Cheriez Lucas Upper 6 Mr Chinapoo Sociology Discuss how sociologists explain the existence of social order today. Sociologists define social order as a set of linked social structures, social institutions and social practices which conserve, maintain and enforce ways of relating and behaving. A society which has social order is one where the persons within it accepts the norms and values and replicate them in their behaviour. In studying the theories of social order, there are three main perspectives, the functionalist, the Marxist and the interactionist perspectives. The first sociologist to come up with the term social order was Thomas Hobbes, in the 17th century. Hobbes was an English philosopher who based his theory …show more content…
These were: adaption, goal attainment, integration and pattern maintenance. Through the institutions socialization occurs and values are passed on from generation to generation. Also, in order for social order to be attained, the entire social system must be harmonious. For this to happen there need to be laws and sanctions for deviant behaviour. That is why today if someone commits a crime they’ll receive a punishment to fit the crime whether, it be jail time or they are fined. On the other hand, Marx talks about social order being forced unto the proletariats by the bourgeoisie. They, the bourgeoisie, conform the thinking of the proletariats to their capitalist way of thinking with ideologies. This is “a set of beliefs, values, and opinions that shapes the way a person or a group such as a social class thinks, acts, and understands the world”. This is also known as false consciousness (Engels), where the upper class forces their values onto the lower class. The control that the upper class exercises over the means of production includes not only the production of food or manufactured goods, it also includes the production of ideas as well. This explains why members of the subordinate class may hold ideas contrary to their own interests. This is seen in Marx’s explanation of religion where he views it as the opium of the masses. Religion controls the mind of the proletariats, which in turn makes them accept the morals and
Those who control means of production have power over the rest of the society (Morrison, 2006). Marx saw two very different social classes.
Social order, the fundamental concept that outlines the way that social structures and cultural aspects like beliefs and values come together in order to maintain order in a society. Both Vedic India and Ancient China established a stratified structure that served as an outline to maintaining social order within their civilizations. Those that were in the high class had their spot at the top of the pyramid while others like the working class were at the lowest of the pyramid.
The bourgeoisies made sure that the only way of survival for the working class was through them. Marx even believed that the churches were oppressing the proletarians because the bourgeoisies were controlling the churches. Therefore, Marx thought that religion should be abolished. Another thing that Marx believed had no existence was the government because the bourgeoisie held all political power.3
Generally, Marx’s position on religion is drawn up in an entirely negative manner. In his writings, he expresses his belief that religion is a set of doctrines intended to stabilize, while at the same time bring into servitude the working class people. In addition to that, he argues that the society’s inclination towards religious excitement serves to represent a reaction to disaffection. Also, Marx contends that, since religion causes human beings to feel delusive happiness it makes an erroneous mental representation in as well as of itself. Indeed to him, it is an instrument utilized to sustain cultural systems together with ideologies that in most cases encourages oppression in the society (Parsons 38-46).
Every form of politics needs to answer the questions of who has political power, what should the social order be like, and when should or shouldn’t the government interfere. So, who has political power? Each country has a form of government where there are one or many persons with power. In a democracy, the people elect the government. In a monarchy, power is passed on through the family, with no say from the people. In each political system, the social order needs to be determined by either the government or the citizens. That leads to, what should the social order be like? Here, we need to figure out if the government should “make” the citizens good, or should they be left alone. Social order helps us determine if the citizens or the government
There is deep substance and many common themes that arose throughout Marx’s career as a philosopher and political thinker. A common expressed notion throughout his and Fredrick Engels work consists of contempt for the industrial capitalist society that was growing around him during the industrial revolution. Capitalism according to Marx is a “social system with inherent exploitation and injustice”. (Pappenheim, p. 81) It is a social system, which intrinsically hinders all of its participants and specifically debilitates the working class. Though some within the capitalist system may benefit with greater monetary gain and general acquisition of wealth, the structure of the system is bound to alienate all its
For example, it shapes the nature of religion, law, education, the state and so on. According to Marx, capitalism sows the seeds of its own destruction. For example, by polarising the classes, bringing the proletariat together in ever-increasing numbers, and driving down their wages, capitalism creates the conditions under which the working class can develop a consciousness (or awareness) of its own economic and political interests in opposition to those of its exploiters. As a result, the proletariat moves from merely being a class-in-itself (whose members share the same economic position) to becoming a class-foritself, whose members are class conscious – aware of the need to overthrow capitalism. The means of production would then be put in the hands of the state and run in the interests of everyone, not just of the bourgeoisie. A new type of society – socialism developing into communism – would be created, which would be without exploitation, without classes and without class conflict. Marx’s work has been subjected to a number of criticisms. First, Marx’s predictions have not come true. Far from society becoming polarised and the working class becoming poorer, almost everyone in western societies enjoys a far higher standard of living than ever before. The collapse of so-called ‘communist’ regimes like the former Soviet Union, and growing private ownership and capitalist growth in China, cast some doubt on the viability of the practical implementation
Each individual justifies their actions and wishes by appealing to various moral principles based on the local or individual conception of the good. In the argument of morality and where are those moral judgments come from, brings us to the central question of ethics, that is “What is the good for human beings?” More than two thousand years ago, Aristotle gives his answer in Nicomachen Ethics suggesting that the purpose of morality is to enable us to lead good lives, and it is necessary to acquire virtues to achieve the good. However, this view of ethics based on virtues led to a relativism toward the notion that believes the criteria of ethics is tied up with virtues which the local and individual approves to be good. In other words, the conception of goodness is based on the tradition or custom of the local society/groups or the individual. Therefore, many suggest that the high degree of individualism that was shown in Aristotle’s virtues ethics theory proves that he supports cultural relativism. In this paper, I will defend Aristotelian ethical approach based on virtues and refute relativists argument by showing the objections that against the local ethical objectivity.
