Structuralist Perspective

Three of the most widely used theoretical approaches used by sociologists are the functionalist, conflict, and interactionists perspectives. Functionalists highlight the contributions made by society that lead to social stability. Talcott Parsons, a key figure in the development of functionalist theory, viewed society as of a vast network of connected parts, each of which helps to maintain the system as a whole (Schaefer 2015). Conflict theorists take the approach that social behavior is understood in terms of tension between competing groups over power or the allocation of resources. Interactionist explain society by generalizing about the everyday forms of social interaction in places such as work, parks, or in public places. Functionalist and conflict approaches to the study of society focus on large scale phenomena or entire civilizations, or macrosociology, while the interactionist approach focuses on microsociology which stresses the study of small groups (Schaefer 2015). Functionalists reason that individuals are socialized to perform certain societal functions. However, conflict theorists consider that individuals are socialized by power of authoritative groups. In the interactionist view, individuals are shaped by their everyday interaction within small groups. Social order is maintained through cooperation and overall consensus in the functionalist’s perspective; laws are created to reinforce social order. Similarly, interactionists believe social order is

To fully understand the sociological implications of the issue on government surveillance, it is critical to examine the social problem using Structural Functionalism Theory, and Conflict Theory. Structural Functionalism explains the issue on government surveillance by viewing the society as a living organism with "organs," or social institutions, that work together to keep the society stable. The social institution that is closely related to the issue on surveillance is the government. In a different perspective, Conflict Theory explains the social problem by looking at the society as an entity that constantly changes due to conflicting values.

When we are born our mind is a blank chalkboard. As we grow and interact with the world around us, that chalkboard gets filled with pictures, shapes, and words that construct our ideals in life. It is important that not only we, but our children be surrounded by open minded positivity. In the article that I will analyze we can clearly see where the picture for a better tomorrow goes rye.

My chosen contemporary social problem is drugs and alcohol abuse. Structural-Functionalist perspective on drug abuse is a response to weakening societal norms. Drugs and alcohol abuse is one of the most significant social problems not only in the United States but also around the world. As a matter of facts, drugs and alcohol abuse is a problem with innumerable effects both on the body and mind of a person. Many times, these adverse impacts affect the families, friends, and acquaintances of the addict whereby, for instance, the latter may lose their jobs or cause chaos. For individuals that abuse psychoactive drugs it can affect the body in many different ways, such as behavioral, cognitive and physiological problems, these problems occur when a person that abuse psychoactive drugs on a regular basis. Consequently, I chose this topic because it is a major problem that has affected the lives of the individuals and those around them in the communities. Not a single day has ever ended without me coming across a drug addict begging for money. To my dismay, some of these people are usually so drunk that they cannot even communicate or stand properly. Therefore, I have come to conclude that drug and alcohol is a problem that can cause long-term effects. I desire to learn more about the issue and help individuals with addiction problems now and in future.

In my opinion both of the theories structuralism and functionalism involved the study of the human mind and how it works and they were both concerned with the mind at the conscious level. Personally, my feel of the two is that functionalism is more important than structuralism. I believe that functionalism is far better school than structuralism as it is more flexible and scientific in nature which I can relate myself with. I happen to think that functionalism is an object that is designed to determine solely by its function. These are a few of the similarities between structuralism and functionalism. Throughout this paper I will further explore some of the differences between these

The students have a difficult time understanding cultural behaviorisms, especially when they cannot have it explained to them on a personal level. Learning language involves cognitive and academic development, and their first languages must be involved when learning a new one. Finding the appropriate level of challenging material for students who are trying to understand new concepts in a foreign language is also very difficult, since they must incorporate both the child’s first language, and the new one. (Ludhra 2008).

Ever since slavery was abolished, there has been a continuous struggle in the United States between African Americans and Caucasians involving social class, poverty and equality. Although blacks have suffered terribly in the past, they are still commonly looked down upon and even placed in a lower class category. The struggle over slavery opened to flood gates to the Civil War, Reconstruction, segregation, Jim Crow laws, the Civil Rights Movement and is still something we are overcoming as a Nation.

