soc 311 salon 4

Salon #4: Now we will start to address Michael Lewis's The Culture of Inequality.

Mini-lecture on The Culture of Inequality. You should read the first part of the book by Wednesday, Sept. 30th and answer the questions below at that time.

This is a sociological essay which is built around a central thesis, or argument. The first three chapters lay out in detail what Lewis means by the culture of inequality. Make sure that you understand what is meant by culture: this refers to all man(and woman)-made aspects of life. Lewis is arguing that while eqalitarianism is the official ideology (or political belief system) and the ideal value system of the U.S., that in fact the inequality of opportunity which exists in the U.S. is ignored and denied.

This comes about by focusing on the individual as the major player in the society denying that she or he is circumscribed or advantaged by social origins, by economic factors, by educational differences, by norms governing the sexes, ethnic groups, age groups, etc. Thus the success or failure of the individual is accounted for by the individual's efforts and talents. In American society you get little credit for following traditions or for being a religious or moral person. Individuals are judged primarily on their success economically, politically, and socially. As Lewis makes his case, this focus on the individual ignores the impact of social structure, in which an individual is embedded and which shapes her or his possibilities for success or failure.

Questions for Salon 4: to be answered by Wednesday, Sept. 30th.

1. Lewis states that the culture of inequality is "an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances." Explain what this means.

2. Lewis argues that the culture of inequality rests on a "sensibility" of the individual-as-central. How have social scientists (psychologists, sociologists, social workers) tended to explain why some (or most) individuals fail to succeed.

3. How do political liberals and conservatives explain why some people are poor. And how do these ideological groups propose to wipe out poverty.

4. Lewis talks of three strategies used to try to handle and explain why an individual may not be successful: they are (1) situational impediments (2) lowering one's aspirations, or (3) inflating achievements. Explain in your words how these operate.

5. On p.42, Lewis first brings up the fictional character of Willy Loman, the salesman in Death of a Salesman as an example of how the "individual-as-central" sensibility can fully undermine an individual. You might note that Willy Loman is referred to many times again as an example of a tragic figurel who believed that successful outcomes were fully within his grasp. This is not a question, but a suggestion that by this point, you might want to get a hold of the video and watch this play.

Enter your comments below (Don't forget to submit): http://s311salon4.htm

To view others' comments in this salon, scroll down this page. [Soc311--Inequality Home Page] [Return to Salon Menu] [CSU, San Marcos Sociology On-Line Courses] [CSU, San Marcos Sociology Homepage]

Salon #4 Responses

Fri Sep 25 16:09:18 PDT 1998

Garrett garrett@csusm.edu responded:

Test for Salon 4

Mon Sep 28 20:09:34 PDT 1998

Andrew Fritzinger latigo@pe.net responded:

1.)Lewis is basically saying that although society supports equality we can obviously see inequality in the fact that there are economic class distinctions in this country. Society ignores the social structures that are in place that may hurt peoples productivity. 2.) Behavioral scientists diagnose failure with language like " poor family background " or " interpersonal incompetence " instead of of accusing the individual of moral fault. 3.) Conservatives see the disadvantaged as victims of there own moral faults and should be left alone to fix their situation. Liberals see the disadvantaged as mostly good people who are socially incompetent and they offer programs to assist them. 4.)Situational Impediment is when something that is out of the persons control and responsibility causes them to fail. Lowering ones aspirations is the process of relinquishing one's goals with the price of low morale. Inflating one's achievements is when someone performs activity like buying an uneconomical car to create a false sense of achievement.

Tue Sep 29 14:22:37 PDT 1998

Jill Gustus gustu001@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded:

1. What Lewis meant by that quote is that even if people are given equal chances, it doesn't mean that the outcomes for these people will be equal. We as a society want equality but it doesn't always end up being that way. 2. Social scientists believe it is the individual and their background that tends to lead them to fail rather than to succeed. It could have been because of the individual's self-esteem or outlook in life. It could also have been because of the way they were raise by their parents and the standards they were given. 3. Liberals see the poor stuck in situations beyond their control and that they need help to live a better life. To accomplish that the liberals believe that the poor need programs like welfare to get out of this poverty. The conservatives blame the people for their own situation, that they made the wrong choices in life. The conservatives believe helping these people isn't the answer, that they should be left alone to find to get out of their situation by themselves. 4. Situational impediments are the barriers that occur in different situations that cannot be controlled or eliminated (easily). Lowering one's aspirations -- People lower their goals to meet up with their actual achievements. This is done to make their live seem better, that they are actually meeting their goals. Inflating achievements is done when someone wants their status, usually economic, to look better than what it really is. They will usually buy things that are way beyond their grasp and standard of living. For instance, they will buy expensive clothing or a new car.

Tue Sep 29 20:23:48 PDT 1998

Louise Basford jlbasford@earthlink.net responded:

1) Lewis states that the culture of inequality is "an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances." Here, Lewis is stating that society in general always wants equality, yet it will never happen. Too many people have too many definitions on what equality is, where is starts and where it stops, if it ever does. Society gives these chances, if they are taken people will succeed. If they do not take a chance they will no doubt fail in life. It is really all up to the individual, what they may want their outcome to be. Anytime you are given a chance take it, it can never hurt you, just make you that much stronger for attempting the challenge. 2) Social Scientists have tended to explain why some people fail to succeed. They feel that perhaps we should not look at the individual who is failing but those who have failed in his/her life time. Could it be that if their parents have different morals, that those morals will not survive in today's society. Therefore, should we judge this person as an individual? If they were not brought up with much love or affection, or if there were brought up in a family who has experienced a divorce, is this person now going to fail, and now has been labeled as a failure. Is this perhaps why one may fail to succeed. Because they have no morals, no self esteem, why should they succeed, who is going to be there to pat them on the back? So, perhaps Lewis's argument is that we are pointing our fingers at the wrong individual(s). 3) In the book it states that we should not "disregard the differences separating liberals and conservatives. The differences are real..." (Lewis, p. 11) Liberals and conservatives have two completely different outlooks on the "poor." The Liberals see that the poor need our help to get out of or survive poverty. They feel that people who are poor need an extra "push" if they want to survive, or to obtain a better life style. Liberals see them as being in this societal status for as long as they live unless someone else helps them. This is where the programs come into to place. Such as, Head start, donations, welfare programs, whatever the government has to offer, etc. The Conservatives on the other hand feel that these people got themselves into this mess, why should we have to work extra hard to get them out. This is something they need to do for themselves. IF they are not willing to get up and look for jobs, why should we hand things to them. Why can't they work as hard as everyone else to earn their life savings. If they can't afford their bills, perhaps they should not have a family of 6 or 7 or even 10. It seems to me that Conservatives would rather "wipe-out" this population and the Liberals are the "Expensive do-goodings." It all depends on how you want to control your life and how happy you want your family to be. It is up to the individual, it's nobody's responsibility but your own. 4) The 3 stages Lewis discusses are as follows: a) Situational Impediments -- This is when an individual has no way of controlling the situation, perhaps because of a disability. They can't control the situation, therefore fails. b) Lowering one's aspirations -- This is when a person tries to make the best out of a poor situation. They do worse to look better. If they strive to do one thing and fail, they will then do something they are good at, whether it is successful or not so they look better. An example the book gave was if you wanted to be a journalist and for some reason felt that you could not be successful, you become a teacher. Which I think is a bad example because I wanted to be a nurse, did not want that life style so I am studying to become a teacher, does this mean I am lowering my aspiration's? hope not) It is when one strives for a goal, fails, then tries for the next best thing. c) Inflating achievements -- When a person wants society to look at them in a different perspective, they out do themselves by buying or wearing expensive things. They may go out and buy a new car, a fancy house, new clothes etc., then people will look at them as successful, although, they really have credit card debt that they can't pay off for the next ten years! Or they will put a fancy stereo system in their car so you can hear them a mile away. Or lower their car so they will get peoples attention. Something that is a waste of money and is not needed. Harley Davidsons are really loud, why? Only because it makes them feel and perhaps look more powerful. Nine times out of ten people do not need these things, they just want to be recognized.

