NEWS from the Centro Segoviano for today Friday
Dear friends,
This Sunday we are discussing: Integration in Society
No doubt this is a very apt and relevant topic for us today, not least 
because many of us do not live in the country of our birth. Both Ruel 
and I have written an essay on the topic.
--------
Hi Lawrence,
I wrote an essay on Sunday´s topic. Here is the link to access it:
http://ruelfpepa.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/integration-in-society/
Thanks.
See you at PhiloMadrid.
Always,
Ruel
-------
Presentation - Tres Años Sin Bea - Centro Segoviano 4 April
Please check out this link for more details: 
http://philomadrid.blogspot.com.es/2014/04/presentation-tres-anos-sin-bea-centro.html
------------
Integration in Society
Despite the efforts of some radical politicians, societies are 
influenced by two shaping forces. The first is the internal dynamics of 
the society itself that plays a pivotal role in defining the makeup of a 
society. The other force is the influence of other external societies, 
including individuals from other societies. Indeed, given that societies 
are constituted by biological open systems, i.e. human beings, societies 
cannot be hermetically sealed systems.
In a stable society with a well established mechanism to channel the 
interaction of individuals we can expect integration to be a key issue 
for two types of individuals. Firstly, those individuals who are born 
within the society but who find it difficult to conform to the accepted 
norms so they forced to function at the peripheral margins of society. 
As Matilda argues last week, there are people who try to escape their 
harsh reality by writing poetry and others who take drugs; those who 
take drugs are assumed not to have integrated in society. The second 
would be the group of outsiders who join, or try to join, a foreign society.
Of course, a weakness of open systems is that they are very susceptible 
to instability. The advantages of having genetic diversity in a society, 
is counterbalanced by the inherent instability created by the changing 
dynamics of having to introduce new members into the society. And 
although we can all agree that maintaining a reasonable equilibrium 
between these two forces is not easy, we can also agree that having a 
stable society is a very desirable objective.
But the issue is not a choice between a stable society, through 
stagnation, or a dynamic society because of genetic diversity. The issue 
is how to arrive at an equitable equilibrium without reaching a critical 
mass that can lead a disintegration of society itself.
Some closed societies will try to achieve equilibrium by simply 
"stagnating" the very society itself. Thus dissidents within the society 
are somehow removed from society before they become a danger to that 
society. And outsiders are aggressively kept out for the very same 
reason; China and N Korea are prime examples of these types of stagnant 
societies. The question is whether stagnant societies are determined to 
become incestuous societies (at least metaphorically speaking) or simple 
become extinct with time?
Many African countries are examples where the colonial distribution of 
tribes into geographical demarcations resulted into a mixture of 
ancestral backgrounds that just made it impossible for each separate 
society to live within a given confine. Burundi is one such example.
The integration of individuals in a society is a balance between 
individual survival and to maintain the equilibrium that is necessary 
for a stable and functioning society. We can safely assume that 
individuals both try to achieve an acceptable level of happiness and an 
acceptable level of comfort. This does not mean that we all want to be 
rich but rather we all want to reach a level of living standard we are 
happy with. I would argue we can all be reasonably well off and have a 
comfortable life if remuneration and wealth is a function of our 
legitimate contribution to society and not through illegitimate gains we 
can make at the cost of society.
When we just look at the bottom line we fail to see how we arrived at 
that profit balance. Thus there is always the danger that a society can 
become a means to extract wealth from rather than a means to create 
wealth for equitable remuneration. I would also argue that integration 
of individuals in society becomes a major problem, for both the 
individuals and society, when society puts more value on the 
accumulation of wealth rather than the method of accumulating wealth.
Whilst money can solve a lot of problems for individuals and society, it 
is not the only issue that affects integration in society: there are two 
other issues that play a major role in the integration process. The 
first is culture and tradition, which I will include the legal system 
and religion, and the second is language.
Culture and tradition have a causal effect on the moral and ethical 
standards of a society. Thus the more a society needs dogma to keep it 
together (N. Korea, Iran etc) the more its ethics feels flawed. The more 
an ethical system is based on empirical evidence the likelier we are 
able to relate to it and accept its precepts. Countries that pay fair 
wages tend to be more stable; e.g. Sweden despite the flaws one would 
expect in any society.
Thus, the more an individual deviates from the moral and ethical 
standards of a society the more integration would become an issue. For 
example, a major issue today in European countries is the so called 
"female circumcision". From all aspect on life in Europe we find this 
practice abhorrent and barbaric; many societies in Africa and the Middle 
East find this normal. The challenge is to find the balance between two 
different ethical systems, but the bottom line is that empirically this 
practice is dangerous, painful and discriminatory and therefore unlikely 
to be morally acceptable by any objective standards.
Finally, the second issue is language. By its very nature, language is 
both discriminatory and, up to an extent, racist. Discriminatory because 
people who do not speak a given language are excluded from the 
communication loop of that language.  And racist because until now 
languages have been closely, if not causally associated, with a given 
race or society. And within a given language accent would be a further 
complication of the issue.
The misconception about learning a second language is that we have to be 
as proficient in it as a native speaker to claim that we can speak the 
target language. This will never happen unless one is prepared to spend 
a life time living in the culture of target language. Second generation 
immigrants have no problem learning and using the target language of 
their parents. This evidence suggests that although learning a second 
language is difficult it is not impossible. The positive side of 
language is that we don't need to reach any equilibrium or a balance to 
integrate in a society; knowing the language enough to enter and stay in 
the language communication loop is sufficient.
If we accept this language argument, i.e. that language can help us 
access the society language communication loop, it gives us a relatively 
effective foot hold in that society.
Thus, language and an empirically based ethical system should probably 
help us much better to integrate into any society that have these two 
membership criteria, rather than a society based on some irrational dogma.
A final observation is that with issues and money and ethics we are 
really looking at a balance between extremes, language gives us a 
threshold for easy integration, but is the relationship between an 
empirically based society and a dogma society? Can these live side by 
side or too contradictory that there is no room for both?
See you Sunday
Best Lawrence
tel: 606081813
philomadrid@gmail.com <mailto:philomadrid@gmail.com>
Blog: http://philomadrid.blogspot.__com.es/
<http://philomadrid.blogspot.com.es/>
PhiloMadrid Meeting
Meet 6:30pm
Centro Segoviano
Alburquerque, 14
28010 Madrid
914457935
Metro: Bilbao
-----------Ignacio------------
Open Tertulia in English every Thursday from 19:30 to 21h at 
O'Donnell's
Irish Pub, c/ Barceló 1 (metro Tribunal)
http://sites.google.com/site/__tertuliainenglishmadrid/
<http://sites.google.com/site/tertuliainenglishmadrid/>
----------------------------
from Lawrence, SUNDAY PhiloMadrid meeting: Integration in Society +NEWS
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment