key features of the interrelationships of biological, cultural and

sociopolitical processes in humans that can still be used and developed
- explain the diffeences of biological and cultural revolution
- explain how hominids evolved into modern humans

Species Characteristics
Homo habilis Species with a brain of a Broca’s area which is associated with speech in
modern humans and was first to make stone tools. The species name means
 “Handy Man”. Lived about 2.4 to 1.4 million years ago scavenging for food.
Homo rudolfensis Species characterized by a longer face, larger molar and pre-molar teeth,
and having a larger braincase compared to habilis particularly larger frontal
lobes, areas of the brain that processes information. The species lived about
1.9 to
1.8 million years ago.
Homo erectus The species name means “Upright Man” with nody proportions similar to that
of modern humans. Lived 1.89 to 143,000 years ago; adapted to hot climates
and mostly spread in Africa and Asia. They were the first to use axe and knives
and produce fire.
Homo heidelbergenesis Species with large brow ridge and short wide bodies that lived about 700,000
to 200,000 years ago in Europe and Africa. They were the first to hunt wild
animals in a routine basis using spears, and first to construct human shelters.
Homo floresiensis Species nicknamed “Hobbit” due to their small stature with a height of more or
less 3 feet and lived 95,000 to 17,000 years ago in the island of Flores,
Indonesia along with other dwarfed animal species.
Homo sapiens The species name means “Wise Man” that appeared form 200,000 years ago.
The present human race belongs to this species.
Homo sapiens Subspecies with short yet stocky in body build adapted to winter climates
neanderthalensis especially in icy cold places in Europe and Asia. The subspecies, also known as
“Neanderthal Man” is the closest relative of modern humans. The first to
practice burial of their dead, hunting, and gathering food and sewing clothes
from animal skin using bone needles.
Homo sapiens sapiens Subspecies known as Cro-Magnon characterized to be anatomically modern
humans and lived in the last Ice Age of Europ from 40,000 to 10,000 years ago.
They were the first to produce art in cave paintings and crafting tools and
accessories

Man’s Cultural Evolution

Cultural Period Time Frame Cultural Development

Paleolithic Age (Old Stone Age)
Neolithic Age (New Stone Age)
Traditionally coincided with the first
evidence of tool construction and
use by Homosome 2.5 million years
ago.
Occurred sometime about 10,000
BC
- Use of simple pebble tool
- Learned to live in caves
- Discovered the use of fire
- Stone tools were shaped
by polishing or grinding.
- Settlement in permanent

PALEOLITHIC villages
NEOLITHIC
AGE - Dependence on
AGE domesticated plants or
animals
- Crafts (pottery and weaving)
Unpolished - Food producing cultures
Polished stone
Stone
erentiation of the Cul
ution
Simple Diff Tools tools
tural Evol

Hunting and Domestication of

Gathering plants and animals
Nomadic way of Living in
living permanent address
The evidence of change in economic aspect have resulted in the transformation of man’s way of life.
Early societies started to emerge as a result to man’s interaction with his environment. Every society is
organized in such a way that there will be rules of conduct, customs, traditions, folkways and mores and
expectations that ensure appropriate behavior among members. Sociologically and anthropologically,
society possesses different characteristics that show the interdependence of people with one another.

Characteristics of Human Society

1. It is a social system.
2. A society is relatively large.
3. A society recruits most of its members from within.
4. A society sustains itself across generations.
5. A society’s members share culture.
6. A society occupies a territory.

Types of societies

Have you ever wondered what society was like before your lifetime? Maybe you wonder in what ways
has society transformed in the past few centuries? Human beings have created and lived in several types
of societies throughout history. Sociologists have classified the different types of societies into six
categories, each of which possess their own unique characteristics:

Type of Society Characteristics

Hunting and gathering - The earliest form of human society.
societies - People survived by foraging for vegetable foods,
hunting larger wild animal, collecting shell fish
- They subsisted form day to day on whatever was available
- They used tools made of stones, woods and bones
 Pastoral societies
Horticultural societies
- It relied on herding and domestication of animals for food
and clothing to satisfy the greater needs of the group
- is an organization devoted to the study and culture of
cultivated plants. Such organizations may be local,
regional, national, or international. Some have a more
general focus, whereas others are devoted to a
particular kind or group of plants. 

Agricultural societies - An agricultural society, also known as an

agrarian society, is a society that constructs social
order around a reliance upon farming.

Industrial societies - is a society driven by the use of technology to enable

mass production, supporting a large population with a
high capacity for division of labour.

EVALUATION/Activity for Study Guide 2

Fill up the table with correct information. Evolution of

Man
Species Characteristics

1. Homo habilis
2. Homo erectus
3. Homo sapiens
4. Homo sapiens sapiens

Man’s Cultural Evolution

Cultural Period Cultural Development

Paleolithic

Neolithic
 Study Guide 3: Organization of Society

In the end of this module:

1. I can identify norms and values to be observed in interacting with others in society, and
the consequences of ignoring these rules.

2. I can assess the rules of social interaction to maintain stability of everyday life.

3. I can recognize the value of human rights and promote the common good.

Socialization
Man as a social being needs other people to survive. We develop ourselves as human beings through
our social interaction. Socialization is a continuing process whereby an individual acquires a personal
identity and learns norms, values, behavior, and social skills appropriate to his and her social position.

Socialization can be described from two points of view : objectively and subjectively.

Objective Socialization- refers to the society acting upon the child.

Subjective Socialization- The process by which society transmits its culture from one generation to the
next and adapts the individual to the accepted and approved ways of organized social life.

This perspective on socialization helps identity formation of individuals which is essential in establishing
her/his social skills. Its functions are:

Personality It is through the process of socialization that we develop our sense of

Development identity and belongingness.

Skills Development Social skills like communication, interpersonal and occupational are
and Training developed.

Values Formation Individuals are influenced by the prevailing values of social groups and
society.

Social Integration The socialization process allows us to fit-in an organized way of life by
and Adjustment being accustomed including cultural setting.

Integration to society binds individual to the control mechanisms set forth by the
society’s norms with regard to acceptable social relationships and social behavior.
 Social Control and
Stability
portance Imtio
of n
Socializa
Socialization continues to be important part of human development. It is an instrument on how an
individual will adapt to his existence to survive. The process of socialization enables the individual to
grow and function socially (Medina, 1991 p. 47). Hence, the change in man’s social reality modifies his
culture . The culture becomes internalized that the individual “imbibe” it. This influences his/her
conduct.

Cultur
e

Sex Role Differentiati on

Socialization is Vital to:
Personality
Agents of Socialization

These refers to the various social groups or social institutions that play a significant role in introducing
and integrating the individual as an accepted and functioning member of society (Banaag, 2019 p.138)

Mass Media Family School Peer Group Church Work Place

Individual

The agents of socialization guide every individual in understanding what is happening in our society.
People learn to determine what is proper, right or wrong. Social norms were formed in order to control
the individual behavior in the society. The following are forms of social norms.

Folkways – Customary patterns that specify what is socially correct and proper in everyday life. They are
repetitive or the typical habits and patterns of expected behavior followed within a group of community.

Mores- They define what is morally right and wrong. These are folkways with ethical and moral
significance which are strongly held and emphasized.

Laws- Norms that are enforced formally by a special political organization. Component of culture that
regulates and controls the people’s behavior and conduct.

According to Peter Worsely, values are general conceptions of “the good”, ideas about the kind of ends
that people should pursue throughout their lives and their activities they engage.

Major Value Orientation according to Robin

Williams
Achievement and Success

Activity and Work

Moral Orientation

Humanitarianism

Efficiency and Practicality

In study about Filipino values, Jaime Bulatao, SJ, discovered the following values held highly by the
Filipinos.

Emotional Closeness and Security in the Family

Authority Value

Economic and Social Betterment

Patience, Suffering and Endurance

Socialization serves as an avenue for developing self-concept which is essential in role identification. The
self responds to categories called social statuses (Clark and Robboy, 1986 p.65). The child must learn the
categories or statuses by which to identify or define himself or herself like being a daughter, friend,
student, Catholic lay evangelist, teacher, officer of an organization. Social status refers to position an
individual occupies in society and implies an array of rights and duties. Related to status is a social role
which involves the pattern of expected behavior in a social relationship . Social status can be classified
into two:

Ascribed Statuses Achieved statuses

Those which are assigned to the It is acquired by choice, merit, or

individual from birth. individual effort.

It involves little personal choice Made possible through special abilities

like age and sex. or talents, performance or
opportunities

It carries with it certain Choice in occupation, marriage, joining

expectations of behavior. religious organization are examples.
Conformity and Deviance

Social Role must be performed in connection with the xpected behavior. Erving Goffman, in his book The
Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, tried to show how certain social processes modify the presentation
of self and the impact of the role expectations on the behavior of the individual. To Goffman, everyone is
consciouysly playing a role. When persons present themselves to others in everyday ineteractionm they
organize their overt behavior in such a way as to guide and control the impressions others form of them
to elicit role-taking response.

It is a process of conformity where individuals attempt to change his/her behavior because of the desire
to conform with the defined social norm. Different types of conformity according to Kelman (1958).

1. Compliance (group acceptance)

Occurs when an individual accepts influence because he hopes to achieve a favorable reaction from
another person or group. He adopts the induced behavior because he expects to gain specific rewards or
approval and avoids specific punishment or disapproval by conformity. (Kelman, 1958,.p53)

2. Internalization (genuine acceptance of group norms)

This occurs when an individual accepts influence because the content of the induced behavior—the
ideas and actions of which it is composed—is intrinsically rewarding. He adopts the induced behavior
because it is congruent or consistent with his value system.

3. Identification

This occurs when an individual accepts influence because he wants to establish or maintain a satisfying
self-defining relationship to another person or group. Individuals conform to the expectations of a social
role, eg. Nurses, police officers.

4. Ingratiational

This is when a person conforms to impress or gain favor/acceptance from other people. It is similar to
normative influence, but is motivated by the need for social rewards rather than the threat of rejection.
Example group pressure does not enter the decision to conform.

Nonconformity of an individual would mean deviation from the acceptable social norms which is
known as social deviance. Social Deviance refers to any behavior that differs or diverges from
established social norms.
Functions of Deviance

- Deviance serves as an outlet for diverse forms of expressions.

- Deviance serves to define the limits of acceptable behavior.
- Deviance may also promote in group solidarity
- Deviance can serve as a barometer of social strain

Social Control of Deviance

Two type of Sanctions:

Unofficial, often casual pressures to conform

Positive informal sanctions involve reward for conformity or
Informal compliance.. Exmples: smiles, kiss, an affirmation
Sanction Negative sanctions or informal sanctions involves penalties for not
s conforming. These may take the form of ridicule, ostracism,
rejection, or even expulsion from the group.

