Talk:Total institution

Nazi-like policies

"The North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics could also be considered a total institution in regards to their Nazi-like policies."

???

There is something like commensurability. It should be applicable even at Wikipedia. Kind regards

I deleted Nazi-like policies, unless someone comes up with a good reason for the comparison.Bronayur 19:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I see no reason for that reference at all. Is there something unique or important about this particular school? It sounds like the line was put in my someone with an ax to grind, and it should be removed entirely.

Hmm. I'm a student at NCSSM, and this page's reference to the school is kinda a joke in Sociology classes. Feel free to remove it. Or leave it in as an example. Your choice. 204.85.24.5 03:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)AnNCSSMStudent (who doesn't really want to identify him/herself)

I like it. It is an example for those who have heard of it and it makes this page far more enjoyable to those that actually live there. Leave it! Leave it! Katami 17:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

boom shakalakalaka

tori a1 captain yayah

schooling

what about general education up until the end HS? it pretty much meets the definition

--Dumbing Us Down: --lies my teacher told me --newciv.org/whole/schoolteacher.txt so on —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.38.243 (talk) 23:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Possible NPOV vio

‘According [sic] S. Lammers and A. Verhey, some 80 percent of Americans will ultimately die not in their home, but in a total institution.[2]:853 In recent decades the nursing home industry has quickly extended, and particular regions of the country have become huge territorial nursing homes where we hide the aged and they hide from us.[2]:853 Long before their death, they are buried in the folds of the total institution, hidden, out of sight and out of mind.[2]:853 In the United States, dying in a total institution has become a common experience.[12]:495’ Even if this is NPOV, it needs to be rewritten to appear so, in my opinion, and its placement under the heading ‘Facts’ also seems questionable. Thoughts? Wikitorrens^T 12:00, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Maybe most of the stuff on the Article page should be identified as the "Classical" interpretation of the total institution concept

Here's three easy searches in Google reflecting areas not addressed on the Article Page:

1. criticism of Goffman's total institution concept

2. greedy and total institutions

3. "as a total institution"

Note: in #3 use the quote marks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.218.248 (talk) 16:53, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

what about school?

If one institution is total, the archetype of total institution in fact, then it is school, isn't it? Why isn't it adressed in this field and the article? denis 'spir' (talk) 09:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Removing "Universities" section

I previously removed the section on "universities" in this article, since this section promotes a fringe theory and doesn't cite any reliable sources. Aside from one article by Gibbon, Canterbury, and Litten (1999) the view that colleges and universities can be considered total institutions is not represented in the sociology literature as far as I could find. Their article's claim is more reserved than Wright's---the authors argue only that colleges and universities "approximate total institutions," and that this analogy is useful in framing discussions on issues in administration and admissions.

John Paul Wright is not a sociologist and has no academic credentials in sociology. His article (published in a magazine that may not be considered a reliable source,) briefly describes Erving Goffman's concept of a "total institution," but doesn't define it with any clarity, or establish an argument that colleges and universities fit Goffman's criteria for being considered total institutions. As his article is a personal reflection, it cites no sources and doesn't attempt to engage with other literature.

If it really is important for Wikipedia to reflect the view that universities are total institutions, this article should contain Gibbon, Canterbury, and Litten's argument before quoting a personal reflection by Wright, particularly since the quote doesn't explain why the established definition of a total institution applies to universities in any precise way. My personal opinion is that this article's treatment of the subject is not improved by discussing this view, and that the section should be removed again.

68.100.136.55 (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Agree with this removal. Quillette doesn't pass WP:RS, so just being published there doesn't make something noteworthy; and the author's expertise in criminal justice isn't relevant. If we're going to cover it we would need better sources. --Aquillion (talk) 00:53, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

References

How total is total?

The article needs to discuss the concept itself in greater depth. I remember reading tht the term, "total institution", lends itself to a very binary, polar notion, where any institution either is a total institution or isn't: whereas Goffman's conception was of a continuum, or spectrum. So, at one extreme what the person wears, when and what they eat, where and when they sleep and wake, who they're with, when they speak and who to, where they go and what they do are all centrally regulated; at the other maybe only a few of these characteristics are regulated and, for example, there may be some choice at meals.

Accordingly, for example, it's entirely in line with Goffman's original thinking to describe a university as much less total than a residential school for disabled children.

It's my impression, too, tht Goffman (? or subsequent workers) listed the relevant characteristics. The article needs to discuss this.

I've no idea how far Goffman touched on regulation of opinion, freedom of speech, groupthink, etc. (Again, the article should clarify this.) 2A04:B2C2:1800:DF00:301F:AE2F:EF49:82EC (talk) 10:16, 25 July 2024 (UTC)