Question 1

1). Have you made friendships that exist exclusively in cyberspace? If so, how are they different from f2f relationships? If you have not formed cyber relationships, why not?

I have had, still have, and made relationships via cyber space. It almost seems like now, everything could be cyber space especially text messaging but for the sake of this argument I'll talk about online, email, or instant messengers. These friendships seem more accessible, meaning that you can talk to someone a lot more instantly than waiting to see them in person. By communicating via cyberspace, it is done more than if someone were to pick up the phone and talk.

For me personally, I really don't like having friendships that don't include some face to face time or even conversations on the phone because it seems more impersonal. I feel that by communicating via email, instant messenger, or online gives people an opportunity to be more scripted. For example, I find myself writing an email or instant message to someone but then delete what I wrote because I felt that I could word it differently, or I shouldn't say that. Too much can get lost in translation where as face to face friendships and conversations, context, tone, and pace of what you talk about can be better understood.

To me it is somewhat frustrating because I'd rather talk to people face to face or even on the phone because it does not give anyone the chance to hide behind a screen. Anyone can be anybody when they are communicating online but it is not until you see someones body language, demeanor, and actions that you can really get the chance to know someone. Communicating online is very convenient but at the same time, not as effective as communicating with someone face to face.

Question 3

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading (not already discussed for this week) that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

One of the things i found interesting and it actually did not hit me until i read it is how most organizations operate on a hierarchy and bureaucracy style of governing. It is ironic how America likes to show themselves as a democratic style government but in reality, most of the economic and business structures that the country operates on is based on both the hierarchy and bureaucracy styles of governing.

It is possible to have these types of governing and structures as long as there is a upward and downward flow of communication because typically, these structures show examples of downward communication which in turn becomes detrimental to the voice of the subordinates.

Question 2

2). Review the etiquette rules suggested in the text. Respond to each one. Have you ever been bothered by cell phone, answering machines, or beepers? What do you feel about call waiting? Is it rude to put people on hold to take another call?

I have been bothered by cell phones, especially when people are texting while you are trying to have a conversation with them. It's understandable if, for example, you receive a phone call at dinner and it is important but to the point where friends are calling or other irrelevant phone calls are received and answered, it is not only bad etiquette but rude.

I think call waiting is basically the same thing. One thing I do if I get put on hold because the person I was talking to answered another line, I only wait on the line for about 30-45 seconds. Not only because I don't want to waste my minutes but I subtly sends a message to the other person that I'm not going to wait around for you, if we are conversating, let's conversate at that moment. I think that answering another phone call briefly depending on how important it is, is ok. But, if you answer the other call and put someone on hold for minutes at a time, then that is completely rude.

Question 1

1). How are organizations tied to the environment? What is the relationship between the school you attend and the city or town in which it is situated? What, if any, ethical obligations does an organization like a college or university have to the local community?

Organizations can have both positive and negative impact on an environment and the environment can also do the same to the organization. If organizations change and expand, then more stress and demand is asked of the environment to support the organization whether it be resources, energy, transportation etc. If the environment changes and the organization can not adapt, then eventually the organization will fail or die.

San Jose State is in the middle of downtown San Jose and both the organization and environment feed off of each other. There are many restaurants, shops, and other venues that are frequently used by college students or those who work in relation to the organization. The organization's presence helps stimulate the economic environment but also puts more stress on transportation needs, capacity, energy and housing. For a university or college, there has to be a two way street between its environment and the organization. From an ethical standpoint, the college must be able to give back to the community just as much as the community gives back to them. Examples of this might be community service work done by college students, or donations given to the community for various projects like road work, or building plans.

It is a check and balance between the university and community because at the same time, the community feeds the college not only through providing tuition costs if local students attend, but the stresses and demands that the university asks of its environment to continue to be successful.

Question 2

2). Think about the filters you use to eliminate people from consideration as potential romantic partners. What characteristics or behaviours lead you to judge others as unattractive? Does Duck's theory make sense to you? Have you ever eliminated someone by using a sociological or pre-interaction cue only to reconsider them based on interaction and cognitive cues?