Official, institutionalized incentives to conform and penalities for

deviance.
Needed in large complex societies.
Formal
Criminal Justice system is the most important and visible institution of
Sanctions
social control.
These may take form of arrest, pre-trial, sentencing or imprisonment.

Human Rights and Dignity

Human Rights are natural rights of all human beings whatever their nationality, religion, ethnicity, sex,
language and color. We ara equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination.

1. Natural Rights- rights inherent to man and given to him by God as human being. (Right to
live, love and be happy)

2. Constitutional Rights- rights guaranteed under the fundamental charter of the country
(rights against unreasonable searches and seizure, rights safeguarding the accused.)

3. Statutory Rights- rights provided by the law making body of a country or by law, such as the
right to receive a minimum wage and right to preliminary investigation.

4. Civil Rights- These are rights specified under the Bill of rights. (freedom of speech, right
to information) Rights enjoyed by an individual by virtue of his citizenship in a state or community.
 5. Economic Rights- rights to property, whether personal, real or intellectual. (right to use and
dispose his property, right to practice one’s profession, right to make a aliving)

6. Political Rights- rights an individual enjoys as a consequence of being a member of body

politiv. (right to vote and right to be voted into public office.

HUMAN DIGNITY
Protection of different
rights of Human Beings.

HUMAN DIGNITY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT HUMAN RIGHT

FROM WHICH ALL OTHER FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS DERIVE

Evaluation/ Activity for Study Guide 3: Process Question:

1.How does socialization help in development of individuals to become a productive member of society?

2.Why is social conformity important in society?

Study Guide 4:

How Society is Organized

Groups: The Heart of

Interactions In the end of this

module I can;

1. Understand and discuss the composition of society based on the groups that compose it;
2. Identify and define the different types of groups in society
3. Explain the role that social groups play in the formation of identities, values, attitudes and beliefs
4. Describe theorganized nature of social life and rules governing behavior in society
 Evaluation/Activity for Study Guide 4:

Write at least 2 paragraphs (here in Microsoft word) regarding your home province, your favorite things, and
interest and desired profession.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________
 Social Groups

A social group consists of two or more people who interact with one another and who recognize
themselves as a distinct social unit. The definition is simple enough, but it has significant implications.
Frequent interaction leads people to share values and beliefs. This similarity and the interaction cause
them to identify with one another.

Identification and attachment, in turn, stimulate more frequent and intense interaction. Each group
maintains solidarity with all to other groups and other types of social systems.

Groups are among the most stable and enduring of social units. They are important both to their
members and to the society at large. Through encouraging regular and predictable behavior, groups
form the foundation upon which society rests. Thus, a family, a village, a political party a trade union is
all social groups. These, it should be noted are different from social classes, status groups or crowds,
which not only lack structure but whose members are less aware or even unaware of the existence of
the group. These have been called quasi-groups or groupings. Nevertheless, the distinction between
social groups and quasi-groups is fluid and variable since quasi-groups very often give rise to social
groups, as for example, social classes give rise to political parties.

Social Aggregate

A social aggregate is a collection of people who are in the same place at the same time, but who
otherwise do not necessarily have anything in common, and who may not interact with each other.

A social aggregate is different from a social group, which refers to two or more people who interact
regularly and who have things in common, like a romantic couple, a family, friends, classmates, or
coworkers, among others. A social aggregate is also different from a social category, which refers to a
group of people defined by a shared social characteristic, like gender, race, ethnicity, nationality,
age, class, etc.

Every day we become part of social aggregates, like when we walk down a crowded sidewalk, eat in a
restaurant, ride public transit with other passengers, and shop in stores. The only thing that binds them
together is physical proximity.

A social category is a collection of people that have certain characteristics or traits in common, but they
tend not to interact with each other on a regular basis. For example, teenagers is a social
category because they are all within a particular age range and share certain characteristics.

Factors That influence Groups

- Motivational base shared by individual

- Size of group
- Type of group goals
- Kind of group cohesion
Social Organization- is a process of bringing order and significance into human social life. It has its roots
in social interaction.

According to McGee (1977:132) there are certain identifying characteristics of social organizations:

- Differentiationin statuses and roles on the basis of sex, age and ability which may be observed in
the activities of different types of people.
- Recurrent connection between sets of activities and the repeated tendency for one type of social
activity to follow regularly after another.
- A system of norms and values govern the social activities.
- Control: some person control the behavior of others, and a system of sanctions maintain
orderly behavior.
- Repeated activities and behavior.

Social structure is the organized set of social institutions and patterns of institutionalized relationships
that together compose society. Social structure is both a product of social interaction, and directly
determines it. Social structures are not immediately visible to the untrained observer, however they are
always present and affect all dimensions of human experience in society. It also refers to independent
network of roles and the hierarchy of statuses which define the reciprocal expectations and the power
arrangement of the members of the social unit guided by norms.

Primary and Secondary Groups

Primary Group- is a small, intimate and less specialized group whose members engage in face-to- face
and emotion based interactions over extended period of time. ( family, close friends, work-related peers,
class mates and church groups)

Secondary Groups are larger. Less intimate and more specialized groups whre members engage in an
impersonal and objective-oriented relationship for a limited time. (example employees treat their
colleagues as secondary group since they know that they need to cooperate with one another to
achieve a certain goal.)

In-groups and Out-groups

A self-categorization theory – it proposes that people’s appreciation of their group membership is

influenced by their perception towards people who are not members of their group.

An in-group is a group to which one belongs and with which one feels a sense of identity. An out-group
is a group to which one does not belong and to which he or she may feel a sense of competitiveness or
hostility.
 Reference Group

A group to which an individual compares himself or herself. Such group strongly influence an individual’s
behavior and social attitude. It is considered a source of role models since the individual uses it as a
standard for self-assessment.

Network

Refers to the structure of relationships between social actors or groups. These are interconnections, ties ,
linkages between people, their groups, and the larger social institutions to which they all belong to.
Modern societies feature more expansive, diverse and overlapping social networks than primitive ones.

Evaluation/Activity for Study Guide 4:

My Group As a mirror of Myself

From among the many groups (FRIENDS/peers) that you have had, past and present choose one that you think
provided you the most memorable impacts. Describe the group in column A, then enumerate the impacts it had
on you as a social person.

A The Group B its lasting impact on me as a person

STUDY GUIDE 5:

SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS

CULTURAL, SOCIAL AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS: The Family Today: Declining or Changing?

At the end of this module the student can:

- Explain the function of the family

- Define kinship, marriage and household
- Enumerate and explain the different forms of kinship by blood, kinship by marriage and kinship by rituals
- Discuss the different types of families
- Summarize recent changes in the family as an

institution Motivation/Activity. For Study guide 5:

What is your own idea of a family? Draw a picture or make a sketch that matches your definition. In
your drawing, be sure that you specify the members and the gender of the parents. Kindly draw on a
piece of paper and send it to my email – alcheeno@gmail.com

Kinship is one of the main organizing principles of society. It is one of the basic social institutions found
in every society. This institution establishes relationships between individuals and groups. People in all
societies are bound together by various kinds of bonds.
The most basic bonds are those based on marriage and reproduction. Kinship refers to these bonds, and
all other relationships resulting from them. Thus, the institution of kinship refers to a set of relationships
and relatives formed thereof, based on blood relationships (consanguineal), or marriage (affinal).

Types of Kinship

Kinship by blood

Consanguineal kinship or kinship based on blood is considered as the most basic and general form of
relations. This relationshipis achieved bu birth or blood affinity.

Descent refers to a biological relationship. Societies recognize that children descend from paerents and
thatthere exists a biologicl relationship between parents and offspring.

Lineage refers to the line where one’s ddescent is traced.

Symbols used by anthropologists to study patterns of descent and kin groups

Male Female

= Marriage Bond

Descent bond

Codescent bond

Unilineal Descent is a system of determining descent groups in which one belongs to one's father's
or mother's line, whereby one's descent is traced either exclusively through male ancestors
(patriline), or exclusively through female ancestors (matriline).

Bilateral Descent some societies trace their descent through the study of both parents ancestors.
In a baliteral descent, kinship is traced through both ancestral lines of the mother and father.

Kinship by Marriage

Affinal Kinship refers to type of relations developed when marriage occurs. When marriage takes
place new forms of social relations are developed.

Marriage- is an important social institution wherein two persons, eneter into family life. During this
process, the partners make a public, official and permanent declaration of their union as lifetime
couples.

Endogamy and Exogamy

Endogamy is the practice of marrying within a specific ethnic group, class, or social group, rejecting
others on such a basis as being unsuitable for marriage or for other close personal relationships.

Exogamy is the custom of marrying outside a community, clan, or tribe.

Monogamy and Polygamy

Monogamy- refers to the marriage of sexual partnering practice where the individual has only one male
of female partner or mate.

Polygamy- refers to the practice of having more than one partner or sexual mate. It can be polygyny (a
man has multiple partner) or polyandry (a woman has multiple mate).

Family and the Household

The family is considered the basic unit of social organization. It is made up of group of individuals who
are linked together by marriage,blood relations, or adoption.

The best way to look for the definition of “family” is to look at the government census definition. For
example, the Census Bureau of Canada defines the family: Census family refers to a married couple and
the children, if any, of either or both spouses; a couple living common law and the children, if any, of
either or both partners; or, a lone parent of any marital status with at least one child living in the same
dwelling and that child or those children. All members of a particular census family live in the same
dwelling. A couple may be of opposite or same sex. Children may be children by birth, marriage or
adoption regardless of their age or marital status as long as they live in the dwelling and do not have
their own spouse or child living in the dwelling. Grandchildren living with their grandparent(s) but with
no parents present also constitute a census family.

The United Nations (UN) uses the term nucleus family: A family nucleus is of one of the following types
(each of which must consist of persons living in the same household):

a. A married couple without children

b. A married couple with one or more unmarried children
c. A father with one or more unmarried children or
d. A mother with one or more unmarried children. Couples living in consensual unions should be
regarded as married couples.

