All About Security From Sociology Viewpoint
Home   Contact      FA

Latest Essays

Security Priorities of Citizens in Various Zones of Tehran
Dr. Manijeh Navidnia
With emphasis on security models and considering utilization mode of various city places in Tehran, this survey studies the citizens' status in these places in regard of their security priorities

Police, Security and Family Institution
Dr. Manijeh Navidnia
In modern society, family is not an autonomous and self governed institution and essentially depends on other institutions to supply many of its requirements, as it needs the police to provide security.

The Analysis of Relationship Between Social Conditions and Security Discourses
Dr. Manijeh Navidnia
This article attempts to study the type of prevalent discourse in securitization of society with emphasis on social conditions

The police perspective; security and social capital
Dr. Manijeh Navidnia
The police as one of the main supporters of security have a remarkable place and there is no doubt about perspective of its future role and function.

The Analysis of Relationship Between Situations of Walfare and Societal Security, A Study in Tehran
Dr. Manijeh Navidnia
This research is studying the societal security with emphasis on welfare status variable and investigating the rate societal security at present conditions


Security and Viewpoint


Every scientific concepts and issues in terms of their origin have a specific functional and semantic field. The origin of security is also political science, and therefore, security inevitably based on paradigms and theoretical viewpoints of political science. Comparison the security between sociology and political science would result in better understanding:
1) Political science is enemy-based, because it divides individuals and groups into two parts friends and foes, or insider and outsider. It believes in "everything or nothing" rule, so reduces the diversity and plurality of groups into two categories friend and foe. Also it assumes all activities, measures and behavior of individuals and groups under these two friendly or hostile actions. Hence, security in political science is summarized in confronting enemies and safeguarding friends. On the other hand, in many cases bi-polarization of relations has led security measures of a country or group to be considered as insecurity for another country or group that is called "security dilemma". Security dilemma implies ambiguous and uncertain conditions in which it is hard to estimate and evaluate the opponent's intentions and goals of security measures.

But the sociology believes that relations between individuals and groups is based on cooperation and competition and just separate normal and abnormal people; the abnormal refers to those who have confronted the damage and attempted criminal or ill acts, or are exposed vulnerability. Thus, there is no enemy in the social sphere, and we can only speak about stranger and foreigner. Namely the social categories are eventually divided into familiars and strangers and this division doesn't imply the threatening of the opponent. For example, a group of people are familiar with the health issues and apply them in their lives and another group does not comply with health orders. Definitely the latter will make harms for themselves and perhaps their disease can spread to the first group, but these behaviors are never considered as hostile actions. In sociology, "social distance" is considered natural and the amount of nearness and remoteness of individuals and groups determines weakness and intensity of their empathic or antagonistic relationship. Thus, the security viewpoint in sociology is free of enemies and sociology would eventually consider surveillance and care some abnormal people. In sociology the major part of security program is removing difficulties and obstacles to achieve individuals' benefits, access to assets, and developing human-centered methods.
2) Because political science is focused on insider and outsider bipolar relationship, consider the differences as signs of the hostility and does not tolerate plurality and diversity of groups and individuals, and emphasizes the resemblance and unanimity and contests with any innovation and modernism as if it is a threat. But because sociology considers the difference of organizations' and groups' functions as a requisite of society turnover, regards the plurality and diversity as inherent of the society and it accepts it. Sociology affixes pluralism with cooperation and by accepting diversity, furthers the society with collaboration and increases the efficiency of affairs by accepting differences and versatilities. Therefore, security in sociology as much as linked with unity and solidarity, is mixed with diversity and plurality. Also, security in sociology is never realized with providing security for a group (insider group) and deprivation and excluding of another group (outsider group).
3) War, defense, aggression, and defeat are words originated from the enemy-based view that draw the political space. While the sociology, words relations, cooperation, collaboration, association, assistance, and kindness are predominant. As according to the quality and quantity of collaboration, social forms such as family, peer groups, citizens and so are distinguishable from each other. Even in major changes that are the end of a period and start another new era, for example, transition from agricultural to industrial society, also in these fundamental transformations there is no word about of the decay and destruction, and these events are never considered as some people's subversion and destruction. Hence it can be concluded that the security measures and securitization operation in sociological are more based on patterns of tolerance, support and protection methods, and flexible and adaptable acts and this would result in collaboration, unlike political actions that in based on the powerful behavior, defensive measures and retaliations. Thus, political science has a "threaten oriented" view; initially regards everything as a risk, unless the contrary is proved. But sociology is "relationship oriented" and in its view, relation is valuable in itself and emphasizes more on communication functions than damages and losses of communication. Thus, security in political science is more about dealing with risk and threat, but security in sociology tries to realize safe communication and to ensure regular interrelations. Hence, political science relies on force, coercion, fear, and intimidation, because attempts to control and inhibit aggressive and criminal behavior. But sociology based on friendship, altruism, compatibility and conformity. Sociology sees man as a social being who wants to communicate with others. So, the goal of security in sociology is providing situations full of freedom and authority to guarantee growth of human capabilities that can achieve by education, information, knowledge and wisdom.

4) Political science is "government oriented", it means considerations and benefits of government have priority and also security is organized to preservation of government's interests and sovereignty. Sociology is "people oriented" and considers communication between individuals and groups to provide needs and also intends to security for maintaining the health of people in different social classes.
Political science evaluates individuals and groups according to their nearness to or remoteness from government and believes in government's ideology as criterion of affairs. Therefore, assessments in political science are one dimensional and depend on the amount of acceptance of government. Sociology doesn't use one criterion or one rule for all human beings. So that a skilled practitioner can be admired, but not as a father or husband. The validation and evaluation of individuals is multifaceted and is based on principle of groups that individuals are members of them. Thus, security field in sociology differs from a group to another group; also security plans, tools and operations are not the same and can be defined by features of parts and groups. Security in political science is mixed with the amount of loyalty to the government, because government is the main trustee of securitization and naturally provides security for those who are under the command and obey it. But security in sociology in order to its span and broad scope is not reduced to government's special work and one's need to security begins with the birth in family and security demands continues with the participation and membership in various social groups. Hence, the desired security in political science is considered just as some kind of security need that governments realize it and other security demands should be provided by different groups and organizations like social security and pubic insurances.
5) Individual activities in political science can be summarized to conflict for power, so it can be concluded that the motive of activity in all groups and parties is one dimensional and is will to power. But motive of activity of people in the society in addition to power, is other sources such as wealth, information, dignity, esteem, etc. Thus, in sociology field and motives of activities are numerous and diverse and can differ from a group to another group. Hence, the security in sociology gets diverse aspects and in different groups will have different meanings. As for some groups preserving languages and dialects is the priority and for some others level of their participation in the economic scene is more important and for another group maintaining past traditions and customs is important. Thus, security in sociology in addition to encompassing public and common field has specific fields for each class and group will that in many cases, understanding safety or insecurity of groups depends on it.
new comment
Security code: