1. PART IV: DEMOCRACY Political Stratification Discrimination and Exclusion

2. Before we jump in… For the final papers: – Most important thing to do: Stick to your research question! Secondly: Do not use the readings as labeling devices. The most common mistake: you ask questions that you already know the answers to, and then you use the readings as decorations to describe or express the preconceived answer.  Instead, the theories should GENERATE explanation, including going in directions that you might not have expected, that contradict your preconceived answer.

3. LIST OF DON’Ts Cherry picking: picking a claim out of context to make it seem as if it is supporting a particular proposition, but paying attention to the context shows otherwise. “Straw man”. Misrepresenting an argument to make it seem easily refutable. Proof by example. Examples or counterexamples are not proof of anything. They can serve as illustrations or specifications of broader trends, but if you are using them to prove or disprove entire claims or arguments, something is wrong. Fallacy of affirming the consequent. If a theory says X causes Y, the existence of Y does not prove X happen. Ad Hominem: proving or disproving a claim/argument based on who is saying it. Appealing to pity. No pathos. Reasoning, not just conclusions. Don’t just use the conclusion of a given argument – try to use the reasoning behind it.

4. Merton’s Classic Article Although it was written in the 1940s, many of Merton’s observations on discrimination and the American creed are still widely cited today. Merton examines the relationship between the American creed and racial inequities. Merton views the American creed, which is set forth in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, as essentially a sociological construct since it asserts the collective “principle of the human right to full equity”. As he notes, “viewed sociologically, the creed is a set of values and precepts embedded in American culture to which Americans are expected to conform” (190).

5. Clara On the Merton piece: he distinguishes moral philosophy from sociology (on page 194— the all-weather liberal is satisfied by his own altruism, he personally adheres to a moral standard and this is acceptable behavior according to a moral-philosophy framework). But this in turn implies a moral framework unique to sociology, doesn’t it? What is this framework — what are sociology’s normative goals (or do these goals vary among thinkers within the discipline)?

6. Durkheimian Norms at Work According to Merton, this principle of full equity includes “the right of equitable access to justice, freedom, and opportunity, irrespective of race or religion or ethnic origin” (190). Since the American creed is dynamic and subject to interpretation, “it is often evaded, and the evasions themselves become institutionalized” in what Merton describes as “institutionalized evasion of institutional norms” (190).

7. “Discrimination” Comes in Many Forms Merton sees racial inequality not as the simple product of a dichotomy between creed and conduct, but rather as the product of three variables: (1) cultural creed, (2) beliefs and attitudes, and (3) actual practices. According to Merton, “attitudes and overt behavior vary independently”, in the sense that “prejudicial attitudes need not coincide with discriminatory behavior” (192). In other words, attitudes do not necessarily and automatically lead to discriminatory behavior, or vice versa. In fact, Merton recognizes four categories of individuals based on this complex relationship between attitudes and behavior:

8. Type I: The Unprejudiced Non-Discriminator or All-Weather Liberal The individual who adheres to the creed in both belief and practice. Type II: The Unprejudiced Discriminator or Fair-Weather Liberal An expedient individual who supports discriminatory practices in the interest of profit, even though such behavior may contradict his beliefs in the American creed. Type III: The Prejudiced Non-Discriminator or Fair-Weather Illiberal The prejudiced individual who, in a liberal environment, reluctantly conforms to the creed in practice (but not in belief) out of fear of sanctions and repercussions. Type IV: The Prejudiced Discriminator or All-Weather Illiberal Antithetical to the All-Weather Liberal, this bigoted individual is prejudiced, discriminates, and completely departs from the American creed. Which do you guys feel is the most perilous for a democratic society?

