Download Understanding and Applying Sociological Theories

Kearney Sociology 3
Understanding and Applying Sociological Theories
Sociological theories are general and abstract (existing in thought, rather than
physical existence). The reason for this is that once you understand each theory
you can apply it to different contexts (e.g. family, education, crime etc.)
For this course, it is important to apply these theories to the idea of
socialisation. The following questions are often asked in exams for this course:


Explain the role that socialisation plays in determining how an
individual’s sense of identity is presented.
Explain the role that socialisation plays in social control.
To apply these theories to socialisation, you will need to be able to compare
them.
We look at THREE major theories (Functionalist, conflict and interactionist
theories). These theories fit into different categories:
Structural: Functionalist and conflict theory
Action: Interactionist
Structural theories are based on the understanding that we live in already
formed societies. We are born into societies which precede our existence. The
legal system, for example, existed well before you or I entered society and will
continue well after we leave it. In other words, within society exists enduring
(lasting) structures, and according to structural theorists, these lasting systems
of organisation (e.g. legal system, education system) are larger than the
individual and shape the individual’s life. Structural theories are also defined as
macro theories. Macro means large-scale, and is used to describe structural
theories because they look at society as a whole. These theories focus on how
structures dominate individuals and control their actions (e.g. the values of the
education system control students’ actions).
Action theories are critical of the structural perspective that we are ‘puppets of
society’. Instead, action theories presume that we are all individuals who make
decisions and have reasons for what we do. We are not controlled by society,
rather we have the ability to shape the society in which we live. Rather than
looking at the whole of society, action theorists try to explain the everyday world
in which individuals interact. Societies are not the result of some outside force,
like a grand puppet master, but are the result of people’s purposeful interactions.
Unlike in structural theories, the social actor is not passive. In other words, we
are not robots controlled by society. Instead, we are active participants in our
own socialisation process; we shape our own identities.
Kearney Sociology 3
Functionalist theory
The functionalist approach to socialisation is a traditional way of viewing society.
As mentioned above, it is a macro/structural theory, and this means that it
looks at the impact that society has on the individual. It views socialisation as a
one-way process, whereby social forces and organisations control individual
behaviour.
This perspective sees the socialisation process as necessary for the social
cohesion of society. Social cohesion is a way of saying the cooperation or
‘togetherness’ of society. A society that is socially cohesive is one that shares
similar values. Without socialisation, functionalists argue that society would not
function; social life would be chaotic.
In regard to how people learn their identity and how to behave in society, this
theory focuses on social forces (Giddens, 2006). Social forces include the norms
and values surrounding one’s gender, education, class, ethnicity etc. Rather than
seeing each individual as having power or ‘agency’, it seems to suggest that
socialisation leads us to share values, norms and beliefs (i.e. consensus, which
means ‘agreement’). The only real difference between people is the roles they
acquire.
Functionalist theorists argue that social agents and institutions (e.g. family,
peers, school, work etc.) socialise people, particularly children, to learn the
norms, values and beliefs of society. Functionalists see this as necessary for
smooth integration into social life (Brinkerhoff, Meitz & Ortega, 2012).
The “central focus of the process of socialisation lies in the internalisation of the
culture of the society into which the child is born” (Parsons & Bales, 1955, p. 17
cited in Mackie, 2002, p. 42) Family, the primary agent of socialisation,
internalizes and transmits value consensus from one generation to the next, and
this explains both social order and cultural uniformities across time and space
(Mackie, 2002, p. 42)
“Families…are factories which produce human personalities” (Parsons & Bales,
1955, p.16 in Mackie, 2002, p.42)
Approach: Socialisation…
o Serves as the important function of:
o reinforcing the social structure
o maintaining society
o transmitting culture from one generation to the next
o Motivation and ability to perform role expectations are acquired through
socialization
o Prerequisites for survival of the social systems
Example:
o Can be compared to vaccination:
o Members of society are injected with the attitudes, values, beliefs, and
norms that will allow them to assume and successfully fulfill the roles
of full and productive citizens
Kearney Sociology 3
Key theorists:
EMILIE DURKHEIM
Durkheim saw social forces as having a major effect on our lives, as he
demonstrated with his study on suicide (written in 1897). He argued that even
suicide is not a result of choice or free will, but a result of external forces (e.g. the
religious group that you follow or whether you are married or single etc.).