Common in these definitions are the following elements: the biological component (with a child,
married), the functional component (takes care of the children and provides economic support), and the
residential component (living under one household or common residence). Whether the family is
universal, whether it has existed from the beginning in all forms of societies, will depend on the
definition of the family. But Friedrich Engels, who wrote The Origin of the Family, Private Property and
the State (1884), is right to argue that families do evolve in relation to the material and economic
conditions of societies. Families have never been static all throughout human evolution. All definitions
of the family will have to address three components: residential, biological, and functional roles. If one
defines the family simply as the nuclear family, meaning two adult couples with children, then this can
be challenged immediately by the case of kibbutz in Israel and the Nayar in India. If one defines the
family as taking care of the children, then it can be shown that in many societies, socialization is carried
by kinship groups and not the nuclear family. Another challenge to the nuclear definition of the family is
the emerging single-parent households, gay couples living together, and overseas families whose
members do not live regularly with the family. These examples may not contradict and discredit the
definition of the family, but they challenge the nature and functions of the family. The family as a basic
unit of society performs several important functions or roles for society: (1) for biological reproduction;
(2) as the primary agent of socialization of children; (3) as the institution for economic cooperation
through division of labor; and (4) to care for and nurture children to become responsible adults.

Different definitions of family according to Sociologists and Anthropologists

Sociologist and Anthropologist Definition of Family

George Peter Murdock Family is a social group that has the following
characteristics:
1. Share common residence
2. Presence of economic cooperation
3. Reproduce offspring
4. Includes adults of both sexes, wherein at
least two of whom uphold a socially
approved ofrm of sexual relationship.
5. Responsible for the socialization of infants
and children.
Kingsley Davis Family is a group of individuals wherein the
relationship is based on consanguinity and kinship.

Talcott Parsons Family is a factory that develops and produces

human personalities.

Bronislow Nalinowski Faily is an institution that passes down the cultural

traditions of a society to the next generations.

Assumptions of Major Sociological Perspective About Family

Assumptions about Family

Theoretical Perspective
Structural Functionalism Family is important because it performs different
roles for society

1. Agent of socialization
2. Provides emotional and practical support
for family members
 3. Controls sexual activity and
sexual reproduction
4. Provides family members with social
identity
Conflict Theory Family is a cause of social inequality because it
strengthens economic inequality and allows the
continuity of patriarchy.

Symbolic Interactionist Theory The family member’s interaction can produce a

shared understanding of their situations.

Nuclear Family and Extended Family

The Problem of Defining The Family

Traditional definitions Filipinos are family-oriented. The anak-magulang complex and the kamag-anak
relationship are very important to Filipinos. Ama (father), ina (mother), and anak (children) are culturally
and emotionally significant to us Filipinos who treasure filial attachment not only to our immediate
family but also to our extended family (tiya and tiyuhin, inaanak, lolo, at lola). This family centeredness
supplies a basic sense of belonging, stability, and security. It is from our families that we Filipinos
naturally draw our sense of self-identity. This traditional view of the family leads many people to think
that the family is an indispensable unit or institution of society. Today, however, many experts who study
the family raise doubts about its future. Consider the following statistics:

- Declining marriage rate and increasing rate of cohabitation There were 476,408 marriages
registered in 2011, down by 1.3 percent from 482,480 recorded in 2010, the NSO said in a
report posted on its website, adding that the number of registered marriages has been
declining since 2009. (Source: http:// www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/03/28/924859/fewer-
pinoys-getting- married, accessed August 19, 2014)
- Increasing annulment rate in the Philippines The number of marriage annulment cases in the
Philippines has risen by 40 percent in the last decade with at least 22 cases filed every day, according
to a report by the Catholic bishops’ news agency. Citing data from the Office of the Solicitor General
(OSG), CBCP News said the number of annulment cases had risen from 4,520 in 2001 to 8,282 in
2010.
- Increasing number of cases of domestic violence The 2008 National Demographic and Health Survey
(NDHS) conducted by the National Statistics Office (NSO) revealed that one in five women aged 15–
49 has experienced physical violence since age 15; 14.4 percent of married women have
experienced physical abuse from their husbands; and more than one-third (37%) of separated or
widowed women have experienced physical violence, implying that domestic violence could be the
reason for separation or annulment.
Study Guide 6: Religion and the Search for Ultimate Meaning

At the end of this module, the students are expected to:

- discuss the significant role of religion in society;

- distinguish religion from other social institutions;
- define and explain the meaning of religion;
- explain the various religious groups;
- connect contemporary religious movements with globalization; and –
- conduct participant observation (e.g., attend, describe, and reflect on a religious ritual of a
different group).

The Nature of Religion and Its Meaning

The English word religion is from the Latin verb religare, which means “to tie” or “to bind fast.” Religion
is a powerful institution that connects human beings, both as individuals and collectively, to a
transcendent reality. A scholar studying the importance of religion in world history and in the evolution
of humanity observes, “The evidence proves that since the remote past religion has been a part of our
mental and emotional make-up. Even nonbelievers usually agree that the term homo religiosus
[religious
man] aptly describes the human experience. Men and women by their nature are religious, and efforts
to eliminate religion, as many social and political movements have done since the eighteenth century,
come up short. Religion has a pervasive effect and influence on the development of humanity, society,
culture, and the individual. However, many scholars in the early 20th century predicted the demise of
religion as a social phenomenon because of the advancement in science and the unprecedented
advancement in technology. As people rely more and more on scientific reason and method to explain
natural events and so-called miracles, supernatural occurrences, and mysteries, many critics of religion
such as Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, and Karl Marx, the father of scientific socialism,
believed that religion will gradually disappear. This view is called secularization (from the Latin word
saeculum, which means “worldly”). Surprisingly, in the 21st century, religion seems to have grown
stronger, with no sign of abetting. Headlines in both local and international scenes contain news about
religious issues. Hence, one scholar on religious studies boldly concludes, “The fact is that atheism and
rationalism no longer constitute (if they ever really did) the major challenge to Christian theology today.
That challenge comes not from the death of God but from the “rebirth of the gods” (and the
goddesses!)” (Cox 2000, p. 9).

Some social scientists prefer a functional definition of religion that does not necessarily refer to the
belief in a supernatural being (god or force). In the functional definition, religion is anything that
provides an individual with the ultimate meaning that organizes his/her entire life and worldview. A
classic statement of this definition is given by the American scholar of religion, Milton Yinger, who
defines religion as “a system of beliefs and practices by means of which a group of people struggles with
the ultimate problems of human life” (Yinger 1970, p. 7). In this definition, religion may also include
humanism, individualism, nationalism, and even socialism. Peter L. Berger (1973), a pioneer in sociology
of religion in the United States, singles out the problem of legitimation as a primary function of religion:
Religion legitimates social institutions by bestowing upon them an ultimately valid ontological status,
that is, by locating them within a sacred and cosmic frame of reference. The historical constructions of
human activity are viewed from a vantage point that, in its own self-definition, transcends both history
and man (p. 43).

In this view, religion provides the ultimate basis for social order. The separation between the sacred and
the profane or the unholy, for instance, is a reflection of the order of the cosmos. Religious myths
designate and consecrate certain spaces as sacred. Hence, holy places are considered as places for
worship and for connecting with the divine such as churches and burial grounds. Berger further adds
that religion provides an all-encompassing explanation for the negative experiences in this world. For
Berger, religion “maintains the socially defined reality by legitimating marginal situations [i.e., sufferings,
pains, and miseries] in terms of an allencompassing sacred reality. This permits the individual who goes
through these situations to continue to exist in the world of his [sic] society—not ‘as if nothing had
happened,’ which is psychologically difficult in the more extreme marginal situations, but in the
‘knowledge’ that even these events or experiences have a place within a universe that makes sense” (p.
52).

Types of Religious Organizations

Religion is necessarily social. Beliefs and rituals are usually shared by people belonging to a definite
religious community. While an individual may opt not to belong to or affiliate with an established
religion or religious tradition, that person is still religious and belongs to an individualistic or spiritualistic
interpretation of religion. In the age of global capitalism, more and more people tend to retreat into
their own private world and create their own individualized religion. But they do not create it from
scratch. They also borrow and pick from various religious traditions in the market of religion. Even the
practicing New Age believers who have their own distinctive personal beliefs are influenced by non-
Western religious traditions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and other beliefs. These people are called un-
churched believers. Those who belong to organized religious groups may belong to any of the following
(Furseth 2006, pp. 137ff):

Church

The church is a religious organization that claims to possess the truth about salvation exclusively. A
classic example is the Roman Catholic Church. The church includes everybody or virtually everybody in a
society. Membership is by childbirth: new generations are born into the church and are formally
inducted through baptism. The church adapts to some extent to the fact that it must embrace everyone.
Unlike the sect, the church tends to be oriented toward compromises with the prevailing culture and the
political sphere. Hence, the church is relatively moderate in its demands on its members. In the
Philippines, the National Statistics Office estimates the Roman Catholics at about 74,211,896 in 2014
Being the largest religious organization in the country, it is a very powerful institution as attested by the
recent controversy regarding the reproductive health bill.

Sect

The sect also perceives itself as a unique owner of the truth. However, it constitutes a minority in a given
society. Recruitment takes place through conscious individual choice. A good example is the resurgence
of “born again” Christianity that recruits members by asking them to accept Jesus Christ in their lives.
Once an individual has joined, the sect requires a high level of commitment and activity. Members are
expected to support the teachings of the sect and to comply with its lifestyle, which may be strict and
ascetic. Life as a sect member constitutes a major contrast to the lives of people in society. Therefore,
the sect and the larger society may harbor mutual suspicions toward each other. Sects tend to depict
society as a place full of dangers and moral and religious decay. Sects often are breakaway groups from
the mainstream churches. An example of sect in the Philippines is the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC, or Church of
Christ) that has 2,251,941 members in 2014. The INC was established in 1914 by Felix Manalo, who
served as the first executive minister. As a sect, the Iglesia ni Cristo believes itself to be the one true
universal church. It preaches that all other Christian churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, are
apostates

Denomination
 In contrast to the church and sect, the denomination is oriented toward cooperation, at least as it
relates to other similar denominations. People join through individual and voluntary choice, although
the most important form of recruitment in established denominations takes place through childbirth.
The demands for activity and compliance are moderate, and there is a relatively harmonious mutual
relationship between the denomination and the larger society. The liberal branches of Protestant groups
belong to this category. In the Philippines, the religious groups affiliated with the National Council of
Churches in the Philippines (NCCP) are usually tolerant of other forms of religious organizations. The
NCCP, founded in 1963, is composed of ten mainline Protestant and non-Non-Catholic denominations,
and ten service-oriented organizations in the Philippines. It is a member of the World Council of
Churches and the Christian Conference of Asia. These groups usually maintain dialogues and
cooperative programs with other religious groups (http:// nccphilippines.org/about-us/, accessed
August 7, 2014).

