Category: Functionalism

1. Introduction

Have you wondered the contemporary societies must be better than traditional one? Social change is inevitable due to various factors, like technological progress and urban development. However, it may not necessarily lead to an improvement in all aspects. The modern factory system is a valid illustration. The contemporary practice of it may induce some negative impacts on the workers and cause exploitation. In this essay, I will explain why I believe the practices of the modern factory system represent the source of contradiction and exploitation but not productivity and efficiency by sharing the circumstances at Foxconn. Then, after the analysis of the practices, I will compare and contrast functionalism and Marxism in understanding labor relations in contemporary societies. In the end, there is a conclusion and I will express my personal views on the modern factory system.

2. Working conditions in Foxconn

Foxconn is one example of a modern factory. It is a Taiwanese electronics manufacturer and is responsible to supply electronics parts for worldwide companies. Foxconn is the largest electronics contract manufacturer and a lot of Foxconn factories are located in China. Since most of the factories are distributed in China and the suicide among Foxconn workers are controversial, this section will focus on the working conditions in the factory and explore how they manage the workers.

Foxconn is like a military camp and sweatshop. All they want is the workers to be disciplined and restrained. To maximize the profit of the company, the factory will sacrifice the essential human needs of its workers. They are obsessed with production targets, business growth, and interests (Chan, 2013). For them, they are aiming at efficiency and higher labor productivity. Because of this, they will separate the workers and prevent them from establishing connections with others. All they desire is for each labor to concentrate on their duties and tries to be more efficient and precise. Therefore, if anyone makes a mistake, the leader will warn the others by humiliating him publicly. It is like the potential of the laborers is unlimited and everyone wants to force them to complete the tasks quicker. To maximize the gain, the wages of the workers are only slightly above the minimum wage and they never share the profit gain. Instead of distributing the profits to labor, the firm prefers to reinvestment and earn more. Moreover, talking is prohibited among workers. Even the workers felt solitary and isolated in a stressful working environment and attempt suicide, the company will blame the workers to sustain the reputation of the company. Many practices at Foxconn are violating labor rights. The example at Foxconn is the authentic practices in the modern factory.

3. The explanation of why it is a source of contradiction and exploitation

In my opinion, the practices of the modern factory system represent the source of contradiction and exploitation. Contradiction and exploitation express the class struggle, the gain of one class is the other’s loss (Wood, 2002). The contradiction section, it implies class antagonisms. The people involved in the contemporary factory operation are divided into two groups, one is the owners and one is the workers. Owners are capitalists and workers are in the working class. They will develop their class consciousness and have an opponent relationship (Giddens & Sutton, 2017). Different classes are having conflict regarding the distribution of benefits and the ruling power. This also explains the suicide and protest from Foxconn’s workers afterward. The working class will employ these methods to voice their opinion and disapproval to the owners and the working environment.

For exploitation, there is an exploitative relationship between the capitalist and the working class. To maximize the gain, the capitalist would demand discipline and long spun working hours from workers. It is like the example of Foxconn, they command the workers to work for twelve hours a day and a day off per two weeks (Chan, 2013). The labor power and the unreasonably low salary are used to maximize the capitalists’ gain. Exploitation means the success and profit produced by the mistreatment of workers and produced solitary in the workplace (Giddens & Sutton, 2017). The alienation in the workplace is used to raise the productivity of the workers. The workers at Foxconn cannot establish supplementary relationships in the factory, it causes solitary and all they can do is focus on their duty. This working condition is inhumane and causes the workers to feel stressful and under pressure.

Productivity and efficiency can be reasonable when defining the division of labor in the factory. It is a strategy used to enhance labor productivity and work opportunities (Adler, 2010). However, productivity and efficiency cannot describe everything that occurred in the authentic practices of the modern factory system. Take Foxconn as an example, there are ungrateful working conditions and treatment. It administers workers as commodities and the tools to gain extra money (Wood, 2002). They never confer caring but exploitation. If the company only craves to boost productivity and efficiency, there are several alternatives. The owners can be caring but not punishing all the time. They can help the workers feel welcomed and strengthening a sense of belonging. These methods can motivate workers to work diligently. Nevertheless, the owners manage to practice in an inhumane approach. It is full of mocking and endless isolation. They apply the most harmful way to increase profit and never appreciate the workers. For the owners, the workers are constantly machines but not humans. Therefore, I consider the practices of the modern factory system is more similar to the source of contradiction and exploitation but not productivity and efficiency.

