Today, one can increasingly hear from representatives of the intellectual elite that marginality as a social phenomenon is a disaster of modern economics and politics. But what do they mean by this concept? If marginality is the result of a conflict with existing social norms, then how to combat this phenomenon and is it necessary to do so?
It turns out that marginality is a topic that worried sociologists back in the 20s of the last century. At that time, marginalized were immigrants who, having moved to North America, could not relate to the local subculture in any way. Later, the concept of marginality began to apply to both the shaggy-haired homeless person from the neighboring garbage dump and the intellectual artist with a free outlook on life.
The leading American sociologist of that period, Robert Park, spoke about the impact of migration on increasing indifference among the human masses. Today, marginality is a quality that is very often attributed to modern youth, who do not obey accepted norms and traditions, but also do not defend their own. But it is present not only in her, but also in other representatives of society. Therefore, we can say that marginality is something that is inherent in any society.
In the literature devoted to this issue, the following types of this phenomenon are distinguished:
- structural or social;
- cultural or ethnocultural;
- marginality of social roles.
Modern scientists are studying the reasons for the emergence of groups that do not agree with existing ones. There are two main ways to explain this phenomenon. People may not accept norms due to the fact that various things are happening in society at the moment. social transformation, and also because of their own psychological characteristics.
A. Farge, for example, said that the marginality of the population is a consequence of the conflict between social norms inherent in different cultures. Most often, such a conflict arises in the presence of significant migration flows. After moving, emigrants simply cannot readjust and fully accept new patterns of behavior that seem alien to them. Farge calls marginalized those people who cannot adapt to their environment. Thus, they can be not only foreigners, but also people who have lost their usual Brighton Beach and China Town in the large American city of New York - these are precisely the communities of marginalized people who do not want and do not accept the orders adopted in this country. They continue to live as they are used to, but in their new homeland.
In the 90s of the last century, a special class of marginalized people formed in Russian society. These included both representatives of the “social bottom” and “new Russians”. Each of these groups had their own views on life, interests and needs, which were strikingly different from the interests and needs of the middle class.
This topic is quite difficult to address, because there are different consequences of marginalization. So in most cases, marginality becomes the cause of conflicts. To make it easier to understand, let’s introduce a definition of marginality.
Marginality (Late Latin marginalis - located on the edge) is a sociological concept denoting the intermediate, “borderline” position of a person between any social groups, which leaves a certain imprint on his psyche. This concept appeared in American sociology to denote the situation of immigrants’ failure to adapt to new social conditions.
Group marginality arises as a result of changes in the social structure of society, the formation of new functional groups in economics and politics, displacing old groups, destabilizing their social position.
However, marginalization does not always lead to “settling to the bottom.” Natural marginalization is associated primarily with horizontal or upward vertical mobility. If marginalization is associated with a radical change in the social structure (revolution, reform), partial or complete destruction of stable communities, then it often leads to a massive decline in social status. However, marginal elements are making attempts to re-integrate into social system. This can lead to very intense mass mobility (coups and revolutions, uprisings and wars).
On the other hand, marginalization has a number of positive effects. A marginal situation arises at the boundaries of dissimilar forms of sociocultural experience, is always very tense and is implemented differently in practice. It can be a source of neuroses, demoralization, individual and group forms protest. But it can also be a source of new perception and understanding of the Universe and society, non-trivial forms of intellectual, artistic and religious creativity. A retrospective look at the history of world culture shows that many renewing trends in the spiritual history of mankind (world religions, great philosophical systems and scientific concepts, new forms of artistic representation of the world) largely owe their emergence to marginal individuals and sociocultural environments.
Analysis of works carried out by members of the Olympic jury
Essay on the topic: “The positive and negative impact of marginality on society.”
Example of an excellent essay
First of all, we will give a definition of the concept of “marginality”, on which the subsequent discussion on the proposed topic will be based. The classic and most frequently used definition of this phenomenon was given by R. Park: “Marginality is the state of an individual or group occupying a borderline position in a stratum, class, society and not fully included in the corresponding social formation.” The start is very good. The author introduces a basic definition in the first lines of the text, thanks to which he is able to clearly identify the area of the phenomena under consideration. It fully meets the requirements of criterion No. 1.