Sociological and pre-interaction cues are all apart of gaining a first impression of people. When I first meet someone, I pay attention to things like where this person lives, how they live and their physical appearance. It is human nature to begin judging people at a first glance to get an idea if they might be right for you. I believe Duck's theory to be true because it is a step by step process based on the information you receive. I feel like everyone does part take in this filtration process to find friends or romantic partners

For me, I have eliminated someone based on sociological and pre-interaction cues because those are the first few questions that you ask yourself if someone "qualifies" to continue to the next level of interaction and closeness. But I have found that even though you might eliminate someone based on these two factors, by getting to know them more and more, you can begin developing a closeness based on interaction and cognitive cues. To me, these two are more important than the other two because you begin to see what a person is made up of, their values, your interaction and chemistry with them, and shared beliefs. I think today, distance between two people become less and less of a factor because of technology. You are able to call someone from any where, or communicate through text messaging, email, or video phone calls.

Question 1

1. Which pattern (rigid complementarity, competitive symmetry, or submissive symmetry) do you think would be the most difficult to change? Why? Which would be the most damaging to a relationship? Which would be the most potentially damaging to the self-esteem of the individuals involved?

I think that submissive symmetry would be the hardest to break. I think this is true because when people are both in a submissive state of mind, they become comfortable and scared at the same time. They don't want to displease the other person but don't want to make a decision for themselves. Yet at the same time by not making a decision and knowing the other person won't either, it leaves both people in a sense of control because they already know how the other person is going to respond.

In a relationship, I think rigid complementarity is the most damaging. I say this because to get to a point where the submissive or dominant partner wants to relinquish their roles, they fell into those roles through a complementary pattern either on accident or on purpose. Since they have been in these roles for so long, the other partner may not want to take a new role because of comfort or other reasons. Sometimes when trying to transition out of a new role, people may not go about it in the right way and thus cause arguments and fights. It's very tricky especially if a relationship has been the same for a long time.

In addition, the same would be damaging for those individuals involved because it may send a wrong message. By being more submissive or dominant, the other person may receive that message as being unhappy, or not caring about the other person when in fact, they may not be the case. A transition in roles can be misleading and even more hurtful especially if a relationship has been the same for many many years.

Week 11 Question 2

2). Do you believe in the rationality, perfectibility, and mutability premises? What social institutions and practices are based on these beliefs?

I believe that only the mutability and perfectibility premise are only true. I say this because the rationality premise, the average person varies based on location and their beliefs and morals that they were grown up to know. The average person is different between California and Texas because life styles are different, culture is different, and values are different. The average person is hard to define because it does vary and the decisions that these "average" people make will depend on their ways of thinking. For example the proposition of gay marriage, depending on where you live or culture will determine if you think it is right on wrong.

Perfectibility premise is that people can achieve goodness through effort and control. I believe this is true because IF someone puts in the time and effort to become a better person, in time they will achieve this. Self control is sometimes hard but when someone has the desire and will to control themselves, it goes a long way.

Mutability assumes that behavior is shaped by the environment and to improve humans is through physical and psychological circumstances. I believe this premise is the truest because by improving both aspects mentally and physically, can really improve someones health, self esteem, and overall well being. For example, when you see someone emotionally and psychologically drained, you can normally tell in their body language or their physical state.

All three of these premises remind me of religion. I say this because in religion, most of the time it is talking about being a better person and releasing your sins to become healthy mentally and spiritually. When you are a better person mentally and spiritually, it then translates to better physical health.

Week 11 Question 1

1). Do you agree with anthropologist Ruth Benedict that we are "creatures of our culture" and that our habits, beliefs, and impossibilities are shaped by our culture? If so, how can we break through the limits of our cultures?

I would have to agree that we are a creation of our culture. It starts out when we are children and what are parents begin teaching us what is right and wrong based on what society has taught them to be true. What are habits are, our beliefs, and what we can or can't accomplish is outlined for us by the culture in which we grow up in because it is usually all we know.

Most people do not get the opportunity to live in another country or culture with different values of their own so they do not know any better. The closet thing someone might come to experience different culture beliefs is if they go on vacation to another country, and even then, they might see that country's culture as "weird" or "not normal".

To break out of the tendency to follow what culture has made us believe and the path to follow, is learn about different cultures and live it. Communicating cross culturally is beneficial because you receive more perspectives in life than just your own, or perspectives that have been given to you. Being able to utilize and experience other cultures beliefs may begin to develop your own beliefs even if it does not follow your culture's norm.