Berger and Luckmann (1967:15-22) argue that social relativity is inherent in reality and knowledge, hence, its collection is defined by social contexts imperative for sociological analysis. They contend that analysis should be conscious of varieties of knowledge in human societies to maintain their position on the social construction of reality. For them, there is a relationship between human thoughts, history and social context. They draw on Mannheim’s work that society is imperative for the content of human ideas to argue that knowledge is always from a particular position. The influence of ideology can only be mitigated by the analysis of diverse socially
Sociology and the Family SOC101: Introduction to Sociology (GSP1114A) Instructor: Abstract Sociology is an area of study based on reality. Its observations and applications are founded in reality, and its theories have been derived out of various experiences of reality and now affect common perception of the same reality. The three main theories of sociology are the theories of Functionalism, Conflict Theory, and Interactionism. They give credibility to a different understanding of and toward the different sociological institutions that are in place. By understanding the concepts of the each theories a person can see how they can affect the social institution, such as the family, differently and can present a more much better understanding of the concepts as they apply to reality.
Through a variety of experiences we develop a set of ideas about the world and how it operates. This point of view influences how we look at the world and guides our attempts to understand the actions and reactions of others. A sociologist would note that this personalized approach does not give enough accurate information to develop an understanding of the broader social picture.
Sociologists carry out their research from a number of theoretical perspectives, and depending on the views they adopt they will have different ideas about the nature of social problems and know how to solve them. Early positivist and functionalist sociologists, such as Comte and Durkheim, would argue that sociology was a science and would discover both the cause of social problems and scientifically based solutions to them. Both positivist and functionalists see social policies beneficial to society as a whole, and contribute to it running smoothly. For example, educational policies help to promote equal opportunity and reduce class boundaries. However Marxists would argue that social problems such as underachievement are simply aspects of a wider structure of class inequality, and unlike functionalists, they do not see the state and its policies beneficial to all members of society.
There is increasing interest in something called "phenomenological sociology." If this interest is to be sustained, indeed if this sub-discipline is to contribute to our knowledge of the social world, we must become clear on what phenomenological sociology is and can become. At present serious problems exist in the writings of many sociologists who have contributed to, and implicitly defined, this approach to sociology. In general, they display only a metaphorical understanding of phenomenology as a philosophy and as a set of methods. In addition, and partly as a result, they fail to understand the relationship between sociology and phenomenology.
Functioning is all a part of life but, can it work in a sociologist standpoint? According to the You May Ask Yourself by Dalton Conley its possible. Throughout Colney’s works in chapter one he explains three major theories. Including the Functionalist theory, conflict theory, and Symbolic Interaction. In the position as a student of sociology, I believe the Functionalist theory best describes society.
There are two major aspects in regards to the sociological perspective, the first being interaction between social structure and an individual and the idea of two levels of analysis. When it comes to the interaction of social structure and the individual, sociologists tend to concentrate not so much on the characteristics of an individuals behavior but rather on the precedents that are collective amongst individuals in regards to society and groups around them. The key to grasping sociology comes from the inevitability and repetition, which are seen in customary social behaviors throughout society and individuals. Social structures are socially embodied in the actions, thoughts, beliefs, and long-lasting temperaments of individual human beings. The typical being often has a
Giddens (2009 p.6) defined sociology as ‘‘the scientific study of human life, social groups, whole societies and the human world as such’’. He argued further about sociology by suggesting that, ‘‘it is a dazzling and compelling enterprise, as its subject matter is our own behaviour as social beings’’. Hence, it is opined that sociology is an academic tool that broadly looks at human organisms’ lives in order to explain why they act the way they do. Black (1979 p.18) defines common sense as ‘‘the style of discourse by which people understand reality in everyday life”. Sociology is in one way or another related to science and common sense but it is also in many ways distinct from the two.
Or we can say that conflict theory deals with the incompatible aspects of human society. Conflict theory emerged out of the sociology of conflict, crisis and social change. Consensus theory, on the other hand, is a sociological perspective or collection of theories, in which social order and stability/social regulation forms the base of emphasis. In other words consensus theory is concerned with the maintenance or continuation of social order in society; in relation to accepted norms, values, rules and regulations as widely accepted or collectively by the society-or within a particular society- itself. It Emerged out of the sociology of social order and social stability/social regulation.
However, whereas iconological analysis aims to understand what social conventions and ideological goals stand behind given visual motifs, social semiotics aims to systematically reveal conventions in order to promote social change. Social semioticians claim that “the signs of articulation” found in texts form the basis for later articulations of the same ideological discourses into other texts. This is because they are immediately available for perception and interpretation by others, who are then likely to re-articulate them into a variety of texts and by means of various semiotic modes. Being able to systematically analyze texts, then, allows not only to renegotiate meanings that would be otherwise re-articulated “as fixed, irrevocable and natural” (Iedema, 2001, p. 201), but also to use resource inventories as tools for design promoting social change (Jewitt & Oyama, 2001). Social semioticians see all semiotic action as social action, as embedded in larger economic and cultural practices and power relations.