It is equally important to clearly formulate the concepts of “positive” and “negative” influence, which we will rely on in the future. Indeed, which of the phenomena observed in society can be considered as “positive”? Is it the spread of certain cultural values, ethical views, the growth of production, or the increase in its stability? All these phenomena, in themselves, from the point of view of ordinary consciousness, have a certain “positive” connotation, however, from the point of view of science, they often not only do not imply each other, but even exclude each other. Thus, it is known that the ethical philosophy of Socrates, which had a huge influence not only on Greek but also on the entire world culture, is considered by many authors as a factor that destabilized the life of the Athenian polis. However, since this work is written in sociology, we will proceed from the fact that the positive aspects are those that contribute to the existence and development of society, and the negative ones, accordingly, contribute to the disruption of a stable situation in society. This paragraph is very good. Firstly, the author makes an attempt to analyze concepts that are most often taken without proper theoretical understanding. Secondly, he clearly formulates the difficulties that arise in this case and supplies his reasoning with the necessary examples.
Perhaps the most obvious negative manifestation of marginality, lying on the surface, is that this phenomenon is far from being associated with the “strongest”, “unprotected” position of a person. After all, the basic rights and responsibilities are assigned to the individual as a member of certain strata and groups, and the loss of them can give rise to difficult existential experiences and mental states. A person may begin to feel superfluous, unnecessary, which will negatively affect his character and attitude towards the social world, and can give rise to both primary and secondary deviations, including deviations dangerous to society.
This paragraph is very remarkable! The author almost lost the main object of his small study - society. Note: he initially talks about the negative consequences of marginality not for society, but for the individual. This is a very common mistake, for which points are deducted from criterion No. 4. However, in this case, the author managed to very organically return to the research outline, competently linking mental states with the phenomenon of deviation. So he doesn't lose any points in this paragraph. In addition, the paragraph “works” to get the highest score on criterion No. 2, because the author substantiates his position on the basis of sociological theories about the connection between an individual’s life guidelines and his belonging to certain social entities, and about the connection between deviation and the social disorientation of the individual.
From another point of view, it is this position that can become an impetus that will force a person to make efforts and either adapt to society, restore his position in it, or try to influence the social structure. The author correctly points out that the same manifestation of deviation can have both a negative and a positive impact on society.
Another negative trait marginality is the lack of opportunity to engage in the usual type of activity, because in most cases, an individual, guided by reasons that are rational for him, chooses the type of activity that is most appropriate to his status. But positive feature in the current situation may be a strategy/decision that an individual will take to return to his usual group or adapt to the norms and values of another group. Expressed right idea, but this time it has not really been completed - the individual remains the only object being discussed here. Therefore, a point is deducted from criterion No. 4 (“…absence of unjustified deviations”)
Thirdly, using the example of one of the most important factors in the formation of marginality - interregional migrations from small to large countries - some scientists emphasize the danger of assimilation of the cultures of small groups into the culture of a larger group. This happens in the case of children of emigrants, who soon begin to reject some of the ideals and values of their parents and make attempts to absorb the culture of their new homeland. Such processes, of course, lead to a reduction in the number of carriers of cultures of small groups, which harms not only the culture of mankind as a whole (the disappearance of living languages, the loss of unique traditions), but also a specific society: as is known, the absence of subcultures makes a society inert, weakly capable of perception of innovations and development. At the same time, marginalized people, by introducing themselves into the dominant culture, contribute to the “revival” of outdated cultural complexes and contribute to the introduction of new social stereotypes and norms. This paragraph is almost flawless. It continues to expand on the topic theoretical level, i.e. based on existing sociological theories and with adequate use of social science terms.
In conclusion, we will briefly list other manifestations of the positive and negative impact of marginality on society. Marginality, taking on a wide scale, undermines the existing social structure, which can negatively affect the stability of society. At the same time, this contributes to its renewal. Suffice it to recall Weber’s concept, according to which Protestant communities, which occupied a marginal position in society, played a crucial role in the formation of Western capitalism. Magnality, tearing people out of stable groups, significantly complicates the implementation of effective social control in society, but at the same time, marginality frees true innovators and social creators from under its paralyzing influence. This paragraph contains both original examples and adequate use of theoretical knowledge. In addition, it is very successful compositionally: having examined in detail two cases of marginality, the author cites several brief examples, also illustrating the features of this phenomenon.
