Traditional Sociological Paradigms (some notes)

TRADITIONAL SOCIOLOGICAL PARADIGMS
(aka theories or perspectives)

Functionalism (also known as Structural Functionalism) – Macrosociological level theory

Focus on order and stability in society
Society is a system of interrelated, interdependent parts, which are social institutions or structures, e.g. a part may be family, education, economic, religion, etc…
The function of a part is its contribution to the system, and its effects on other parts
The needs of society are to be identified and determining how the parts satisfy the needs
Each part functions to maintain an orderly and predictable system, preserving social order
There is a normative consensus where members of society share a set of values and behaviours
An analogy is the human body
Key sociologists: Emile Durkheim, Talcott Parsons, Robert Merton
Criticisms

May justify and legitimize the existence of a part of society, e.g. poverty or unemployment
Helps to preserve status quo by overlooking or downplaying sources of tension and inequality
Efficiency of a part may not be questioned
Origins of social conflict and instability not accountable or are considered dysfunctional

2. Conflict Theory – macrosociological level theory

Focus on conflict as inevitable part of social life,
Societies are characterized by inequality and thus there is an emphasis on the role of competition in producing conflict
Conflict is not necessarily a negative aspect of society since it produces social change
Society comprised of dominant and subordinate groups which compete for resources – the have and the have nots
Who benefits at whose expense is the question
Key sociologists: Karl Marx, Max Weber
Marxism is essentially a sub-theory of conflict theory but it was the originator of conflict theory as well: focus was on class conflict, believing that the economic system was the primary determinant of a society, and within the economic system there existed two classes - the bourgeoisie(owning or ruling class) and the proletariat (working class); class membership was determined by relationship to means of production; belief that the proletariat would organize and precipitate a revolution because of this inequality and thus capitalism would be transformed into socialism and eventually communism.

Criticisms

overemphasize tensions and divisions
relationship between groups more complex
situations exist where subordinate groups control the interactions are ignored

3. Interpretivism (also known as symbolic interactionism or interactionism) – microsociological level theory

Focus is on how people themselves define reality, how they make sense of the world, how they experience and define what people are doing
Assumption is that social structures are created through interactions among people so that patterns and standards of behaviour emerge, i.e. social reality is a construction by people
Focus on meanings assigned to actions and symbols, how meanings are learned and modified
Inquires into factors that influence how we interpret what we say and do, and patterns that give rise to same interpretation for many
Actors in a play in an analogy – dramaturgy, a sub-theory of interactionism
Key sociologists: George Herbert Mead and Herbert Blumer

Criticisms

No systematic frameworks for prediction or persistence/evolving of meanings
Potential for subjectivity in analysis greater

SOURCES: various introductory sociology textbooks authored by the following: J. Ferrante, B. Hess, R. Schaefer, J. Mancionis; and other sociologists including N. Blaikie, G. Schutz, K. Marx, T. Parsons.