INTRODUCTION

Sociology and the social sciences as a whole is a very dangerous science, if not THE most dangerous of all the sciences. Yes even more volatile than Physics which invented the atom bomb or even Mathematics or Economics that brings down whole economies and crunches numbers. This paper, dear sir, is a bird s eye view of just some of the issues that arise from the bittersweet science that gave you Marxism, the seemingly never ending war in the Middle east, the Korean war, the World wars and even 9/11. Sociology seems to be the sleeper that sits at the corner of the room watching as everyone cuts each other s throats. The most difficult part about the study of the social sciences is how to be impartial about the facts and the observations we find out of it. How can we as rational species and at the same time look at ourselves at the proverbial mirror not just as an individual but as a society in the big picture? Can we truthfully tell ourselves that everyone acts the same way as we do but ultimately reject other observations of the psyche of others just because it does not coincide with ours? One great example is the rise of Nazi Germany. Hitler was considered as one of the most radical sociologists ever and he had one simple ideological value: cleanse those who do not look like us. It s funny how one simple sociological idea can kill millions of people. As earlier stated we shall dip our toes to merely a few sociological problems that plague our world today, there s the never ending question of morality (RH Bill), religion, politics, and even a little hint of culture. We want to be as critical and as impartial as possible because as students of sociology, we must become that sleeper in the corner. We must watch as society unravels before our very eyes, and keep our tongues as the event happens, and inform others of Why the hell it happened in the first place, and how to avoid such things in the future..

I.

Less is More (?)

House Bill No. 4244 or An Act Providing for a Comprehensive Policy on Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health, and Population and Development, and For Other Purposes, better known as the RH Bill was introduced by Albay 1st district Representative Edcel Lagman, and Senate Bill No. 2378 or An Act Providing For a National Policy on Reproductive Health and Population and Development introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago is probably the most controversial topic today. Controversial because of the fact about how many people are so divided over it and how at the same time people do not want to talk about it or have strong opinions about it. That s how powerful this sociological concern is. We have the moralists, who base their arguments on the sacredness of life over the utilitarian idea that having less people to fight over the rice pot will eventually lead to more people having a bigger serving. You will be surprised how divided people are over this. Even family members will argue over it on the dinner table (If families still gather at dinner tables that is, that is, but that s a different sociological concern). When we think about it, how can one idea generate such mass hysteria and debate? First of all the Philippines is a largely (fanatically?) Roman Catholic/Christian nation. We were raised by our parents to be God-fearing individuals and to follow the Bible and the teachings of our Priests/Pastors (Ministers, Primates... you get the picture) lest we face the wrath of hell below our feet. The mere fact of hindering the creation of life itself either through contraception or abortion is unspeakable and will have to be dealt with accordingly. Supporters of the bill have economics as their sword and shield. The proverbial economic pie of the Philippines is small enough as it is, so probably the best way to solve that issue is to reduce the number of people partaking of that pie. Everyone knows that you cant just kill the people off (God I

hope so) so the next best thing would be population control. The people who draft this bill have transcended from traditional culture and have decided to against it. The result is just complete bedlam. This is what happens when two contrasting cultural ideas clash. Let s face it, the RH Bill is not a Filipino idea but more of a western one. Wade V Boggs, a landmark case in the US, created the precedent for issues such as this. Basically what it says is that a woman has every right to the complete health and control over her body. This was then opened for interpretation and addendum and ultimately became the template for socio-economic standards and population control. We then return to our culture. Tradition states that this act is as immoral as pretty much any of the mortal sins. To hinder God s gift of life from blossoming, to stop a couple from conceiving a baby either by necessity or by choice is a sin. It is even more ridiculous and sinister to abort a fetus just for convenience or even by choice and is considered murderous. Naturally the bandwagon for pitchfork carrying torch-toting God fearing Filipinos is not lacking of members who will desperately fight the bill from being considered (let alone passed). It is just against our culture. We can argue about morality or faith all we want but the truth is what we are witnessing is a classic clash of the cultures. We cannot just deviate from the current status quo. Eventually one idea will win over the other, but as we see throughout history, it is never a pretty sight.

II.

Osama bin Rotten

Imagine riding a jeepney on your way home from school. You re having a quiet time, being alone with your thoughts, probably thinking of your schoolyard crush and when the hell is he going to ask you out when all of a sudden a person wearing a Kurta sits beside you. All of a sudden you re palms get sweaty, your brain goes haywire. You try to alert yourself about imminent danger. You start to think of a way to defend yourself, defend your country, and stop the terrorists. You imagine the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York crashing down and you not wanting to be a part of it. You over react then you notice he has a child You realize all your fears were founded in fear alone and you feel sorry for yourself for thinking that way, and you now probably think of yourself as a racist. The Muslim people and Islam in general have been demonized in our society. Admit it, whenever you ride any vehicle you would rather not be beside someone who wears a Kurta (Islamic Men s dress shirt) and wears a long beard. Not to be pedantic but don t you imagine a terrorist behind all that clothing? Just like the ones you see on TV or the movies and even the news? We see our Muslim brothers and sisters as people to be feared but who can really blame us? A lot of the problems we see on the news are about someone bombing this place another person being kidnapped for ransom and other horrible things we see on the news. Then again who are we to judge and say that what we see on the news is real (that s another sociological concern other than this topic) Why do we create associations in our brain just because someone else dresses differently than us? Is it because of the fear of the unfamiliar? Or are our fears based on actual experience or just a conditioned mentality. If you know better, you will find that Islam is a culture of temperance, of constant acceptance of predetermined conditions and is built by probably the nicest people you will ever meet. Sure there are