As we see, the phenomenon of marginality is multifaceted and ambiguous in its impact on society. The same aspects of it, depending on specific situations and scales, can have both a positive and negative impact on society. But this only means that every time we encounter a given phenomenon, when assessing it, we must rely not on abstract rules and slogans, but on the results of specific empirical phenomena, the implementation of which is precisely the task of sociologists.
Speaking about the work as a whole, we should also note its competent structure, the presence of an introductory part, a full-fledged main section, and an original conclusion with conclusions. The overall score for this work, taking into account minor comments, is 37 points ().
Result: criterion No. 1 – 5 points; criterion No. 2 – 15 points, criterion No. 3 – 6 points; criterion No. 4 – 3 points; criterion No. 5 – 5 points; originality of the position – 5 points. Score – 39 points.
In the statement I have chosen, the author examines the essence of such a social phenomenon as marginality. This problem is relevant in almost any society, since there have always been people who are different from others. This is especially common in a modern democratic society, in which the boundaries between classes are almost erased and the ideas of pluralism are widespread. The author of the statement, sociologist A. Farge, wrote: “Marginality is the result of a conflict with social norms.” In other words, the author says that such a phenomenon as marginality is born due to the fact that a person finds himself outside the generally accepted norms or independently goes against them. That is, according to Farge, marginality is primarily expressed in the confrontation between the individual and society, conflicting sentiments emanating from one side or another or to mutual agreement. It is difficult to disagree with the author's point of view. I also believe that marginality appears if and only then when a person is pushed out by the “masses” or independently separated from them due to inconsistency of views, opinions, and characteristics of thinking. So, let's turn to the theoretical basis of the problem. In modern social sciences It is customary to define marginality as “borderline”, the intermediateness of an individual or social group in the social structure of society.
The main principle of marginalization is the severance of spiritual, economic and personal ties. When a person enters a new social community, connections and relationships with people are established slowly; psychologically, the person remains in the old one for a long time personal quality. This leads to the division of marginality into individual and group. Individual marginality implies an individual who finds himself in the position of a “cultural hybrid,” as R. Park called it. Such a person is, as it were, on the border of two different social groups, sharing their lives and traditions. Group marginality arises as a result of social restructuring in society, when new, newly emerged political or economic social groups are beginning to displace the old ones. For example, if marginalization is associated with a radical change in structure (as, for example, during revolutions or dramatic reforms), which entails the destruction of established social communities, then it often leads to a massive decline in social status. However, marginalization does not at all imply vertical downward mobility, as is for some reason commonly believed. On the contrary, natural marginalization is usually associated with horizontal or vertical upward mobility. Despite this, marginalization in a modern democratic society, whose motto is “pluralism of views and freedom of speech and opinion,” marginality is fraught with new dangers. Thus, marginalized groups can easily become imbued with extremist ideology and try to spread it. Modern society is different high level social mobility, and as a consequence a high level of marginality. The boundaries between classes in modern society are becoming less and less clear. However, in the past, there was little social mobility and boundaries were clearly defined, so each person knew where he belonged, and marginality was perceived in a purely negative light. In our time, on the contrary, it is difficult to find a person for whom his position in society would be strictly fixed. Modern man configured to constantly change status, wants to try different roles. In addition to theoretical justifications, a number of specific examples can also be given. Thus, immigrants have always been considered the most striking example of marginality, to designate whom the concept of “cultural hybrid” was introduced in the 20s of the 20th century. These people are on the cultural and social border between their home country and their new place of residence. That is, formally they no longer belong to any of these social groups. Like any other, this marginality is “the result of a conflict with social norms.” This is manifested in the fact that the new social group is not able to accept a “foreign body” that is the bearer of a different cultural and value set, perhaps adhering to a different religion, different opinions. This is where the conflict arises.
