1.1. Low Grid vs High Grid

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.

In this section, we learn about 'low grid' and 'high grid'. A low grid refers to a society where everyone is treated equally—meaning anyone can participate in activities regardless of their characteristics such as race, gender, or age. This promotes an egalitarian environment where everyone's rights are respected. Conversely, a high grid represents a society where individuals' actions are limited by factors like social class or caste. In this scenario, inequalities exist, and certain groups may be excluded from social participation based on these restrictions.

Think of a sports team where every player is allowed to play no matter their background, skill level, or appearance—that's a low grid. Now imagine a sports league where only players from certain prestigious schools or backgrounds are allowed to compete. This exclusion represents a high grid scenario, highlighting how varying access can create divisions.

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 are open and in case of high group are closed.

Here, we focus on how social interactions differ between low grid and high grid societies. In a low grid society, the social networks are characterized as radical, meaning they allow for many open interactions with fewer boundaries. This contrasts sharply with high grid societies, where interactions are more closed off and frequent, creating a structured environment. In such societies, group membership may dictate the type of interactions individuals can have, leading to isolation for those outside particular groups.

Imagine a neighborhood where everyone mingles freely, and people of different backgrounds often share meals—this represents a low grid community. On the other hand, consider a gated community where residents seldom interact with those outside their walls, and social events are exclusive—this is more representative of a high grid scenario.

In case of grid, when the grid is low that means in a particular group, particular community, particular society, the low and high is like horizontal and vertical, one is very hierarchical one is very equal okay, specializations; in low group it’s very little, people are all have similar kind of activities, they don’t have any specializations, in high group there is lot of specializations, lot of division of labour, people are divided, segregated.

This chunk addresses the differences in specialization and role allocation between low and high grid societies. In low grid environments, roles tend to be more horizontal—meaning that most members engage in similar activities without significant specialization. In contrast, high grid societies typically feature pronounced vertical divisions, where roles are clearly defined, leading to a more specialized labor force. This segregation can create systemic barriers to equality and participation.

Consider a school project where every student is assigned the same task—everyone participates equally, which reflects a low grid. Now, think of a corporate structure where there are rigid job titles and responsibilities, with some roles requiring specialized training. This division illustrates a high grid where individuals are placed in different hierarchical levels based on their expertise.

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.

This segment compares how resources and roles are allocated in low versus high grid societies. In low grid settings, roles are assigned based on individual accomplishments, reflecting an egalitarian approach where everyone has equal opportunities. Conversely, in high grid societies, the emphasis is often on ascribed status, where roles and resource access are determined by lineage—echoing systems like the caste hierarchy. This leads to inequality, as opportunities are not shared equally among members.

Imagine a scholarship program where every student competes for funds based solely on their academic performance—that illustrates egalitarian distribution (low grid). In contrast, think of a family business where the heirs automatically inherit control regardless of their personal capabilities; this is an example of hierarchical allocation (high grid).

But which culture they belong that matter, for somebody is eating with chopstik, is okay for somebody it’s cultural shock because it is eating by fork or knife...

In this section, the importance of cultural perspectives in shaping values and social norms is emphasized. It illustrates that individuals' beliefs and behaviors stem from their cultural backgrounds rather than just their biological traits. The example of different eating utensils highlights that what is normal in one culture can be unfamiliar or shocking in another, emphasizing the diversity of cultural norms and values.

Consider how different cultures celebrate birthdays. In some cultures, it's customary to have a lavish party with gifts, while in others, it may be a simple family gathering with no gifts. This diversity in cultural norms shows how deeply our backgrounds influence our values and social behaviors.

--