Handbook Abstract ProposalLiterature Review 留学生论文翻译 Annotated Bibliographies Methodology 留学生论文润色 出国留学论文 Reference

literature review怎么写? review of literature

First and foremost, let us look at how scholars think of consumption. If we take consumption as a social process, it is thought, more specifically, to be a process of cultural production; a process of distinction; a process of social reproduction; a process of appropriation and a process of value production. Some scholars, like Durkheim, take consumption as a threat the society. Durkheim required the 留学生论文网identification of “social facts” by his rules of methods. However, long before him economists had carved out a sphere of “economic facts” by disregarding the ending of human activity and concentrating on problems of choice. The changes happened in the division of labour increased mobility and released people from old social bonds, therefore they were set free. However in Durkheim’s eyes, this would not necessarily lead to and happy ending, which he called “organic solidarity” (1968) since there was always the threat of anomie, which, moreover, can be increased by consumption and the endless desires evoked by it.
Anthropologists think consumption is a private matter, besides there are two boundaries in defining consumption in anthropology. First may be drawn by an idea essential to economic theory: that is that consumption is not compelled; the consumer’s choice is free. Second, it may be drawn by the idea central to national book keeping that consumption starts where market ends. Thus, consumption decisions become the vital source of the culture of the moment. Douglas and Isherwood said that they had “succeeded in defining consumption as an area of behaviour hedged by rules which explicitly demonstrate that neither commerce nor force are being applied to a free relationship… social sanctions protect the boundaries”.(1996: 38) And goods, from their point of view, are considered goods as an information system. They assume that “goods are needed for making visible and stable the categories of culture instead of supposing that goods are primarily needed for subsistence plus competitive display”. (1996: 38)
Then, they developed those two conceptions in the sphere of ritual. Rituals, from their perspective, are conventions that set up visible public definitions. To manage without rituals is to manage without clear meanings and possibly without memories. Some are purely verbal rituals, vocalized, unrecorded, but they fade on the air and hardly help to limit the interpretation scope. More effective rituals use http://ukthesiss.com/Thesis_Tips/material things; and the more costly the ritual trappings, the stronger we can assume the intention to fix the meanings to be. Under such argument, goods are just ritual adjuncts; and consumption can be seen as a ritual process whose primary function is to make sense of the inchoate flux of events. Meanwhile, since consumption uses goods to make firm and visible a particular set of judgments in the fluid process of classifying persons and events, we can still define it as a ritual active. And, the most general objective of the consumer can only be to construct an intelligible universe with the goods he chooses. (1996: 43)

UK Thesis Base Contacts