Another example is the biography of the great Russian poet Joseph Alexandrovich Brodsky. Living in the Soviet Union, he was a marginalized literally this word. His talent and unusual views, unlike those generally accepted, were the reason that society deliberately began to “squeeze” him out, push him to the “edge.” It all started with persecution and condemnation by the public, and ended with the trial and subsequent emigration of the poet. Thus, all talented, gifted people find themselves in a marginal state due to conflict with society based on differences in vision of the world and abilities. Another example is the historical situation of Italy shortly after the death of Benito Mussolini in 1945. After this event, the creation of fascist or Nazi parties and the propaganda of corresponding ideologies was prohibited at the legislative level in new Italy. Thus, thousands of formerly prominent adherents of the ideas of Hitler and Mussolini were marginalized. Their conflict with social norms was based solely on political beliefs. And even if an individual tried to join a new social group that shared democratic views, the “masses” pushed him out, remembering his past, views unacceptable under the new laws.
And finally, we can also give an example from personal experience. IN modern society with constant changes and reforms, no one is safe from marginalization. To avoid this, you need to quickly adapt to all innovations, including technical innovations. For example, a computer science teacher who does not keep up with the changes in the computer world may be marginalized. In this case, such a social group as a class or Teaching Staff, having managed to adjust approaches, may begin to marginalize the “lagging behind.” That is, the computer science teacher will find himself on the edge, due to the conflict between the new norms of society and the old ones preserved in his mind.
Thus, marginality is a social phenomenon, which indeed cannot always be avoided. But one thing will always be true: it arises due to some difference between an individual or group and the rest of society, which necessarily leads to a conflict, which can only be resolved in this way.
Answer Delete
I view this statement both from the positive and negative side. Marginality is a concept that characterizes borderline, intermediate phenomena standing at the border of cultures, social actors, statuses...Marginal people are those who have left a social status, but have not yet entered another, being at the border. The reasons for the emergence of marginalized people are any social phenomena, social conflicts, reforms.
Marginalized people who are capable of adaptation, rapid mobility, and learning new things are on the positive side. An example is moving from a village to a city, i.e. improved life, opportunities and a greater perspective. Also, on the contrary, the movement of qualified workers from the city to the village is, of course, an improvement in education.
The negative side of marginality is a conflict with social norms. These are the people who did not adapt to society, were unable to join the new and find a place for themselves. Example: After the abolition of serfdom, peasants were forced to leave their homes and go to the city to earn money. There, they were out of line, which shows us the negative side of marginality. Vivid examples from modernity, which belongs to the negative side, is the arrival of residents of the far abroad to work in Russia, forced to break away from their culture, home, and already here, accept new rules of behavior in society, completely different foundations.
Thus, marginality is not only a conflict with social norms, but also a positive social phenomenon.“Marginality is the result of a conflict with social norms” (A. Farge)
Answer Delete
I completely agree with this statement by Farge, because even the definition of the term “marginality” does not have a similar meaning, and confirms this quote:
Marginal is a freely interpreted/used concept to designate a person whose position in society, lifestyle, worldview, origin, etc. do not fit into the general mass.
Let's take a closer look. How does a person become marginalized? This occurs due to a change in his worldview, or lifestyle, or other of the above factors. Moreover, the changes must be quite strong. One of the factors ceases to fit into everyday life. What happens when, say, a person’s worldview is strikingly different from the worldview of the people around him? Conflict between society and a specific person. In addition to personal marginality, there is also group marginality.
Group marginality arises as a result of changes in the social structure of society, the formation of new functional groups in economics and politics, displacing old groups, destabilizing their social position.
Marginalized people may make attempts to return back to the social system. This can lead to very intense mass mobility (coups and revolutions, uprisings and wars) or to the formation of new social groups. Thus, the flourishing of ethnic entrepreneurship is explained precisely by the marginal position of ethnic minorities, for whom the usual paths to achieving high status are difficult.