9. Simone "More, these group soliloquies in which there is typically wholehearted agreement among fellow- liberals tend to promote another fallacy limiting effective action. This is the fallacy of unaniminity. Continued association with like-minded individuals tends to produce the illusion that a large measure of consensus has been achieved in the community at large. The unanimity regarding essential cultural axioms that obtains in these small groups provokes an overestimation of the strength of the movement and of its effective inroads upon the larger population, which does not necessarily share these creedal axioms. Many also mistake participation in the groups of like-minded individuals for effective action. Discussion accordingly takes the place of action. The reinforcement of the creed for oneself is mistaken for the extension of the creed among those outside the limited circle of ethnic liberals." Merton, p. 194 The problems of self -aggrandization and self-legitimation run rampant in circles from both sides of the spectrum, not just the liberal side. Whether the groups are conservative or liberal, many of the events and discussions they hold are attended by the very same people who already holds those beliefs (preaching to the proverbial choir); discussions must reach out to the populations who need to hear it, not ones who've already heard it, otherwise we face the problem Rossaeu and so many other thinkers identified where small groups (factions, if you will) take their individual beliefs and conflate them as the general will. We see the stalemate today with our general political system between the Democrats and the Republicans (see Congress/government shutdown as the microcosmic example), the Black Lives Matter activists and the police, pro-choice and pro-life, feminists and "humanists," etc., and we cannot progress as a society if both sides of the arguments are only listening to themselves instead of talking to each other. How to make this happen? Merton suggests the limitation and the other fallacies first be recognized -- basically lifting the curtain of denial. "The fallacy of group soliloquies can be removed only by having ethnic liberals enter into organized groups not comprised merely of fellow liberals. This exacts a heavy price of liberals. It means that they face initial opposition and resistance rather than prompt consensus. It entails giving up the gratifications of consistent group support. The fallacy of unanimity can in turn be reduced by coming to see that American society often provides large rewards for those who express their ethnic prejudice in discriminatory practice. Only if the balance of rewards, material and social, is modified will behavior be modified." Merton 195. Basically the "cultural masturbation" needs to come to an end and the real work needs to begin; it's not enough to pat yourself on the back for having these views, you need to actually incite change, especially in those who before were themselves in denial.

10. Policy Implications Merton believes that an awareness of the different types of discriminators is necessary to devise effective social policy aimed at reducing racial inequality. In his view, it is incorrect to assume all people discriminate for the same reasons, and therefore no single social policy can address such variation: “Those who practice discrimination are not people of one kind. And because they are not all of a piece, there must be diverse social therapies, each directed at a given type in a given social situation” (199). Social policy must address the three principal forces that sustain all types of discrimination: (1)ignorance; (2) the social, psychic, and economic gains that apply to discriminators; and (3) the cultural norms that legitimatize discrimination.

11. Solutions Type I: The Unprejudiced Non-Discriminator or All-Weather Liberal  Will implement social policy and will serve as a model for the other three groups. Type II: The Unprejudiced Discriminator or Fair-Weather Liberal  Since this type discriminates when it “seems rewarding to do so”, effective policy must minimize the benefits of discrimination by modifying the interpersonal environment.  The purpose of this social policy is to transform the Type II discriminator into Type I. Type III: The Prejudiced Non-Discriminator or Fair-Weather Illiberal  Social policy must modify the institutional and legal environment to promote tolerance and racial amalgamation.  This social policy aims to minimize prejudice, thereby changing the Type III individual into Type I. Type IV: The Prejudiced Discriminator or All-Weather Illiberal  Effective social policy depends on climate. In a hostile cultural climate (one conducive to discrimination), legal control should be implemented to reduce the economic benefits of discrimination.  On the contrary, in a more favorable climate, policy should aim to isolate the illiberal, thereby impelling him “to conform with institutional regulations, even though he does not surrender his own prejudices” (208).  Since this new legal control would eliminate the advantages of discrimination, “all- weather illiberals may slowly abandon some discriminatory practices as they come to find that these do not always pay,” (208) thereby moving from Type IV to Type III.

12. Western finds Inequality in Funny Places Mass imprisonment = an incarceration so vast as to draw entire demographic groups in the web of the penal system (p.12). This phenomenon produces a variety of important effects, not least of which is “a sharp line between the black underclass and the middle class” (p.18). MEN (90%) YOUNG (2/3 < 35yo) MINORITIES (2/3 black, hispanic) POOR (1/3 unemployed at arrest) UNEDUCATED (mean of 11 years of schooling)

13. The Big Picture

14. Among Developed Countries…

15. Absolute Numbers Even More Shocking

16. Crime Rate ain’t the Reason

17. Consider the Implications for Democracy  Compare to: unions, welfare programs, training programs, military service.

18. A Life Course Perspective

19. Wacquant on the Ghetto Ghettos (banlieue, quartieri periferici, problemomrade, favela, villa miseria, etc.): those stigmatized neighborhoods situated at the very bottom of the hierarchical system of places that compose the metropolis.  These places are relegated to a regime of advanced marginality – a system of exclusionary closure which encompasses racial, linguistic, class, confessional and geographical aspects of its residents’ lives. Main Point: American, French or any other ghettos are byproducts of the emergence of a new kind of urban poverty.  So you can see the appeal of the “prison” metaphor.