Tue Sep 29 20:28:19 PDT 1998

Jeff Basford jlbasford@earthlink.net responded:

1. Lewis's Statement "an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances," is in reference to the perceived equal opportunity in the U.S.. This perception of equal opportunity is based on the belief that the country has a unlimited amount of "chances." Those who do not take advantage of the available opportunities fail while those who do succeed. "To be poor, to have suffered disadvantage, was taken to mean failure to make the most of an abundance of chances." Focus is not placed on the in-equal advantages afforded individuals and the impact those advantages have on future success. "It is a sensibility that virtually ignores the impact of social structure upon personal achievement and mobility."

2. Psychologists, sociologist, etc. use the "individual-as-central" "sensibility", in a modified form, to explain the failure of individuals in society. They adhere to the idea that individual effort is a deciding factor in success or failure. However, their focus is on explaining the failure of individuals to put forth an effort. Explanations for this are sought in "psychodynamic makeup, cultural commitments, family background and contingent socialization, degree of cognitive competence, and extent of interpersonal competence."

3. Both Liberals and Conservatives are described by Lewis as perceiving poverty and disadvantage as a function of qualities characteristic of the disadvantaged poor, they perceive the failure of the poor as a failure to put forth an effort. They differ in their focus, however, Liberals focusing on the deficient background of the individual, and Conservatives focusing on the inherent lack of motivation of the individuals. Liberal thinking sees financial aid as a means to help the poor, while Conservatives believe they should be left to their own defenses. The author explains that the poor are stuck within a societal problem.

4.

(1) Situational Impediments - not giving an effort based on a belief that you did not have a true chance at success.
(2) Lowering One's Aspirations - Demonstrating your success by comparing your achievements to ever lowering standards.
(3) Inflating Achievements - An overt attempt to make your successes as visible as possible. The purpose being to make your current success appear to be more than it is.

Tue Sep 29 23:09:10 PDT 1998

Rita Danskin lakegrove@aol.com responded:

This was a tough reading for me. I stumbled repeatedly with semantics and had to read each sentence many times to make sense of it. It wasn't until I got to Chapter 2 that it began to make sense. However, as I am now attempting to interpret what I read, I find myself stumbling again! So if it sounds like I'm tripping...I am! I would appreciate any and all clarification. Also, I don't recall how to put in a line break. Can someone help me out? Thanks! (1) I believe the quotation means that when we think of "all men are created equal," we ignore the impact society has on "all men." Lewis says when we do this, "Society is seen as benign, offering up opportunities and waiting to be enriched by those who have the will and the capacity to make productive use of them." (2) Social scientists tend to explain that individuals fail to succeed because of a number of deficiencies, such as: Inadequate personality structures, inadequate motivation, absence of strong paternal models, lack of sufficient cognitive skills, and interpersonal incompetence. (3) Conservatives say the individual is responsible for their own state-of-affairs. I'm assuming this means conservatives believe that "God helps those who help themselves." Liberals blame the system and try to wipe out poverty by funding programs such as Head Start, Job Corps, etc. which aim to bring the disadvantaged up out of poverty by changing behaviors (this, of course, assumes that everyone would WANT to change their behavior!). (4) An example of someone who uses the "situational impediment" stratagem is someone who uses a physical impairment as a handicap, i.e., asking for special favors, rather than taking the much tougher role of accepting their physical impairment as a challenge (as in the cases of sports figures and others who have gone on to become great despite their handicap). An example of someone who uses the "lowering ones aspirations" stratagem is someone who aims for a 4-year degree but settles on a 2-year degree by saying, "I make more money working in an office with my 2-year degree than I would teaching with a 4-year degree." Note focus on $$! An example of someone who uses the "inflating achievements" stratagem is simply someone we would call a braggart. For instance, someone who overextends their credit to appear more successful than they are.

Tue Sep 29 23:09:44 PDT 1998

Anne Chambers chamb012@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded:

1) Lewis is saying that everyone has an equal opportunity to achieve success in life, however, it is up to the individual to strive for that. It is the individual alone who is "responsible for the degree of personal success achieved." (p. 8) 2) Social scientists believe the individual fails to succeed because they have no "committment to do their personal best." (p. 9) However, they also give "deficiency explanations" of psychodynamic make-up--self-defeating attitudes, cultural committments--poverty or lower-class views, family background--no male role model, and, degree of cognitive competence--lack of sufficient reading skills, to explain failure to succeed further. 3) both groups believe in the "individual-as-central sensibility." Conservatives believe in this in its purest form-the individual IS responsible for his/her own destiny. Liberals believe it also, however, they do add "the individualized misfortunes of incompetency and capacity" to their beliefs to justify the need for social programs. (p. 12) Liberals implement many social programs to assist those in poverty-counseling, Head-Start, Job Corps, Vista, etc.-"to tutor the untutored and to alter their attitudes so that they might cease their apathetic withdrawal from society." (p. 60) Conservatives don't want as many programs. They believe these programs only keep people where they are by not forcing them aspire to better themselves and thus make the leap from poverty. 4) A>Situational impediment-People try to claim they can't be successful because they are poor and don't have the same opportunities as the rich. This thinking alone keeps them in poverty. They find little sympathy. Reverend Jesse Jackson tells "poor black students to overcome the only barriers to education that count, the ones within themselves." (p. xiii) Lewis says that a physical illness may be the only situational impediment that one has no control over, but may overcome. Many people have physical problems, but they have the fortitude to get the education needed to achieve success despite their disabilities. B>Lowering one's aspirations-People don't want to realize they haven't achieved greatness. They lower their aspirations to meet their achievements. This removes the "if-only" mindthink. Unless a person makes "successful claims of situational impediment, in order to neutralize the impact upon their self-respect of the disparity between themselves and what they appear to be achieving" one can't lower their aspirations. (p. 26) Since situational impediments don't work, neither will this strategem. C> Inflating achievements-Lewis says this is "the counterfeit of success." (p. 26) We buy BIG to make the illusion of success. How many people have massive amounts of credit card debts? This is a sign of living beyond one's means. We MUST have the best car, clothes, hairstyle, etc. to impress everyone. To show off. However, the more people try to show what they possess, they see what everyone else has and feel they don't have enough. Everyone wants to be on top. One joins associations to be with other people of the same status (or the status they wish to be) i.e. Junior League. They then must elevate their status even further by running and becoming an officer of that association. As Lewis noted the prime example of this is Ralph Cramden of "The Honeymooners". (p.33) Willie Loman in "Death of a Salesman" inflated his achievements every time he spoke. When he returned from travelling he would tell his wife that he sold much more than he actually did to impress her. Only when she pressed would he tell her the truth. He overstated his importance to Biff and his brother when talking to them in the backyard when they were younger. He wanted Biff to become successful so he could ride on his laurels. He overlooked Biff's failures when he was in his 20's, but was finding it intolerable when Biff got older, because it only emphasized his own failure to achieve his aspirations of becoming a top salesman.