WithIn the introduction the essay will clearly identify the two theories chosen to compare and contrast through out the critical analysis of the essay it will be important to clearly outline the two theories of Structural Functionalism and Social Learning Theory. The main objective to the introduction will be to introduce the topic question and set the scene of the essay.

Structural Functionalism sociological perspective sees a human society as a system. In a system, many interconnected parts work together with a common objective. In a society, all individuals have specific roles. In addition, things like beliefs, rituals, values, rules, morals and ethics all determine the specific behavior expected of all members in a community. The interactions between individuals depend on the role of the individuals and the collective social values and rules in the society.

Structural functionalism is a macro level approach to study sociology (Browning, 2015). Structural functionalists believe social consensus is what holds society together; social consensus being a condition in which most members of the society agree on what would be good for everyone. Structural functionalists view society as a web of social structures, each structure being functional to fulfill it’s own needs, but dependent on all other structures for survival (Vago, 2012).

The idea that the society functions as a whole, comes from the perspective of a structural functionalist. It draws upon the human body as a metaphor, and anyone that has illness or disease it is viewed as threat or deviance. So epistemologists and other fields of medicine study illnesses and disease to identify the risk factors and come up with preventative measures. People are no longer a diabetic; they are now identified as being at risk of diabetes. This has become a new way of identifying a person. A person has now formed an identity without actually having the health issue. From the Foucauldian perspective we can understand health as a source of identity. The notion of identifying ‘risk factor’ can be described as creating a biological

The concept of the developmental state has been crucial to the economic growth in East Asia. Combining Berger’s analysis on developmental state theory and Kalinowski’s investigation into VOCs (varieties of Capitalism), it can be seen that looking at developmental states through a structuralist lens helps to deconstruct the economic outcomes seen in East Asia. Through Berger’s in-depth analysis of developmental state theorist perspectives, it can be established that understanding the history, rise and fall of the developmental state theory is essential in understanding the capitalist transformation that has taken place in East Asia.

Poststructuralism mainly criticizes the dependence of structuralism on tradition and opposes traditional structuralism to focus research on objectivity and rationality. It attempts to restore irrational tendencies, pursue from the logic, but produce non-logical results. There is seldom a coherent theory in the field of poststructuralism, but each theory begins with a critique of Structuralism. Take the documentary as an example, in the view of the poststructuralist theorists, there is nothing else other than ideology, and any objective and true claim is doubtful in the documentary expression. For many people, such a poststructuralist approach is disappointing. If the documentary cannot get any form of objectivity or authenticity, even full of "fiction" like other feature film, then, how does documentary confirm its identity and value? For the moment, the response of the theorists to this issue is not sufficient, but I am in favor of Carl's point of view. Carl (1996) argues that the theory of poststructuralism and postmodernism is untenable as a philosophy. Also, as a basis for political analysis and political action, it is a failure. The research on poststructuralism is political, because many poststructuralists believe that the world which people living now is just a social construct, and there are many different ideology promoters who want to be hegemonic. This is obviously not acceptable.

Despite the recent surge in the ecosystem strategies of firms in both the practitioners and academics sphere, our understanding of why some ecosystem orchestrators create and capture more value than others still remain incomplete (Adner, 2017). Prior studies have traditionally explained the performance of focal firms from either the structural properties of the ecosystem (structuralist perspective) or from the network/relational embeddedness of partners within the ecosystem (actor centric perspective). In this study, we provide an alternative explanation for the heterogeneity in the performance of focal firms by focusing on the architectural features of the ecosystem, which constitutes of technologies and actors interacting within the

The foundation of the structuralism movement began with the idea that this was new theory. The structure of influence came from a combination of three anthropologists. Levi Strauss took the ideas of Marcell Mauss and Emilie Durkheim and applied them to the structure of cultural anthropology. His argument was that few factors separate us from apes/other animals due to language, culture, and myth. The use of structuralism is a relatively new and highly controversial theory. “The Academy of Anthropology sees structuralism as elements of human culture and they must be understood in terms of their relations to a larger, over arching system of structure.” The school of phenomenology in Germany began from 1910-1930. Developed through Ferdinand de Saussure he proposed that languages were constructed full of hidden rules that practitioners know but are unable to articulate. The fundamental way of thinking about the world; this predominantly concerned with the perception and description of structures.