Marginalization does not always lead to “settling to the bottom.” Natural marginalization is associated primarily with horizontal or upward vertical mobility. Therefore, marginalized people should not be perceived solely negatively. After all, if a person is in the minority, then he is not necessarily wrong. As proof, I will give a quote from Viktor Shenderovich, a writer: “There is nothing offensive in the word “marginal”. Marginal is someone who is in the minority. Christ was a fringe, as we know, Sakharov was a fringe... Thomas Mann was a fringe.”To reason, you need to understand who the marginalized are. Parents skillfully know how to powder their heads and still have not given a single definition of this concept, so it is impossible to push away. “Marginal is a fashionable word, but the concept is quite vague.”
Answer DeleteHello!
Sorry for being late!
I chose the topic: “Marginality is the result of a conflict with social norms” (A. Farge)
An amazing scope for thought is opened by this short statement by the famous sociologist, A. Farge, that “Marginality is the result of a conflict with social norms.” And I absolutely agree with this statement. First you need to understand what “marginality” is. Marginality (in a broad sense) is a borderline, transitional, structurally uncertain social state of an individual or group. Well, who are the marginalized? Marginal is a concept to designate a person whose position in society, lifestyle, worldview, origin, etc. do not fit into the general mass. There are two types of marginality - personal and group. Personal marginality is when a person becomes marginal due to a change in his worldview, lifestyle, or other factors. This also happens in society, i.e. in group marginality, only there the changes are much significant, i.e. changes social structure society, new functional groups are formed in economics and politics, displacing old groups and fundamentally changing the structure. Often marginalized people cannot find “their place” in society and they have difficulty settling in and adapting to some extent to the “new” society for them. Sometimes marginalized people try to “merge” into everyday society again, but often these attempts lead to conflicts, disagreements, and revolutions. But being marginalized does not mean being some kind of “scum” from society and does not mean that it carries everything negative. No. It also happens that it is better to stick to your opinion than to be like everyone else. And it may ultimately turn out that the person who defended “his own”, adhered to some other qualities, becomes right. So marginality can be considered with different sides and highlight its pros and cons.
I will give a couple of examples on this topic. For example, from history: The beginning of the industrial revolution. Replacement of manual labor with machines. Part of the peasantry is forced to move to cities to look for work. This is where people are trying to “get along” in a new society, because not everyone likes urban conditions. People feel like strangers there. And we can say with certainty that they are marginalized. In their hearts they still live in their village. All the values are folded into the villages - regulate relationships and human behavior. But in the city there are special rules of life, different conditions. It is difficult for people to get along in a new society and often different views collide, which leads to conflicts.
I would also like to give one example, about people who look like marginalized people, and whom we know very well and meet on the street, these are lumpen. To begin with, we need to explain who the lumpen are. Lumpens are groups of people who have sunk to the “social bottom”, who do not have a specific place of residence, etc. And we know them well, to put it simply, they are homeless. Society has, as it were, “thrown in” the lumpen from normal life. But it is worth distinguishing the lumpen and the marginalized from each other. But I know for sure that they have in common that both when trying to return to “normal” society, they cause any clashes and conflicts.
And finally, I want to say that there is no need to draw any “loud” conclusions. Each of us can find ourselves in the place of the marginalized or the same lumpen, although inside each of us is marginalized.
I absolutely agree with A. Farge’s position: “Marginality is the result of a conflict with social norms.” What is marginality? MARGINALITY (Latin margo - edge, border) is a concept traditionally used in social philosophy and sociology to analyze the borderline position of an individual in relation to any social community, which leaves a certain imprint on his psyche and way of life. Marginality does not arise outside of a sharp real or imagined collision with the outside world.
Marginalized people are people whose position in society, lifestyle, worldview, origin, etc. do not fit into the general mass. Marginalized people are not united by any common interest or goal and are characterized by a lack of historical memory and continuity in the perception of traditions. Let's look at three examples of marginalized people that characterize their position. The first, a person who recently moved to live from a village to a city. The absence of cruelly defined norms and connections contributes to an increase in his personal activity. The second example of marginalized people is a citizen working in a village after graduating from college. Knowledge of skills and acquired experience will increase the workforce in the village. The third, a representative of an Asian country who came to work, better adapts to constantly changing conditions.