20. The big insight: Ghetto is a Construct “Urban space is a historical and political construction.” It has profound effects not just on the distribution of material resources (money, goods), but on intangible, symbolic resources (honor, reputation). Many of these resources have to do with security and stability. We are talking about much more than “neighborhood effects,” “segregation” and racism. We are talking about a certain worldview, folk sociology and way of life.

21. The Panopticon

22. The Basic Historical Argument Bad Chattel Slavery (Colonial Era => Civil War) Bad Jim Crow System (Reconstruction => Civil Rights Movement) Better? The Modern Ghetto & Prison System (1914 => Today) & (1970s => Today)

23. Maintaining the racial “caste line” “But, as migrants from Mississippi to the Carolinas flocked to the northern metropolis, what they discovered there was not the ‘promised land’ of equality and full citizenship but another system of racial enclosure, the ghetto, which, though it was less rigid and fearsome than the one they had fled, was no less encompassing and constraining” (p.381).

24. Clara, Part II. And finally a question regarding Wacquant’s argument: how conscious/isolated are racial motivations in white creation/perpetuation of ‘peculiar institution’? Wacquant writes that white abandonment of public schools/space/the inner city was the practice of “maintaining an unbridgeable social and symbolic gulf with their compatriots of African descent.” But certainly there are other “reasons” (the economy, for example, or the desire for “better schools”) that white people cite for their movement. According to Wacquant’s theory, are these “reasons” better understood as “excuses”, a carefully constructed dialogue meant to avoid the underlying desire to avoid acknowledging racial prejudice? In terms of understanding social behavior, is race to Wacquant what the economy is to Marx? (I am pretty sure this is what he is saying, but want to make sure I have it right).

25. A Culture of Fear and Suspicion “You hear the law coming, you merk on [run away from] them niggas. You don't be having time to think okay, what do I got on me, what they going to want from me. No, you hear them coming, that's it, you gone, period. Because whoever they looking for, even if it's not you, nine times out of ten they'll probably book you” – Chuck - Avoid all public institutions that might register you (hospitals included). - Play the police and courts as best you can – but at a daily rate, to the point that it preoccupies your life and routine. - Family and friends use the fugitive status of their boyfriend/son/brother to subordinate them in various ways. - Employment becomes more unlikely for the simple fact that most of the labor market is avoided.

26. The Persistence of Ethnoracial Closure Following on a Weberian point that should be familiar by now, Wacquant argues that blacks and other minorities are endowed with a negative social estimation of honor (p.383). (1)Stigma; (2)Constraint; (3)Territorial confinement; (4)Institutional encasement. Ghetto = social prison Prison = judicial ghetto  Both are “institutions of forced confinement” (p.378).

27. Andrea "But, while whites begrudgingly accepted 'integration' in principle, in practice they strove to maintain an unbridgeable social and symbolic gulf with their compatriots of African descent. They abandoned public schools, shunned public space, and fled to the suburbs in the millions to avoid mixing and ward off the specter of 'social equality' in the city" (Wacquant, p. 382) "Two decades after the passage of the Fair Housing Act, levels of black segregation remain exceedingly high in large urban areas where the concentration of poverty is more severe. This high level of black segregation cannot be explained by blacks' objective socioeconomic characteristics, their housing preferences, or their limited knowledge of white housing markets. Rather, it is linked empirically to the persistence of discrimination in housing markets and to continuing antiblack prejudice" (Massey, p. 354) I think these two quotes do a good job of demonstrating why racial segregation persists. Despite having outlawed segregation and discrimination in the housing market, schools, and other public spaces, a de facto segregation still exists and is deeply ingrained in our society. This makes segregation particularly hard to combat. For example, when the government attempted to integrate schools in the 60s and 70s through forced busing, the result was "white flight"– white families would move to the suburbs so that their children would not have to attend "black schools." Thus, instead of encouraging integration, this policy had the result of further segregating the cities, and created this movement from de jure segregation to de facto segregation.