4. The similarities between functionalism and Marxism regarding labor relations in contemporary societies

Functionalism and Marxism both have numerous similarities and differences in interpreting labor relations in contemporary societies. In this section, I will compare their similarities. Functionalism and Marxism admit that there are more innumerable applications of the division of labor in contemporary societies. Modern societies desire higher working productivity and efficiency so various companies will attempt to practice division of labor. They recognize the division of labor can induce higher productivity but it will cause the dilemma of solidarity to the workers (Adler, 2010). To present diverse parts of the production process, workers will lack a sense of belonging. The isolation of labor induces them to commit suicide as they perceive that they are detached from the world (Ritzer, 1996). Since the whole production process is divided into different parts, they will feel lonely and irrelevant. The solidarity will hold back the societies.

Both of them also acknowledge the labor will sense unfairness or depression when they encountered the varied treatments by the employer. There will exist economic exploitation and class conflict. Since there exist class relationships, it is unavoidably to have unequal distribution of benefits (Bilton, Bonnelt, Jones, Lawson, Skinner, et al., 2002). When the laborers cannot obtain equally distributed benefits, some of them will be dissatisfied and furious. Due to this problem, Functionalism and Marxism have a consensus on possessing regulation. Workers require regulation to maintain order. Without order and regulation, chaos will rise (Adler, 2010). They necessitate decent punishment to demonstrate how to behave properly. With proper regulation, the workers will have fewer opportunities to feel unfair and displeasure. Therefore, to sustain healthy labor relations, they consider it is fundamental to possess proper regulation and punishment.

5. The differences between functionalism and Marxism regarding labor relations in contemporary societies

Functionalisms present labor relations in an optimistic direction. On the contrary, Marxism presents it in a permissive direction. Functionalists believe the specialization of labor can motivate people to cooperate more because of their need for the services of others (Ritzer, 1996). As contemporary societies hold more practices on specialization and all process depends on numerous laborers, functionalists think that it enhances the dependence of everyone. If they want to achieve what they want, they need to operate with each other. Thus, society has become a greater existence due to collaboration. The labor relation is mutually benefiting one another and working on what they are more talented. They need the wages from the employer and the employer also demands their talent and experience. Both of them need the help of one another to survive so the labor relation is more similar to a harmonious situation. Functionalists optimistically believe the labor relationship so it is distinctive from Marxism. Functionalisms focus on the good side of the labor relationship but not on the corrupt side.

Marxism, they concentrate more on the exploitative relationship in labor and employer. They believe that the workers have to trade their abilities and creativity as a marketable commodity and make use by the capitalists (Bilton, Bonnelt, Jones, Lawson, Skinner, et al., 2002). Even they serve and devote a lot, they will be continuously exploited. However, they need to exchange their time to survive. During the production process, they are performed like a machine but not human and all of them are dissociated (Ritzer, 1996). They can simply work in a tiny role in the working process so they cannot recognize much about the outcome. Hence, they cannot develop their talent and abilities and they will remain to be a part of the working class. As labor’s productivity is equivalent to income, they can only work endlessly and obey to the capitalist system (Bichler, Nitzan, & Muzio, 2012). The employer will not be the one who got insulted or condemned as they have power and wealth. This is how Marxism interpreted labor relations in contemporary societies.

6. Conclusion

From the example of Foxconn, we can understand the practices of modern factory systems. Functionalism tends to believe the practices of it is the source of productivity and efficiency. On the contrary, Marxism tends to believe it is the source of contradiction and exploitation. They are holding diverse perspectives but they agree on the frequently used division of labor in contemporary societies. In my opinion, Marxism’s interpretation of the class struggle and the working condition is more precise. The tragedy of the workers at Foxconn makes me recognize that some employers can objectify the labor and take away their essential need for relaxation and communication. It is inhumane and the capitalists should concern their workers if they want the workers to contribute and devote themselves to the company.

Introduction

On the grounds of contemporary theory, it is satisfactory that it is perturbed with the understanding of deep structures of such as class, ethnicity, religion, and gender from the functionalism perspective, conflict theory, symbolic interaction, critical theory, and postmodernism perspective. However, as it is obliged by the assignment, the pivotal point of this essay will be on comprehending the deep structure of class from the analysis of functionalism perspective, conflict theory, and critical theory. Therefore, this essay calls for the meaning of class, its analysis from the perspectives of functionalism perspective, conflict theory, and critical theory, and at length an inference appropriate to the essay.

