Functionalism is a macro, structuralist theory. This means they see human behaviour being shaped as an influence of social forces. It is also seen as a consensus theory, as functionalists’ argue that, individuals are socialised into a shared value to ensure conformity and social order. However, this functionalists approach is criticised by action theorists, as they argue that individuals create society through their interactions. Unlike other functionalists, Parsons argues that individuals are integrated through socialisation and social order.
Assess the Usefulness of Micro Sociology to Our Understanding of Society Assess the usefulness of micro sociology to our understanding of society (33marks) Micro sociology focuses on the actions and interactions of individuals and is a bottom-up approach. Such micro approaches, see society as shaped by its members, who possess agency, in other words, the ability to act as free agents. Micro approaches, also known as action theories, include social action theory, symbolic interactionism, phenomenology and ethnomethodoly. However, macro sociologists take a deterministic approach, as they believe that our actions are determined by society. Macro theories include Functionalism and Marxism, who see individuals as puppets, under the control of social structures.
For example the nature vs nurture debate. Talcott parsons (1902-79) were a key functionalist thinker. He saw society as a system made up of interrelated institutions (like the human body) He thought the main role of an institution was to socialise individuals so they behaved in acceptable ways. He argued that socialisation is the key to understanding patterns of human behaviour. Our behaviour is controlled by the rules of society into which we are born; the result is we don’t have to be told that what we are doing is socially unacceptable- we already know and feel uncomfortable if we don’t conform to social norms.
b) Fligstein’s implicit criticism of Pfeffer, in turn, reintroduced a social constructionist element to the explanation of what subunits get power in an organization. Explain Fligstein’s critique of Pfeffer. Make sure to discuss Fligstein’s alternative conception of what a social constructionist argument entails.
#1). In order to develop this skill, you must be able to free yourself from one perspective and look at things from an alternative point of view. Individualism is a social theory favoring freedom of action for individuals over collective or state control. Individualism is the belief that the needs of each person are more important than the needs of the whole society or group (Mariam Webster, 2014). The relationship between these two is they both help us find reasoning and uncover why many things in society are the way they are while also uncovering the bigger picture.
Examine the role of access to opportunity structures in causing crime and deviance. The access to opportunity structure in a society is the distribution of people’s access to occupations, education and other ways of supporting their lives and achieving goals. There are many different factors that have to be considered when examining the role of access to opportunity structures in causing crime and deviance. Merton’s (1998) ‘Strain theory and anomie’ argues that deviance arises from the structure of society and that unequal access to legitimate opportunity structures is the cause of deviant behaviour. The main point that Merton’s theory outlines is the fact that people engage in deviant behaviour because they are unable to achieve socially approved goals by legitimate means, and when most people share similar goals for example financial success in an unequal society not all individuals have the opportunity to achieve those goals through approved means, therefore they feel different, as the dominant rules on how to achieve success don’t meet their needs, and as a result deviance occurs.
Education is in the middle of the bridge. Education is an agency of secondary socialisation, it teaches us the norms and values within wider society and it also teaches us the skills we need for future occupational roles as well as providing us with qualifications. Functionalists argue that society is an organic analogy, meaning that society works like a human body and that everything is in consensus with each other. For example, the human organs work together to achieve consensus, just like society does with citizens, authority, norms, values etc. Durkheim argues that there are two main functions of education, these are social solidarity and specialised skills.
Emile Durkheim, a leading Functionalist, believed that different institutions in different cultures teach us norms and values that make up our identity and personality. Our actions result in consensus of norms and values, which then gives us a sense of social order and installs order in society through man’s actions. Through culture, social order is achieved and individuals can begin to develop their personal qualities. However, Functionalists base their ideas on a traditional society, as opposed to today’s more multi-cultural society and this is a point to which Postmodernists disagree with. Other theories also have the idea that the Functionalists are exaggerating the consensus in society.
In order to determine social coordination/organization, Benedict claims, “we need detailed information about contrasting limits of behaviors and the motivations that are dynamic in one society and not in another” (229). This means that it is of the upmost importance that, in order to eliminate and organize aspects of society, we need to understand what has functioned. To do this, “situational results” (236) are necessary. These results have the ability to predetermine a specific mode of conduct, as well as “a set of tendencies” (236) in society. But in order to completely structure society and culture, “selection is the first requirement” (237).
As stated in Giddens, sociologists who support this theory see individuals as not created by society but as the creators of society. Both the functional and conflict perspective, study society on a macro level. Unlike the micro study of society that looks to the individual, structural theory instead looks to society as a whole. Supporters of this theory view society as the creator of the individual, it is believed that the rules norms and values of society influence and govern the individuals. This essay will look at that two structural theories of functionalism and Marxists, it will compare and contrast both perspectives and identify similarities and differences in their views of on education family, as well as highlighting the strengths and a weaknesses in both perspectives.