As a term marginality has existed since 1928, 1656
year in France marked the beginning of a new practice, which henceforth has an invariable effect
impact on the perception of deviations, in late XVII century arises new project: Isolate marginalized people as repulsive and harmful.
History knows many examples when individuals or social groups lose their previous social status, or, on the contrary, gain it. Typical examples of marginalized people include migrants, women, people with disabilities, as well as those who entered into interethnic or interracial marriages, representatives of national minorities.
Thus, we come to the conclusion that marginality is the result of a conflict with generally accepted norms.
Essay on the topic: “Marginality is the result of a conflict with social norms”
I chose this topic because this problem is relevant in almost any society, since there have always been people who are different from others. This is especially common in modern society, in which the boundaries between classes are almost erased.
The author of the statement, sociologist A. Farge, wrote: “Marginality is the result of a conflict with social norms.” In other words, the author says that such a phenomenon as marginality is born due to the fact that a person finds himself outside the generally accepted norms or independently goes against them. That is, according to Farge, marginality is primarily expressed in the confrontation between the individual and society, conflicting sentiments emanating from one side or another or to mutual agreement. It’s hard to disagree with the author’s point of view, but I am inclined to believe that this term “marginality” has many meanings, and in order to fully understand it, you need to consider all its sides and meanings, and I also believe that marginality appears when and only when the individual is pushed out by the “masses” or independently separates from them due to inconsistency of views, opinions, and peculiarities of thinking. Hence it follows that a marginal is a person who finds himself in a middle position: cut off from one social group and not included in another.
The life of such a person is very, very difficult. In addition to the difficult social situation, the situation is aggravated by the psychological aspect. For example, a person who was born in a village and lived there most of his life finds it difficult to adapt to urban conditions. Group marginality arises as a result of social restructuring in society, when new, newly emerging political or economic social groups begin to displace old ones. For example, if marginalization is associated with a radical change in structure (as, for example, during revolutions or dramatic reforms), which entails the destruction of established social communities, then it often leads to a massive decline in social status. The situation began to change during modernization, that is, during the formation of an industrial society. After all, modernization itself is not only a transition to a higher way of economic life, but also a process that was accompanied by radical changes in the social structure of society. Of course, modernization had a pronounced revolutionary character and led to the marginalization of entire groups of the population. Social groups changed their status within the framework through group mobility, which many scholars have written about. They noted that group mobility took place during times of social upheaval and did not always end well.
People were “stuck” between social groups and, having found themselves in difficult situations, they were forced to violate norms in order to survive. This means that a person’s conflict with social norms was a consequence of marginalization, and not vice versa. During the civil war in Russia, not all those who fought were inherently “revolutionaries”; they found themselves drawn into the conflict by a combination of circumstances. There are such examples in history modern Russia. In the 90s of the 20th century, many scientists lost their status due to radical reforms. Considering that the term “marginal” has many meanings, and modern stage School graduates and students are considered marginalized, since they have not yet taken a stable position, then the idea of the author A. Farzhd can be disputed.
One example of marginality is the biography of the great Russian poet Joseph Alexandrovich Brodsky. Living in the Soviet Union, he was an outcast in the truest sense of the word. His talent and unusual views, unlike those generally accepted, were the reason that society deliberately began to “squeeze” him out, push him to the “edge.” It all started with persecution and condemnation by the public, and ended with the trial and subsequent emigration of the poet. Thus, all talented people find themselves in a marginal state,
gifted people due to conflict with society based on differences in vision of the world, in abilities. You can also give an example from personal experience. In a modern society with constant changes and reforms, no one is protected from marginalization. To avoid this, you need to quickly adapt to all innovations, including technical innovations.
For example, a computer science teacher who does not keep up with the changes in the computer world may be marginalized. In this case, a social group such as a class or teaching staff, which has managed to adjust its approaches, may begin to marginalize the “lagging behind.” That is, the computer science teacher will find himself on the edge, due to the conflict between the new norms of society and the old ones preserved in his mind. Thus, marginality is a social phenomenon, which indeed cannot always be avoided. But one thing will always be true: it arises due to some difference between an individual or group and the rest of society, which necessarily leads to a conflict, which can only be resolved in this way.