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 reintegrate into the 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 of 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 obtain 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 formations, and about the connection between deviation and the individual’s social disorientation.
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 feature of marginality is the inability to engage in usual activities, 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 a positive feature in the current situation may be the strategy/decision that an individual takes to return to his usual group or adapt to the norms and values of another group. The correct thought was expressed, but this time it was not really completed - the individual remained the only object being talked about 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. In it, the topic continues to be revealed at a 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 gives several brief examples that also illustrate 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.
Answer Delete
I view this statement both from the positive and negative side. Marginality is a concept that characterizes borderline, intermediate, cultural phenomena, social subjects, statuses standing at the border... Marginals 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, or 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. A striking example from modern times, which is on 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 principles.
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. the social structure changes 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 at first 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. The marginalized 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, at the end of the 17th century a new project arose: to isolate the marginalized as a repulsive and harmful phenomenon.
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 can be migrants, women, people with disabilities, as well as those who have entered into interethnic or interracial marriages, and representatives of national minorities.
Thus, we come to the conclusion that marginality is the result of a conflict with generally accepted norms.
The author in his statement touches on the problem of marginalization in society. He wanted to say that the reason for marginalization is a conflict with social norms. In other words, the reason for the marginality of a particular person is conflict. Not just a conflict, but a conflict with the rules of behavior accepted in society.
It's easy to agree with this. So, first, let's remember the definition of marginalization. Marginal is a person located between two main social strata. Therefore, marginalization is the process of increasing the number of people suspended between social strata.
Accordingly, from the author’s words, we see that the reason for this situation is conflict. Conflict is a clash of interests and opinions of individuals and groups.
It turns out that a person left one social layer, but did not enter another social layer and found himself in the position of marginal, and the reason for this is the conflict of his actions with the rules of behavior prevailing in society.
As an example to confirm my position, I would like to cite the story of Benito Mussalini. When he died in 1945, it was prohibited at the legislative level to create fascist parties and propagate fascist ideology. After which, thousands of Mussalini’s supporters, due to persecution, instantly became marginalized. Their ideology and, so to speak, way of life, became in conflict with social norms. Another example can be given from the life of Anna Akhmatova, who was also marginalized in the USSR. Her poetry and views were not similar to the generally accepted norms and views of other people in society. As a result, this resulted in her being persecuted by the ruling party.
These examples illustrate the main cause of marginalization - conflict with social norms.
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 become as close to the local subculture as they were. 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 social transformations are currently taking place in society, as well as due to 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.
In his statement, A. Farge touches on the problem of the emergence of such a social phenomenon as marginality. The appearance of marginalized people in any society has many negative consequences both for this society and for the people who fall into this category. That is why thinking people have always wondered why marginalized people appear.
Farge sees marginality as a person’s manifestation of rejection of the norms of the society (whether legal norms, moral norms, or traditions and customs) into which he finds himself.
In fact, A. Farge's statement about marginality comes from the definition of this phenomenon. A marginalized person is a person who has lost his previous social status and previous sociocultural environment and at the same time was not able to adapt to the new environment and new status. The inability to adapt, of course, is a consequence of non-acceptance of the norms of this environment. Marginality inevitably follows from the stratification of society and the inequality of individuals. Any society is characterized by stratification and a hierarchical structure, therefore, perhaps, there have always been and will be marginalized people. Stratification in society on the basis of prestige, material wealth, and power originates at the very origin of social relations from the natural inequality of individuals. With the development of culture and civilization, hierarchical relations only became more rigid, and social mobility - the possibility of moving from one layer of society to another - became more and more difficult. And if a group of marginalized people under a communal-tribal system, when the stratification framework was not yet rigid and officially controlled, could still easily survive or even pull the blanket in the form of material benefits or prestige over themselves, then in the Middle Ages this was already completely impossible. All this is explained by the fact that for the dynamic development of society, the stability of its structure, the consolidation of social statuses - the position of the individual in the social structure, associated with certain rights and responsibilities - were necessary. Social institutions emerged and gained strength to control the coordinated work of the hierarchical system. Accordingly, the elements of the hierarchical structure of society - strata - became increasingly closed. For example, a young man entering adulthood could involuntarily acquire the social status of a craftsman and not accept the norms of his workshop, but he did not have the opportunity to change anything. Thus, the position of the marginalized became more difficult from century to century. The reverse process - the gradual opening of hierarchical frameworks - was launched around the Renaissance (however, this is a controversial issue). The attitude towards people who did not accept the norms of the social environment in which they found themselves gradually softened (relatively, of course). In addition, social mobility was also facilitated. It is worth recognizing that this “thaw” did not occur without the participation of the marginalized themselves. Marginality brings destruction to society, on the one hand, and, on the other, the will for renewal and improvement. Everything depends on the social community where the marginalized appeared, on its condition, as well as on the intentions of the marginalized themselves and their strength.
Let's look at examples of the positive and negative consequences of the existence of marginalized people. In the socio-philosophical novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment" the main character is none other than the representative of the marginalized, Rodion Raskolnikov. Raskolnikov, a commoner who had the social status of a student, had financial difficulties that did not allow him to complete the course. It turns out that during the action of the novel, Raskolnikov is already marginal. He cannot continue his studies due to lack of funds, and he cannot work, obviously, because he does not want to engage in hard, unprivileged labor and be at the bottom of the social structure of society. Of course, the hero experiences psychological inconveniences, in addition to financial ones. Reflections on the imperfection of the social system in Russia lead him to the creation of the fatal theory about “trembling creatures who have the right.” And she, in turn, pushes Raskolnikov to a criminal experiment - the murder of an old money-lender in order to distribute the money she had saved to those in need. In addition to the old woman, Rodion also kills her sister Lisa, who just happened to be nearby. In addition, the hero subsequently suffers terrible psychological shocks that do not allow him to carry out his plan - he hides the money, without taking it himself or giving it to people.
However, history knows examples of people who were once marginalized, but later found themselves “accepted” by society. In our opinion, the intelligentsia in Russia after the Revolution of 1917 and during the USSR can be considered as such. Of course, there were so many of them that they formed an entire social stratum. However, they were marginalized who did not accept the order that was imposed on them by the established government in the country. One of them, the talented poet Joseph Brodsky, was even judged for his marginality - he did not work, explaining this by the fact that he was engaged in poetry. The Soviet government considered this a crime - parasitism. Brodsky did not submit to pressure from the authorities and did not change his position. He was subsequently expelled from the USSR. Nevertheless, the poet’s poetic heritage enriched the national cultural fund and had a significant influence on subsequent poetry; Brodsky became the favorite poet of many, which would not have happened if he had submitted to the authorities.
Thus, we see that marginality - rejection of social norms - is a double-edged sword. Rejection of norms will last as long as these norms exist, as long as social stratification exists. Marginality is the same consequence of the natural inequality of people as the social stratification itself, on which society still rests.
