RLST 112 Lecture : RLST 110

28 views5 pages

blushchimpanzee546

20 Jan 2012

School

Department

Course

Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Through these things you can essentially develop the history of hinduism. **arjuna and krishna: kali-necklace of skulls with bld dripping down, she doesn"t kill ppl only demons, she kills the things within you that you don"t like->ex. greed, lust, ego, and other negative qualities, etc. >always demonstrates motherly love->abstract way of viewing her as a god of love. Kali she too is a warrior, she defends us from weapons, by carrying weapons, often seen riding a lion. Other gods/goddesses: ganesha: -elephant head, under his foot is a louis mouse, some view the mouse as: >helper b/c if u have a lil issue the mouse can gnaw thru it for you. >ex. of weakness b/c it"s one sec away from being squished, not true b/c ganesha would never do that. >you see it how u see it b/c there is no right or wrong answer->reason for diff views of.

Related Questions

Write a summary of of this article below. You should write at least one paragraph.

ABSTRACT
Feminist theories in sociology reflect the rich diversity of general theoretical
orientations in our discipline; there is no one form of feminist theory. The development
of these theories over the last 25 years has only recently begun to
influence the mainstream theory canon, which has much to learn from their insights.
This chapter demonstrates why feminist versions of the following theory
types should be more fully integrated into mainstream sociological theory:
neo-Marxist, macro-structural, exchange, rational choice, network, status expectations,
symbolic interactionist, ethnomethodological, neo-Freudian, and social
role. Feminist standpoint theory, an epistemological critique of mainstream sociology,
is discussed at the beginning, and the chapter concludes with a brief
account of the newly developing effort to theorize the intersection of race, class,
and gender.
INTRODUCTION
The term âfeminist theoryâ is used to refer to a myriad of kinds of works, produced
by movement activists and scholars in a variety of disciplines; these are
not mutually exclusive and include: (a) normative discussions of how societies
and relationships ought to be structured, their current inequities, and strategies to
achieve equity; (b) critiques of androcentric classical theories, concepts, epistemologies,
and assumptions; (c) epistemological discussions of what constitute
appropriate forms, subject matters, and techniques of theorizing from a feminist
perspective; and (d ) explanatory theories of the relationship between gender and

various social, cultural, economic, psychological, and political structures and
processes. Much of this work is explicitly interdisciplinary in inspiration and
intended audience. To complicate matters further, there is no consensus on the
exact meaning of the word âfeminist,â which makes it difficult to distinguish
with precision between theoretical material that pertains to gender (e.g. Parsons
1949, 1955, which no one would label feminist) and gender-related theory that
is specifically âfeminist.â Finally, there is little consensus among feminist sociologists
about the basic theoretical questions that require an answer, resulting
in the proliferation of theories at a low level of abstraction that explain specific
phenomena (e.g. pay inequity), in addition to more abstract, general works.
To remain within the limits of one chapter, I confine this review in several
ways, beginning by excluding feminist theory that has not been produced or used
extensively by sociologists. While feminist theory is often defined as âwomencenteredâ
(e.g. Lengermann & Niebrugge 1996:436; Smith 1979, 1987; Alway
1995), I use a definition that focuses more broadly on gender, yet maintains the
normative emphasis implied by all definitions of the term feminist, which thus
enables one to distinguish feminist from other gender-relevant theory.

Some feminists focus on those contemporary theories and texts that ignore
the contributions of feminist theories and the topic of gender and conclude that
feminist contributions remain largely ghettoized within our discipline (e.g.Ward
& Grant 1991, Alway 1995). My view is that, while progress has been made
in integrating feminist concerns and insights into the disciplineâs theoretical
discourse, much work remains to be done. This chapter demonstrates the
abundance and variety of feminist theoretical insights that can and already have
to some extent contributed to a more robust theoretical understanding of social
life, one which reflects the centrality of gender in virtually all sociocultural
contexts. It also demonstrates that feminist theories emanate from, critique, and
revise the rich array of theoretical traditions that define our discipline. Space
limitations preclude much discussion of precisely how feminist theories can be
better integrated with mainstream ones. Rather, I focus attention primarily on
reviewing the central insights of feminist theories in order to better inform those
sociologists who may be unfamiliar with much of this body of work about the
rich array of theoretical ideas that are at their disposal.

EPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES
Much of the literature that is labeled âfeminist theoryâ consists of epistemology
and epistemological critiques of âmalestreamâ sociology. Its foundations reflect
several nonfeminist traditions, especially Marxâs and Mannheimâs discussions
of ideology, Foucaultâs work on knowledge and power, and phenomenological
and ethnomethodological approaches, the exact mix of influences varying by
author. While this work makes important contributions to these traditions, for
two reasons I believe that it is a misnomer to call thiswork feminist epistemology
(or theory). First, the issues raised are not in any fundamental way different
from those raised by many scholars who haveworked in these traditions but have
not been interested specifically in women or committed to feminism. Feminists
extend their insights in important ways, but this does not constitute a uniquely feminist approach to sociology. Second, many women in sociology, whose
scholarship they and others consider as well within the feminist tradition, do
not agree with this perspective.
Feminist scholars in a number of disciplines critique what they define as
mainstream, âmasculinist,â âobjectivist,â and âpositivistâ social science, and
develop a âfeministâ alternative called standpoint theory. In sociology, the
two most widely cited are Dorothy Smith (especially 1987, 1990, also 1979,
1989) and Patricia Hill Collins (especially 1990, also 1986, 1989), whose basic
ideas constitute the focus of this section (see also Harding 1986, 1991). Where
Smith focuses on developing a âwomanâs standpoint,â Collinsâ work is directed
at an Afrocentric feminist standpoint epistemology. The Issue of Essentialism
Feminist standpoint theory, which is highly attuned to reification committed by
mainstream sociologists, cannot avoid reifying the genders. While Smith and
Collins explicitly recognize considerable variation among women (and presumably
men) in their experiences and consciousness, their own logics, and
many times wording, make it clear that they assume that there are overarching,
gender-specific standpoints; they could not otherwise talk about a âmasculineâ
form of discourse. In addition, Collins explicitly cites such feminist theorists
as Gilligan (1982) and Chodorow (1978, also 1974), who argue that the
genders are fundamentally different in their moral reasoning and capacities
for/commitments to interpersonal relationships.
Positing dichotomous gender differences that are treated as transcultural and
transhistorical is termed âessentialism,â a view that has substantial currency
among feminists in a variety of disciplines but is hotly contested in our own
(e.g. Lorber et al 1981, Coser 1989, Epstein 1988). The empirical evidence for
it is flawed, often based on small, nonrandom, American samples, and typically
finds only modest differences, along with extensive overlap, between the sexes.
Essentialist thinking converts differences of degree into differences of kind. The
presumed but often unstated origin of essential differences includes psychodynamics
rooted in the parental division of labor (Chodorow 1978) and biological
sex (Rossi 1977, 1984). It has become common for feminist scholars to recognize
within-gender categorical differences (e.g. race, class), but this awareness
of difference has often failed to preclude essentialist thinking about basic personality
and value orientations (e.g. the assumption that, regardless of other
differences, women are nurturant and oriented toward personal relationships,
while men are individuating and oriented toward abstract moral principles).
Given that the evidence suggests modest between-sex and considerable withinsex
differences on virtually all individual-level traits, a dichotomous gender
variable is theoretically useless when speaking of individual-level phenomena.
Explanations that begin by categorically attributing different characteristics
to women and menâcognitive, emotional, relational, and/or behavioralânot
only exaggerate differences in the distribution of such traits by gender, they also
implicitly treat these variables as dichotomous rather than continuous.

Check the Course Announcements at the beginning of the week following the deadline for Part 1 to discover exactly what happened to the deer population on the Kaibab plateau. This information is essential for completion of Part 2.

The second part of your project is to take what you've learned about the Kaibab forest ecosystem and write an accurate description of the boom and bust of this deer population, using correct ecological language. Consider as many of the aspects of these events as you can. Be sure to consider the effects on the other species in the ecosystem as well.

Refer to your on-line materials and the appropriate sections of your textbook. Your discussion should include (but not be confined to) consideration of all of the following concepts: carrying capacity, predator/prey relationships, population cycling, resource partitioning, competitive exclusion, fundamental and realized niches, food chains, food webs and trophic pyramids.

Note that the purpose of this exercise is for you to demonstrate to me that you understand these important concepts of ecology by utilizing them accurately and appropriately in the description of the disaster in the Kaibab forest. Your essay must include both clear indications that you understand the meanings of these principles and clear indication that you understand how these principles can be used to describe what happened to the ecosystem on the Kaibab plateau.

information given of part one: On the north rim of the Grand Canyon, an area called the Kaibab plateau, there is a conifer forest called the Kaibab forest. The forest's trees include pine, fir and spruce. Shrubbery includes a variety of willows, raspberries, etc. A hundred years ago, this forest was a stable ecosystem, housing, among other species, a population of about four thousand mule deer.

These deer were hunted by local Native Americans, who used them for food and other materials. They were also hunted by predators like pumas, wolves and coyotes.

In 1906, the US made this region into a National Game Preserve. With the intent of protecting the deer, hunting was forbidden. Bounties were paid for killing the pumas, wolves and other large animals that preyed on the deer. By 1925, more than 6000 predators had been killed, virtually wiping out the ecosystem's large predators.

