Analyzing Controversial IssuesSociology 220Prof. Pamela OliverIssues for project 1, debateIs it appropriate to use race or ethnic profiling in policing and security enforcement?Is it OK for sports teams to use Native American mascots?Should U.S. immigration law be changed to allow more workers from Mexico?Should English be the only language of instruction in U.S. public schools?Major Dimensions of analysisInterests: who stands to gain/loseFactual claims: assertions about realityValue claims: assertions about justice or moralityRhetoric & Discourse: how language is used to persuade, to position the issue with respect to other issues or principlesPlan for classGeneral lecture on conceptsDiscuss American Indian issues especially Black Hills as examples for conceptsInterestsWhat people stand to gain or lose from different policiesMoneyJobsPolitical PowerPrestige, sense of superiorityCultural comfort: your sense of belonging or being right is not challengedPeople may disguise their interests under claims of general principlesThis may be entirely unconsciousSocial Location & InterestsPeople in common social locations have common or group interestsSocial location = place in societyPolicies ALWAYS affect people differently, depending upon their social locationPeople often think that what is good for them is good for everyone, often genuinely unaware of others’ interestsThere is generally no policy that is “good for everyone.” It is a matter of balancing interests & principles.Interests around Land ClaimsWhat interests are at stake?(note; turn off view)Factual ClaimsWhat people say “the facts” areMost times, the different sides disagree about factsPeople may make factual claims about which the evidence is non-existent, in dispute, or contraryImportant to look for factual claims & the evidence supporting themValue ClaimsAssertions about core principles of justice, fairness, equality, moralitySome people believe as a value that only individual interests matter, but most people adhere to other more general valuesBoth sides generally advocate positive valuesThe sides may invoke different values or weigh them differently, or may agree on values but disagree on how to accomplish themRhetoric - DiscourseThe words that are used, how the issue is compared to othersThe two sides usually use different language, talk about the issue in different waysNon-ethnic example: pro-life vs pro-choice. Different ways of framing what abortion is “about”Those advocating points of view typically choose their language & framing purposefully to make a point (but sometimes are unconscious of this)Rhetoric may be grounded in larger religious, political or philosophical belief systemsAnalyzing Controversial IssuesSociology 220Prof. Pamela OliverIssues for project 1, debate• Is it appropriate to use race or ethnic profiling in policing and security enforcement?• Is it OK for sports teams to use Native American mascots?• Should U.S. immigration law be changed to allow more workers from Mexico?• Should English be the only language of instruction in U.S. public schools? Major Dimensions of analysis• Interests: who stands to gain/lose • Factual claims: assertions about reality• Value claims: assertions about justice or morality• Rhetoric & Discourse: how language is used to persuade, to position the issue with respect to other issues or principlesPlan for class• General lecture on concepts• Discuss American Indian issues especially Black Hills as examples for conceptsInterests• What people stand to gain or lose from different policies– Money– Jobs– Political Power– Prestige, sense of superiority– Cultural comfort: your sense of belonging or being right is not challenged• People may disguise their interests under claims of general principles– This may be entirely unconsciousSocial Location & Interests• People in common social locations have common or group interests– Social location = place in society• Policies ALWAYS affect people differently, depending upon their social location• People often think that what is good for them is good for everyone, often genuinely unaware of others’ interests• There is generally no policy that is “good for everyone.” It is a matter of balancing interests & principles.Interests around Land Claims• What interests are at stake?• (note; turn off view)Factual Claims• What people say “the facts” are• Most times, the different sides disagree about facts• People may make factual claims about which the evidence is non-existent, in dispute, or contrary• Important to look for factual claims & the evidence supporting themValue Claims• Assertions about core principles of justice, fairness, equality, morality• Some people believe as a value that only individual interests matter, but most people adhere to other more general values• Both sides generally advocate positive values• The sides may invoke different values or weigh them differently, or may agree on values but disagree on how to accomplish themRhetoric - Discourse• The words that are used, how the issue is compared to others• The two sides usually use different language, talk about the issue in different ways• Non-ethnic example: pro-life vs pro-choice. Different ways of framing what abortion is “about”• Those advocating points of view typically choose their language & framing purposefully to make a point (but sometimes are unconscious of this)• Rhetoric may be grounded in larger religious, political or philosophical belief
View Full Document
Unlocking...