Understanding Sociological Perspectives

Divya Chugh*

Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur Chhattisgarh

ABSTRECT:

Each perspective views society from a different vantage point, asks different questions, and reaches different conclusions. Evolutionists focus upon the similarities in changing societies; interactionists focus upon the actual social behaviour of persons and groups; functionalists focus more heavily upon value consensus, order, and stability; conflict theorists focus more heavily upon inequality, tension and change. The conflict perspective has a different take on the family relationships. This society looks at family as miniature class society where dominant groups oppress the weaker sections. Taken alone, any of the sociological perspectives may present a single-sided, distorted picture of society and human behaviour. Although each provides a unique framework for studying society, none is complete by itself. Each sociological perspective clarifies some aspect of society and human behaviour. Sometimes these perspectives complement each other, and sometimes they contradict each other. When integrated, however, these perspectives give sociologists the opportunity to gain the fullest possible sociological understanding.

KEY WORDS: Inequality, dominant, paradigms, monopoly, oppression

INTRODUCTION:

Sociological perspectives, theories, or paradigms are complex theoretical and methodological frameworks used to analyze and explain objects of social study. Theory is informed by epistemological discussions as to the most reliable and valid methods to use in the conduct of social science. Perspectives also relate to core assumptions regarding the ontological nature of the social world. The sociological perspective is a particular way of approaching a phenomenon common in sociology. It involves maintaining objectivity, not by divesting oneself of values, but by critically evaluating and testing ideas, and accepting what may be surprising or even displeasing based on the evidence. The sociological perspective often assumes that “official” explanations are incomplete or self-serving. It involves a conscious effort to go beyond the obvious and question what is accepted as true or common sense. This is important because common-sense assumptions are usually based on very limited observation. The sociological perspective helps us to see general social patterns in the behavior of particular individuals and offers insights about the social world that extend far beyond explanations that rely on individual quirks and personalities. A working set of assumptions is called a “perspective”, an “approach,” or sometimes a “paradigm,”.Each perspective views society from a different vantage point, asks different questions, and reaches different conclusions. Sociologists analyze social phenomena at different levels and from different perspectives. From concrete interpretations to sweeping generalizations of society and social behaviour, sociologists study everything from specific events (the micro level of analysis of small social patterns) to the “big picture” (the macro level of analysis of large social patterns.

A sociological perspective is the lens that an individual chooses to view the scope of society from.

It's either primarily from a:

A. Structural Functional Perspective

B. Conflict Theory Perspective (the Feminist Perspective evolves from here)

C. Interactionist Perspective.

TABLE 1 Sociological Perspectives

Sociological Perspective	Level of Analysis	Focus
1. Symbolic Interactionism	Micro	Use of symbols; Face-to-face interactions
2. Functionalism	Macro	Relationship between the parts of society; How aspects of society are functional (adaptive)
3. Conflict Theory	Macro	Competition for scarce resources; How the elite control the poor and weak

A. The Symbolic Interactionist perspective

The symbolic interactionist perspective, also known as symbolic interactionism, directs sociologists to consider the symbols and details of everyday life, what these symbols mean, and how people interact with each other. According to the symbolic interactionist perspective, people attach meanings to symbols, and then they act according to their subjective interpretation of these symbols. Verbal conversations, in which spoken words serve as the predominant symbols, make this subjective interpretation especially evident. The words have a certain meaning for the “sender,” and, during effective communication, they hopefully have the same meaning for the “receiver.” In other terms, words are not static “things”; they require intention and interpretation. Conversation is an interaction of symbols between individuals who constantly interpret the world around them. Of course, anything can serve as a symbol as long as it refers to something beyond itself. Written music serves as an example. The black dots and lines become more than mere marks on the page; they refer to notes organized in such a way as to make musical sense.

Now if we apply symbolic interactionism to the American institute of marriage. Symbols may include wedding bands, vows of life-long commitment, a white bridal dress, a wedding cake, a Church ceremony, and flowers and music. American society attaches general meanings to these symbols, but individuals also maintain their own perceptions of what these and other symbols mean. For example, one of the spouses may see their circular wedding rings as symbolizing “never ending love,” while the other may see them as a mere financial expense.

Also the people do not respond to the world directly, they respond to meanings they impute to the things and happenings around them: a traffic light, a line up at a ticket window, a police officer’s whistle and hand signal. An early sociologist, W.I Thomas, coined the phrase, definition of the situation, noting that we can sensibly only after we decide what kind of situation it is. If a man approaches with right hand extended, we define this as a friendly greeting, if he approaches with clenched fists, we define the situation differently.

Although symbolic interactionist concepts have gained widespread use among sociologists, the perspective has been criticized, particularly during the 1970s in the U.S. when quantitative approaches to sociology were dominant. In addition to methodological criticisms, critics of symbolic interactionism have charged that it is unable to deal with social structure (a fundamental sociological concern) and macrosociological issues.

B. The Functionalist Perspective –

In this perspective a society is seen as an organized network of cooperating groups operating in a fairly orderly manner according to a set rules and values shared by most members. Society is seen as a stale system with a tendancy toward equilibrium, that is, a tendancy to maintain a balanced, harmoniously operating system.

According to this perspective i,e functional perspective, also called functionalism, each aspect of society is interdependent and contributes to society's functioning as a whole. The government, or state, provides education for the children of the family, which in turn pays taxes on which the state depends to keep itself running. That is, the family is dependent upon the school to help children grow up to have good jobs so that they can raise and support their own families. In the process, the children become law-abiding, taxpaying citizens, who in turn support the state. If all goes well, the parts of society produce order, stability, and productivity. If all does not go well, the parts of society then must adapt to recapture a new order, stability, and productivity. For example, during a financial recession with its high rates of unemployment and inflation, social programs are trimmed or cut. Schools offer fewer programs. Families tighten their budgets. And a new social order, stability, and productivity occur.

If a particular social change promotes a harmonious equilibrium, it is seen as functional, if it disrupts the equilibrium, it is dysfunctional, if it has no effects, it is non-functional. In a democracy political parties are functional while bombings, assassinations, and changes in political vocabulary or party insignia are non-functional.

C. The Conflict Perspective-

The conflict perspective, which originated primarily out of Karl Marx's writings on class struggles, presents society in a different light than do the functionalist and symbolic interactionist perspectives. While these latter perspectives focus on the positive aspects of society that contribute to its stability, the conflict perspective focuses on the negative, conflicted, and ever-changing nature of society. Unlike functionalists who defend the status quo, avoid social change, and believe people cooperate to effect social order, conflict theorists challenge the status quo, encourage social change (even when this means social revolution), and believe rich and powerful people force social order on the poor and the weak. Conflict theorists, for example, may interpret an “elite” board of regents raising tuition to pay for esoteric new programs that raise the prestige of a local college as self-serving rather than as beneficial for students. Conflict theorists examine the tensions between dominant and disadvantaged groups within society and seek to understand how relationships of control are established and perpetuated.

Under the conflict perspective, the basic form of interaction in society is not cooperation, but competition, and this leads to conflict. Because the individuals and groups of society compete for advantage, there is constantly conflict for change. When there are large groups competing, such as Marx's bourgeois and proletariat, the outcome is often major social change. This conflict can arise from the desire to own the means of production, to own the power or land, or to own the realm of political power, and can be revolutionary, as it was in many of the communist societies that practiced Marxist teachings.

The conflict perspective sees society as being full of tension and struggle between groups. As for the individual, they are perceived as being shaped by power and authority. Social order is viewed as being maintained not through cooperation, but through force. And social change is not predictable, but is constantly taking place. The conflict perspective's main idea is that there are competing interests between groups and social inequality exists, therefore there is always conflict of some kind. One major teaching of the conflict perspective has it that conflict arises from the dissimilar goals and interests of different social groups---the oppressed, the dominant, the powerful, or the powerless. The conflict can arise in different areas: law, religion, education, or media, and can be found in the powerful protecting their monopoly on these holdings.

Conflict perspective in family

Family is one of the important social institutions. Every social perspective has its own perspective on family as a social institution. According to the interaction theory, it is the family where a person forms his values and ideologies in the initial stages of life. Another social theory known as functionalism theory looks at family as the basic unit of society which gives the sense of belonging to people. The conflict perspective has a different take on the family relationships. This society looks at family as miniature class society where dominant groups oppress the weaker sections. For example, in the family men tend to dominate the family as they are bread earners and control economy of the house. After marriage, women have no choice but have to live with their husbands and compromise accordingly because that is the age old practice where women are subjected to oppression. The children in the house also have to listen to parents as they are more experienced and their authority is legitimized by the society. Parents always have an edge over their children only because they are parents. Children do not have absolute freedom in this situation. Such situations lead to conflict in the family. Sometimes there are fights in the family between husband and wife, or parents and children that is necessary to bring the social change.

CONCLUSION:

REFERENCES:

Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 1–ISBN 9780631213482

Anthony Giddens, Sociology, Wiley India Pvt. Ltd, 6^th edition, 2010

Paul B. Horton, Chester L. Hunt, Sociology, Tata McGraw Hill Education Private Limited.6^th edition 2010