Wed Sep 30 07:30:03 PDT 1998

Christina Glady glady001@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded:

1.The quote “an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumptions of equal chances.” means that many times we believe that we are not given the same opportunity as others. We believe that, that is the reason that we do not succeed. For example some people believe that they are poor because they were born into poverty, which is true, but they can do something about that. When they are young they have to live in poverty, but when they get older they can get more education a high paying job and get more money. They could break away from poverty. Everyone though is not given a fair chance. Some people will try their whole lives to do something, but they may never achieve it. For instance some people born into poverty will always be poverty because they do not have the chance to break free. Maybe they have family obligations, but they are stuck in poverty. 2.They say that most people have failed to succeed because they don’t want to. He says that they are setting their goals to far out of reach. Also we put too much emphasize on success and failure. We do not settle for any middle ground. We either want it all or nothing. We can not be happy without being successful. For example when you go out to buy a car do you get the strip model or do you get the one with air conditioning ? You may only be able to afford the strip model, but you will get the air conditioning. 3.Conservatives believe that we each are responsible for our own destiny and if we are poor then it is only our own fault. They do not look at other circumstances which may have led to poverty. Liberals believe that it is “misfortunes of incompetence and incapacity.”(pg12) They look at programs and see where programs have failed and succeed. Both of them look at the individual as being responsible. Ideological groups propose wipe out poverty by looking at it psychologically. They want to combine culture and personal achievements. 4. 1. Situational impediments- they need to look at the situation and see if there is anything different that can be done in order to succeed. 2. Lowering one’s aspirations- they need to lower what they are trying to achieve. You may want to be rich, but you may have to settle for middle class. 3. Inflating achievements- Instead of leaving their achievements full and out of reach they should lower their goals and make it more reach able.

Wed Sep 30 13:41:57 PDT 1998

Ledia Flores lediaflor@hotmail.com responded:

(1) What I think Lewis means by "culture of inequality" is that we are taught and therefore believe that we all (everyone who lives in the U.S.) have the same exact chances and if we have different outcomes is because we, at the individual level, have failed. Based on this, we interprete our failure or success as something that is entirely out fault because we did not take advantage of the abundant opportunities we had. The responsibility is therefore shifted to the individual level when in reality is society the one at fault. This happens because the elite who runs our country after all, wants it that way. And so we go on believing that if we fail is because we do not have what it takes to make it. (2) Like I said on response #1, we are taught in various ways that if we failed is because we did not take advantage of the numerous opportunities. And so the job is given to social scientists to make us understand that the lack of success in our lives is our own doing because we have personality problems; did not have a paternal model; or lacked cognitive, inter-personal, or educational skills all together. According to them, our inadequate personal characteristics and experiences are the only things that are to blame. (3) What I understood here is that both ideological groups think that the individual fails because it lacks desire for success. According to Lewis, these groups believe that the misfortunes of incompetence and incapacity at the individual level are the causes why some of us are not able to reach personal success. The liberals think that they can wipe out poverty by providing the poor with programs intended to help change their behavior and making them competent. The conservaties on the other hand, think that there is only one way; the poor need to be punished. They (the conservatives) think that it is their duty to punish the poor by not providing any kind of help because if they receive any help than they will not try to pull themselves out of the hole of poverty. (4) What I understood in this section of the book is that when individuals are not conscious of the culture of inequality, they look at themselves and their sorroundings to find an answer: a) With situational impediments, individuals look at immediate circumstances, Although they may not blame it on personal inadequacy, they will still blame themselves for not being aware of those immediate external impediments; b) With lowering one's aspirations, I see individuals thinking that they do not have what it takes to make it so they reset their goals expect less of themselves. What they are doing here is cheating themselves by lowering their standards; c) With inflating achievements, I see individuals making themselves look good so they can have their peers' respect and admiration. However, I think that people who behave this way do not know when or where to stop. It is never enough for them; they are never completely happy with the mask they create and so they keep on changing it to look better every time. Who do they think they are fooling? The respect and recognization that every individual searches for cannot be achieved with this type of behavior or attitude.

Wed Sep 30 20:26:47 PDT 1998

Beth Carson BCarson222@aol.com responded:

1. I think Lewis means basically what his statement implies...people assume that everyone has an equal chance at success, but don't take social factors into consideration. IT assumes that everyone has equal opportunities and it is simply up to that person what they do or how they succeed or fail with those given opportunities. 2. Social scientists explain failure as having to do with personality structures that may be self defeating, with people who are born into economically challenged families who are not motivated to rise to success, they blame the absence of a strong paternal model, maybe a single parent family or one where the father must be away long hours to make a living for the family, and they also explain a lack of success on people lacking cognitive skills. The social scientists refer to these as deficiency explanations. 3. Liberals explain it as the result of unintended deficiencies, individual misfortunes over which the poor have no control. Conservatives tend to see the poor as suffering the consequences of not being willing to take the opportunities to help themselves, the person is responsible for thier success or failure and circumstance has nothing to do with it. Liberals propose spending enormous amounts of money for programs to help allieviate the disadvantages caused by poverty. Funding programs to help them change and grow out of the disadvantage and be more productive. Conservatives see it as a waste of money for those who are too lazy to get out and earn their own living. 4. Situational impediments-circumstances that a person has little or no control over such as disability or serious illness, people often use an excuse but many of these things can be overcome to succeed, and many people who have disabilites and handicaps have accomplished great things instead of giving up. Lowering one's aspirations-Lowering a person's aspirations to do great things down to the level where you are achieving. I think this is settling for what you have instead of motivating yourself to "go for the gold". Lewis describes it as convincing yourself that the high aspirations you held for yourself were "nothing more than the dreams of a naive youth." Inflating achievements-showing off, buying expensive items to make it visible to everyone how successful you are, or think you are. You buy a fancy car, get attention for it, then you get a big head because you think people see your success by what you possess materially.

Wed Sep 30 20:38:30 PDT 1998

Sarah Dyroff Dyrof001 responded:

1. Lewis states that in the United States we see ourselves as equal since we are all "created" equal, but somewhere along the line people loose a sense of self worth due to what happens to them along the road of achieving their expectations. 2. Social Scientists believe the future is due to an individual's reality. What is expected is not always gained and a sense of loss can result from that. Education and environment play a big factor in how individuals view themselves. 3. Liberals believe that there are poor due to circumstances beyond their control. Given opportunity they would have faired much better in life, but situations were not equal for them and therefore they are in such a plight unvoluntarily. They see government programs as a way of helping out. Conservatives have the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" attitude. If you want it all in life, just go after it and never give up. the only way out of poverty is for the individual to take control of their life and make it work for them. No one can do it for you. They see the individual as the answer to the problem. 4. Situational impediments-These are thing that happen to you that are out of your control. Some of these impediments hold you down emotionally, spiritually, academically and physically. Lowering asperations-If you set your goals high and they are never achieved, them to make you feel worthy as a human, you feel the need to lower you standards and make your goals meet your reality. Inflating achievements-Living a lifestyle that you cannot afford to appear on the outside that you have succeeded in your goals.

Wed Sep 30 21:03:30 PDT 1998

Katherine Kelleher kelle@csusm.edu responded:

1. Lewis views individualistic moral sensibility as central to the existence of the American culture of inequality. In the interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances, it is sensibility that overlooks the impact of social structure upon achievement. According to Lewis, if inequality indicates that individuals produce exertion at different levels with many being free to exercise their ambitions to the fullest extent, only the individual can be held accountable for his own well-being. At this point, if inequality is present, it is a reflection of diversity in personal qualities. 2. Social Scientists have explained that individuals fail to succeed because of inadequate personality structure. Believed to be self-defeating, those lacking in structure are incapable of making the best of opportunities available to them. The term "deficiency explanations" has been coined to define this position. With such deficits come an absence of productive effort which results in the absence of personal success. A primary example of deficiency is seen in those who lack sufficient knowledge to get along well with others in the workplace and are, therefore, unable to be productive. In comparing the moralistic form of the individual as central sensibility to deficiency explanations we see the latter defining personal inadequacies as non-volitional. 3. Political conservatives view the poor as a product of moral infirmity. They disagree with liberals who feel the disadvantages of the poor should be relieved, as destitution is no fault of their own. Conservatives believe it is foolish to help the poor because they are unwilling to help themselves; that the poor should be treated punitively because they are slothful and failures. The ideology of the liberal group proposes that poverty can be eliminated with the development of educational, welfare, and medical programs which would reverse deficiencies that lead to disadvantage. Funding programs such as Career Opportunity Program, Job Corps, welfare, and psychological counseling are seen as potentiating a change in the behavior of the disadvantaged. Conservatives find the liberals quilty of do-gooding which avails only brief intervention, not permanent change. Conservatives prefer to decelerate the development of such programs so that the disinherited would see their time for obtaining welfare as limited, otherwise, the street awaits. 4. Lack of success as it relates to a situational impediment evolves around it's claimant. An individual may have a serious physical disability, but if he has a way of overcoming that disability, he must. The individual is expected to work unless he is obviously permanently disabled. Social Victimization could also be claimed as a situational impediment. However, the alleging of being discriminated against or falling on difficult economic times do not appear effective excuses under individual as central sensibility. Lowering one's aspirations means that the individual achieves a certain status in life and does not aspire to higher goals, thereby, vindicating himself from the need to improve. If lowering aspirations has no moral costs attached to it, and is combined with a valid claim of situational impediment, one might be able to redeem himself as having achieved success to the best of his ability. Inflating achievements, also known as the counterfeit stratagem, allows the individual to claim success providing he has the outward appearance of prosperity. Props seem to be the operational factor here. If one drives a distinctive automobile, has impecable taste in clothes, takes vacation on a remote island, and rents a home in an upscale neighborhood, he can create an illusion of accomplishment. This allows the individual to feel and look successful regardless if he loses it all within a paycheck or two. Voluntary employment or involvement in prominent associations are other means by which the individual can inflate achievements. Retired people often participate in volunteer positions which mimic important occupations. In order to preserve one's value in society, no mention is made of volunteerism. This improves the ability of the individual to maintain a sense of self-esteem and self-worth.

Wed Sep 30 22:02:39 PDT 1998

sheila morrison cdckidzmom@aol.com responded:

Theoretically speaking everyone who is given the same opportunities in life should be able to achieve the same outcomes . However, the fact is that this is not true. Hence, the culture of inequality. 2) The explanations given by most social scientists are based on some type of deficiency; be it personality structure deficiency, lower-class views, cognitive ability deficits, lack of interpersonal competence, or absence of strong parental models. Inadequate personality structures can produce a "1) Lewis' uses the term "culture of inequality" to describe the outcome whereby everyone within a certain group are given equal chances and yet they have dissimilar outcomes. why bother" attitude that causes people to miss the opportunities afforded them, they don't even attempt to succeed because they feel that it beyond their grasp. Belonging to the poverty subculture usurps the individuals motivation to achieve because they feel they are too far out of the game to start with. Anyone who's cognitive ability is not strong in one or more areas may not have the tools necessary to achieve what they might given stronger abilities. The lack of interpersonal skills can override one's abilities by making the person hard to work with. And finally, the absence of strong parental models leaves individuals without a mold in which to pattern their successes after. 3)The Liberal theory regarding poverty is based on the fact that people are not suffering poverty because of their own failures but because of the fact that they have suffered disadvantages beyond their control. Therefore, the Liberals propose social assistance programs to alleviate those disadvantages. On the opposite end of the spectrum, of course, are the Conservatives. The conservatives attribute the existence of poverty to laziness and lack of initiative on the part of those suffering from it. They propose sanctions for the outcomes of poverty as a motivation to succeed. 4)Situational impediments are events or traits which limits one's ability to succeed. However, this becomes questionable when others find ways to overcome great odds and manage to achieve great things despite their impediment. Lowering one's aspirations seems a fairly good way to deal with the aspiration-achievement disparity. This happens when one lowers their goals so those goals become easier to achieve. The problem comes when those outside of one's self fail to align their expectations with those of the individual. Inflating one's achievements so they are more in line with one's expectations is the final strategy. This occurs when one falsely represents their station in life by buying things they cannot afford or appearing to be someone they are not. This becomes problematic because the individual needs to keep getting bigger and better to keep up the charade.