Durkheim refers to these social forces as ‘social facts’. Social facts are the
patterns, norms, values and beliefs of a society which control our behaviour.
Social structures, or agents, such as family, peers, school and media are thought
to be responsible for socialising us to adopt these social facts. For example,
during primary socialisation, we may receive negative sanctions (e.g.
punishments) from our parents if we do not use our manners. As a result of these
sanctions, we internalise the idea that not using our manners is socially
unacceptable. It is because of this process that society, Durkheim thought, was
characterised by order and stability (Curtis & Pettigrew, 2009)
Durkheim was interested in the schooling system and saw the primary function
of education as maintaining social systems rather than transforming them in any
radical way (Curtis & Pettigrew, 2009). In other words, he believed that schools
were able to sort out which students would be doctors and which would be
labourers, and that this would allow for all the necessary roles in society to be
fulfilled. He thought that it was through the discipline of the classroom that
people would learn to find their place in society (i.e. people would learn their
roles).
Draw the idea above:
Durkheim compared society with the human body. He explained that just as the
organs of the body had to work together in order for a human to survive, the
organs of society (e.g. the family, the education system etc.) had to work together
so that society could survive. “The continuation of society thus depends on
cooperation, which in turn presumes a general consensus, or agreement, among
its members over basic values” (Giddens, 2006, p. 109) He thought that religion
helps in encouraging people to adhere to core social values (Giddens, 2006).
Without institutions socialising individuals, a state of anomie might exist (i.e. a
confused, ‘normless’ state).
Kearney Sociology 3
TALCOTT PARSONS
Parsons was very influenced by the work of Durkheim. He saw the family unit as
particularly important for socialisation. He saw that the family had two key
functions (Thompson, 2008):
1) The primary socialisation of children
2) The stabilisation of adult personalities (i.e. identities)
The primary socialisation of children happens during the earlier years of
childhood, particularly when the child is spending considerable time in the
family home. During socialisation, Parsons argues that a child’s sense of self is
moulded so that the core values of the society it belongs to becomes part of that
child. In other words, the child internalises the culture it is socialised into,
through the family agent.
The stabilisation of adult personalities or ‘selves’ refers to the emotional security
found in marital relationships (Thompson, 2008). According to Parsons, this
balances out the stresses and strains of everyday life. This stabilisation is aided
by the sexual division of labour within the family. In other words, if women and
men have clear roles within the family unit, then the family will function
smoothly. For Parsons, the role of the woman in a family is an expressive role.
This means that a woman’s key role is to provide love, affection, care, security
and all the emotional support required within the family. Men, on the other hand,
have, what Parson’s termed, an instrumental role (Thompson, 2008). An
instrumental role involves being the breadwinner (i.e. main income earner).
Kearney Sociology 3
Critique of functionalist theories:
Conflict theory:
Like functionalist theories, conflict theories are macro/structural in the way
that they analyse society and socialisation. This is because they emphasize the
importance of structures within society and how these structures influence our
behaviour and identities. They don’t see individuals as having much agency (free
will) when it comes to their life paths.
The difference between functionalism and conflict theory is that conflict theory
does NOT agree with the functionalist idea that socialisation leads to consensus
(general agreement among people in society) (Giddens, 2006). Conflict theorists
see socialisation as resulting in groups with varied interests, which leads to
conflict and inequality. They argue that the small, powerful group at the top of
society (bourgeoisie) often have their needs met and make sure that things stay
the same (maintain the status quo). This is because the group at the top of
society, those that are wealthy, are very cautious not to lose their position of
power. This means that through certain agents, like the media and political
system, they will try to socialise others to agree with their norms, values and
beliefs.
Conflict theory recognises that socialisation leads to social reproduction (i.e.
the continuation of society through social roles etc.) However, unlike
functionalists, they see this reproduction as a problem for society because it
tends to allow for continued inequality, as people are unable to move up the
social ladder.
Kearney Sociology 3
Key theorists
KARL MARX
Marxism, named after Karl Marx, emphasizes the conflict that occurs in society
between classes. He was writing during the Industrial Revolution, and he pointed
out that there were two distinct classes in society: the bourgeoisie (the owners
of the means of production) and the proletariats (the workers). The bourgeoisie
were making large profits and enjoying the ‘good life’, whereas the proletariats
were just ‘getting by’. There was major economic inequality between these two
groups because they had unequal access to resources. The bourgeoisie were able
to use their resources (e.g. their equipment/businesses) to make great profits,
but the proletariats only had their hands and their time. Marx believed that this
would eventually lead to the workers over-throwing the owners of the means of
production: a revolution. We still have a capitalist system today, so Marx’s theory
of capitalism being overthrown through revolution has not yet occurred.