Class

A social class refers to as a set of postulations in the social sciences and political theory occurring mainly on the models of social stratification in which people are clustered into a set of hierarchical social classifications of the upper classes, middle classes, and the lower classes (Abbas, 2012). Class is a thesis of inspection for sociologists, political scientists, anthropologists, and social historians. Nevertheless, there is no concurrence on a definition of class and the phrase has a spacious range of sometimes incompatible meanings (Barry, 2001).

Some people contend that due to social mobility, class boundaries do not prevail. In normal expression, the term social class is usually corresponding with the socio-economic class which is precisely marked as the people having a common social-economic, cultural, political, and educational status for example the working class, an emerging professional class, elite class among others (Kuper, 2004). Even so, academics discern social class and socioeconomic status, with the foregoing alluding to someone’s relatively stable socio-cultural background and the later alluding to someone’s present-day social and economic situation and accordingly being more varying over and over again (Rubin, et al., 2014).

More so, Encyclopedia Britannica explicates class as a group of individuals inside a society who possess one and the same socio-economic standing (The editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2019).

The phrase class is said to have first originated into spacious use in the early 19th century, replacing phrases such as rank, and order among others as elucidations of the paramount hierarchical groupings in society. This terminology reflected changes in the structure of western European societies after the industrial and political revolutions of the late 18th century (Milton, 1949).

Functionalism perspective analysis of class

Functionalism is the theory that claims that every element of society contributes to the stability of the whole society. It maintains that society is more than the sum of its parts rather, each part of society is functional for the stability of the whole. Durkheim related society to an organism, and argues that just like within a body of an organism, each element plays an important role. None can function alone. If one part experiences a crisis or failure, other parts must adapt to fill the vacancies in some way.

On the basis of the analysis of class, functionalism theory assumes that society is a complex system of interdependent parts that cooperate together in order to ensure a society`s survival (Pope, 975). Functionalism exclaims that classes are needed, indispensable as well as inevitable because they provide everyone with a place in society and they all have a role to fulfill for example if one person is in the wrong place, they mess up the class structure and the society does not function correctly (Fletcher, 1956).

Functionalist theorists also equate society with the way the human body works. They look at society as being made up of interrelated parts that must all work in harmony for the larger system to perform. As a lens from which to consider social class then, functionalists highlight the ways in which social classes are functional for society (Kemper, 1976). The Proponents of the functionalism perspective point out that those people in the lower class (poor) also play a central role in society and are necessary for several reasons. They argue that society needs the poor to do the dirty jobs that nobody else wants, particularly given the low wages for working in difficult conditions such as workers in many factories and farms. For example, if everyone in as society would be superfluously rich in the upper class with a lot of money and other material possessions, who would be cleaning their toilets, collecting garbage, guarding them, and cleaning their compounds among others. Consequently, according to the functionalist perspective, social class is inevitable and functional for society because everybody in different classes plays his /her role.

More so, Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore, explain on the need for social classes by exclaiming that, in order to function, society must have people working in a variety of professions including physicians, teachers, and politicians among others. Due to the personal ability, extensive training, and advanced degrees required for the more specialized positions, people in those professions are rewarded with increased earnings and higher status than those whose positions require less (Kingsley & Wilbert, 1945). A good example can be grasped from this framework if you finish high school, and then you continue to University, you pursue a law course and then ultimately you become an attorney, your income and status should reflect the skills needed for your profession. In reverse, if you drop out of school and work as a watchman, you would still be making a contribution to society but your contribution would be less important and therefore not deserving of as much income and status as an attorney. Therefore, according to the functionalist perspective, social class is inevitable and functional for society.

Conflict theory analysis of class

Conflict theory is said to have emanated from the works of philosopher Karl Marx, who focused on the causes and consequences of class conflict between the bourgeoisie or the owners of the means of production and the capitalists and the proletariat the working class and the poor highlighting on the economic, social, and political implications of the rise of capitalism in Europe (Polak, 2008). Karl Marx speculated that this system presupposes on the existence of a powerful minority class the bourgeoisie and an oppressed majority class the proletariat, which created class conflict because the interests of the two were clashing, and resources were unjustly distributed among them.

Conflict theory analyses classes in the ways social groups disagreement, and fight over power and other resources in form of material possession and wealth. Conflict theorists believe that social classes make society dysfunctional because it harms individuals and societies (Hans & Neil, 1992).