28. American Apartheid Massey argues that racial residential segregation is the key structural factor responsible for urban poverty, the birth of the underclass, and racial inequality. Racial discrimination is institutionalized through the labor market and (secondarily) the education system. Not a problem of culture, but of residential structure. There is widespread consensus that structural transformation of the urban economy is an important factor in transforming the inner city ghetto. But Massey argue that it is because of residential segregation that structural changes had such negative social and economic consequences. So he is modifying the conventional wisdom (the emphasis on middle class outmigration), saying – yes it did occur – but we should really focus on racial segregation of the housing market itself, which has negative effects for both poor and middle class blacks.  Incidentally, the work shows that welfare payments had a negative effect only for residentially segregated groups – in this context, they created an environment in which welfare dependency was the norm.

29. Kirsi "Segregation's role in concentrating poverty also explains why the urban underclass is confined primarily to the Northeast and Midwest, and mostly to a small number of large metropolitan areas, such as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. During the 1970s, older industrial cities in these regions not only experienced the sharpest economic reversals but also exhibited the highest levels of race segregation in the United States" – (Massey p. 352). I thought this paper was really interesting because it just showed an empirical analysis of the effects of segregation. This quote interested me in particular because it seems like when this is looked at from a historical view the fact that these urban areas would be the most affected makes sense - during the 20s and 40s, African Americans from the South migrated en masse to these urban areas. Connecting the historical evidence to the empirical analysis makes this argument more compelling to me. I was wondering if the author would think that in a completely unsegregated neighborhood if the rate of black poverty might go down. In this empirical study it is taken as a constant rate. Would the next step of this study be to determine if that rate would stay the same in the completely unsegregated (or completely segregated) or if it would fluctuate up or down? All of the side effects of segregation would lessen (mortality, crime, etc.) but would the rate of poverty as well?

30. Clara, Part III. I found the Massey article really interesting because it identifies the incentives for white people to support institutional racism and racial segregation: i.e., while racial and class segregation do worsen the effects of an economic downturn, they do so only on one small portion of the population, with no part of the burden falling on white people. For white society, then, segregation plays a functional role. While the legacy of formal, legal segregation (Jim Crow) obviously still bears impact, I did wonder what other formal pieces of legislation have this same effect—or is the continued racial segregation (particularly in cities) a result of stagnation more than any kind active maintenance?

31. Effects of Racial Segregation in the US (1) Segregation increases susceptibility of neighborhoods to spirals of decline. Feedback between individual and collective behaviors – beyond a certain threshold, self- perpetuating negative spiral kicks in. In periods of economic dislocation, social disorder, crime, property decay all become concentrated in segregated neighborhoods. (2) Political consequences of segregation – blacks are only ones to benefit from public expenditures in ghetto; this makes is hard to form political coalitions and isolates them from pluralist politics. (3) segregation perpetuates poverty – barriers to spatial mobility are barriers to social and economic mobility.

32. Ted "As long as racial discrimination and prejudice are translated so directly into economic disadvantage through housing markets, and as long as racial segregation persists at such high levels in American cities, blacks and Puerto Ricans will remain vulnerable groups whose basis for community life and socioeconomic well-being can be systematically undermined by the closing of a factory or the onset of a recession" (Massey 354). Massey's analysis of racially-driven housing segregation post Fair Housing Act illustrates, to me, the important role history plays in the way in which social institutions and culture play in economic and political stratification. That is, even with the seemingly quick institutional change in housing policies through the Fair Housing Act, Massey shows that the effects of discriminatory institutions still persist via informal rules and regulation of housing patterns, such as landlord discrimination or post redlining issues. This goes to show the large implications for history of social discrimination: even with quick policy changes, the problems of discrimination do not seemingly go away. Rather, the lingering effects of discriminatory institutions limit true progress to end social discrimination in political and economic realms.

33. Michael "The decline of manufacturing, the suburbanization of blue-collar employment, and the rise of the service sector eliminated many well- paying jobs for unskilled minorities and reduced the pool of marriageable men, thereby undermining the strength of the family, increasing the rate of poverty, and isolating many inner-city residents from accessible, middle-class occupations." - (Massey, pp. 330) In highlighting the plight of the urban poor in this passage, Massey (referencing Wilson) paints a picture that serves as a stark juxtaposition to the detailed descriptions from last week of the power elite and their maintenance of control over wealth and power in our society. What this contrast highlights, with particular regard to the urban poor being overwhelmingly black, is that there are structural deficiencies in society which are the legacy and continuation of a racist system in which the deck is stacked against black people. Still, the upper classes may often choose not to recognize the role that their defined institutions (including nepotism) by which they can pursue their 'best interests' play in keeping other classes down, which I find frustrating and confounding if it is our aim to create an overall more prosperous society. Normative opinions aside, the apparent willful ignorance of the elite cannot be denied.

