Sociology examines how our behavior individually and in groups is influenced by social processes and what that means. In fact once you start seeing things with a sociological perspective – things will never be the same. It’s knowing how and why we do what we do that engages us with the world around us and makes us more effective agents for social change. However, sociologist C. Wright Mills describes sociology as “the intersection of biography and history?” A lot of you may wonder what he mean: well from my studying and perspectives; The reason why he say sociology is the interception of biography and history is because, Biography: happens to individuals and History: happens to society. For example, every
He argued that capital society and social order are all link to a capital system to human beings. Durkheim on the other hand, argued that sociology should be look at social facts as objects. Roles and institutions act like bodily organs, each depending on other. The world should be divided into subjective and objective, regarding society as a reality in itself. Durkheim sees anomie as responsible for the world’s disorder of economics- the lack of morality and regulation resulted in overpowering the weak; thus, he feels that only norms can prevent the abuse of power and calls for regulation and equal opportunity from birth- the greater the equal opportunity the less need for restraint.
Subcultures are groups of people within modern society, who have steered away from traditional norms and values and have created their own. These sub-cultures have been known to exist throughout society. Just as sociologists see members of subcultures to have strayed away from society, subcultural strain theorists say that deviants and criminals are those individuals that are involved in deviant subcultures. These members are those who have not been able to achieve the mainstream goals that Marxists say are drilled into their brains through socialisation by the ruling class, e.g. the American Dream.
Peer groups are another influence in how a person behaves and this is because a peer group will mould you in a specific way on how to communicate with different people so for example a peer group might teach an individual to curse and swear whilst talking to friends as a joke but that individual wouldn’t communicate that way to their parents they may be more formal and polite in order to avoid trouble and disappointing them. Marxism: Marxism is another sociological approach which believes that a person’s place or status in society depends on the economic society. Karl Max (1818-1883) held the view that in his time there were two social classes, the bourgeoisie/capitalists and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie (ruling class) were a small but powerful group who owned the factories and other places of employment. Whereas the proletariat were labelled as the ‘working class’ and were the larger but poorer mass of society and were the
Assess the view that the news is a social construction. (33 marks) There are many sociological ideas that contribute to our understanding to whether or not the news is a social construction. The news may be seen as a ‘window on the world’ to some, however, others would argue that the news in not objective, and instead it only reflects ideas of the power elite. McQuail argues that the news is socially manufactured product that has been through a selective process, made by what he calls gatekeepers. This is the idea that journalists and editors control what is considered newsworthy, and consequently what appears in the news.
The first sociological perspective, structural factualism, was established by Auguste Comte. Comte discussed the stages that societal knowledge must surpass, with significance on logical reasoning, as well as society as a structure and how it is composed of many parts (Murray, 2011). Herbert Spencer compared the structure of society to a human body due to the contribution of the many organs it takes to sustain life. Max Weber, one of the symbolic interactionists introduced the approach that society is a product of individual interactions (Murray, 2011). Central conflict theorist Karl Marx asserted that society is not a harmonious system, but riddled with unfairness, conflict and disorder.
The main criticisms of mass society theory, namely the limited effects model, will be discussed. Social Movements Keywords Collective Identity; Demagogues; Frame; Industrial Era; Industrial Revolution; Limited Effects Model; Mass Media; Mass Society Theory; Social Movement Theory; Society; Sociology; Symbolic Interactionism Social Movement Theory: Mass Society Theory Overview Mass society theory is an interdisciplinary critique of the collective identity that results from the mass commodification of culture and the mass media's manipulation of society. Mass society theory invokes a vision of society characterized by alienation, absence of individuality, amorality, lack of religion, weak relationships, and political apathy. Mass society theory developed at the end of the nineteenth century and beginning of the twentieth century in response to the rise of the media industry and the socio-political changes created by industrialization, urbanization, and the fall of established political regimes. Major contributors to mass society theory include Alexis de Tocqueville, Emile Durkheim, Emil
Explain the difference between the Sociological Imagination, as described by C. Wright Mills and common-sense explanations. Then through the use of examples show how each approach would explain one of the following topics. The sociological imagination and common sense explanations have contrasting ideas on many topics such as education success and failure and sexuality. In this essay I am going to discuss and explore both the sociological imagination and common sense and how each of these explains the concept of education success and failure. First of all I am going to explain what exactly the sociological imagination and common sense explanations are, and then go on to discuss how each justify educational outcomes.
In this article, the writer (Peter L. Berger) attempts to explain the purpose and methods of studying sociology. It can be derived from the article that sociology breaks down the façade of appearances and assumptions to reveal differences and deviances that can be cultural, political, religious, moral, and so on. Berger compares the experience of studying sociology with “culture shock” by explaining that one expects, when entering a new culture, to experience the shock of lifestyles, traditions, and activities that are new, opposite, or variations of what an individual is accustomed to. The article explains that this same experience can also be had when studying, in depth, the reality underneath the façade of individual units within society
Is classical sociology still relevant today? Discuss with reference to a contemporary social issue This essay will be concentrating on the contemporary work of George Ritzer, specifically his theory of Mcdonaldization and how he has taken the classical work of Weber and his theory of rationalisation and applied it to the workings of modern day society. The essay will then look at how this is having an effect in the work place, where rationalisation, predictability and control of tasks takes place causing people to find their jobs dehumanising and mundane. Finally it will then move on to examine and assess criticisms of Ritzer that have been raised by other sociologists Weber described rationalisation as the process in which factors that motivate and affect our behaviour such as traditions, values and emotions are replaced with more rationalised and calculated factors such as efficiency and predictability, causing our social life to become increasingly subject to planning. Goals are achieved through more efficient means due to standardized behaviour, this is due to the fact that rules made through practical rationality, where calculations are made based on an individual’s subjective day to day interest, is being taken over by bureaucracy, and these new rules are then mindlessly followed without any thought or regard for our higher human values.