Marx dismissed the relevance of all but two of these classes, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, because they didn't have any real impact on society as a whole. They weren't in a position to exploit labor. His theory focuses on the conflict and antagonism between those who owned the modes of production, the bourgeoisie, and those who were forced into selling their labor to them, the proletariat. As Marx saw it, "class is about the transfer of surplus (profit) from below and the exercise of power from above". The class with the means of material production also has the means of intellectual control. Those in charge have a political doctrine to control their interests, at whatever cost. This led to what Marx terms "brain colonization". The concept of ideology was used in the defense of capitalism. It was a strategy used to support the system and keep the workers concerns quieted. Liberalism was the ideology used by the bourgeoisie. Marx said, "Liberal ideology is used to blind the workers to the injustice of exploitation". It was an official veil to persuade the masses that they are free by extolling the myths of progress to them. They argued that since slavery was no longer used for labor, the workers were indeed free. The workers were also told to find happiness and freedom through religion for their material conditions were as
Karl Marx, also a philosopher was popularly known for his theories that best explained society, its social structure, as well as the social relationships. Karl Marx placed so much emphasis on the economic structure and how it influenced the rest of the social structure from a materialistic point of view. Human societies progress through a dialectic of class struggle, this means that the three aspects that make up the dialectic come into play, which are the thesis, antithesis and the synthesis (Avineri, 1980: 66-69). As a result of these, Marx suggests that in order for change to come about, a class struggle has to first take place. That is, the struggle between the proletariat and the capitalist class, the class that controls
Marxism is an ideology based on the economic and political theories of Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels. Karl Marx who was born in Germany in 1818 was a revolutionary whose ideas on society were the foundation of communism. Under modern capitalism the means of production, such as factories, land, and technology are controlled by a small minority who Marx called the bourgeoisie. Production is carried out by the working class, known as the proletarians who have to sell their labour or face poverty or starvation. Taken together these two classes form the economic base of society, what Marx called the substructure. Marx saw that there was conflict between these two divisions
I have viewed social order to be dependent to a degree of how much money, or the ability to access certain needs that you are born into. For example I believe that it is harder for someone who is born into a very poor family, living in the streets, to move out of the social order. I also have always thought that someone who was born into a very wealthy family was given more opportunities than the person who lived on the streets. Regardless, I have always envisioned the social order to be dependent on the ability to access certain means, and that could be on a sliding scale for anyone. I can see how my thoughts can relate similarity to social integration and how people may feel tied to their social class however in comparison, there are so
All social interactions take place with a social structure, including those interactions that redefine social reality, for purposes of study, sociologist breaks down any social structure into six elements which are, Statues, Social Role, Groups, Social Networks, Virtual Worlds and Social Insinuations. Society is nothing more than the shared reality that people construct as they interact with other people, Society is a complex, ever-changing mosaic subjective meanings. Firstly, Status is a slot or position within a group or society. They tell us who people are and how they “fit” into groups, status can be ascribed or achieved. Secondly, Social roles are expectations for people who occupy a given social position or status, Thirdly Roles are a significant component of social structure, for Example her in Belize, we have the Belize Police Department, as to where by the police are expected to protect us and apprehend criminals. At fourth place we have Social Network which is the web of direct and indirect ties connecting an individual to other people who influence its
Without knowing it, social order is very important in everyday life. As Elizabeth Silva says ‘social order is a key principle of living together’ (Reflections on Ordered Lives, 2009, Audio). The ordering of social life can be looked at in many ways. However, two theories stand out when looking at the making of social order, that of Erving Goffman and Michel Foucault. Both of these theories are concerned with how society is produced and, more specifically, how social order is made and remade. While the two theories aim to understand a broad picture of understanding society, they do so in very different ways. They both split the big questions down into smaller ones, Goffman looks at how an individual creates order, and Foucault looks at how
Though Marx views the communist revolution as an unavoidable outcome of capitalism, his theory stipulates that the proletariat must first develop class consciousness, or an understanding of its place within the economic superstructure. If this universal character of the proletariat does not take shape, then the revolution cannot be accomplished (1846: 192). This necessary condition does not pose a problem within Marx’s theoretical framework, as the formation of class consciousness is inevitable in Marx’s model of society. His writings focus on the idea that economic production determines the social and political structure (1846, 1859). For Marx, social class represents a person’s relation to the means of production, a relation that he believes is independent of