Cult

The concept of another form of religious organization, the cult, was introduced in 1932 by sociologist
Howard Becker. After reviewing the literature on cults, Gerry Lanuza (1999) provides a comprehensive
definition of a cult: “a non-traditional form of religion, the doctrine of which is taken from diverse
sources, either from non-traditional sources or local narratives or an amalgamation of both, whose
members constitute either a loosely knit group or an exclusive group, which emphasizes the belief in the
divine element within the individual, and whose teachings are derived from either a real or legendary
figure, the purpose of which is to aid the individual in the full realization of his or her spiritual powers
and/or union with the Divine” (p. 494). The label cult is often attached to a religious group that society
considers as deviant or non-traditional. Hence, the term cult is often used in a negative way. Cults are
often considered as deviant groups within society. In the 1960s, when a series of unusual religious
groups emerged to challenge the dominant religious institutions, the members were considered as
cultists. They were considered as “brainwashed” by their religious organizations. “Brainwashing” means
that cult members were forced to believe in the doctrine of the group by force. Cults include the
Moonies of the Unification Church, the Hare Krishna of the International Society for Krishna
Consciousness (ISKCON), the Church of Scientology, and the People of Jonestown (with its 911 deaths in
the jungles of British Guyana in 1978), Heavens Gate, Scientology, Dianetics, and others (see Demerath
III, 2003, p. 22).

Religion in the Age of Globalization

Secularization thesis reconsidered Peter L. Berger (1999) briefly summarized the thesis of secularism:
“Modernization necessarily leads to ‘a decline of religion,’ both in society and in the minds of
individuals” (p. 2). Modernization drastically replaces tradition with science-based knowledge. And as
science dominates the entire cognitive fabric of society, it pushes the split between religion and other
institutions. Religion is reduced to just one of the many sources of ultimate meaning. Religion declines
because the previously accepted religious symbols, doctrines, and institutions lose their prestige and
significance, culminating in a society without religion. Hence, religious belief system weakens its hold on
society. To have a “secular mind” means that one believes that this world is all there is to reality. There is
no heaven, no afterlife of any kind, and no Messiah (Ledewitz 2009, p. 1). This definition is well-
expressed in the statement of Richard Dawkins, a contemporary biologist who wrote several books
criticizing religion: This brings me to the aspect of humanism that resonates most harmoniously for me.
We are on our own in the universe. Humanity can expect no help from outside, so our help, such as it is,
must come from our own resources. As individuals we should make the most of the short time we have,
for it is a privilege to be here. We should seize the opportunity presented by our good fortune and fill
our brief minds, before we die, with understanding of why, and where, we exist. (Source: Free Inquiry
18, no. 1 (Winter 1997):18.)

Or, in the statement of Edward Wilson, a pioneer in the study of sociobiology, who himself grew up as a
believer: I was raised a Southern Baptist in a religious environment that favored a literal interpretation of
the Bible. But it happened that I also became fascinated by natural history at an early age, and, as a
biology concentrator at the University of Alabama, discovered evolution…I realized that something was
terribly wrong in this dissonance. The God depicted in Holy Scripture is variously benevolent, didactic,
loving, angry, and vengeful, but never tricky. As time passed, I learned that scientific materialism explains
vastly more of the tangible world, physical and biological, in precise and useful detail, than the Iron Age
theology and mysticism bequeathed us by the modern great religions ever dreamed. It offers an epic
view of the origin and meaning of humanity far greater, and I believe more noble, than conceived by all
the prophets of old combined. Its discoveries suggest that, like it or not, we are alone. We must measure
and judge ourselves, and we will decide our own destiny. (Source: Free Inquiry 18, no. 1 (Winter
1997):18.)

With secularization, religious beliefs cannot compete with the intellectual credibility of both natural and
social science. Religious beliefs are made relative to one’s private belief. It is sufficient to claim a religious
belief as ‘true for me’ for it to be recognized as in some way valid. Yet scientific statements are
considered “truths.” The notion that the laws of gravity are a matter of private opinion, and therefore
might be believed or not, rather than scientifically accepted public truth, is dismissed as nonsense in
secular society

However, with the coming of globalization, there is a resurgence of religious movements, or new
religious movements as discussed earlier. This resurgence seems to challenge the thesis of
secularization. While statistics would show the rapid decline of church attendance and declining
religious membership in mainstream religion, it does not necessarily support secularization or the idea
that once people begin to live in a scientific and rational society, they will gradually shed off their
religious beliefs just like in the case of Wilson and Dawkins above. The rapid communication among
people across time and space promotes the spread of religious ideas across geographical boarders. As
Peter Beyer (2006) points out, People, considered now as loci of communication, carry their
communicative orientations and habits, their particularity, with them, but to a different social context.
Migration is thereby a way of universalizing various particulars, but also of particularizing universals as
migrants generate adaptations of what they carry with them, transfer these adaptations back to the
place of origin and elsewhere, and thus contribute to the transformation or at least pluralization of the
original form (p. 59).

Summary
Religion as a social institution has a very powerful impact on society and the world. Basically, religion
provides the ultimate meaning to human being’s quest for life meaning, the search for origin of the
world, and the justification for death and suffering. Today, religions, instead of dying because of scientific
and technological advancement, are very much alive as shown in the cases of neo-pagan religions,
Islamic resurgence, Pentecostalism, charismatic groups, and born again Christianity. The revival of
religion is facilitated by the growing interconnection of different geographical regions through
globalization. Globalization is allowing religions to travel faster from one area to another. Indeed, religion
contributes in the globalization process since its creation.

Evaluation: Activity for Study Guide 6: W

How do you contribute in a religious service?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Are you a member of a religious sect?

How do could we manifest unity in diversity among religions?

Study Guide 7: Education and Reproduction of Inequality

At the end of this lesson, the students are expected to:

- know what are the social functions of education is in society;

- appreciate the interaction between education and the social system;
- understand how education helps in reproducing social inequalities;
- promote primary education as a human right;
- evaluate how functions of education affect the lives of people in society; and
- appreciate the transformation of education in the era of globalization.
Motivation/Activity for Study Guide 7

Which track did you choose under the K-12 program: technical-vocational or college track? Why? What
and who influenced your decision? Why? In your opinion, what is the primary consideration of students
in choosing a track? How about for parents? (Instructions Kindly write your answers here)

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
 Education and Social Reproduction

Education and perpetuation of inequalities

Another social institution that has pervasive influence in shaping the minds of the younger generation is
education. Education refers to the formal and informal process of transmitting the knowledge, beliefs and
skills from one generation to the next. However, it is not a simple process of transmission. It also includes
equipping the minds of the younger generation with the necessary critical skills to challenge and change the
existing knowledge system and practices. Therefore, education has a humanistic goal of freeing the members
of society from ignorance and false beliefs. Educational institutions are important in reproducing the existing
belief system and practices of a particular society. It accomplishes this goal by allotting to the individual
learners the roles they need to fulfil as adult members of society. Horace Mann, an American educational
reformer, proposed that education could cure social ills. He believed that education is the great equalizer by
giving people the knowledge and technical skills to participate in national development. Education is one of
the most pervasive institutions that determine one’s future status. Hence, many people believe in education-
based meritocracy or the belief that education is the great equalizer and the key to succeed in life. Filipinos,
for example, believe in the value of education that they are willing to sacrifice everything just to finish
college. If the functionalist analysis of education as a social institution sees education as allocating social roles
to the individuals and providing them with skills to become useful members of society, the conflict theory of
education looks at it differently. Randall Collins, a neo-Weberian sociologist, for instance, argues that
education functions as a filter to perpetuate credentialism. Credentialism refers to the common practice of
relying on earned credentials when hiring staff or assigning social status rather than on actual skills. Collins
further argues that people should be hired by employers not on the basis of educational qualifications,
although this is also necessary, but on the actual skills of the applicants. Many radical sociologists also
challenge the functional analysis of education. In 1968, Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis, both American
economists, published Schooling in Capitalist America. In this classic textbook on the sociology of education,
Bowles and Gintis argued that education is a tool for capitalism to equip the workers with the necessary skills
so they can be hired and exploited by the employers. The schools teach their students the values necessary
to be successful workers. In other words, education reproduces social and economic inequalities along racial,
gender, and class division of labor. Pierre Bourdieu, a French sociologist, further advanced this analysis and
combined it with neo-Weberian analysis. Bourdieu, and his colleague Jean-Claude Passeron, studying the
French educational system, showed empirically how education is advantageous to middle class children by
teaching and rewarding behaviors that are generally expected from middle class families. Middle class
children possess relatively more cultural capital. Cultural capital is acquired in the family from which one
belongs. It is further reinforced in the “academic market” that hones students to have the right styles and
decorum—accent, dispositions, books, qualifications, dictionaries, artistic preferences, etc. Having knowledge
of “high art,” for example, will give the children of the middle class a huge advantage in art and humanities
classes. Inspired by Bourdieu’s analysis, many sociologists of education argued that the school involvement of
middle class parents also help in augmenting the scholastic achievement of middle class children.

Education and economic development

For social scientists, education is seen as an important determinant of national development. Existing
studies confirm this consensus among social scientists. First, education provides basic knowledge and
skills that enhance the productivity of labor. Second, education contributes to new innovations that lead
to inventions, discoveries, and continuous upgrading of technologies. This is very true for the
development of knowledge economy. Knowledge economy is made possible through the massive
promotion of educational technologies that support the utilization of information. Third, education is an
effective instrument to spread and disseminate knowledge among different sectors of society
(Hanushek and Wobmann 2010, Vol. 2, p. 245). Such diffusion of knowledge can sustain the endless
production of new knowledge. For children with poorly educated parents, the effects of social
deprivation manifest early in life. Lack of education has adverse impact on the life course of individuals
and their well-being. More importantly, education serves as a human capital for society that produces
skilled and learned citizens. The benefits from education is summarized by Brewer, Hentschke, and Eide
(2010):

Economic research has also found nonmonetary benefits, both private and public, associated with
educational attainment. Individuals who have invested in education and job training often have more
job stability, improved health (e.g., exercise regularly, smoke less, and eat better), are more likely to
receive employer-provided health insurance and pension benefits, are more inclined to vote, and have
generally increased social and cultural capital that often enables upward mobility (p. 194).

Economists, in general, agree that investments in education can increase economic growth. Educational
reforms can provide new knowledge and re-tooling of existing skills of the people to expand labor
productivity. Education contributes to economic development not only by producing well-informed
citizens but also by amplifying human capital or the potential of the laborers to improve the quality of
their work. Statistically, earnings rise with education level and at an increasing rate in the immediate
post education years, continue to increase at a slower pace, and then flatten as individuals approach
retirement. Economic research has also found nonmonetary benefits, both private and public,
associated with educational attainment. Individuals who have invested in education and job training
often have more job stability, have improved health (e.g., exercise regularly, smoke less, and eat better),
are more likely to receive employer-provided health insurance and pension benefits, are more inclined
to vote, and have generally increased social and cultural capital that often enables upward mobility.
Educational improvements in all levels, through its effects on individual values and beliefs, create the
foundations for a productive work force that can sustain economic growth. An educated citizenry is the
bedrock for modernization. In short, the greater the provision of schooling, the greater the stock of
human capital in society and the greater the increases in national productivity and economic growth.

Recognizing the importance of education in national development, the report of Jacques Delor to the
International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century, UNESCO entitled Learning, The
Treasure Within (1996) suggested, among other things, that each country should at least allocate 6% of
its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to the annual budget for education.

Summary

Louis Althusser once argued that education had taken over the function of the Church and religion in
reproducing the capitalist social system. Education is a pervasive institution that shapes the minds of the
young generation. Education is a very powerful tool for allowing society to survive and persist through
generations, while also contributing to the reproduction of existing inequalities. Despite this, education
has a very strong impact on national development. By providing human and social capital, education
significantly contributes in economic development. Today, with the advent of globalization, education is
being streamlined to international standards, and many scholars are debating on the nature of this
internationalization of education.

Evaluation

Group

Research

1. Given the basic problems of the Philippine educational system, such as shortages of classrooms,
teachers, textbooks, and facilities, and the low salary of teachers, what concrete solutions can
you suggest?
2. List all the advantages and disadvantages of adopting a new academic calendar. Among the
advantages and disadvantages, which is the most convincing? Why

Study Guide 8: Economy, Society, and Cultural Change

After this module, the students are expected to:

- analyze economic organization and its impact on the lives of people in the society;
- examine stratification from the functionalist and conflict perspectives;
- identify characteristics of the systems of stratification;
- discuss the process of economic globalization and its consequences;
- suggest ways to address global inequalities;
- identify new challenges faced by human populations in contemporary societies;
- describe how human societies adapt to new challenges in the physical, social, and
cultural environment; and
- identify the social goals and the socially acceptable means of achieving these goals.
The Economy as foundation of Life
The Importance of economic structure Karl Marx, the father of scientific socialism, famously stated in his
A Preface to a Critique of Political Economy the most controversial assertion in sociology:

In the social production of their life, men enter into definite relations that are
indispensable and independent of their will; these relations of production
correspond to a definite stage of development of their material forces of
production. The sum total of these relations of production constitutes the
economic structure of society—the real foundation, on which rises a legal and
political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social
consciousness. The mode of production of material life determines the social,
political and intellectual life process in general. It is not the consciousness of men
that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that
determines their consciousness.

System of Stratification as Source of Inequalities

Some sociologists, however, extend the definition of class to include not only access to the means of
production like land, capital, and technologies but also to the prestige attached to one’s social position.
Hence, some sociologists, writing along the Weberian tradition, use the term stratification. When
regularly recognized social differences (of wealth, color, religion, ethnicity or gender, for example)
become ranked in some hierarchical manner, sociologists talk about strata (Bruce and Yearly 2006, p.
290). Max Weber defined class a category of individuals who (1) “have in common a specific causal
component of their life chances in so far as (2) this component is represented exclusively by economic
interests in the possession of goods and opportunities for income, and (3) it is represented under the
conditions of the commodity or labor market.” He was close to Marx’s view because he believed that
ownership of property is crucial to the definition of class. But Weber’s sociology distinguished status
from class as the two principal bases of social stratification. Where class referred to social differences
based on economic divisions and inequalities, status designated the differentiation of groups in the
“communal” sphere in terms of their social honor and social standing. For Weber and his followers,
status groups are differentiated less on the basis of wealth but by the kind of shared lifestyle they have.
It is well known that Weber saw class as only one aspect of the distribution of power in society. So, while
a physician belongs to the middle class, being a member of a professional group of physicians also
means having an elite status that gives a member social prestige. Caste Caste system as a system of
social stratification differs from class in its rigidity and in the basis of legitimation. It is also called a
closed system in contrast with the class system that is relatively open. Membership of castes is ascribed
rather than achieved, and social contact between castes is heavily constrained and ritualized. Unlike in
the class system, in the caste system the positions of people are already determined at the moment
they were born. In his famous essay on “The Future Results of British Rule in India,” Karl Marx
characterized the Indian castes as “the most decisive impediment to India’s progress and power.” Marx
correctly argued that the caste system of India was based on the hereditary division of labor, which was
inseparably linked with the unchanging technological base and subsistence economy of the Indian
village community.
Class system

As discussed earlier, under the class system, individuals are positioned according to their access to the
means of production and contribution to productive labor. People with higher income tend to have
children who also have higher income. Parents who can aff ord to send their children to better schools
are promoting the future advantage of their children. To talk about the class system is to talk about the
ways in which individuals from a defi nite family background can advance to a relatively better
economic position than their parents. In most class system, education has become the accepted means
to advance one’s social mobility. Among Filipino families, education is considered as the “ticket to
success.” This is supported by the theory of education-based meritocracy proposed chiefl y by American
sociologists Daniel Bell in the 1960s. In this theory, education is supposed to be the great status
equalizer. Education provides much needed capital to climb the economic ladder. Hence, many Filipino
families will sacrifi ce anything for their children to fi nish a college degree. This practice is based on the
belief that our society is an “open” society that allows the movement of individuals from a lower class
to a relatively higher class. When people are allowed and are capable of moving from one stratum or
class to another class, it is called social mobility. According to Bruce and Yearley (2006), social mobility
“signifi es the movement of people between positions in a system of social stratifi cation. In modern
societies this means the movement of people between social classes is defi ned by occupational scales.
It may occur between generations (as when a girl born into a working-class family achieves a middle-
class occupation) or be the ups-anddowns of an individual career” (p. 283). Status and class In sociology,
when the concept of class is discussed, it is often diff erentiated from Weber’s notion of stratifi cation.
According to Peter Saunders (1990), the term “stratification” has been borrowed by sociologists from
the science of geology. Stratification, in geology refers to the accumulated strata of rock that form the
earth’s surface. In sociology, while strata do not constitute communities, according to Max Weber,
status groups normally are communities. Status refers to life chances that are determined by social
honor or prestige. People who belong to status groups usually form exclusive communities with clear
boundaries. They distinguish themselves from the “outsiders” by the use of the derogatory terms of
“us” versus “them.” This is exemplified in the caste system where high-class caste sets itself apart from
the outcast. Whereas Karl Marx defined class in relation to the ownership of the means of production
or property, Weber framed class in terms of life chances in the market. In the market, one can increase
one’s life chances or economic opportunities by having more prestige or social honor. These prestige
and honor are often not acquired by merits but through birth to a status group. Being a member of a
royal family, for instance, is not acquired but inherited. Yet, like Marx, Weber believed that it is property
or the lack of property which are decisive in determining the individual’s chances in competing in the
marketplace. In contemporary sociology, it is Pierre Bourdieu (1930–2002), a French sociologist, who
dealt extensively with class inequalities by arguing that capital, in its classic Marxist usage, does not
refer only to economic assets but also includes cultural, symbolic, and social capital. Cultural capital
refers to the forms of knowledge, educational credentials, and artistic taste that a person acquires from
family background, which give them higher status in society. A physician has a higher cultural capital
compared with an ordinary office clerk. Parents provide their children with cultural capital by
transmitting the attitudes and knowledge needed to succeed in the current educational system. Middle
class families prefer to send their children to exclusive private schools so their children can acquire
higher cultural
capital. Social capital refers to resources based on group membership, relationships, and networks of
influence and support. Bourdieu (1984) described social capital as “the aggregate of the actual or
potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized
relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition.” In traditional societies, for instance, individuals
are recruited in a bureaucracy on the basis of blood relations. In his book Distinction (1984), Bourdieu
refers to symbolic capital as “the acquisition of a reputation for competence and an image of
respectability and honourability…” (p. 291). A celebrity has a higher symbolic capital than an ordinary
individual. She can utilize that symbolic capital to run for political office. These forms of capital
constitute the resources of a person’s habitus, which refers to the personal psychological dispositions of
a person that are shaped by these forms of capital and family background, while also modifying them in
the light of engagement with the social world. Bourdieu defines the habitus as “an acquired system of
generative schemes objectively adjusted to the particular conditions in which it is constituted”
(Bourdieu 1977, p. 95). A person can combine these forms of capital and transform or activate them to
gain advantage in the social field. A middle class student, for instance, can hire a tutor for his/her
subjects. A middle class family can only do this because it has economic resources. In this example, a
middle class family converts economic resources to cultural and symbolic capital. In return, this
conversion will serve as an asset and resource for a middle class student in achieving better scholastic
performance in school. In the case of students coming from the lower class, the cultural and symbolic
capitals they acquire from college education are transformed into assets in applying for employment.

POLITICS

What does politics mean? Why does politics bear a negative connotation especially when used by
well known politicians, celebrities, and media practitioners? What is the relationship between
power and politics? Where does power lie? Who wields power? Who seizes power? What does it
mean to be political? What does it take to be politicized? What are the possible ways in which
politics and empowerment can mean something meaningful and fruitful for the majority?

Politics and Social Organization

All known societies are organized in ways that facilitate and maintain the everyday life and culture
of different social groups. This means that the morality made up of norms, mores, and folkways that
people live by are part of an organized system of “ways of doing and mixing” are ways of living in a
world where each individual needs to mix with other people. In other words, there are rules,
unwritten or written, that guide people’s ways of socializing. This way of inhabiting the world is
conceptualized as social relations. Power is a nominal term or another word we use to refer to
social relations. This means that the rules for relating socially are observed depending on one’s
position in society. This is why all social relations are power relations. This why politics is not even
a choice that those who can get into. Politics is part and parcel of social life. It shapes the way
people live and die.

Since people are not similarly situated in society, they will wield power in different ways forming a
hierarchy of social relations wherein some groups wield power over another. Individuals,
depending on the social groups to which they belong, would exercise power or the lack of power on
the basis of their life chances. Life chances are determined by one’s social origins, primarily one’s
economic class. Take the social organization of class for example, an individual who comes from the
economic elite of a given society will most likely to wield power over an individual who comes from
the dispossessed class. This social relation between two people, one is rich, the other is poor, is a
relation of power, and it is the kind of relation that makes up politics.

