Discrimination And Prejudice

Prejudice is a term which is used in most of our day-by-day conversations and means unconfirmed or untested spurted belief, position, opinion or knowledge held about an entity or a conclave and it is taken as truth by the person or companys who holds such opinion, belief, attitude or knowledge, (Honey, 1999). A common example is the belief of the western countries that Africans ar primitive and nothing not bad(predicate) comes from them. This statement qualifies as prejudice since no test has since been carried out to confirm this claim even though most western community widely accepts it.An separate example to elaborate further prejudice is an opinion by Christian community that both Muslims and Hindus are sinners, not worthy of heavenly inheritance. The equivalent is also the typical opinion held against Christians by adherents to other religious groups. This statement propagates prejudice since it is not true that following a diametrical religious belief makes people ba d. Final example in this category is the belief by a group of people that Muslims are terrorists. Is it confirmed?Discrimination on the other hand is a term widely used to mean a process of according unbalanced treatment or chance to different individuals, group of people, objects or events based on the views held on them. In this case therefore, the factors about which positive view(s) is/are held have higher probability of being given favorable treatment as opposed to those factors about which negative attitudes are held. By the same token, to discriminate refers to an act of giving unequal treatment to an entity or group with presume similar characteristics, (Cochran, 1999).For instance, the belief that Africans are primitive may act someone from western countries to prefer an American as his/her personal doctor over an African medical specialist. A assuranceful Christian is most is likely to appreciate neither Hindu nor Islamic faith and vise versa. Finally, most Muslims ma y not be given visa to most countries as other nationals have access to this document with ease. It therefore follows that discrimination and prejudice are two interrelated row with prejudice possibly resulting to discriminationDiscrimination and PrejudiceDiscrimination is easiest explained through prejudice. Prejudice is when a favorable subject holds a preconceived notion about another person or a group of people, without judging from experience. Discrimination is when a social subject acts upon such preconceived notions. A common demerit is the concept that both prejudice and discrimination are except negative, as in a disparaging notion of someone (such as the treatment m all minorities were subjected to), but, in truth, positive discrimination and prejudice are both possible, if there is a preconceived notion in favor of someone.Both of these notions are those of inequality, the difference in the midst of them being in thought as opposed to action of any(prenominal) kind . In fact, its possible to be prejudiced and not discriminate, out of such things as fear or profit, and it is possible to discriminate for the same reasons and not be prejudiced. Though, most commonly, it is those who are biased who discriminate, and those who are-non biased give equal treatment to their peers from different groups.There are three types of discrimination, based mostly on the level of social deepness. There is personal discrimination, which consists of any personal attack on a minority member, from slurs to murder. This is any attack on the personal level, any interaction of particular benevolent beings. An instance of such an attack would be calling a transgendered human spawn of Satan. There is legal discrimination, which is when a minority group is denied any kind of rights public institutions, jobs, caparison and anything social, basically.Any person who has ever been denied a job because blacks do not work as well as whites do (without looking at the prior c redentials) knows what legal discrimination is like. And, finally, the most deeply entrenched in society is institutional discrimination. This is when there is a tradition of discrimination so deep that it is no yearner viewed as discrimination, where a discriminatory idea is so old and seemingly natural, that even members of the minority group themselves sometimes believe it.A great example is that Romani are thieves. Despite all cultural tradition, if this stump werent upheld by society, building walls on their side of the Romani self-chose seclusion, their way of life might have changed over the centuries, like it did with many other peoples. There are four basic approaches to the matters of aging within society. The basic is the structuralist approach, otherwise known as social disengagement theory.It looks upon the withdrawal of elders from society as natural, since they gradually mislay social power, and thus remove themselves from social responsibilities as to make room f or youth in functional aspects, while retaining the ability to engage in activities of their choosing, such as hobbies, should they so desire. However, the activity (or interactionist) theory disputes the functionalist approach, by claiming that the more active an elderly person remains, the better their quality of life. They may disengage from responsibilities, but be active is necessary for a full life even in this age.Research supports this, despite criticisms that this may gravel unrealistic goals for the elderly. Their capacity for activity does lessen, but activity remains a basic need for happiness, and ask to be fulfilled, even in this reduced amount. But if the elderly are happier if engaged in activities, wherefore do they disengage? Conflict theory states that, since profit is the driving force behind society, there is a great deal pressure on the elderly to leave their positions, so that younger, less expensive and more competent specialists may be hired, the elderl y losing social value as time goes on.This seems more correct than the subculture approach, which states that the elderly, while disengaging with those younger, form subcultures among themselves to compensate. While subcultures may be formed, they are not the defining factor for the disengagement, but rather, one of its consequences. And last, the rallying theory on aging combines all of these perspectives, by stating that the elderly remain active socially (and thus, happy) as long as their activity is beneficial to all involved.By beneficial they do not mean only economic benefits, but also the exchange of simple human feelings such as love, friendship and compassion, though some elderly people remain engaged economically (for instance, by renting rooms in their homes), and thus allow themselves the possibility of social interaction. This also includes the functionalist perspective, for it shows how rewards are given in return for historic productivity. This is the most comprehe nsive approach.