Wed Sep 30 22:53:01 PDT 1998

Julie Schmidt juls@ix.netcom.com responded:

1) This means that the culture of inequality focuses on whether or not an individual succeeds or does not succeed based on their own efforts, determination and motivation, (or lack thereof) and assumes that everyone is born with the same chance for success, regardless of their social status. "...it is the individual alone who is socially significant....Society is seen as benign." To sum it up, if you do not succeed, you didn't try hard enough and it doesn't matter what social circumstances you were faced with. 2) Social Scientists have tended to explain the failure of certain individuals as a character flaw. They feel the individuals did not live up to their expected "productive effort" and the outcome is "the absence of personal success." They also believe that insufficient structure of personalities causes some people to be self-defeating and are then unable to take advantage of the opportunities that exist in society. They also say that due to their "poverty or lower-class subcultural world-views", some are not motivated to rise up to middle class status. Also in a young man's life the absence of a paternal role model may result in the adult man being unprepared for mainstream society. Lack of cognitive skills is also a reason why certain individuals do not acheive success. Not having strong "interpersonal competence" hinders some from using what skills they do have. 3) Both sides support the individual-as-central sensibility, but have differing explanations for poverty. The Liberal explanation for poverty focuses on the misfortune of individuals, incompetency and incapacity. Liberals are willing to help and push for public programs that would relieve disadvantage. Liberals want to improve welfare, education, and medical programs and have set up programs such as Head Start, Upward Bound and Birth-Control programs. The Conservatives explain poverty as an "interpretation of moral infirmity" which basically means that they view poverty as a result of a person's weak morals. They think that the poor are unwilling to help themselves so we too should be unwilling to help them, and also feel that if we make being poor punishable and as bad as we can, people would realize they need to help themselves. They do not agree with the costly efforts of the liberals and would cut the programs way back if given the chance. 4) In talking about why an individual might not be successful, situational impediments are situational hardships which are not the fault of the person nor under their control (such as handicaps). Lowering one's aspirations is when a person lowers their ambitions so that they seem to coincide with their actual achievements. Inflating achievements is when a person has possessions or affiliations that convey a higher level of achievment than really exists. This creates an illusion to others as well as the actual person that they have obtained personal success. For example expensive cars, voluntary associations, and exploiting their children because if their children succeed, they feel they (the parents) have succeeded as well.

Wed Sep 30 22:55:21 PDT 1998

Estella Gallagher galla002@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded:

1. On the whole, the ignorant view of our society towards inequality, has come to to be that those who belong to this group have been given the same opportunities as those on top, but have chosen to ignore or put forth minimal effort to surpass their place. These ideas completely disregard our social structure and anything that has to do with race, class, or gender. 2. Social scientists suggest that many individuals fail to succeed, not because of minimal effort or disregard of opportunity, but rather because of being incapable of making the most of the opportunities that society offers them. Aspects such as a lack of money, lack of education, lack of parental relations, etc., all play a hand in shaping a persons place in society. These are situations which make it much more difficult to clench all the opportunities which arise. It is a harder stuggle for someone who has to overcome all, or some, of this to make it to the top. Those who have nothing to deal with have it much easier, but it has nothing to do with the character of each individual. 3. Liberals want to help out the disadvantaged. They feel that with several programs, focusing on many aspects that the disadvantaged face, the lines between classes can begin to diminish. Conservatives, on the other hand, feel that the disadvantaged deserve the place in life they hold. They say that these individuals face what they do because og their own wrongdoings and lack of effort to move forward. 4. Situational impediments are those things which we can't really control. They limit people from easily making the most of each opportunity that comes our way. Situational impediments can be a physical hardship, a persons appearance, race, class standing, or gender. Lowered aspirations transform ones hopes and goals to coincide more closely with that which one's already achieved or is close to achieving. This makes any step up more significant, but at the same time the process is much slower and puts "making it big" seemingly out of reach. Inflating achievements happens when one makes a bigger deal out of something so as to appear successful to others. Material goods and possessions are often used to help compensate for any failure at success.

Wed Sep 30 22:55:50 PDT 1998

Estella Gallagher galla002@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded:

Wed Sep 30 23:11:36 PDT 1998

Kathy Johnson Eric21@home.com responded:

1. First, to define "culture", at the beginning of Ch. 3, p 49, Lewis defines culture as "a collective design for living" and says "…it is nevertheless true that not all such designs are equally serviceable" and "…if culture is a design for living it can also be a trap in which life is made torturous indeed". With regard to the author's statement that inequality is "an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances," I believe he is saying that society is based on the concept of equality. Opportunities are always available, and what people do with those opportunities in the set of circumstances they find themselves, determine what the results or outcome will be. Nevertheless, even if individuals are given equal chances, there is no guarantee that the results for these individuals will be equal. 2. Social scientists have tried to explain why individuals tend to fail rather than succeed. They have suggested it is because of their background, how they were raised, values or morals. Self- esteem and confidence, or lack of, must play a part in this as well. 3. Political liberals see people in poverty as not necessarily being in that state through their own fault, but through circumstances through which they may have no control. Liberals see the solution as providing programs that will help people in poverty attain a better quality of life through various social programs (Head Start, Welfare, Job Corps). Political conservatives on the other hand believe it is up the individual to better or improve his/her situation, and not rely on government. So liberals hope to wipe out poverty through various projects to change individuals behaviors and circumstances, and sometime it seems the conservatives philosophy is that by not addressing this "problem" (people in poverty), it will just go away. 4. Three strategies used to try to handle and explain why an individual may not be successful: (1) Situational Impediments - these are obstacles that can happen in various sets of circumstances that are difficult to control. (2) Lowering one's aspirations - this is when a person lower his/her goals to match their actual achievements. (3) Inflating achievements - this is when a person wants to make his/her economic status appear better than it really is by doing things such as living or buying things beyond their means to look more successful to others - "keeping up with (or surpassing) the Jones" is an example of this. NOTE: This subject of inequality is extremely interesting, but I am having a hard time with the Culture of Inequality, even allowing for the fact is an "information / education book rather than fiction. The subject matter is really interesting, but I'm finding the writing style is difficult to "get into" and I love to read anything from technical books to fiction to labels on cans. Hopefully as I read the rest of the book I will be better able to follow the author's writing style.