*Read the instructions* for Part 2, then consider this additional information about the Kaibab forest.
There are some hints in here to suggest the *minimum* range of the subjects you need to discuss to explain this; You will need to read the chapters and the course materials to understand the meanings of these concepts, and to be able to use them to explain the Kaibab disaster. There are other important concepts as well--so keep your eyes open as you read. It wouldn't hurt to go back and read the original description in Part 1, either. And you may find it necessary to do some quick browsing in areas of your book not directly related to ecology. (For instance, you might just want to do some looking into the nature and importance of the bark and twig ends on a tree.) Do not neglect the on-line essays which are provided for you in this Unit. What you should *not* do is Google the Kaibab, or look it up on a source like Wikipedia. This is not about what you can *discover* about the Kaibab forest.
Your grade will depend upon how completely you convince me you understand the concepts involved in this description. This is your test on ecology--your goal is to convince me that you understand the concepts and terminology of the subject, and can apply them to a real life situation.
Before we go on to the new information, there are a few things that came up as I was grading the Part 1 submissions which I think I should mention, just to keep you from straying in some incorrect directions.
First, remember that your concern is the fate of the Kaibab forest in the *immediate* sense--over tens of years, not thousands. There are no evolutionary issues here, at least in the short term (and that's your concern right now). So we won't be talking about adaptive radiation.
Also, keep your focus on the *Kaibab forest*, not on other ecosystems. Oh, and remember that the Kaibab is pretty isolated--emigration really isn't a reasonable alternative for the species living in this forest.
And finally, until we get to Part 3, the only human interaction we are considering is the initial decision to put bounties on those large predators, which led to their near-extinction in the area. You will be thinking a bit about human hunters trying to control the deer population toward the end, but the rest of the time you're just concerned with the natural processes going on in the ecosystem.
Okay, now on to the actual description of what happened in the Kaibab Forest as a result of killing almost all of the large predators. Remember, your task in Part 2 is going to be to describe and explain all of this using the concepts of ecology which you are learning in Unit 2 of the course.
*****
The primary, most immediate outcome of the removal of the predators from the ecosystem was that the deer population exploded, because the loss of the normal predator populations removed a primary source of population control. And the expanding deer population ate a *lot.* [Hint: explaining this requires discussion of population cycling, predator prey relationships and carrying capacities.]
As the deer population got larger and larger, their impact upon their favored food plants became extreme. They ate a much larger percentage of each year's plant populations, and they ate a larger portion of each individual plant. They also began to eat more from the plants which they didn't like so well--plants normally consumed by other herbivores in the ecosystem. In the winter, the starving deer ate about anything remotely resembling food, including twigs and bark from trees. As a result of the destruction of many of the twig ends of the trees, the spring tree growth was inhibited (why?). The stripping of the bark caused the death of some of the trees (why?). The extreme browsing on the herbaceous plants caused shifts in the plant population diversity, as the deer drove many of their favored plants into extinction within the ecosystem. [Hint: Explanation here will need to include discussion of resource partitioning, competitive exclusion, and realized vs. fundamental niches.]
All of this also impacted upon the rest of the animals in the ecosystem, since many of them depended upon the same kinds of food the deer ate, or depended upon the foods that the deer were eating because they could no longer get the food they favored. Then of course, the smaller predatory species (like foxes and owls) depended upon the health of those populations of small herbivores (like rabbits and mice). [Hint: sounds like food chains, food webs and trophic pyramids come into this part.]
After a couple of decades, the ecosystem was quite altered. The plant community was very different from what it had been before, and the deer herd, though not extinct, was composed of significantly smaller and weaker deer than the herd from the 1890s. (This was partially due to their straightened circumstances re. food, but also partially due to the absence of predators. Why would the removal of the natural predators cause this change in the general vigor of the deer in the herd (and why would the substitution of *human* hunting not exert the same positive influence)?)
Okay, the next phase of your assignment is to describe all the things going on in this ecosystem using the proper terminology that you should be learning from studying this unit of the course. Note that your use of terms like, for instance, "resource partitioning" needs to show that you understand not just what the concept means, but how it is reflected in this specific ecological disaster. Feel free to discuss this as much as you want to on your Discussion Board. Don't ignore the little questions tucked into the above description, and pay attention to those hints. Your response must demonstrate proper understanding of these concepts and how they are demonstrated by the disaster in the Kaibab forest.
This is the largest part of your exam project; your response should reflect the fact that this is a 50 point "essay" question. You are given a lot of organizational clues and hints about what issues you need to include in the information above. Make use of those things.