The dominant type politics of any given society therefore is a reflection of a society’s social
organization. In a society where only one percent of the population monopolizes wealth, and the
rest are engaged in hard labor and/or bare survival, the dominant form of politics will be that of the
rich using all its resources (which translates to political power) to maintain a system that will keep
the majority in their places, that is, a life of material and moral poverty, and poor health.

Forms of Legitimacy

In the scientific study of politics, there are typically three types of legitimacy or kinds of legitimate
rule. But first, what does it mean to be legitimate? Legitimacy means the recognition, acceptance,
and support for an existing form of rule or government as right and proper. A legitimate
government is one which has a recognized, accepted, and supported sphere of influence by the
majority. A popular consent of the governed is the basic condition for legitimate authority.

German Sociologist Max Weber identifies 3 types of legitimacy which concretizes the same in its
various concrete forms:

1. Traditional legitimacy (TL)

 TL is the kind of moral authority that keeps society together by virtue of custom and habit.
This type of legitimacy emphasizes the authority of tradition by virtue of its historical
practice by a particular group. This form of rule is understood as historically accepted by its
practitioners: “This is how we have always done things.” Governments or forms of rule that
are based on traditional legitimacy are historically continuous such as monarchies and the
traditional legitimacy of customary law that govern tribal societies.

2. Charismatic Legitimacy (CL)

In his book “Charisma and Institution Building,” Weber studies the transition of power from
one regime to another through the seizure of power or revolution. He studies a dimension
of regime change or revolution focusing on a charismatic leader. He argues that seizure of
power is often initiated by a leader who questions traditional authority, brings together and
leads followers to oust the old regime and bring forth a new one. Fidel Castro of Cuba’s
1959 revolution, Mao Zedong of the 1949 Chinese Revolution, Vladimir Lenin of the 1917
October Russian Revolution. Other examples of charismatic leaders in world history are
Zapata, Khomeini, and Mandela. The charismatic leader is often regarded as endowed with
exceptional powers and superhuman qualities. Charisma is the quality of political leaders
whose individual characteristics set him apart from ordinary people. Weber, however,
highlights that the charismatic leader’s authority over her followers can only be maintained
and reinforced when solidified in political institutions. This means that as a quality of a
leader, charisma must itself undergo institutionalization, the most effective of which are
formal bureaucracies or modern governments that have replaced the traditional and
hereditary rule of monarchs.

3. Rational-legal legitimacy (RLL)

Authority in this context derives from formal procedures of institutions. This is a type of
legitimacy that is based on a government’s capacity to use public interest as the rationale
for establishing and enforcing law and order. Rational-legal legitimacy is therefore the basis
of power and leadership of a government that pledges to abide the law and wins consent
from the people through public trust. Modern states or governments premised on
representative or participative democracies are examples of the kind of authority that is
derived from rational-legal legitimacy. Betrayal of trust and culpable violation of the
constitution by a
 government official strips him or her of rational-legal authority. This explains the
phenomenon of presidents leaving their office due to public clamor and/or people power.

Power and Authority

From the examples above it is now easier to understand the connection between power and
authority. First, bear in mind that power is a nominal term for social relations, and thus exists as a
given in all societies and forms of social interaction. Authority, on the other hand is a by-product of
power or how social relations are organized in a given social setting. Authority is conferred to a
person or a group of people whose position in society matches a society’s mode of constituting
political authority in a given historical period. For example, in the feudal epoch, kings, monarchs,
and bishops of the church were authority figures of authority because they had control over the
major economic resource of feudal society—land. In the era of modernity, politicians are figures
who must exhibit a dedication to protect law and order. They are usually recruited from the
intellegenstia or the educated class as law and order are presumed to be products of a legal-
bureaucratic organization based on knowledge-production of contemporary societies.
Political conflicts take place when power is not wielded properly or in the right way. Conflicts
happen when authority is deemed as ineffective that constituents or followers can no longer put
their confidence in an authority figure. The authority figure then in the form of a government or a
politician is challenged by another power group in society. If this competing group manages well in
exposing and opposing an existing government authority, the latter gradually loses its/his or her
mandate or legitimacy. Depending on the critical mass that the opposition is able to muster,
governments may be dislodged or continue to rule but no longer with moral and intellectual
leadership that makes government to people relation smooth and effective.

Political conflicts are one of the consequences of challenges posed against an existing authority or
government. What this reveals about power and authority is the fact that they do not reside in
exclusively in the political leader. The greatest mistake of the king is his assumption that he is king
because of his crown. He therefore assumes that there is essentially powerful about his crown. The
truth about the king’s crown is the same truth about power and authority. The king is king because
the people recognize the power of his crown. In other words, the people relates to the crown in a
particular way. It is a symbol of power for them. Whoever wears the crown is a worthy figure of this
symbol of the authority that the people confer to the crown. The king is not king because of his
crown, he is king because the people recognizes his crown. Without the people’s consent to a
particular form of social relation or power, for example one entity controlling over another,
authority cannot be established. In the end, especially in modern democracies and dictatorial
regimes, authority resides in and depends on the continued recognition of the people and not in the
inherent power of the political leader. The reason that politics bears a negative connotation is due
to the historical practice of authority itself. The social relation between leader and the people is one
that is skewed to reinforcing the privilege of the former than promoting the interest of the latter.
Theoretically, there is nothing essentially wrong with authority. But the history of governance since
the emergence of the state has only reflected the use and abuse of power of the economic elite or
the ruling class. The authority to run governments and thus, shape the everyday lives of people has
yet to be practiced by the majority of the laboring majority. The ajority’s participation in politics is
only encouraged and maximized by political leaders to activate the electoral process. The majority’s
active participation and intervention in policies that affect their lives is yet to be constructed and
realized. This is the challenge of true and participative democracy: a state for, by, and of the people.

State Power
What is a State?

Some see a "state" as an ancient institution, going back to Rome, Greece and before, and theorized
by Plato, Aristotle and other classical philosophers. Others insist on the unique features of the
modern state, with its extensive rule of law, citizenship rights, and broad economic and social
responsibilities. A state is more than a government; that is clear. Governments change, but states
endure. A state is the means of rule over a defined or "sovereign" territory. It is comprised of an
executive, a bureaucracy, courts and other institutions. But, above all, a state levies taxes and
operates a military and police force. States distribute and re-distribute resources and wealth, so
lobbyists, politicians and revolutionaries seek in their own way to influence or even to get hold of
the levers of state power. States exist in a variety of sizes, ranging from enormous China to tiny
Andorra. Some claim a long lineage, while others are of modern construction. In all but the short
term, states are in flux. They expand and contract as military and political fortunes change. Some,
like Poland, even disappear and re-appear later. Or they may be divided up (sometimes peacefully)
by communities that prefer to go their separate ways (Czechoslovakia). Others, such as Iraq, may be
occupied or run as a colony or protectorate. States can also "fail" - their governing institutions
collapse due to civil war and internal strife (as in Somalia) or because the state has little authority
outside the capital city (Afghanistan). While globalization and regional integration (like the
European Union) challenge the state's powers, the state is still the dominant arena of domestic
politics as well as the primary actor in international relations.

Some states occupy a unique status in the international community of states, due to a very small
population or very small land area, but usually both.Microstates, or small states and territories
(SSTs) are sovereign state and enjoy a disproportionately large influence in the United Nations
General Assembly thanks to the one state, one vote rule. Experimental States, such as Sealand,
Freedom Ship, Cyber Yugoslavia are among the hundreds of experimental states that people have
founded in order to avoid taxation, feel independent, or to create a tourist attraction.

State and Class

Class as a social relation generally refers to the dominant/ruling class and the dominated/ruled.
There are various signifiers of class, namely, status, lifestyle, distinction, etc. but in the last instance,
what determines class is its economic basis. Social class in modern as well as in feudal societies is
based on the relationship between property ownership and dispossession. Those who own
property or the means of production that is productive of value are in the position to rule the ones
who surrender their labor by tilling the land or selling their labor power as a worker in a factory in
exchange for wages.

Classes in society are a result of the accumulation of wealth by the ruling class and the rendering of
labor by the ruled. The accumulation of wealth is not a result of natural development of societies. A
social scientific analysis of class formation has to account for the fact that the same phenomenon
did not occur through peaceful gradual differentiation. Rather, class formation and the current
global class structure is the result of violent invasion and subjugation.

Recall how the Squirearchy (English ruling class) was made up of the Normans or the successful
conquerors, whose subject class were the defeated English Saxons. In the same manner, the
dominant class of the Frankish state (which would later evolved into France and the Holy Roman
Empire) were the Frankish and Burgundian conquerors whose subject populations were the
descendants of the conquered Romanized Celts.

These historical accounts belie the assumption that classes are a product of natural development.
What is then the connection between class and state? It must be clarified in the outset that the State
is not a human aggregation or a collection of various groups of people that may possibly come to be,
or happen as it should be. The State is the sum total of advantages, privileges, dominating positions
that are concretized by surplus economic power that operates in society, and is monopolized by a
few dominant groups and institutions.

Russian philosopher and revolutionary Vladimir Lenin succinctly articulates the relationship
between State and Class: The State is the instrument of class rule. This means that in every society,
the economically dominant social class takes over the State and rules. State power, therefore, is the
rule of one class over the rest of society. Under global capitalism, the State is an instrument for the
advantages, interests, and privileges of the capitalist class. In socialist states such as the Soviet
Union and China before their systems reverted back to capitalism, the state power was seized
through a proletarian (working class) revolution so that state became the instrument of proletarian
rule. Today, Cuba and Venezuela are holding fast to the proletarian orientation of state power or
class rule. Cuba won the revolution against its local ruling elites and colonizer United States in
1959. Venezuela’s socialist construction began with Hugo Chavez emerging as a leader through
popular vote in 1998.

In South America, different States have recently converged to form what is now known as ALBA:

ALBA-TCP is the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America–Peoples’ Trade Treaty (1).
Established on December 14, 2004 “for the development of cooperation and the economical,
commercial and productive integration with special emphasis on the social dimension,” ALBA-TCP
was first launched in a Summit held in Havana, Cuba “through the subscription of the Joint
Declaration for the establishment of the ALBA and the Agreement for the implementation of the
Alliance, by the President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, and the President of
the Council of State of Cuba, Fidel Castro.”

Currently, the ALBA-TCP members are: Venezuela (December 14, 2004) Cuba (December 14, 2004)
Bolivia (April 29, 2006), Nicaragua (January 10, 2007)Dominica (January 26, 2008) Ecuador (June
24, 2009) Antigua & Barbuda( June 24, 2009) Saint Vincent & The Grenadines (June 24, 2009) Saint
Lucia (July 30, 2013).