Wed Sep 30 23:23:29 PDT 1998

Anthony Simpson Hombredelsol@earthlink.net responded:

1. The culture of inequality in America is the belief that anyone can be successful with the understanding that some people have it better than others. 2. Social scientist look for reasons why people fail to find success in ways that often look for reasons in society at large and also mental and physical reason for that failure. 3. Poverty to a conservative is a failure of the individual. The liberal believes that individuals may need help to find their own success. 4. Situational impediments are events that are blamed for preventing success. Lowering one aspirations is when a person does not fully complete their goal but finds fulfillment in a related but lesser field. i.e substituting policework for law. Inflating achievements is in essence an attempt to keep up with the Jones'. An example is people who buy material goods they often cannot afford in an attempt to appear successful.

Wed Sep 30 23:24:28 PDT 1998

mary meredith pbjs@lasercom.net responded:

1. Lewis, in describing what he calls the "culture of inequality", bases his argument on the foundation that there is a large chasm between our belief system in the U.S. (that we are all equal and that we al l have equal chances to succeed financially) and the actual chances to succeed. In other words, the idea of equality and the reality of inequality are more of an accurate portrayal of American culture. 2. The "American Way" is the under-lying belief that if you work hard, you'll succeed financially. This belief system doesn't leave room to compassionately or comfortably explain those caught on the economic margin. Instead, the individual-as-central sensibility argues that ..."only the individual can be held accountable for his or her well-being."(p. 8). This explanation does not take into account the cultural factors that can influence an individual's chances to succeed. Even social scientists tend to explain an individual's struggle in terms of a modified form of the individual-as-central sensibility where the emphasis still rests on the individual's effort as being central to his or her success or failure. It is a common thought that there are other factors that influence the outcome of some individuals' lives, such as, a lack of commitment to do his or her best or the "deficiency explanations". 3. Political liberals and conservatives appear to be very different in their ideology concerning the "disinherited", but they are more similar than appearances warrant. Both groups have the same basic belief in the individual-as-central sensibility. Yet, they approach solutions to poverty differently. According to Lewis, liberals place their effort in "programs intended to upgrade the competencies and change the behaviors of the disadvantaged so that they will presumably be better able to compete for a fair share of society's bounty" (p. 12). On the other hand, he states that conservatives "often seem incapable of understanding disadvantage as a product of social and economic circumstances over which the disadvantaged poor have no real control" (p.12). Liberals have been very "program-oriented' in instituting such programs as Head Start, Job Corps, welfare and more while conservatives look at liberals as "bleeding hearts" who are willing to spend "the taxpayers' hard-earned money". In a nutshell, liberals see society's shortcomings in affording equal opportunity to all and seek to make things more fair through support programs. Conservatives believe that we all need to pull ourselves up by our "bootstraps". 4. The three strategies that Lewis writes about are 1: Situational impediments- This is where a "disability" is a hardship and, basically, something out of the control of the disadvantaged. 2: Lowering one's aspirations- Fear of failure to reach for the higher goal causes one to "settle for less". 3: Inflating achievements- This is probably the most common strategy used and witnessed in our culture. Inflating one's achievements by superficial attempts to impress others of a "false success" by making purchases and living outside of "ones' means" are the trademarks of this strategy. 5. I just have a comment about the character of Willy Loman...how sad that his self-worth was dependent on his success as a salesman and "how well liked" he was. All of his self-worth, therefore, was dependent on what others thought of him and not what he thought of himself. That was the tragedy.

Wed Sep 30 23:45:04 PDT 1998

Sally Fuentez fuent003@csusm.edu responded:

1. I believe that Lewis's quote "an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumptiom of equal chances" means that because of cultural inequality, minorities will have to work twice as hard in order to succeed or get ahead in life. Is there such a thing as equal chances, or does society want us to perceive that we should all assume that we are given equal chances? 2. Social scientists (psychologist, sociologist, social workers) tend to explain why some (or most) individuals fail to succeed is due to the lack of personal success, positive role models, and "(interpersonal competence)." 3. Conservatives view poor people as being lazy and unwilling to help themselves. They believe that they are getting what they deserve and nobody should have to bail-them-out of poverty. Liberals are viewed as wanting to help the less privileged and those who live in poverty. The conservatives view the poor as beggers and believe that we should cut federal aid. They believe that helping them will only perpetuate the problem, while liberals believe that it would be inhuman to turn our backs on the poor and leave them with little or no chance for survival. 4. 1. Situational impediments - A person who is unable to succeed because of reasons beyond their control, i.e., lack of positive role models, cultural oppression, etc. 2. lowering one's aspirations - Setting a goal that one is unable to accomplish. Being afraid of failure and therefore, settling for less. 3. Inflating achievements - Using props to paint an illusion of success. For example driving a beautiful new car that one can not afford, drinking the finest and most expensive wines. Doing things that make you feel important and successful. Trying to live the "American" way.

Wed Sep 30 23:52:56 PDT 1998

Mark Angelo Ware markaware@aol.com responded:

Lewis was articulating that every one is starting out at the same marker. If every variable was the same, which I believe is impossible to set the stage with such a notion, all things being equal. The same opportunities made available to each individual and as they go through the process many states of being exist scattering people all across the pendulum of successes and failures. These failures equate to the unequal out comes. American Social Scientist attribute these failure to a deficiency in personality, thus creating and setting in motion a self-destructing mechanism the will end in a form of inequality. They feel that inequality is self-determining. Also, the lack of motivation also contributes to this self-destructing nature. The metaphor of society as being benign is ludicrous. The text states that society is this creation just sitting there waiting for individuals to take advantage of the abundant life that it offers. There is an element that has control a step below mother nature--Man. Man is always in direct manipulation with the elements that [places everyone at that equal plateau that was mentioned in question one. Liberals, as a whole, are always trying to manipulate the variables to favor those who are "less fortunate" those who start off with an equal chance at the being, but once we exit the womb. The class that we are born into is where the struggle for upward mobility begins. To say that everyone has equal chance is a baseless claim. Conservatives on the other hand feel that individuals are responsible for their state of being. The liberals scandalize the conservatives because they "mistake unintended deficiencies for volitional default" going back to my previous statement because being born at a socioeconomic status is not the choice of the person who is born into a world without choice

Wed Sep 30 23:59:20 PDT 1998

Jim Currey curreys@Mailhost2csusm.edu responded:

1. The fundamental basis of our society is that all are created equal and there is opportunity for everyone. There is one chance for all and each individual is responsible for his or her own successes or failures. Society cannot be blamed for those that do not achieve the "American Dream", even though we know that our social system is not alway equal. 2. Social scientists have used the "deficiency explanations" to explain why people fail. These include--inadequate personality structures,self-defeatism--inadequate motivation--absecnce of a strong paternal role model--lack of educational skills or vocational skills--inadequate interpersonal skills. My question is whay some people with these same deficiencies succeed? 3. Liberals explain that the disadvantaged poor are not to be blamed for their situation. They are products of unfortunate circumstances. Liberals push for public programs aimed at relieving poverty. Conservatives, on the other hand, regard poverty as a "product of moral infirmity" and refer to public assistance and programs as a waste of money. Their proposal to wipe out poverty is to ignore it and it will go away. 4.Situational impediments. The individual has no control over his/her situation.It is beyond their control. This is an easy way out. Lewis says that only a severe physical illness could be used to justify lack of success. Even with a physical disability there are those that overcome failure. Lowering one's aspirations. Can create lower self-esteem by lowering goals and becoming an underachiever. Inflating achievements. An attempt to make yourself seem more successful by spending money that you don't have to buy things that you don't need to impress people that you don't like!