The purpose behind much of advertising is to influence each of the five Consumer Decision Making process (Problem Recognition, Information Search, Evaluation of Alternatives, Product Choice (i.e. Purchase) and Outcomes (i.e. Postpurchase). Each stage of the Consumer Decision Making process has techniques that help consumers to manage the stage and then move onto the next one successfully. Eventually, the consumer moves to purchase (where we get excited to make the sale) but don't underestimate how important the last stage (post purchase) is to making additional sales in the future. Below are guidelines that show basic techiniques used to target and manipulate each Consumer Decision Stage through advertising.

Below are some issues that you will want to consider as you evaluate each of the five chosen advertisements. Please remember that your goal is not simply to answer these questions, but to provide insights into the consumerâs decision making process that you feel would be useful to a marketing manager (e.g., if an ad triggered the consumerâs decision to purchase the product). Other areas to comment on would be level of involvement, etc.

Consumer Decision Making Stage:	Considerations for Stage:	Common Ad Techniques:
Problem Recognition	What problems does this product solve for the consumer? â¢ What triggered the decision to purchase this product? â¢ Was this the first time the consumer purchased such a product? Define and discern the Actual and Desired States	Ask a question (Whatâs for dinner tonight?) Show before (actual state) and after (desired state) Use the word ânewâ or âintroducingâ to initiate curiosity.
Information Search	â¢ Did the consumer seek information about the product and about various brands? How was this information collected, and how much information was collected? â¢ Was the consumer searching for any advertisements for the product? What was the consumerâs reaction to these advertisements?	Match amount of information with type of product. Direct consumers to website, free kit or other information venues. Show role models that âlookâ like the target market. Show the entire line of product offerings (all the flavors and colors, etc.) Testimonials, etc.
Evaluation of Alternatives	â¢ How many alternatives were considered? How were they selected?â¢ What features and characteristics of the product were most important to the consumer? Salient and Determinant defined attributes. â¢ How important was the brand of the product to the consumer?	Featuring specific variables that the product is known for (ex. Volvo=Safety). This is known as âpositioningâ a product. Competitive method (brand compares themselves to âleading brand or categoryâ) Comparative method (brand compares themselves to another brand by name (Coke vs. Pepsi)
Product Choice	â¢ Did any other people play a role in the decision process? Describe theroles that each person played. â¢ How was the final choice determined? How carefully was the decision made? â¢ Where did the consumer make the purchase? Why? â¢ Did the consumer pay full price for the product?	Tell consumers where and how the product is sold. Offer many ways to pay for the product. Divide payments. Offer sales promotion (coupons, rebates)
Post-Purchase Evaluation	â¢ How is the product used and consumed? How does the consumer feel when he or she uses the product? â¢ What is the meaning of this product to the consumer? Does it merely serve a function for the consumer, or does it say something about who the consumer is? Does the Ad encourage repeat purchase or loyalty to the brand- how?	Show awards the brand has won. Show how a brand should be consumed. Allow consumers many ways to return the product. Allow consumers to easily provide feedback. Reward consumers loyalty

This assignment asks you to find one ad that addresses each of the needs of the five stages (in other words five different ads). This means that there must be five different ads for the total project, one for each stage (all ads are different from one another). Create a Power Point Presentation that shows how the advertiser is addressing the needs of the consumer for the specific Consumer Decision Making stage.

*Be aware that there is a helpful power point demonstration in a conference opened this week marked as "Advertising and the Consumer Decision Process (Ad Examples)". This is informative only and does not need to be commented on.

First, show the ad in a slide and then follow-up with a slide which explains (bullet form) why the ad slide targets the Consumer Decision Making process stage. ALL ADS MUST BE STILL ADS (NO VIDEOS or LINKS). Therefore the ad MUST be able to be copied and pasted within the power point slide (NO LINKS). Here is the format of the presentation:

Slide 1: Name, date

Slide 2: Problem Recognition Ad

Slide 3: Explanation why it addresses this stage

Slide 4: Information Search Ad

Slide 5: Explanation why it addresses this stage

Slide 6: Evaluation of Alternatives Ad

Slide 7: Explanation why it addresses this stage

Slide 8: Product Choice (Purchase) Ad

Slide 9: Explanation why it addresses this stage

Slide 10: Outcomes (Postpurchase) Ad

Slide 11: Explanation why it addresses this stage

Slide 12: Conclusion

In the conclusion of the slide presentation choose which ad is most effective (overall) and why.

Logistics Run Down:

-No more than 18 slides in length (includes cover page and bibliography)

-Include a cover page and bibliography of sources. Outside sources (esp. learning resources from weeks covered) are encouraged to be cited and used.

-Organize and utilize the headings given above.

-No more than 2 grammatical/spelling errors are allowed (please proof before submitting).

-Text is required to be in Times Roman, 12 pt font, double space the text.

- Keep voice in business third person. Do not include visuals in text analysis, if need to add create an appendix and refer your reader to such.

RLST 112 Lecture : RLST 110

Document Summary

Get access

Related Questions