Download 03 Paradigms in Sociology

Paradigms in Sociology
Introduction
The sociological perspective is defined by three philosophical traditions (or
"paradigms"): structure-functionalism (i.e., "consensus"), Marxism ("conflict"), and
symbolic interactionism. Structure-functionalism focuses on how society is organized
and how social institutions meet the needs of people living within a collectivity. The
Marxian paradigm guides inquiries into the use and misuse of power within and
across social systems. Symbolic interactionism focuses on how individuals influence
and are influenced by society. It guides investigations into how the rules of society
are re-created everyday through our interactions with one another.
The following introduction to these paradigms relies in part upon materials found
in The Structure of Sociological Theory, written by Jonathan H. Turner. To help us
learn about these paradigms, we will apply them to an example of gender inequality
after they are described in this introduction.
Structure-Functionalism (Consensus)
Structure-functionalism relies upon an "organic" analogy of human society as being
"like an organism," a system of interdependent parts that function for the benefit of
the whole. Thus, just as a human body consists of parts that function as an
interdependent system for the survival of the organism, society consists of a system
of interdependent institutions and organizations that function for the survival of the
society.
Relying upon the successes of biologists in understanding the human body,
functionalists took a similar approach to understanding human social systems. Social
systems were dissected into their "parts," or institutions (family, education,
economy, polity, and religion), and these parts were examined to find out how they
worked and their importance for the larger social system. The rationale was that if
scientists could understand how institutions worked, then their performance could be
optimized to create an efficient and productive society. This approach as proved to
be very successful and is the predominant philosophy guiding macro-level sociology
today.
Structure-functionalism arose in part as a reaction to the limitations of utilitarian
philosophy, where people were viewed as strictly rational, calculating entrepreneurs
in a free, open, unregulated, and competitive marketplace. The tenet of
functionalism, and the fundamental building block of all sociology, is that people
behave differently in groups than they do as individuals. Groups have "lives of their
own," so to speak. Or, as you might hear from a sociologist, "the whole is greater
than the sum of its parts." Anyway, the point is, that just as the "invisible hand of
order" can guide economic relations, "social forces" can guide social relations, and
thus yield for society very positive outcomes (volunteerism, democracy, laws, moral
and ethical standards for behavior, family and educational systems, communities)
and very negative outcomes (discrimination, organized crime, moral decay, warfare,
poverty).
The idea of the functionalists was to create a science of society that could examine
the parts of human social systems and make them work for the betterment of all.
And it is the task of sociologists to use scientific principles to help create the best
form of society possible.
Listed below are the central tenets of the functionalist approach to understanding
human social systems. We will use these tenets throughout this course to gain a
functionalist perspective on social problems facing America today.
1.
Society as a system of interrelated parts functioning for the good of the
whole. Thus, the functionalist perspective assumes that all members of (a
democratic) society view social problems from a position of relative consensus
and understand that social institutions must be altered to meet changes in the
social and physical environment. The functionalist perspective relies upon
consensus. Importantly, this consensus focuses upon the good of the overall
society; sub-groups of society must be willing to sacrifice for the good of the
whole. The functionalist perspective might seem harsh in application,
sometimes ignoring harm to sub-groups of the population to meet survival
needs of the entire society.
Keep in mind that functionalism is always oriented toward what is good for
the whole. As we examine different philosophical foundations of sociology, we
will note the advantages and disadvantages of this perspective.
2. All social systems have four key functions: Adaptation, Goal-Attainment,
Integration, Latency.
These functional imperatives roughly correspond to the five institutions of
human societies:
o Adaptation: production and distribution of goods and services: The
economy.
o Goal attainment: writing and enforcing of the rules: The polity.
o Integration: procreation and socialization of children; integration of
social activities: Family and education.
o Latency: a system of values and beliefs: Religion.
3.
Social action takes place as a dynamic equilibrium within a social system of
cultural norms and institutional structures. Dynamic equilibrium means that
society is always changing, wherein each functional imperative (i.e., social
institution) must adjust to changes in other institutions. As we will learn when
exploring the conflict/critical perspective, the functionalist perspective might
seem unprepared to address changes that occur due to misuse of power. Yet
this perspective can be highly useful in understanding ongoing adjustments to
social institutions in response to changes in the other institutions. It can be a
good tool for understanding previous changes and for anticipating future
changes to society.
In Sociology 235, we will use structure-functionalism primarily as a guide for
understanding macro-level (societal) issues. And, although structurefunctionalism is well equipped to analyze and understand societal conflict, we
will use it mainly for understanding how social order is possible.
Marxism (Conflict)
Although Karl Marx's idea of a communist utopian society failed due to an inadequate
understanding of human motivation and organization, as well as a reliance upon the
flawed labor theory of value (See: The Labor Theory of Value by Donald C.
Ernsberger and response by Salvor Hardin), his identification of potential problems
with human social systems still is a crucial element of all the social sciences. His
hypotheses that human societies can experience sufficient organized and intentional
exploitation by powerful elites to lead to their collapse have received enough support
that citizens should be aware of these potential problems and maintain a constant
vigil against their becoming too severe.
Listed below are the central tenets of the Marxian approach to understanding human
social systems. We will use these tenets throughout this course to gain a Marxian
perspective on social problems in America.
1. Society as a system of competing parts in conflict for scarce resources.
From the perspective of Marxism, the fundamental processes of society are
competition and conflict, rather than cooperation for the good of the whole,
which we noted (with qualifications) was the emphasis in structurefunctionalism.
2. All social systems have a small minority of powerful elites.
For Marx, these persons/organizations were those most closely linked with the
means of production: the owners of large industries.
3. Social action takes place within an arena of conflict and exploitation between
dominant and secondary segments of society.