the exceptions, but like in every culture there are always exceptions. You never see a common theif being branded a terrorist just because he s a Christian but when a Muslim does it all of a sudden he s part of a sleeper cell of terrorists plotting to bomb some place. It s not right but why does society do it? Why do we rely on such security blankets such as ostracizing other cultures? The implications of marginalizing cultures different from us stems from society s demand to protect it from the outside world. Protect itself either from persecuting other cultures or imposing itself on others. It s like an organism that attacks others to preserve its very existence. It is a sociological problem with staggering implications, true, and the only way around it would be a more personal resolution. Society knows it must have tolerance but to say that it must have tolerance is where the problem is to begin with. We have decided that to deal with such Sociological issue and try to change everyone to be tolerant will be counter-productive. As students of Sociology and members of the society from the outside looking in, equilibrium and harmony despite the differences is the key for this dilemma. Then again, we are lead back to the same problem, aren t we?

III.

It s all About the Money (Money money)

Game shows are just everywhere these days, and when we say everywhere, we mean EVERYWHERE. Try it. Just switch the channel to any local channel, and you will most likely find a person singing, dancing or even acting for some prize. We are not saying that it s a bad thing. We only seem to notice the motivation for doing so. Let s face it, wouldn t you probably be doing something you re already very good at for a shot at a prize? Society and its people work around a very powerful axiom, What s in it for me? The society in general work as a combined unit but what those units work on is primarily essential to the survival of the society. Paraphrasing a cartoon character, It really is amazing what people can do when they re paid in cash and not chickens. Before societies even existed, probably back when man was just an individual ravaging through the forests, individuals fight for survival. They hunt for their food, maintain a suitable territory and live off the land. But we must also keep in mind that man is a rational being. The entire basis of society is for the survival of the individual itself, like they say, no man is an island. Man knew that in order to survive, they must rely on others as well as others relying on them. That was the inventive of individuals forming a society. Then, as societies organized themselves, man, being the rational being he is wanted more. They wanted incentives for whatever work they did. They didn t want to work for the society just for the sake of it existing, they knew they can earn while they re at it. Thus the concept of rewards and income was born out of the enterprising society. The same principle works out for game shows. You cannot tell anyone to sing or dance or even make a fool out of themselves just because you told them to. No. of you want entertainment, you pay

for entertainment. The concept of rewards is so powerful that even economists and psychologists study this phenomenon in order to condition existing ideologies to conform to their perceived ideal standards. We know it sounds like a human being that s trodden in front of all the people and letting him or her perform her talent while people throw peanuts at the human sound too inhumane, but the concept is in its self very human. We may judge other people for exposing their embarrassing lives infront of everyone for money but in a pinch wouldn t you do the same? It may probably be in a different form other that what you perceive as embarrassing but we have to admit that every has their price. It just may not be money or fame or fortune a dream perhaps or maybe a life goal? You save money now and have a hard time because you know in the future your savings will earn you more than if you spend it now. Society works to preserve itself, the members work to preserve themselves, it s a concept we are all aware of but are just too judgemental of others to see. You scratch my back, I Scratch Yours.

CONCLUSION

This paper tried to tackle just a few of the most common issues in society; it touched a few sensitive aspects such as religion, science, and even psychology. To say that we have just touched the tip of the iceberg is an understatement; we even haven t reached it yet. It just shows how little we know about the world we live in, the world we move in, the streets we walk on and the people we judge. This paper merely made us think of that fact. We cannot just walk blindly around spinning around in circles and thinking that this is how life should be lead. It would be like Plato s allegory of the cave. What this paper shows us is that we must not judge our society as merely as we see it. As earlier stipulated, Sociology is a very dangerous subject. If we judge it quickly it will come back and bite us and in the end we will only have ourselves to blame. But then, we don t think about it right? So maybe we just go back to another sociological problem and then another one and another one. We d be dead fish floating down a torrent.

Discussions on General Sociology

Prof. Bonifacio

Jose Rizal University

80 Shaw Boulevard, Mandaluyong City 1552 Philippines

Pati-an, LeRoy Marion Salapare, Joan Aon, Jennifer Manuel, Eric Scot Reyes, Noah Olivia, Domingo III Caliwag, Christian Claude Efifante, Bon Jovi Biete, Jayson Inzon, Bernard Arcilla, Euvene Ferdinand, Cherby Fernandez, Roland