34. Vivian “The demonization of welfare mothers and the dichotomy between "us" and "them" can thus provide a dividing line... symbolic boundaries thus become exclusionary boundaries - simultaneously offering a means to affirm shared values and a means to think of "outsiders" in terms of individual blame ” (Hays, p.414-5). As soon as I read this, it made me think of the idea posed by Tarrow from the social movements week and the definition of an "us" and "them" group. In this case, the viewpoint of welfare mothers and the different reasons why they are on welfare is what causes the division of the larger group. Furthermore, similar to what is proposed in nationalist and social movement reading that we have done, this becomes an exclusionary tool. While in nationalism and social movements it was used to simply create solidarity, here, it is to help the individuals dissociate from a negative connotation.

35. Did Sheila Sound Like a Parasite to You? Our demonization of welfare mothers is a Durkheimian sanction par excellence: it establishes an “implicit hierarchy of social worth. [It] is not simply engaging in a mean-spirited attack on others or a self- interested attempt to highlight [one’s] own virtues. These symbolic boundaries also allow [us] to positively affirm shared values and specify the proper way to live one’s life” (Hays, p.413).

36. Julia Lareau argues that more so than race or other cultural identities, social class is the main determinant of how children develop. Concerted cultivation tends to dominate amongst middle-class homes, where children are taught to speak up for themselves and develop a sense of entitlement. However, in poorer families, children are given more free time, less structure, and can make decisions on their own, but also have a sense of constraint, especially around adult figures. The line “It is the specific ways that institutions function that end up conveying advantages to middle-class children,” (Lareau 932) immediately made me think of Durkheim. Through studying the extent to which citizens feel tied to and a part of their communities, Durkheim identifies crucial qualities and institutions in society that either push a person towards group involvement and allegiance or to identify primarily as an individual. I wonder if Lareau’s distinction of concerted cultivation and the accomplishment of natural growth could almost be considered to be two distinct conscience collectives. Durkheim approaches society as a whole, but Lareau finds that there are pretty incompatible differences based on the social class of the family in which the child was raised.

37. Melvin “Middle-class parents, both white and black, appear to follow a cultural logic of childrearing that I call “Concerted cultivation.” Among white and black working-class and poor families, childrearing strategies emphasize the “accomplishment of natural growth” (Lareau 926). “There are signs that middle-class children benefit, in ways that are invisible to them and to their parents, from the degree of similarity between the cultural repertoires in the home and those standards adopted by institutions” (Ibid. 936). Lareau seems to focus on economic status as the primary divisive factor of child growth, but I feel that cultural differences also may play a key role on how children are grown. I feel the different level of emphasis on the importance of education, respect to authority, religious beliefs all play a significant role in child growth that doesn’t necessarily have to do with the economic status. On a separate point, Lareau clearly outlines the advantages that the middle class (and obviously the upper class) have over the working-class families. The primary difference between “natural growth” of the working-class and “concerted cultivation” of the middle-class seems to be the influence of institutions and preconceived ideologies on the better-off groups of people. The reading seems to suggest that the higher one’s class the more concerned they are in keeping a certain set of beliefs and ideologies in order to maintain that class collective, which seems very accurate. A good point the reading makes is that middle-class children may benefit in invisible ways, because the indoctrination of beliefs and mindset during childhood is often very subtle and rooted in one’s subconscious.

38. Culture has long been Neglected Culture as Values Culture in Action Culture isn’t just “values” in the sense of end goals; nor is it a byproduct of the economy, politics, etc.; CULTURAL REPERTOIRES can themselves be exclusionary. Culture is a toolkit or repertoire of symbols, stories, rituals, and world-views which people use to solve different problems Focuses on strategies of action (rather than straight behavior) as outcome – The strategies of action are “cultural products” Culture’s casual significant is not in defining ends of action but providing cultural components used to construct strategies of action.