In 2006, merely two years after ALABA’s founding, and with Bolivia joining in, it scaled new heights
through the proposal of the People’s Trade Treaties. TCP constitutes instruments of trade that
promote solidarity and complementary exchanges among member countries whose goal is to carry
out a plan of economic development that will benefit the people. This formation is in stark
opposition to the Free-Trade Area (FTA) whose neoliberal mandate is to promote the profit-driven
logic of transnational corporations.

As a complementary economic zone, ALBA-TCP seeks to expand and consolidate the Latin American
and Caribbean (Petrocaribe) trade integration from a progressive standpoint. From South America
and the Caribbean basin, member states have been promoting an economic integration that is based
on humanist principles of justice and solidarity. The starting point for which is the existing
conditions of hunger and poverty in the region.

On account of the long history of colonialism and imperialist plunder— external forces that have
historically brought together the peoples of this region to struggle for national sovereignty and
dignity— the world has witnessed counter-hegemonic ruptures from tyranny and exploitation in
the great revolutions led by Bolivar, Marti, Sucre, O’Higgins, and the more contemporary victories
and struggles led by Fidel Castro in Cuba and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

In its 2004-2014 Management Report, it is made known that:

“The nine Member States of ALBA-PTA are inhabited by some more than 74 million people, 47.7%
of which forms part of the labor force 1. It spreads over three million square kilometers in the
aggregate, including the exclusive economic zones, 49.5% of which comprises forests and 6.73%
covers plowlands. The latter number surpasses the average of 1% in the whole Latin American and
Caribbean region.”
As opposed to the FTA that promotes the privatization of the basic services of water, education,
health, transport, communications and energy, the PTT promotes and strengthens the role of the
State in these essential services that allow for the full compliance with human rights.
For 10 years now, ALBA has been keen on identifying new economic actors in redefining a growing
commercial presence.

Source:

Origins of the Philippine Modern State

Modern Principalia: “A continuity of leadership recruitment from a tiny minority of elite

families and, inspite of “democratic” elections, members of these families get elected again
and again.” –Dante Simbulan
In a very important work on the analysis of the Philipine State entitled The Modern Principalia: The
Historical Evolution of the Philippine Ruling Oligarchy, Simbulan traces the historical evolution of
the Philippine ruling oligarchy, or the few who run and rule this country, and how.

The ruling elite or the plutocracy refers to any given society’s economic and political elite. In this
context, the melding of economic and political power is decisive in the formation of the Philippine
State and the different regimes or governments that have historically made it up. In an ideal world,
governance only requires political acumen or the ability to wield political capital effectively. But the
history of colonialism and neo-colonialism has shaped the confluence of economic and political
power in shaping the life of a nation.

Each province in the Philippines is almost always ruled by political dynasties that rule not only the
political life, they also shape and control ordinary people’s economic and social life.

How are political dynasties maintained? Simbulan keenly observes that power is concentrated to a
few land-owning families. These families’ hold on power is transferred from one generation to the
next, from grandfather to son or daughter, to wife or husband, brothers or sisters and on to their
grandchildren. Political power for this economically dominant class is a curious case of heredity.
The process of naturalization of political power, which appears as though it is imprinted in each
family member’s genes, is part and parcel of the elite’s mechanisms to monopolize, maintain, and
accumulate economic power through political power. While political power finds its base on
economic power, it also reinforces the latter, giving the Congress and the Senate, and even local
governments a flavor of family enterprise that extends to their relatives and business associates.

Why do they get elected? Does winning elections any indicator of the people’s will? A quick
rundown of the news during election period since the establishment of the Philippine government,
electoral fraud and violence would dominate the headlines. The electoral process is a superficial
indicator of the majority’s choice. The Hello Garci Scandal that involved former President Gloria
Macapagal Arroyo allegedly rigging the elections of 2004, and the Ampatuan Massacre that
gathered 58 victims in a mass grave in Maguindanao in 2009 are symptomatic of the electoral and
political crisis in the country. Elections are largely a result of the methods of manipulation used on
the electorate identified by Simbulan as follows:

1. widespread use of bribery

2. vote buying by politicians using taxpayers’ money

3. hiring journalists and other media people as the as polticians’ public relations agents

Polticians’ wanton use of the 3 Gs, that is, guns,goons, and gold is no longer an expose about the
Philippine electoral system.

In such conditions, can there be genuine democracy? A democracy is the rule of, by, and for the
people or the majority. What actually exists when a plutocracy runs the political, social, and
economic life of the country is not a democracy but an oligarchy or the rule of the few. According to
Simbulan, oligarchy is made up of plutocrats of wealthy people, whose source of power is not the
sovereign will of the people as the Constitution states but mainly the possession of wealth.
Following the aforementioned definition of democracy and actually existing governance in
Philippine society, Simbulan’s argument that ours is a democracy without substance can be
supported. In addition, this kind of democracy that operates like an oligarchy, Simbulan avers is a
façade conveniently used by the elite to disguise their control of power. Hence, the Philippine
Oligarchy that presents itself as a democracy is, as Simbulan established, composed of families who
have monopolized political power since the nation-state was formed.
Senator Juan Sumulong of the wealthy Sumulong clan had this to say in a Senate speech made in
1935:”…the majority and minority parties represent almost exclusively the intelligentsia and what we
would call the Philippine plutocracy, and that the needy classes have no representation in these
parties and for these reasons they have no voice nor vote, even only as minorities, in the formulation of
governmental policies…”

image from http://retrato.com.ph/retratoimages/Midsize/PP/PP00546a.jpg

The Modern Principalia in Philippine History

The principalia is a product of Spanish colonialism that morphed into the modern principalia all
throughout American colonialism and neo-colonialism, up to the institution of the modern
Philippine State.

Caciquism is a system of rule introduced by the Spanish colonizers who ruled the Philippines from
1571-1898. While leaders of barangays and datus already existed in the social organization of the
various regions in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao before Spanish colonial rule, these sophisticated
system of organization was used by the Spanish colonizers against the colonized.

The Spanish colonizers introduced caciquism or the rule of the cacique or chief through local
leaders like the datos and cabezas de barangay. In other words, local chiefs were recruited to the
Spanish colonial government as local collaborators. They were compensated through the
encomienda system, or land grants to local caciques. The caciques then started to preserve and
reinforce power through getting more land which allowed them to make their constituents, the
people, dependent on them. This newly formed local elite group also served as tax collectors who
extorted money from the locals, partly for their use and part of it to be surrendered to their Spanish
superiors.

In the Bonifacio-led 1896 Katipunan Revolution, the principalia played a counter-intuitive role. The
1896 Revolution was inspired by the reform movement initiated by the ilustrados, they are
intellectual segment of the principalia who are alienated from the practices and interests of this
elite group. They are the young intellectuals who studied in Europe amidst the Philippines’
colonization of Spain. Their exposure to the literature on the Enlightenment and the different
revolutions in the West, foremost of which is the French Revolution, these alienated young
intellectuals would come home to the country to become propagandists of the reform movement
against Spanish colonialism. From this movement, the revolutionary Katipunan was born and
eventually won the revolution against Spanish colonialism.

During the United States colonization of the Philippines, the campaign to pacify revolutionary anti-
colonial forces ensued. The principalia during this period was comprised of pro-American upper
class Filipinos, who in December 12, 1900, came together, all 125 of them, to organize the
Federalista Party. As part of the pacification campaign, local Filipino elites were also appointed by
Americans in different positions in the bureaucracy culminating in the Commonwealth period. This
period marked the institutionalization of the modern principalia as pillars in the establishment of
state institutions in the so-called post-colonial period. This segment of the principalia has its roots
from the land-owning principalia that collaborated with Spanish colonizers.

This is how the modern principalia became the local ruling elite that occupy seats in local
government units, Congress, Senate, and the Malacanang Palace. Contemporary Philippine
politician’s preference for foreign investors, partnerships with big business, and US military forces
is a disposition that has its historical roots in the making of the modern principalia which now
comprise the Modern Philippine State. The phenomenon of making profits out of one’s seat in
government or what is known as bureaucrat capitalism is a logical trajectory of governance that
was instituted during colonial rule, and whose substance and bases (economic power based on
land, and later on, entanglement with foreign interests) have yet to be eliminated to make
Philippine politics a practice of genuine democracy.

Branches and Functions of State Power

The Philippine Government

The Philippines is a republic with a presidential form of government wherein power is equally
divided among its three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial.
One basic corollary in a presidential system of government is the principle of separation of powers
wherein legislation belongs to Congress, execution to the Executive, and settlement of legal
controversies to the Judiciary.

The Legislative branch is authorized to make laws, alter, and repeal them through the power vested
in the Philippine Congress. This institution is divided into the Senate and the House of
Representatives.

The Executive branch is composed of the President and the Vice President who are elected by direct
popular vote and serve a term of six years. The Constitution grants the President authority to
appoint his Cabinet. These departments form a large portion of the country’s bureaucracy.

The Judicial branch holds the power to settle controversies involving rights that are legally
demandable and enforceable. This branch determines whether or not there has been a grave abuse
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part and instrumentality of the
government. It is made up of a Supreme Court and lower courts.

The Constitution expressly grants the Supreme Court the power of Judicial Review as the power to
declare a treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order,
instruction, ordinance or regulation unconstitutional.
 Activity for Study Guide 8:
 What is Good Governance for me? What are the important social services to be delivered by
government? How do we ensure our right to social services? How to achieve Good
Governance? Write at least 5 sentences below

 Should we abolish the pork barrel system? Write at least 2 paragraphs

Study Guide 9: Culture and Society in the Globalizing World

At the end of this lesson, the students are expected to:

 explain the changes brought about by modernization while being critical of the
Western- dominated definition of modernization;
 identify the changes that culture undergoes during the period of globalization;
 critically examine the Westernizing influence of globalization on local nonWestern
cultures; and
 discuss the positive ways by which globalization is able to widen the cultural horizons of
people around the world

Motivation

List down the things you use daily, from food, shampoo to school supplies, music, and TV programs.
Identify each item whether it is imported or not. How did you get to know about these products? Do you
believe that Filipinos have neo-colonial consciousness, that is, they prefer imported products rather than
local ones? Prove your point.

