Jacob Dwelle

Ways of Knowing in the Social Sciences: Midterm

1. Bronfenbrenners ecological model is a very useful tool when applied to this
case study. In the study of Sam, it is said that Sams issues revolve in part around the
history of his relatives. Sams Jewish ancestors were persecuted, causing Sam to be
affected indirectly by societal issues of past times that had carried into the present. The
background of Jewish people is portrayed in a negative and down putting light (Erikson,
p. 36). Interestingly enough, we see something similar in the case of Carmen, where it is
described that her mother had been left with her grandmother just as Carmen was now
being left with her own. The case study goes on to describe that these traumas between
family members have gone on in previous generations. The environment, which is nearly
completely out of Carmens control due to her age, could very well be affecting her.
Much like Sam, Carmen also had large issues with the past of her people. To
begin, Sam was of Jewish ancestry; a group of people who had just been persecuted in
one of the most gruesome ways in history - the holocaust. This reflected the negative
energy of society in some part back onto Sam. Carmen has a similar issue because her
and her parents past are linked to the El Salvador civil war of the 1980s and 1990s. This
negativity, according to Bronfenbrenners ecological model, could very well be impacting
Carmen in ways that are difficult to see and study.
In fact, the case study goes on to talk about a discussion between the mother and
grandmother about how the war had affected both their family and many others they
knew. They say that the war had split many families. It was also pointed out that the war
made it much more difficult to trust those around you, because there was a fear of being

taken advantage of at any given time. From this, we can further point to the environment
being a larger issue at hand.
In a therapy session with Carmen present, we see her using a tiger to represent her
father, and shortly afterwards, throws the tiger behind the couch. Coupled with this
action, she says Hes not coming back. This represents the sadness that Carmen feels
about her father being gone, and sadness that she might feel when she is with her father
and her mother is gone. The therapist referred to this as separation anxiety, meaning
that Carmen was anxious about the idea of her family splitting up, even though it already
had been.
Eriksons theory would suggest that Carmen was coming close to ending her
second stage of development, autonomy versus shame and doubt, and beginning to enter
the third one, initiative versus guilt. This is based on the ages listed by Erikson, and the
age of Carmen herself. If we are to assume that Carmen still remains in the second stage
of development, it might explain some of the temper tantrums that were occurring.
Erikson points out that the battle for autonomy often results in temper tantrums and the
yes-no syndrome (Erikson, 1993, p. 4).
Based on the ecological model by Bronfenbrenner, and Eriksons theory of
development, we would likely see Carmen as a child affected greatly by social and
environmental issues. Using the case study of Sam, we can draw similar conclusions
about how environment can affect a child, and how their personal development can be
simultaneously linked to their behavior.
2. Muusss theory of development differs greatly from that of the Navajo people,
and from that of modern day Japanese people. While Muusss theory focuses heavily on

the development of the self, an inherently western idea and tradition, both the Japanese
and Navajo focus more greatly on their communities. However, it is important to note
that the Japanese and Navajo do show several differences, despite the core idea of being a
functioning member of the community remaining a prominent idea in both cultures.
To begin, it might be best to sort out similarities that can be found between all
three of the developmental views presented. Muusss theory is the most unique of the
three, and therefore has significantly fewer similarities. However, Muuss and the Navajo
both see similar ends to their theories. For example, the Navajo state that their goal in life
is to live to maturity and to die of old age (Chisholm, 1996, p. 169). Muuss shares a
similar view with his theory. The final stage of development in this theory is called
Integrity Vs. Despair, and in this, both old and retirement are emphasized (Muuss, p.
10). This is a noteworthy similarity between the Navajo conception and Muusss view of
life coming to an end.
However, the Japanese do not share the agreement in this area. In fact, old age is
not emphasized in the Rothbaum development text. What is further emphasized is a sense
of eliminating a barrier between the self and others close to you (Rothbaum, p. 21). This
barrier is something that must be broken down throughout the lifetime of the person. This
does not need to be done by a certain age, nor is it inherently associated with a concrete
age, which differs from the similarities of the Navajo and Muuss: They view a final stage
as being directly associated with increased physical age.
If we backtrack to the middle of the previous paragraph, it was noted that a barrier
between the self and those around the self must be broken down. We find a somewhat
similar idea in Navajo culture, where we see that helping society grow and prosper being

valued hugely. Chisholm describes this value of the Navajo at one point as having
harmonious social relations (Chisholm, 1996, p. 169). This idea is ever present in
Japanese culture as noted above, and could be thought of as a form of standing-in
rather than the western ideal of standing-out. Here, however, we see a slight difference
between the Japanese and Navajo.
The Japanese values standing in on a greater level than the Navajo do. While the
Navajo value this, they simultaneously value great leadership and teaching ability. The
true goal of any member of a Navajo society is to be a leader: to be a teacher. The
Japanese tend to not think in this way, and would rather see a collective improvement of
society than improvement of the self.
In this way, we see the Navajo and Muusss theory relate back to each other.
Muuss, who has promoted this western idea of bettering the self from the beginning lines
up, at least to a certain extent, with the Navajo idea of being a leader and a teacher.
Muusss second to last step emphasized generative behavior, which is directly connected
to giving back to a community in the same way that a teacher or a leader can in the
Navajo conception.
I think these similarities emphasize the overall near universality of core ideas in
development. I think a single commonality that can be found in all three of the presented
theories is that success is important for the members of each respective society. The
definitions of success change as we look from one place to another. However, there is no
one single correct definition of success, and the ways in which these societies have
defined success appear to be working for, in large part, the benefit of the members within
these societies.

