Nature Versus Nurture: A sociological view
“At birth, we are – each one of us – hurled into a social world we never ever made.” (Plummer 2010, p1). The question of structure (Macrosociology) or interaction (Microsociology) is probably hotly debated amongst sociologists, almost as much as the chicken or the egg. Humans develop recognisable individual identities from both social interaction and social structure. But which is the more important? Social structure plays an important part, as structure helps with the refinement of an individual’s identity through both rigid experiences such as culture and class or fluid choices such as religion and geographic location, yet before an individual is aware of the social structure that has been laid out for them through culture, class or status they have had social interaction from family or carers. Therefore shaping an individual’s identity through social interaction is more important than social structure for a person’s identity. “We will have no say whether our initial family is Christian, Buddhist, Jewish….” (Plummer 2010, p1) and in this one sentence we have the answer. An individual’s right of choice. Structure is just that, Structural; it’s something that is put in place to solidify an object. like building structures in construction, Social structure is a base for identity the same way as foundations are for a building, yet social interaction is like the design architect, yes they need to follow some structure otherwise their building will collapse, but with social interaction comes an individual’s unique identity and possibly an amazing looking building. Some societies however don’t give people the freedom to choose, whether it is through oppression, lack of resources or conflict. The social structure for these people is very rigid and hard to change. North Koreans are denied most social freedoms, Somalia’s people live in war-torn areas yet these people still have individual identities regardless...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document