39. Kate “I have stressed how social class dynamics are woven into the texture and rhythm of children and parents’ daily lives. Class position influences critical aspects of family life: time use, language use, and kin ties.” –Lareau, pg. 935 When I read Lareau, a large part of me was skeptical about the conclusion that class directly determines all the aspects of family life that she references. A lot of the points that she isolates – the way that middle-class families schedule their children’s time more than working-class families or that they use reasoning more than directives when disciplining their children – seem like they could just as easily be tied to education. Teaching their children more vocabulary words, for example, would seem to more logically stem from a higher level of education in parents, who would probably have a larger vocabulary, than simply a higher income earned by the parents. If education and income are highly and positively correlated, then it makes sense that the middle class families would practice such habits more than the working-class families. Wouldn’t, then, Lareau’s thesis be an instance of mistaken causation for correlation?

40. Lareau on Inequality Punch Line: Culture can be a mechanism for the transmission of class advantage.  In other words, insufficient attention has been paid to the effects of cultural stratification on economic stratification. “Because I said so.” “Well, let me explain. And let’s work out a deal together.”

41. Amalee “In a historical moment where the dominant society privileges active, informed, assertive clients of health and educational services, the various strategies employed by children and parents are not equally valuable” (Lareau 927) “Still, in the world of schools, health care facilities, and other institutional settings, these valuable skills [emphasized in the homes of working-class & poor children] do not translate into the same advantages as the reasoning skills emphasized in the home[s] of.. middle-class children.” (Ibid, 932) The first quote only sunk in for me after the second quote caught my attention, because it highlights a clear undergirding assumption of this study that is crucial: the value judgment of all aspects of family life being transmitted across generational lines as “skills”. As I read the introduction to this study, I found myself reactively presupposing that the skills transferred to children in middle-class homes (esp. reasoning skills) were preferable to those transferred to children in working-class and poor homes (esp. constraint and distrust). This is no doubt a result of my personal bias of seeing reasoning as better than constraint/distrust because it is what was transferred to me, and, more importantly, it is what our society values. It is essential to remember, as the quote highlights, that reasoning (or other skills) are not inherently better than other skills, all skills are just suited to different environments and we grow to elevate those which are elevated by our society’s particular power structures. In this example, children of poor families might fair worse than their middle-class counterparts when advocating for themselves at school, for example. But I doubt the children of middle-class families would fair better than their poor counterparts when negotiating street politics.

42. Different views of relationship between childhood and adulthood These differences are partly the product of occupational differences between middle class and working class parents  Middle class parents: Childhood as a training ground for self-actualization as one becomes an adult. Emphasis on training for creative careers.  Working class parents Adult work is not liberating or self-expressive, but often deadening. Here, one is most fully him/herself away from work, with family. Childhood is a time to be free of life’s burdens, not to prepare for them!

43. Ben "Indeed, one of the hallmark of middle class children's daily lives is a set of adult-run organized activities...These organized activities provided a framework for children's' lives; other activities were sandwiched between them." (Lareau, pg. 928- 9) Whereas working-class children lead more insular lives, with the bulk of their daily schedules consisting of school and "hanging out" with other neighboring children, middle-class children are constantly being pushed into activities where they are exposed to many different types of people, including children that may not live in their immediate vicinity and even adults, a group of people that working-class children interact with very rarely outside of school and the immediate family. By constantly gaining new experiences and learning how to interact with many different types of people, middle-class children seem to be more prepared for college, finding jobs, and adapting to unfamiliar environments in general.

44. Schools, in particular, reward middle class childrearing Schools increasingly reward skills, talents instilled via concerted cultivation.  Promptness, ability to follow directions is important in early grades.  Later grades begin to emphasize creativity, thinking outside of the box.  Private schools emphasize creativity, self-expression, out-of- box thinking far earlier in the curriculum.

45. Ian “As others have noted middle class parents used more reasoning in their speech with children while working-class and poor parents used more directives” (Lareau 930) This statement correlates with a strong, leading hypothesis in the area of psychological child development. Lareau does a good job at bringing up the difference of ‘reasoning’ and ‘directives’ right away. Reasoning with your child involves the child to be thinking and to come up with his or her own conclusions. Giving directives has the opposite effect it leads to a conclusion for the child without much thinking on his or her part. In the cognitive theory, the amount of words that a child hears strongly correlates to the child’s intelligence later on in life. However, the main take away from these studies suggests that it is not simply the amount of words a child hears but rather the amount of words being directed at the child and engaging him or her. This chapter provides further evidence that this theory is realistic.