3. In a large sense, Rogoff views the idea of there being one best way as an idea
that will not work in a social science approach. Rather than focusing on some sort of
objective baseline or starting point, Rogoff is arguing for attempts at unbiased views of
cultures outside of our own, and even a lack of bias, if possible, when reflecting on the
values of our own culture.
As Rogoff notes, understanding a culture practice does not deem it right or wrong,
it simply means you understand what a cultural process or idea is (Rogoff, p. 12). Rogoff
goes on to note, this does require a suspension, or at the very least an attempt at
suspension, of one's own bias towards the practices of other cultures. Omnipresent in
Rogoffs ideas is overall open-mindedness and willingness to learn about and or from
other cultures.
This idea of understanding will stem from an ability to step outside of ones own
culture, temporarily, to adopt the view of the unbiased onlooker. Rogoff says the
following: To learn from and about communities other than our own, we need to go
beyond the ethnocentric assumptions from which we begin (Rogoff, 2003, p. 24). This
brings back the idea of avoiding our initial bias, which without our acknowledgement of
its suspension, will remain at all times.
Suspension of my personal judgment was required when co-sleeping was
discussed in the classroom. This idea, while not entirely foreign to me, seemed to be
something unheard of by other students. Regardless, my gut reaction seemed to lean
towards a low level of disgust and discomfort. However, the idea that Rogoff intends to
promote is that we set these aside and view it without our cultural bias.

Upon doing this, the class came up with several potential benefits to co-sleeping,
even though it is not found regularly in western cultures. For one, it was widely agreed
that a bond between the people co-sleeping was potentially stronger, and represented a
form of unity. This may tie back into, for example, Japanese culture, where the unity of
the self and those around the self is a core principle. Moreover, we found that co-sleeping
could be thought of as a potential safety net; a level of comfort, otherwise not provided
by sleeping separately.
We see this again when in mentor session we analyzed miniature case studies
observing teasing, whether it was between multiple children, or a child and a mother.
While the classroom did not initially agree upon the forms of teasing in large part, we
used what Rogoff had argued for by attempting to set aside our personal bias. In doing
this, the classroom agreed that the teasing seemed playful in most, if not all contexts
provided, and tended to teach the child lessons, whether it be ownership of property, or
overall playfulness. Without using what Rogoff had argued for in looking at situations
with an unbiased view, we might have been left stuck at the idea of the forms of teasing
simply being too weird for analysis.

4. The difficulty in defining obedience is that there are ways which it will be
interpreted through different cultures. Of the ones we have looked at, we could describe
obedience in completely different ways dependent upon the frame that we use to view the
cultural context. However, within these varying descriptions, we will see one common
theme, and that is that you are doing what you are told to do.

Differences in types of obedience occur when looking into different cultures. A

westernized version of the concept of obedience will look much more like obeying what
your parents tell you. If you are told to do something like clean your room, you are
obliged to obey what they have just said. This differs slightly from what might be seen in
Japanese culture, where we could see a slight leaning towards obedience underneath
societal pressures. This is because the Japanese view society at an increased value
compared to their western counterparts. However, it is important to note the world
slightly was used, because the main emphasis still remains on listening to, and
following through the commands of parents.
Assuming the competency of the parents, which is not always the case, obedience
is an important aspect to fulfilling the three universal goals of parenting put forth by
Levine. The first goal is to ensure the physical survival and health of the child, including
the normal development of his reproductive capacity during puberty (Levine, 1974, p.
230). Obedience to fulfill this goal seems borderline self explanatory. The parents who
have survived up to this point should have some level of wisdom with regards to an
ability to survive. The obedience of the child should align with the abilities of the parents
to ensure the survival of the child: and even more than survival, the success of the child,
the health of the child, and the well being of the child are achieved through obedience of
knowledgeable parents.
Obedience in the second universal goal of parenting might see more conflict. The
second goal is to ensure some level of autonomy, and an ability to be independent in
ones maturity (Levine, p. 230). The very concept of obedience runs against the idea of
autonomy. On one end of the spectrum, we see free choice, and ability to be what you

wish, while on the other side, we see simply doing what you are told. Obedience,
however, does have a place in this role. This place is found in a parents ability to help
their child develop abilities to be independent. Take for example a parent who obeys their
children to go and make something original, whether it be writing a paper, creating an art
piece, or trying out a new activity for the first time. Under this scope of obedience, we
still find the child developing some form of autonomy. In turn, the second goal of
parenting is met, regardless of there being obedience and autonomy existing
simultaneously.
The third goal of parenting could be described as the ability to perpetuate the
values of the culture you reside within, but also in some cases to value other cultural
ideas as well (Levine, p. 230). Obedience in this realm seems to be important from the
youngest of ages. Because of the omnipresence of culture, we are devoted to
understanding its value and purpose. Parents who have lived within a culture will have a
better chance to teach this value to their children, but this is accomplished most
successfully through obedience on behalf of the child. Obeying commands by the
parents has the potential to further their understanding of cultural practice and value.

Works Cited

Chisholm, J. S. (1996). Learning respect for everything: Navajo images of

development. In Images of childhood (pp. 167-183). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Erikson, E. H. (1993). Relevance and relativity in the case history: A neurological crisis
in a small boy: Sam. In Childhood and society (pp. 23-47). New York: Norton.

Levine, R. A. (1974). Parental goals: A cross-cultural view. Teachers College Record, 76,
226-2.

Muuss, R. E. (1988). Eriksons theory of identity development. In Theories

of adolescence(pp. 1-25). New York: Random House.

Rogoff, B. (2003). Orienting concepts. In The cultural nature of human development (pp.
3-36). New York: Oxford University Press.

Rothbaum, F., Pott, M., Azuma, H., Miyake, K., & Weisz, J. (2000). The development of
closerelationships in Japan and the United States: Paths of symbiotic harmony and
generative tension. Child Development, 71(5), 1143-1146.