With the Marxian approach, it is instructive to identify the dominant and
secondary segments that affect and will be affected by the outcome of social
action regarding current issues. Using Marxism, we anticipate that dominant
segments will use their power to exploit resources from secondary segments
of society.
Marx's Dialectical Materialism
To understand Marxian social philosophy, it is instructive to review its underlying
principle, which is dialectical materialism. Definition: Inherent conflict over scarce
resources. The dialectic consists of three parts: the thesis (the status quo, or our
current understanding of "reality"), the antithesis (a contradiction to the status quo,
or a recognized flaw in our current understanding of "reality"), and the synthesis (a
suggested alternative to the status quo, or an improved understanding of "reality").
In one sense, the dialectic refers to inherent, inevitable conflict. Thus, citizens must
inevitably wrestle with society as it is, the recognized flaws in society, and suggested
alternatives for an improved society. In another sense, the dialectic is a method for
achieving progress. Thus, citizens can use the dialectical way of thinking to
constantly improve society by recognizing and attempting to overcome its flaws.
Marx focused on material conditions (e.g., food, clothing, housing, access to health
care and education). For Marx, the dialectic represented inherent conflict between
the means and relations of production. Owners were forced to exploit labor to
achieve the competitive edge over their rivals in the capitalist economy, but in the
process, destroyed the very source of their profit: labor.
Thus, Marx used dialectical materialism to understand capitalist society and its flaws
for the purpose of suggesting an alternative that would create a better society.
Thesis: Means of production. The status quo was capitalist society, which
required the lowest possible labor costs.
Antithesis: Relations of production. Marx witnessed first-hand the horrific
conditions of manual labor in industrialized England in the mid-19th century.
Synthesis: Communism. To eliminate poverty and the misuse of power in
capitalist society, Marx proposed a society that would end the holding of
private property--people would work for the common good and share in the
fruits of their labor.
Marx's understanding of societies, the people that live in them, and capitalist
economy was sufficiently flawed that his suggested solution to capitalism was itself
inherently flawed. Marxian social philosophy is valuable today, however, because it
reminds us of the potential exploitation of the less powerful by the more powerful
and of the need for the less powerful to be mindful of this potential.
Symbolic Interactionism
Where did society come from, anyway? Well, from us! From the perspective of
symbolic interactionism, society is in a constant state of re-creation through
interaction and negotiation of meanings. We created the rules we live by, and,
importantly, we re-create these rules everyday through our interactions with one
another. Mostly, societies are conservative with respect to social change. But, our
redefining of: 1) the symbolic meanings we attach to things and events, 2) our sense
of morality and ethics, and 3) what we choose to value have important implications
for the rules we create and the ways we choose to live with one another.
Listed below is a very abbreviated outline of the central tenets of the symbolic
interactionist approach to understanding human social systems. We will use these
tenets throughout this course to gain a symbolic perspective on social problems in
America.
1. Reality is socially constructed through our interactions with one another.
Morality, ethics, and values, are not given; we create them through our
interactions with one another.
2. Social action is influenced by person's beliefs, attitudes, perceptions, and
negotiations of meanings.
3. The rules are open for grabs. If you do not like your society: work hard to
change it!
Key concepts:







Status: Position in society.
Role: Behavioral expectations associated with a status.
Looking-glass self: the continuous redefining of one's self in response to one's
perception of how others respond to them.
Definition of the situation: "What is perceived as real is real in its
consequences."
Relative deprivation: The perception of being deprived in relation to
comparison others. Thus, even a person who is well-to-do might feel
relatively deprived if this person compares themself to others who have even
more resources.
Socialization: The learning of societal rules.
Internalization: Believing in societal expectations regarding the role that one
is assigned/playing.
Example: Gender Role Inequalities
For the same amount of job experience and education women typically earn
significantly less income than their male counterparts. This gap in income
earnings is one example of gender role inequalities. The question is, "So
What?" Are these inequalities bad for society as a whole. If so, how do we
change them? To provide some experience in applying sociological theory to
issues facing contemporary society, the following example interprets gender
role inequalities from the perspectives of structure-functionalism, Marxism,
and symbolic interactionism.
Some important definitions and concepts:
SOCIAL STRATIFICATION: Positions in a social system are organized into
layers with resultant inequalities.
SOCIALIZATION: Learning of cultural norms through language and behavior.
o Language takes on a realist quality such that it influences individual
behavior.
o
Behavior toward persons is based in part on their gender
Structure Functionalism
Structure functionalism focuses on what is good for the whole of society. The
SF perspective argues that social stratification can be good for society if it
motivates persons in lower SES positions to better themselves so they can
experience upward social mobility.
o
o
o
o
o
Gender role inequalities have functions and dysfunctions.
Society both benefits and suffers from gender role relationships.
The "balance" of functions and dysfunctions determines social action.
If gender role inequalities, on the whole, are deemed dysfunctional,
then macro-level changes in norms are introduced.
Affirmative action and gender role inequalities?
Marxism
Conflict theory focuses on the exploitation of power and the means to achieve
power in society.
o
o
o
o
Gender role inequalities reflect exploitation of dominant (male)
segments of society over secondary (female) segments of society.
Females may be alienated from society due to gender role inequalities.
Social change requires a move from false consciousness to class
consciousness.
Formal and informal organizations aimed at raising consciousness of
gender role inequalities.
Symbolic Interactionism
Symbolic interactionism focuses on the effect of language and behavior and
how it affects and is affected by groups, organizations, and society.
o
o
o
o
Gender role inequalities are learned through language.
Behavior toward persons is based in part on their gender.
Society, and therefore language, is dynamic a constant state of
creation and negotiation of rules.
Individual impacts on gender role inequalities?
From: http://www.soc.iastate.edu/sapp/soc235Phil.html