The Three Major Theoretical Perspectives Of Sociology

There are three different theoretical perspectives. Functionalist perspective, which emphasizes the way in which the parts of a society are structured to maintain its stability. Functionalists see the contribution that it makes to society. The conflict perspective, assumes that social behavior is best understood in terms of tension between groups over power or the allocation of resources, and political representation. The interactionalist perspective, which generalize about everyday forms of social interaction in order to explain society as a whole (Schaefer).

In society, there are groups that interact with each other. They may be families, churches, government agencies, or anything in between. Those groups can be defined as systems, and in the systems perspective that is what they are referred to (Hutchison, 2017). In the 1960s, Ludwig von Bertalanffy developed the general systems theory in relation to biology, but it was widely publicized and used for various subjects (Hutchison, 2017). Hutchison (2017) summarized Bertalanffy’s theory by saying, “any element is best understood by considering its interactions with its constituent parts as well as its interactions with larger systems of which it is a part.” (p.

According to the “Social Forces” note sheet, social forces are the most influential aspect of society and they are big part of everyone's everyday life The many social forces can all come into play throughout

Our actions and interactions with others and society are what define us. Society’s perception of an individual may contrast with that individual’s perception of self. Our actions and interactions with others create certain stigmas which may not change despite progression and change an individual has undergone. But however at the end of the day we are our own creators and we chose who we interact with.

“A picture is made up of so many square inches of painted canvas; but if you should look at these one at a time, covering the others, until you had seen them all, you would still not have seen the picture. There may, in all such cases, be a system or organization in the whole that is not apparent in the parts. In this sense, and in no other, is there a difference between society and the individuals of which it is composed; a difference not residing in the facts themselves but existing to the observer on account of the limits of his perception. A complete view of society would also be a complete view of all the individuals, and vice versa; there would be no difference between them.” Charles Horton Cooley, in “Human Nature and the Social Order”.

Sociologists employ three major theoretical perspectives in sociology today. They are the structural-functionalist perspective, the conflict perspective, and the symbolic interactionism. The structural-functionalist perspective is done at a macro level and its focus is on the relationships between the parts of society. The Conflict perspective is done at a macro level and its main focus is on how the wealthy controls the poor and weak.

In order to create a society that is striving, stability needs to be present. Without stability, weakness is created, which then leads to uncertainty. There is no possible way for society to be stable with unstable individuals walking around. For example, I believe society in this sense can be directly related to a sports team in competition. In order for a team to be stable and thrive, stable individuals are needed, and with unstable individuals present, success is unattainable.

Definitions are important as they influence how we think and how our lives are shaped, just as our identities make us who we are, with different relationships pushing us in different directions. Aspects of our lives

People are what make a system “happen”. Without their participation, a system exists only as an idea with some physical reality attached.” (Johnson 1997: 41). There are different positions in the social system that each individual take part in. One person can change a rule of a system, and the people surrounding them will change with them too.

Consequently, these various meanings can distract the reader from the Author’s original intent. A person can analyze their own perspectives too vigorously, and tenaciously challenge what the Author’s view or social intuitions and get lost about what the piece of work has to offer all together; due to this subconscious human behavior, it must be taken in consideration that humans project their subjective views in every piece of information that is presented to them.

Society also fosters in us the sense of perpetual dependence. Precisely because society has its own specific nature that is different from our nature as individuals, it pursues ends that are also specifically its own; but

Society has so many dimensions that pin pointing down one way to organize, it is quite honestly overwhelming.  Achieving social stability is impossible, there will always be disruptions in any system. What makes society interesting and functional are all the different talents and personalities of individuals. Everyone is unique and their individuality is what people look forward to. The author states that “sacrificing real feelings and emotional attachments is the price the society has to pay for stability” however, I disagree.

We as a human race have become a byproduct of our society. Through media, technology, and social pressure, humans no longer run society, but it seems like we are run by society. The quote from sociologist Peter Berger states “Not only do people live in society but society lives in them” This statement is referring to a form of social control were groups and the people in those groups conform to society partially knowingly and partially as a reflection based on dominant social expectations. As I further explain Berger’s statement I will explain how individuality, identity, and freedom fit in to such a predetermined future.

Mechanical and organic solidarity is an idea from the mind of Emile Durkheim. Mechanical solidarity creates social integration. When a population shares similar occupations (or perhaps similar religions), they form the same values and ideas (104-05). An example of a society with mechanical solidarity would be the Puritan society, which existed in the New England area, beginning in the mid 17th century (Kizer). In such a society, because everyone shares the same beliefs in order to remain together, there is little room for a diversification in these beliefs. Societies with organic solidarity tend to be larger and involve a division of labor and interdependence. That is, everyone has different jobs, and they depend on another person to do their job, so that all of the parts contribute to a working whole. American society today would be an example of a society with organic solidarity (105).

Sociology includes three major theoretical perspectives: the structural-functionalist perspective, the conflict perspective, and the symbolic interactionist perspective. Each perspective offers a variety of explanations about the causes of and possible solutions for social problems (Rubington & Weinberg, 1995).