Marx believed that because the bourgeoisie (the wealthy, ruling class) have
economic power (i.e. lots of $$) they also have political power (e.g. the ability to
make decisions in society). They can spread their ideas through the media and
education system. For example, Rupert Murdoch is an extremely wealthy media
owner (he owns most of the newspapers in Australia, many TV channels across
the world etc.) and he also happens to be pro-military and pro-war. Prior to and
during the invasion of Iraq by US, UK and Australian forces, all of Murdoch’s
newspapers and news programmes presented the war in a positive way. This is
because it suited Murdoch’s political opinions. In doing this, Marx might have
argued, that Murdoch was able to socialise millions of viewers to share his point
of view. In other words, the powerful, ruling class are able to control the norms,
values and beliefs that wider society come to adopt.
Marx’s theory also connects to socialisation because he suggests that our social
class affects our identity as well as our norms, values and beliefs. This is partially
because social class is socially reproduced (e.g. we tend to have the same social
class as our parents). Given this, how we see ourselves and the behaviour we
think is socially acceptable will differ with those outside of our class (e.g.
working class and middle class).
Unlike Durkheim, who saw religion as key to social cohesion, Marx saw religion
as the ‘opiate of the masses’. This is because he thought it lulled the workers into
a false sense of comfort, distracting them from their poorly lives.
*There are more conflict theorists, who have differing ideas to Marx, and we will
delve into these theorists later in the year.
Kearney Sociology 3
Approach: Socialisation…
o One of the most powerful and effective tools used by those in power to:
o maintain the status quo
o legitimize existing social inequalities
o Prepares people for class related roles they will fill throughout their lives
Example:
o Upper class children:
o Socialised for positions of authority and leadership roles
o How to interact among members of same class and lower classes
o Lower class children:
o Socialised for positions to serve those higher on the social ladder
o Trained to show respect for those above them in social class
Critique of conflict theories:
Interactionist theory:
As noted in the introduction, interactionist theory is an action theory. This
means that rather than focusing on wider social structures, it focuses on the
everyday, small-scale interactions between individuals in specific situations. For
this reason it is also defined as a micro theory.
Interactionists would argue that it is through these interactions that people are
socialised into their roles, and are able to present their identity. They would also
argue that being able to imagine how others perceive us encourages us to
conform to societal expectations. In other words, it leads to a level of social
control. We are, however, not passive (i.e. like robots) in this process.
Kearney Sociology 3
Key theorists:
GEORGE HERBERT MEAD
Mead focused on the importance of gestures and language for human interaction
(Cronk, 2015, “George Herbert Mead”, Social theory, para. 1)
He believed that the communication process involves two phases: conversation
of gestures AND the conversation of significant gestures (Cronk, 2015, “George
Herbert Mead”, Social theory, para. 3)
1) “Conversation of gestures” is a less sophisticated way of communicating.
Mead uses the example of two dogs, snarling at one another. According to
Mead’s theory, these dogs are simply reacting to one another. They are
unable to stop and consider one another’s actions. This is largely because
“conversation of gestures” is usually non-verbal communication. The dogs
are unable to imagine what the other dog is thinking and how their
gestures will be perceived by one another, and therefore they do not have
a clear picture of themselves.
2) “Conversation of significant gestures” involves the use of language. It
occurs when an individual understands the meaning of their gestures.
Through understanding how our gestures will be perceived, we can adjust
our behaviour accordingly. We can begin to see how our identity is
presented to others.
For example, someone might give me a birthday present, and when I
open it, I might realise that the present is a pair of earrings, which are not
my taste. Rather than pushing the earrings to the side and having a facial
expression, which shows disappointment, I will smile and make sure I
thank the person who has given me the gift. I do this because I know that
the former gestures would present me as ungrateful and unkind.