Culture and Social Change Modernization and cultural change

Culture is an important ingredient in the life of a group of people. While early social scientists argue that
society evolves and develops primarily due to social and economic factors, many scholars also point out
to the significant role played by cultural forces like religion. Max Weber, a German sociologist, in his
classic work “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism,” provided an interesting analysis that
showed how capitalism in the West could have not developed were it not for the push given by Calvinist
ethics. Calvinists are followers of John Calvin. (1509 – 1564), an influential French theologian and pastor
during the Protestant Reformation. According to Weber, Calvinism shaped the work ethics of
entrepreneurs and capitalists during the early part of capitalist industrialization. Calvinism created
anxiety among the believers that could only be relieved through hard–work, total devotion to work,
avoidance of idleness, and renunciation of worldly pleasures. Furthermore, Calvinist doctrine of
predestination (i.e., the doctrine that teaches that God already preordained some people to be saved),
led its members to equate prosperity in this world with salvation. Hence, the cultural ethos generated
by the teachings of Calvinism supplied the work ethic necessary for capital accumulation during the
incipient growth of capitalism. Weber’s culturalist theory of the emergence of capitalism in the West
became one of the pillars for the development of modernization theory. In the 1960s, many social
scientists, governments, and policy makers believed in the theory of modernization. According to this
view, based on evolutionary theory of culture, all societies undergo a process of change in the direction
of greater complexity and progress. The Western model of development is often held up as the
showcase on how non-Western societies or backward societies can catch up with Western development.
The earliest formulation of modernization theory is proposed by Walt Rostow. Walt Rostow (1916–2003),
an American economist and political theorist, proposed five stages of development. The first stage is
known as the traditional society which is associated with the country that has not yet developed.
Majority of the people are engaged in subsistence agriculture and more investments are channelled to
services or activities, such as military and religion. The second stage is called the precondition for take-
off in which the economy undergoes a process of change for building up of conditions for growth and
takes off. It is characterized by the massive development of mining industries, increase in capital use in
agriculture, the necessity of external funding and some growth in savings and investments. The third
stage is called the take-off stage of development which is sometimes called the economic take-off. It is
characterized by dynamic economic growth which is due to sharp stimulus of economic, political, or
technological in nature. The fourth stage after the take-off stage is the drive to maturity which is
concerned with the extension of modern technology over other sectors of the economy or society. Drive
to maturity stage refers to the period when a country has affectively applied the range of modern
technology to the bulk of its resources. Finally, the fifth and final stage is called the age of high mass
consumption where the leading sectors in the society shift toward durable consumers’ goods and
services. This is called industrialization.

In this view, underdeveloped societies, which are in the first stage, must be able to go through the five
stages in order to be on par with the developed economies of the world. Concomitant with this view is
the assumption that the problem of underdevelopment has to do with the backward culture of the
people. Therefore, they prescribe the introduction of Western ways of knowing and coping with social
change so that people in traditional societies can develop into modern societies. This is called cultural
change through Westernization. In this view culture from the West must be assimilated to non-Western
world through the process of cultural borrowing or diffusion. Diffusion is the appearance of elements of
one people’s culture or practices in another; it was first mentioned by Edward B. Tylor in Primitive
Culture (Morris 2012, p. 76). Impact of modernization on culture and its discontent Modernization
theory as an explanation of social change promotes Western cultural values, such as individualism and
rationalism, and does not only introduce new technologies from the West. People can only accept and
adapt to new technologies if they have corresponding changes in their cultural values and attitudes. This
is the gist of cultural modernization. People must be willing to embrace change no matter how
destructive it is to the traditional way of life. This destructive and anti-tradition rhetoric of
modernization theory has generated a lot of controversy among its supporters and detractors.
Modernization of culture promotes individualism, consumerism, and the reliance on science as the right
attitude to explain the world. These radical shifts tend to be unwelcome among the older generation
that still value the old
ways of looking and interpreting the world. But policy makers and governments in developing countries
tell their people that modernization, like birth, is a painful process. It is inevitable, therefore, it has to be
embraced unconditionally.

Globalization and Culture

Cultural homogenization and its critics Globalization is the process whereby spaces between nations
become porous because of the accelerated phase of diffusion of information, people, capital, and goods.
Immersed in computer-mediated technologies, people’s relationships and forms of interaction around
the world increasingly have become unconstrained by geography and are no longer necessarily local or
national in nature. Roland Robertson (1992) defines globalization as ‘the compression of the world and
the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole’ (p. 8). Globalization process intensifies the
consciousness of the people that cultures are intricately linked on the global scale. This is globality—as
opposed to globalism— that equates globalization with simple spread of Western-style liberal
democracy and unhampered market forces of capitalism. With globalization has come the idea of a
world culture, that is, the universality of particular cultural traits, whose spread is a consequence of
globalization. Cultural universalism refers to cultural elements, such as the Internet, fast food from
McDonald’s, and Nike sneakers. Technological objects such as “iPhone” and “Android” are known allover
the world although many people do not possess them. Scientific ideas have the same status. This
parallels the idea of a “world polity,” that is, the world as a single social system exemplified by
multinational corporations and the United Nations (Rosman, Rubel, and Weisgrau, 2009, p. 23). World
culture, as many critics of global homogenization assert, is nothing but the dominance of the largest
corporations in the world such as retail-oriented Walmart, an American giant corporation. These giant
corporations are spreading the values of consumerism around the world. Fear of consumerism leads
many sociologists to invent new words to characterize this corporate process of homogenization of the
world like “Coca-Colonization” by Kuisel, (1993), “McDonaldization” by Ritzer (2008), “Disneydization”
by Bryman (2004), and “Wal- Martization” by author (YYYY). The newest is “Starbuckization” prompted
by the phenomenal spread of Starbucks worldwide (Ritzer 2010, p. 36). The spread of consumer culture
in a globalized world is aptly described by Zygmunt Bauman (2011):

Ours is a consumers’ society, in which culture, in common with the rest of the world experienced by
consumers, manifests itself as a repository of goods intended for consumption, all competing for the
unbearably fleeting and distracted attention of potential clients, all trying to hold that attention for
more than just the blink of an eye (p. 14).

This kind of cultural homogenization is called “grobalization” which is defined “as the imperialistic
ambitions of nations, corporations, organizations, and the like and their desire, indeed need, to impose
themselves on various geographic areas throughout the world” (Ritzer 2011, p. 172). According to Ritzer
(2011), the sociologist who popularized McDonaldization, grobalization involves a variety of sub-
processes, three of which – capitalism, Americanization, as well as McDonaldization – are not only
central driving forces in grobalization, but also of great significance in the worldwide spread of
nothingness” (p. 172). By globalization of nothingness, Ritzer refers to those cultural items that spread
from the rich countries to the rest of the world, cultural items that are devoid of any substance or
content. Hence, they can easily be assimilated to local cultures. The best example given by Ritzer on
globalization of nothingness are the malls. The structure of the malls can easily be adapted and
transported to other localities yet allowing for local choice of goods, services, and commodities to be
served and displayed. Malls are “nothing” because they can contain anything yet without any defining
content. Among Filipinos who live in urban centers, malls have become both a regular place for
relaxation, shopping, and a nightmare. It is a nightmare for commuters who have to endure heavy traffic
jams especially during holidays and Christmas season. Malls have created a culture of “malling.” The
practice of malling includes a range of activities such as window-shopping and people-watching, as well
as sampling the food courts and going to the movies. Malls have eclipsed the parks and museums, even
the churches, as places that Filipino families frequently visit. Interestingly, two of the top five biggest
malls in Asia are found in the Philippines, namely, the SM Mall of Asia and the SM North EDSA (located
in Quezon City). The SM Mega mall located in Mandaluyong City, has daily foot traffic of 800,000 people,
to talling 292,000,000 people a year (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_
largest_shopping_malls_in_the_world).

Other scholars from neo-Marxist tradition still insist on the continuation of Lenin’s famous analysis of
imperialism as the highest stage of monopoly capitalism. According to Lenin, the leader of the Russian
Bolshevik Revolution, imperialism is the last stage of capitalism where corporations merge to form large
monopolies. David Harvey (2003), an American social geographer, argues that the “new imperialism” is
different from the earlier imperialism described by Lenin in that the “new imperialism” uses new
technologies to consolidate its reach and power. Unlike Hart and Negri’s Empire, however, Harvey argues
that the “new imperialism” is still dominated by the United States as a world power.

Cultural heterogenization as hybridization

As globalization intensifies cultures become hybridized. Hybridization denotes a wide register of

multiple identity, cross-over, pick-’n’-mix, boundary- crossing experiences and styles, matching a world of
growing migration and transnational families, intensive intercultural communication, everyday
multiculturalism and erosion of boundaries. In optimistic takes on hybridity, ‘hybrids were conceived as
lubricants in the clashes of culture; they were the negotiators who would secure a future free of
xenophobia’ (Papastergiadis 1997, p. 261). A Filipino-American, for example, may find himself or herself
in Seoul, South Korea watching American soap opera dubbed in Korean language while eating
Mediterranean food. Hybridity has always been with us. But the pace of mixing accelerates and its scope
widens in the wake of major structural changes, such as new technologies that enable new phases of
intercultural contact. Scholars who support cultural heterogenization does not deny that there is some
truth in claims as to global cultural homogenization, – that is, the whole world becoming culturally
similar in some ways. But this is not the whole story, for forms of cultural heterogenization—things
becoming more culturally complex—are also part of, and are produced by, globalization processes (Back,
et al. 2012, p. 122). People do frame their thinking—especially thinking about themselves and who they
are—within global frames of reference. They are compelled to see themselves as just one part of a
much greater global whole. In this view, cultural globalization is ambivalent: it can either encourage a
cosmopolitan consciousness and open attitude towards the wider world and all the diff erent cultures
and groups within it, or it can involve the creation of negative feelings towards people from other
cultures, involving
 racist and ethnocentric attitudes. Eric Hobsbawm (1982) puts this analysis in good light: …somewhere
on the road between the globally uniform coke-can and the roadside refreshment stand in Ukraine or
Bangladesh, the supermarket in Athens or in Djkarta, globalization stops being uniform and adjusts to
local differences, such as language, local culture or... local politics (p. 2, as quoted in Back 2012, p. 122).

EVALUATION/Activity for Study Guide 9

1. Cultural differences are often expressed in the “generation gap.” List all the things that you and
your parents share and believe together (religion, education, and family values) as well as those
that you disagree with (music, clothing, and love relationships,). How will you explain these
differences based on the lesson?

(Write your answers here)

2. List the things you think are good about traditional Filipino values (example: resiliency,
“kasipagan,” and family ties). List also those traditional values that you think should be discarded
(example: ningas kugon, family ties, and mamaya na habit). Explain your answer.

(write your answers here)