Introduction
Social perspectives refer to the various ways human beings apply to understand and appreciate the social world. This involves seeing the strange in the familiar, by critically identifying and examining both our own and other people’s ethics and beliefs. Theories on this subject were explored by several prominent sociologists such as Emile Durkheim, George Herbert Meade, Karl Marx, and Robert Merton. Their theories focused on three social issues namely; social conflicts, symbolic interaction, and structural functionalism (Macionis, 1995 p. 3).
Seeing the Strange in the Familiar
Each of the three issues they focused on represents a social dimension that acts as a guide for further inquiries into the subject. The dimensions also referred to as paradigms enable researchers to identify opportunities and obstacles in the research process. Having information on the opportunities and obstacles involved empowers with knowledge and facts about the theory. A sociologist who advanced the structural-functional theory believed that society conformed to constant laws which had an objective in the real-life situation.
According to Emile Durkheim, A structural-functionalist society is a complex scheme comprising of parts that work hand in hand to promote oneness and stability. The scheme or structure in this case refers to a predictable set of behavior. The function aspect on the other hand looks at the effects of individual actions as society operates. Macionis suggests that in the process that one action breaks or results in adverse effects, then societal dysfunction occurs (12). Truth should therefore be sought from previous social acts and not from what people know.
Durkheim was particularly amazed by the fact that social facts and social dysfunction were causes of suicide cases. He observed that suicide cases were much higher in certain demographic situations than others. He looked at the problem from the point of a structure being the ordinary functioning of society whereas the function being the dysfunction. The dysfunction was the adverse aspect in the efforts of pursuing social integration. Durkheim’s theory suggests that social forces are responsible for major causes of suicidal acts in society (Macionis, 1995 p. 7).
He took both a qualitative and quantitative look into suicide as a subject study, his research work revealed the rates and statistics of the suicide cases. He also looked at how other factors such as religion, prosperity, and race contribute to suicidal cases. His research concluded that single and rich protestant males of white origin were more likely to commit suicide, proving further the theory of social integration. The study was carried out in a male-dominated region in the nineteenth century. Further studies carried out on the same subject by Thorlindsson and Bjarnason in 1998 came up with similar findings.
It was found out that the Protestants unlike Catholics and Jews did not have a cohesive community. They lacked social institutions sponsored by the church or even religious groupings that would give moral support to fellow believers. In the same vein, the whites were much more isolated compared to other racial groups that upheld a strong sense of cultural identity. Wealth was seen as a cause of isolation in society. Those who are wealthy tend to keep to themselves, viewing themselves as independent and self-reliant.
During the nineteenth century, when Durkheim carried out the study social stratification was more prominent in societies compared to the present case. Unmarried individuals were also more isolated as they lacked important family links necessary for social banding. The gender aspect featuring more males was based on the fact that the males naturally chose violent means of achieving success. Based on these facts, Durkheim concluded that people who lived in a socially integrated society were less likely to commit suicide than those who were isolated.
Durkheim is also identified with the theory of anomie, in which he expounds on the state of normalness. In this theory, Durkheim focused on the degeneration of society in the ordinary constraints that do not work or fail. When ordinary constraints fail, the evil side of an individual is released leading to the breakdown of stability and cohesion. Talcott later expounded the theory coming up with the major issues and survival tactics.
The conclusion of all of Durkheim’s work on life is that if society members are grounded in a similar representation and assumption then ethical unity and assimilation can be realized. The theory of social integration and structural functionalism all suggest that class, race, and gender are insignificant in creating tension in society. This fact was opposed by the social; conflicts thinkers who thought otherwise. This group, led by Karl Marx was more focused on the breakdown of stability from a different perspective. He was especially concerned with the disparities in the industrial society in Europe, which was also his homeland. He wanted to use emerging fields of study in sociology to bring about social justice, pointing out that philosophers had interpreted the world from different perspectives and now there was the need to change it.
According to Karl Marx, society was a field of disparity that can cause both conflicts and change. In this regard, he emphasized that social factors such as age, race, and class were responsible for inequalities in society. It is on these social factors that distribution of power; wealth and education are based, causing even further disparities in societies. On the issue of labor, Karl Max observed that the workers provided means for the rich to enjoy. The interests of the rich and the poor are not compatible and this is the basis of conflicts in society.
Karl Max envisioned a revolution by the workers that would culminate into members of society realizing the need for equality. This was eventually realized but was unfortunately followed by the ultimate misuse of the powers of the workers’ unions. Social disparities have continued to widen in society with time, calling for more studies on the conflict theory. George Herbert on the other side explored how human beings develop personality from social experiences. In this regard, he concluded that society is a total of the daily interactions between people.
Herbert points out that life is governed by the perception people have over status symbols. Other life governing principles include; time, universal ethics, procedures, and stereotypes (Macionis, 1995 p.11). We respond to symbols in life in a reaction manner, the symbols can either be positive or negative. Another sociologist in the class of structural functionalists focused his studies on manifests and latent functions. He defined manifest functions as familiar and deliberate effects of a social model of behavior. Latent on the other hand are unfamiliar and unplanned behavior consequences.
The celebration of trees during charismas signifies the tree of life for Christians or the leisure that Martin Luther saw during the charismas eve’s trek in the evergreens for the Protestants. Latent functions associated with the celebration of Christmas would be like incurring debts to cater for the celebration costs, which are unplanned. Many people hardly plan how much to spend for Christmas festival celebrations. The day is known well in advance but lack of financial planning for the celebration costs drive people into debts to foot various bills incurred. The debts incurred to facilitate the celebrations make it a latent function.
Conclusion
The three social paradigms are a very important source of information on learning how to use social perspectives. They also help us to appreciate how various experiences make us. This is vital in understanding and accepting the values of cultural diversity. It is important that every one of us understands and appreciates the social dynamics of society. This enables us to co-exist peacefully and work together to develop our society.
Reference List
Macionis, John. 1995. Sociology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.