Introduction
There are various scholars who have shown interest in determining whether individuals’ behaviors can be predicted. It is worth mentioning that their different explanations provide insights into the topic. Rodney Stack argues tries to elaborate on the difference that exists between explanations that are scientific and those that offer casual justification concerning particular types of behaviors (Stark 87).
Free will versus human behaviors
Rodney Stack contended that people often confuse free will notion with that of human behavior being random as well as unpredictable. Basically, His argument seems to be off the mark. It can be sociologically explained that free will is the starting point to studying as well as making predictions on human behaviors.
Generally, human behaviors can be predicted to a larger extent. Human beings’ behaviors are guided by social interactions as well as socialization. Free will means that individuals have the freedom to make their choices given a particular situation. Rodney makes us believe that free will is incompatible with predictions about human behaviors (Stark 127).
Some scholars argue that an individual’s actions result from the antecedent behaviors, which in most cases are learned from society. Societies often put in place mores, norms, and values that people are supposed to follow as a guide to their behaviors. The do’s and don’ts of the community allow individuals to learn the expectations of the wider society. Therefore, they behave in a manner that can be predicted.
It is important to understand that individuals may be tempted to act in a particular manner following their free choices; however, they have to restrain themselves, therefore acting according to the expectations of the society. Consequently, free will of the individuals will also be guided by social aspects. Free will only act as the starting point to predicting how an individual is likely to behave in a particular situation since the society has its sets of standards that people are expected to maintain (Ritzer 212).
Sociological explanation of suicide
Early studies on suicide have demonstrated how people’s forms of behaviors can be elaborated through sociological perspectives. Emile Durkheim is one of the scholars who have been widely recognized for his approaches to suicide behaviors. His primary concern regarded how societies could be in a position to maintain order and integrity especially during modernization era where aspects such as religion as well as ethnic backgrounds were no longer able to maintain order in the society.
Durkheim’s studied suicide rates in the verge of explaining suicidal behaviors. In his study, it was apparent that the suicide rate was higher among the Protestants compared to Catholics. He also demonstrated that suicide was higher among the married men compared to those who were not married. In his study, Protestants were found to have weak social ties which led to weaker social cohesion as well as lessened social solidarity.
This was the cause of higher suicide rates among the Protestants. Therefore, it is predicted that Protestants are more likely to commit suicide, especially when preoccupied with suicidal thoughts than Catholics due to weak social ties. This clearly demonstrates that individualistic behaviors such as suicide can effectively be explained in a sociological perspective (Ritzer 132).
Conclusion
Human behavior can effectively be predicted due to the fact that it results from learned social behaviors. In most cases, human beings are socialized to certain norms and values which shapes their behaviors. They learn to behave only according to expected standards. Therefore, their free will to act in a certain way is only the first step to determining how individuals will behave in a particular situation.
Individualistic behaviors are significantly explained in a sociological manner. A good example is the suicide explanations given by scholars such as Emile Durkheim. Durkheim predicted that Protestants are likely to engage in suicide activities due to their loose ties as well as lack of solidarity.
Works cited
Ritzer, George. Sociological Theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998.
Stark, Rodney. Sociology. 10th ed. California: Wadsworth, 2007.