Thu Oct 1 00:01:35 PDT 1998

Jim Currey curreys@Mailhost2csusm.edu responded:

Thu Oct 1 00:01:56 PDT 1998

Jim Currey curreys@Mailhost2csusm.edu responded:

Thu Oct 1 00:05:07 PDT 1998

Jim Currey curreys@Mailhost2csusm.edu responded:

Sorry, for the extra posting. I know better and it's too late to be sending this.

Thu Oct 1 09:49:20 PDT 1998

Dan Brown Brown060@csusm.edu responded:

1. I believe his statement means that the basis of American society is a that all people are created equal. If given that equal chance all people should succeed. The fact that they do not succeed is their own decision based on the fact that they had the opportunities to do so. Lewis states that there is the assumption of equal opportunity. People by right should always succeed in America. I personally have alot of problems with these theories and this is why I changed my major away from Sociology. I believe that the liberal view of social success is why places like higher education, public employment and other areas of government have lowered their standards of employment or enrollment and created a more problems then answers to the fight against inequality. There is a fine line between giving someone a leg up and giving them everything that they need to just exists on the back of the hardworking taxpayers.2 Social scientist or the "helping professions" tend to explain the reasons for lack of success in many people lives in broad terms like "poor family structure" etc. They believe that the culture of equality in America tends to actually hold back people from succeeding. People are put in their place in society by factors outside their own control many times making thier life impossible to move forward. Social scientists rationalize the lack of success by creating theories to fit every type of failure. People say that they are unable to succeed because they have "lowered their standards" or they have created "Counterfiet" success all which lower peoples sense of success.3 The Liberal ideal is in a broad generalization a more socialist state everyone who does not succeed will be supported by the state. They believe that success is limited by factors outside the underprivelages ability to control. They believe to solve this dicotomy the wealthy must pay to support the poor and disadvantaged. The Conservative believes that this is a factor of modern capatlism and that the poor and disadvantaged are that way because they failed to take a hold on the opportunities that were presented to them within society. To eliminate poverty is impossible except for eventual darwin type evolution were they will be eliminated through survival of the fittest. I tend to agree with the conservative side. I believe that the people must ry to succeed rather that wait for the handout that is given to them by the liberal "helpers". 4 (1) situational impediments (2) lowering one's aspirations, or (3) inflating achievements. 1 situational impediments are generally defined as blocks to success put in placew by the situation that the person is bor into i.e. poor parental guidance, race, gender,. These situations according to the liberals need to be eliminated bysocial programs. 2 Lowering ones aspirations makes people bring their ideas of success down to the point that even in complete failure they percieve that they are succeeding in their own mind. This createss problems when the person realizes that they are a failure and that they will never succeed according to the "society". Inflating ones achievements is the trap that most Americans tend to fall into. They buy on credit these huge monster cars and try to project their success to others when infact they are projecting that they are insecure males with a small penis and the large car is making up for other inadequacies that because of societies grandious ideas of success they will never fulfill. I think that is bull but then again I drive a huge truck and own a ridiculously huge BBQ in the back yard of a house that I canot really afford. Funny AYE?. Lastly, I think that these salons need to have a little more debate occuring in them, maybe even starting a newsgroup that will stimulate some debate will help.

Thu Oct 1 20:39:59 PDT 1998

Elise Baer ebaer002mailhost1.csusm.edu.com responded:

1. Lewis states that the culture of inequality is "an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances", that there is a reciprocal relationship between an individual and society whereby they are either a productive participant bringing a 'talent', 'profession' and thus either becomes a 'success' or a 'failure'. 2. Some sociologists (interactionist-that the individual has a role along with society as they both engage and interact thereby both are responsible) and (conflict theory- believe that these social arrangements exist because they serve a function, also agreed by the funtionalist theory. 3. Lewis explains that the 'individual is central' given the liberal view that an individual is a victim of 'social impediments' hindering their life or the conservative view that it is the individuals own fault. 4. The social impediment theory believes that there are circumstances beyond the control of the individual to 'choose' his destiny. The 'lowering of ones aspirations' is whereby people lower their goals to meet with their aspirations. The inflating of ones achievments is whereby a person lives beyond their means such as buying something such as an expensive car.

Thu Oct 1 22:45:56 PDT 1998

Debra Taft debnjeff@earthlink.net responded:

1. Lewis’ statement " an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances" means that the failures we see are due to the individual rather than the opportunity. If we are all given an equal chance to succeed in our lives and only a few are able to achieve that success, it is the fault of the individual for not achieving their goal. 2. Social scientists tend to explain why some individuals fail to succeed based on outside factors. They look at how the individuals environment effect their ability to succeed. One example of what a social scientist would look at is the socioeconomic condition that the person was living in as a factor in whether or not that individual would be likely to succeed. 3. Conservatives feel that some people are poor because of factors dealing with the individual. These are individuals that conservatives would consider lazy. Individual who do not care enough about themselves to improve their lives on their own. These individual would rather rely on someone else to get them through life. Liberals view individuals who are poor as products of their environment. These are individuals who need the help of society to help them achieve their success. Liberals believe in systems such as welfare and social programs to provide support for the less fortunate individuals in society. After all, liberals don’t feel it is the individuals fault for being poor. Conservatives on the other hand, feel programs such as welfare provide a crutch for the poor in our society. These programs bread a new generation of poor rather than helping them to achieve success. Conservative feels it is up to the individual to improve their economic situation, not the rest of the country. 4. Situational impediments is when an individual blames outside forces (beyond their control) for their inability to succeed. Due to the individuals belief that failure is unavoidable they don’t put their full effort into the challenge. Lowering one’s aspirations usually has severe effects on one’s morale as well as their self esteem. How can letting go of a dream that gave you drive not lower your morale towards life at the same time? There is only one instance when this is possible. If situational impediments are brought into play with the encouragement from a significant other then lowering your standards is no longer a blow to your self esteem, it becomes a validated achievement instead. Take for example an individual who wants to be a musician, but instead becomes a music teachers. The encouragement from the individuals spouse helps to validate the lowering of the individuals aspirations. Inflating achievements is making something out of nothing. It is creating a world around you that does not really exist. By inflating achievements one can avoid "aspiration-achievement disparity" (pg. 26). This can be seen throughout our society. We all live well beyond our means due to the luxury of credit. Credit allows us to create an environment that we think will make us happier.

