1.4. Cross-Tabulations of Group and Grid

are the constraints like if I am a particular member of a particular group, will they allow me to have an orientation of homosexual or will they allow me to have equal rights for the women so, feminism, a kind of homosexuality how one see; one group see that is a kind of the rule of the group. Some group permits, some group do not permit okay so, it is a kind of law, hierarchy, kinship, race, gender that how it is viewed this is in a group, this is called grid okay.

This chunk discusses how individuals are affected by the rules and constraints of the groups they belong to. Constraints may include acceptance of sexual orientation, rights related to gender, and other social conventions. These rules can vary significantly between different groups, indicating the importance of understanding the group's dynamics to grasp how individuals experience identity and rights within it.

Imagine different schools that have specific rules about personal expression. In one school, students can express their sexuality freely, while in another, they might face restrictions. This shows how group norms can shape what is acceptable and encouraged.

So, we have like low grid where everybody is equal, egalitarian state of affairs, no one is prevented to participate in any kind of activities or social role depending irrespective of their race, gender, age or so forth, everybody is considered to be equal. In other case, where extreme we have high grid panel here, we can see that people are restricted; their activities are restricted based on caste, creed, class.

The grid concept illustrates how equality and restrictions vary across groups. A low grid indicates an egalitarian society where everyone can participate equally, while a high grid shows restrictions based on various stratifications like caste or class, affecting one's opportunities in social activities.

Think of a playground. In some playgrounds, everyone can play together regardless of their background (low grid), while in others, certain groups have access to equipment or areas that others don't (high grid), limiting who can join in on the fun.

So, group when low, it is; the networks are radical, when high it is interconnected, in case of interactions low groups are rare, high groups are frequent, boundaries of interactions among individuals in case of low group is open and in case of high group is closed, shared groups like few, high groups are many.

This chunk contrasts low and high grid groups based on their interactions. Low grid groups often feature open interactions and radical networks that encourage diversity, while high grid groups have closed boundaries, limiting interactions and often promoting a rigid structure.

Consider social media groups. Some are open for everyone to join and share ideas freely (low grid), while others might only let in those who meet specific criteria, creating tight-knit, exclusive circles (high grid).

And allocation of roles is like achievement what you are; what you have achieved but in case of high, it is like ascribed, what your father was, what your mother was, whatever ancestor was, you become like caste system, okay and resource allocations; in case of low grid, it is like egalitarian, everybody is equal, everybody has the same opportunity but in case your hierarchical; in high, it is hierarchical.

The way roles are assigned and resources distributed varies significantly between low and high grid societies. In low grid societies, individuals earn roles based on merit (achievements), while in high grid societies, roles are often ascribed, meaning people inherit their social standing based on family lineage. Resource distribution reflects these principles, with low grids promoting equality and high grids reinforcing hierarchies.

Imagine a workplace. In one where promotions are given based on performance (low grid), everyone has equal chances to rise. In another where only family connections matter for promotions (high grid), it creates a divide where not everyone has an equal shot.

So, if we put this low group and sorry, group and grid into a cross-tabulations, we can get 4 categories; one A, B, C, D, so if we move from A to D to C, we can say that from A to D is A is like individualistic, D is kind of egalitarian and C is like authoritative, some dictators are there and in case of A, it is like little classification and distinctions between individuals are there, they can nobody is segregated or discriminated because they are black because they are women, okay.

Creating a cross-tabulation between the group and grid dimensions reveals four distinct categories of societal structures. Category A represents an individualistic society, while D represents egalitarianism. Category C illustrates authoritarian systems with strict hierarchies, emphasizing the varying experiences of individuals based on their group and grid classifications.

Consider how different countries function. For instance, a country promoting individual rights and freedoms represents category A, while another one with strict laws reflecting C might limit personal freedoms, dictating how citizens live and interact.

For the individualist, they believe that nature is like no matter how much human disturb it, it will; they can handle it, nature can handle it, it is super-powerful, so for your own well-being, for your own achievement for your own success, you can utilize the nature as much as you wish and okay, this myth of nature shows that there is no need for control or cooperations, people are free to use the nature.

The individualistic perspective reflects a belief in nature's resilience, suggesting that individuals can exploit natural resources freely for personal gain without fear of consequences. This notion minimizes perceived risk, leading to a hands-off attitude toward environmental responsibility.

Consider someone who sees a forest full of resources and thinks they can take down trees without worrying about the environmental impact. They believe nature is strong enough to recover, illustrating the individualistic mindset regarding nature.

--