Mead explained that there are three stages to the socialisation process: imitation,
play and the game (see the Interactionism PowerPoint on the class blog for more
detail regarding these stages)
The final stage, the game, is where individuals learn the perspective of the
‘generalised other’. When playing a game, we are required to learn not only the
responses of specific others, but behaviours associated with every role in the
game/position on the field (Aboulafia, 2012, “George Herbert Mead”, “Roles, the
self…”, para. 2). As these roles become internalised (viewed as natural), we come
to view our own behaviours from the perspective of the game as a whole, which
is a system of organised actions (Aboulafia, 2012, “George Herbert Mead”, “Roles,
the self…”, para. 2). In other words, through socialisation, specifically through
participating in games, we come to predict how society, in general, will respond
to our behaviours. For example, we know not to wear a really revealing outfit to
a job interview because we have an understanding how others would respond to
this; an understanding of the generalised other.
Kearney Sociology 3
The generalised other encourages us to shape ourselves to meet the expectations
of society, and is a key reason for explaining how socialisation leads to both
identity formation and social control. Understanding how we are viewed within
the roles and rules of the game reinforces our desire to conform, so that the
group accepts us.
Other useful concepts:
‘I’ vs. ‘Me’ (see textbook pg. 103-104)
Significant others and Reference groups (see slide 21 of the Interactionism
PowerPoint on the class blog)
CHARLES HORTON COOLEY
Cooley worked closely with Mead (Germov & Poole, 2015) and this theories are,
therefore, quite similar. Cooley’s “Looking-glass” self theory seeks to explain how
we develop our self-concept (i.e. our identity). He saw this as a three-stage
process (Brinkerhoff, Weitz & Ortega, 2012):
1) We imagine how we appear to others.
2) We imagine how others judge us, based on those appearances.
3) We ponder, internalise or reject these judgements.
The third step is particularly important because it demonstrates the idea that we
have some free will when it comes to our self-concept. In other words, we do not
simply accept how we imagine others judge us. We can ‘ponder’ and decide
whether we accept (internalise) or reject these judgements. For example, we
might imagine that one teacher thinks we are unintelligent. Rather than simply
accepting this and internalising it (i.e. believing it/seeing it as natural and true)
we can gather other evidence (e.g. the fact that another teacher thinks we are
bright) and reject the idea that we are unintelligent. In sociology, this is called
agency.
ERVING GOFFMAN
Goffman used notions of theatre when describing social life (Giddens, 2006). For
example Goffman saw individuals as social actors who were playing a variety of
social roles, to a variety of audiences. ‘Roles are socially defined expectations
that a person in a given status, or social position, follows’ (Giddens, 2006, p.
142). For example, a principal will play a different role when they are in a
meeting with a parent compared with when they are chatting to another
member of staff.
Kearney Sociology 3
Goffman came up with the following key concepts to explain how we perform in
social life:
-
-
-
Impression management: this involves the efforts we put into
maintaining a certain image of ourselves in the eyes and minds of others.
We constantly manage the impression we make on others, in an attempt
to compel others to react to us in a desirable manner.
Front-stage and back-stage: Front-stage self refers the identity we like
to portray to public audiences (e.g. Facebook is often a place where we
present our front-stage selves). The back-stage self is a private self (e.g.
when home by ourselves).
Situational properties: Different situations have different properties.
This means we must adapt to these situations accordingly (e.g. a job
interview compared with hanging out with friends). Different people that
we interact with also have different situational properties (e.g. different
expectations regarding topics of conversation).
Critique of Interactionist theories:
Kearney Sociology 3
Reference List
Aboulafia, M. (2012). The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy: George Herbert
Mead. Retrieved February 21, 2016, from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mead/#RolSelGenOth
Brinkerhoff, D.B., Weitz, R., & Ortega, S.T. (2012). Essentials of Sociology (9th ed.).
USA: Cengage Learning.
Cronk, G. (2015). George Herbert Mead. Retrieved February 21, 2016, from
http://www.iep.utm.edu/mead/#SH3a
Curtis, W., & Pettigrew, A. (2009). Learning in contemporary culture. Exeter, UK:
Sage Publications.
Giddens, A. (2006). Sociology (5th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Mackie, G. (2002). Functionalist socialisation, family and character. Retrieved
from http://www.analyse-und-kritik.net/2002-1/AK_Mackie_2002.pdf
Thompson, C.H. (2008). Functions of the family: Part 2. Retrieved February 23,
2016, from http://sociologytwynham.com/2008/06/27/functions-of-thefamily-part-2/