Fri Oct 2 12:30:16 PDT 1998

Shannon Nemzer nemze001@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded:

1) The statement that the culture of inequality is "an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances" means that the outcome isn't the only part to look at. It could be argued that people running a race with one chosen finishing line, but quite different points of departure, aren't really running the same race at all. 2) The arguement that the culture of inequality derives from the notion that the journey of accomplishment is seen as individual as central is avery logical arguement from a social scientist's point of view. They would agree that much figures in to the actual end result than just how hard the individual tries. The way they were raised, their role models, the role of social institutions in their lives, as well as unavoidable tradgedies which can severely devestate and hinder one's accomplishments. 3) Political liberals tend to account for poverty more om the basis of societal circumstance, and believe in helping people out of poverty by implementing programs to relieve some of their burden of struggle for sheer survival. Conservatives on the other hand come from more of the believe that we have chances, as well as misfortune and it's up to the person to make something of themselves. They believe that the way to minimize poverty is to stop giving people hand outs. 4) Situational impediments involve things like people being born into poverty. Something they had no say in or control over from the very beginning. Lowering one's aspirations is refering to when somebody lowers there goals to a much more attainable level, to give themselves a false sense of accomplishment. Inflating one's achievements is like when people suffer to pay for material items so as to look more successful than they are.

Fri Oct 2 21:41:38 PDT 1998

veronica castelo vcastelo01@aol.com responded:

1.) What I interpreted from Lewis' quote..."an interpretation of unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal access" seems to mean that although we are built on a system that promotes "equality", the end result seems to differ from this latter. Men and women enter this country seeking equality and freedom, but this is not always achieved. In actuality, it is perceived that men and women encounter equal access, if and only if, they are successful. Equality is based on success, if you strive hard enough to be successful, then you will be viewed as equal, and you will encounter "better" opportunities. In short, equality and success stem from your individual will and drive to rise to the top. 2.)Sociologist, Psychologists, etc. blame failure and success on the determination of the individual. The claim that if a person wishes to become successful, then he or she may do so. A persons' future rests in his.her hands and no one else's. You are the key to your own destiny. In addition, determination for success is also due to our outside sourses. Our family make-up, inter-personal relationships, parental gidance, etc. enhance or destroy our drives and aspirations for success. 3.)Conservatives strongly feel that poverty stricken individuals as well as poorly educated individuals, encounter circumstances that stem from faults of their own. They believe that these people chose to be poor and therefore should pay the consequences of such actions. As a result, conservatives believe that poverty stricken individuals should not be assisted and/or offered any type of governmental and personal donations and assisted programs for self improvement. Liberals are on a different spectrum than that of the conservatives. Liberals feel that poverty is not something that is purposly sought out by individuals, they feel that poverty is a result of outside factors that aid in such lifestyles. They agree that poor people are good people, that they are in need of governmental assistance in aiding them to prosper and find better (economically, socially, psychological) lives. As a reslut, they offer programs in helping to assistant poor people to aid them through their problems. 4.)(A)Situational impediments are factors that cotribute to ones failure through no fault of their own. Outside sources constribute to such failure, and those who are effected through situational impediments should not be blamed and/or faulted as a result. (B) Lowering ones aspirations results from an individual trying to make the best out of his/her unfortunate circumstances. A person will engage in something good or bad to make themselves look good in the eyes of another (and themselves), just so that they can feel on top of a situation. This person will strive to make their situation better, and as a result will lower their aspirations in order to do this. (C) Inflating ones achievements is when an individual makes himself/herself look as if they are more successful than they really are. They want others around them to see someone who is successful (even if they are not), and they will go to great lengths to make themselves seems more than what they are. For example, an individual can tell someone that they are a lawyer when in actuality they are a receptionist in a law firm. A person inflates the truth and makes their situation more than what it really is. 5.) Thanks for the suggestion, I will be watching the movie tomrrow (I already bought the video).

Sun Oct 4 22:21:06 PDT 1998

Carol Schirm schir001@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded:

1. In Lewis's book on inequality he presents the cultural idea that everyone's opportunities in this country are equal. Discrepencies of outcome are dependent on the

Sun Oct 4 23:19:58 PDT 1998

Carol Schirm schir001@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded:

1. Lewis explains the concept of "unequal outcomes given the assumption of equal chances" as everyone starting at the same place with the same chances, what a person makes of those chances is their responsiblity. This concept was presented recently when minortiy quotas were dropped from Universites like UCSD. The premise was that everyone has the same access to education. That educational standards should and can be met by everyone. This puts the responsiblity of academic excellence demanded for admission on the applicant. It does not take into consideration social factors such as availablity of mentoring, funding for tutoring and special programs and perhaps amount of time to study if the applicant needs to work and attend their schooling. 2. With the advent of MRI and Genetic tesing becoming more and more available, it would seem that the biologists and psychologists have joined hands and explained inablitites as physiological. People, according to them, fail to achieve because of some type of misfunction of biology. Social workers and sociologists are more likely to attribute a failure, to some extent, to situations such as absent of a stable homelife or lack of appropriate mentoring. 3. The conservatives explain poverty as the inability of the poor to work as hard or as well as others who are not poor. An example of a conservative program would be the one where the welfare reciepients are required to work menial jobs for their checks and are allowed on the program for a limited amount of time to avoid people going on welfare to avoid work and to remain on it, taking advantage of the system. A liberal program would look at the contributing circumstances why someone is poor. This approach would more likely have programs designed to assist with whatever problems the person is having which is causing them to be poor. Both views see the individual as ultimately being responsible for getting out of poverty. 4. In Lewis's book he discusses three ways people attempt to explain lack of success. The first two strategies are used less often than the third. First is to blame situational impediments. An example of this would be the gymatist who falls and breaks their neck paralyzing them from the neck down. Accomplishment of any pre-existing goal would be impossible. The second stragety is to lower one's aspirations. Material published on the supermom syndrome allowed wosrking mothers to bring in line their aspirations of how clean their house actually had to be, how gourmet meals needed to be and exactly how much to volunteer for. The last, most used stragety, is inflating accomplishments to bridge the void between expressed goals and what is actual reality. "Keeping up with the Jones", even though a person does not have the bank account to accommodate this would be an example. Also, success by association. Ralph Cramden appeared important and successful when he became the Supreme Raccoon of the Loyal Order of Raccoons.

Sun Oct 4 23:22:50 PDT 1998

Carol Schirm schir001@mailhost1.csusm.edu responded: