ON PHENOMENOLOGICAL SOCIOLOGY [1] james L. heap and phillip A. roth University of British Columbia American Sociological Review 1973, Vol. 38 (June): 354-367 The works of Tiryakian, Bruyn and Douglas are examined as representative of "phenomenological sociology." Radical problems are discovered in their use of key concepts in phenomenology: intention, reduction, phenomenon and essence. These problems are shown to arise out of a failure to grasp the nature of the phenomenological enterprise and its relationship to sociology. Turning back to the original formulation of this relationship by Husserl, we discover problems of transcendental intersubjectivity, of type and essence, and of objectivism.
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
UNIT ONE: TEXT QUESTIONS 1. Who are three "founding fathers" of sociology and what is one idea that each contributed to sociology? Max Weber argued that we need to understand the meanings that people give to their actions and ideas. George Herbert Mead argued that the self develops through interactions with other. Emile Durkheim argues that modern society made people more isolated from each other and more concerned about their own problems. 2.
Browne once said "sociological perspectives centre on how much freedom or control the individual had to influence society" He goes on to comment on the two main approaches "structuralism is concerned with the overall structure of society and the way social institutions act as a constraint, or limit and control individual behaviour". Structuralism offers a view of the individual being controlled by the society they live in, Marx and Durkheim are similar in that they can both be described as structuralists, however their individual ideas are somewhat different. Functionalism was developed by Emile Durkheim, he believed like Comte that sociology should be viewed as a precise science and that society should be studied objectively. Durkheim placed an enormous amount of emphasis on social facts which he saw as ways of acting, thinking or feeling that are external to individuals and have their own reality outside the lives and perceptions of individual people. This is known as the macro approach, which places a great emphasis on the structure of society and how an individual operates with that society.
In the position as a student of sociology, I believe the Functionalist theory best describes society. The functionalist theory is viewed to sociologist as society to a living organism. Each part serves an important role in keeping society together. Many sociologist classify this theory as macro-level; large in scale. Including social institutions, a system of behavioral and relationship patterns, having specific roles to perform to make society.
Sociological Perspective The Sociological perspective is learning how to ‘see’ – seeing the strange in the familiar, identifying, respecting, learning from and questioning both our own and others’ values and belief systems. The sociological perspective deals with the growth of people and societies. Sociological thought concentrates on the assessment of how we as people are predisposed to the world around us. More or less, it seeks to offset the question of why we are the way we are. The sociological theory upholds that, people are not instinctively good or bad, happy or depressed, and intelligent or ignorant, but are rather shaped into their own individuality over time by the interactions, connections and relations that one endures along with the situations and circumstances which are undergone throughout a lifetime.
For Mills the sociological concerns have become more of an administrative concern and not thought about in and intellectual manner, for Mills this approach of thinking and dealing with society was incorrect. In the “Sociological Imagination Mills states “The sociological imagination enables its possessor to understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and the external career of a variety of individuals. It enables him to take into account how individuals, in the welter of their daily experience, often become falsely conscious of their social positions. Within that welter, the framework of modern society is sought, and within that framework the psychologies of a
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.
Sociological theories are complex theoretical and methodological frameworks used to analyze and explain objects of social study. Each theory has its strengths and weaknesses. The focus of this essay will be on functionalism and its contributions to the understanding of society today. Functionalism goes back a long way in history with its views and theories on society, with the work of Spencer and Comte. Its theories were then taken on within the work of Emile Durkheim and a lot more recently by Talcott Parsons in America 1940-50's.
Structuralism in Social Anthropology (Edmund Leach) Structuralism is neither a theory nor a method but a “way of looking at things”. The subject matter of social anthropology is customary behavior. In every sequence of such behavior there is a practical component which “alters the state of the world” and a ritual, or symbolic, component which “says something” about the social situation. In the history of social anthropology the bias of interest has lain alternately on one side or the other: Frazer, Durkheim, Radcliffe, Brown, Mauss, and Levi-Strauss. Levi Strauss says that the articulation of culture is like that of a language.