Conflict theory focuses on the competition between classes for scarce resources. The upper classes (capitalists) is seen as practicing battle with those under them (workers), in an effort to maintain their power, prestige, and wealth (Erik, 2005). The conflict perspective suggests that the class system is very deep-rooted because the capitalists (haves) control social institutions such as education, religion, politics, and the law and set them up in favor of their positions and values and also because they pass on their spoils to their children. The same also applies for the have-nots, who also pass on what they have to their children unfortunately, this class has little to pass on but a disadvantaged position.

Conflict theorists also point out that many people in unskilled jobs are pushed into that kind of employment because of social class inequality (Jacques & Stathis, 2008). They have not had the educational and other opportunities afforded by those who are better off. Given equal opportunity and support, they argue that many people in low-wage jobs could perform in higher-level positions. The conflict perspective, therefore, characterizes social class as the result of a struggle for scarce resources.

However, Karl Marx lamented that in order for society to be the better of false consciousness, it should be replaced with class consciousness, the awareness of one’s social class in a society instead of existing as a class in itself and the proletariat class must become a class for itself in order to produce social change (Karl & Angels, 1848). Instead of just being an inertness class of a society, the class could become an advocate for social improvements. Only once society entered this state of political consciousness would be ready for a social revolution implying to mean that capitalism characterized by social inequalities, and exploitation among others will have come to an end with the reception of socialism.

Critical theory analysis of class

Critical theory is a school of thought that circumscribes a wider reference to a method of self-conscious critique aimed at altering, liberating, and emancipation through enlightenment which does not clutch emphatically to its own established assumptions (Guess, 1981). It is a social theory oriented towards critiquing and changing society as a whole. It differs from traditional theory, which focuses only on understanding or explaining society. Critical theories aim to dig beneath the surface of social life and uncover the assumptions that keep human beings from a full and true understanding of how the world works (Guess, 1981). The critical theory emerged out of the Marxist tradition and was developed by a group of sociologists at the University of Frankfurt in Germany who referred to themselves as The Frankfurt School of thought (Guess, 1981).

On the issue of class, the critical theory Centre its focuses on social totality than social classes and it maintains that no facet of our life world can be apprehended in isolation, unlike conflict theorists who affirm that classes originate from unequal distribution and control of the means of production or economic capital (Lisa & Adrian, 1997).

More so, the critical theorist’s unlike Karl Marx who only suggested class hegemony in the spheres of production, the conflict theorists suggested class hegemony throughout the civil society in unions, schools, churches, a family that the entire system of values, attitudes, beliefs, and morality supporting the dominant order sustained itself (Adamson, 1980).

Critical theorists also assert that a social class passes on core elements of habitus and capital from one generation to the other and discerns itself actively and passively from other clusters. They argue that social classes impasse social mobility and opportunities since social classes are possibly identified by mere observation (Bronner, 1994). Therefore the limits of social mobility and the limits of activities are the limits of a social class.

More so, the critical theory maintains that the division of classes in the legal system is still largely valid in contemporaneous days (Michael J. Thompson, 2017). They explain that the legal system is probably not intentionally designed to oppress the lower classes however, the discrepancies are incorporated, contained in the meaning of the socially accepted symbols, and transmitted from one generation to the next. Formally, all individuals are equal, but their habitus and its evaluation differ according to social class.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, the functionalism perspective analysis on class examines the positive functions of different social classes in a society and points out that classes are not only important but also indispensable as well as inevitable because they provide everyone with a place in society and they all have a role to fulfill. More so, the conflict theorists believe that social class makes society dysfunctional because it harms individuals and societies and analyzed classes on the causes and consequences of class conflict between the bourgeoisie or the owners of the means of production and the capitalists and the proletariat the working class and the poor highlighting on the economic, social, and political implications of the rise of capitalism. Critical theory on the other hand analyses class not only in conflicting spheres but also in aiming at altering, liberating, and emancipation of classes through enlightenment and focuses on the social totality of societies than social classes.

References

1. Abbas, k. (2012). The comparison of a middle class in developed societies and Iran society. Journal of American Science, 179-183. Retrieved from http://www.jofamericanscience.org/journals/am-sci/am0808/027_9920am0808_179_183.pdf
2. Adamson, W. L. (1980). Hegemony and Revolution: A Study of Antonio Gramsci’s Political and Cultural Theory.
3. Barry, J. R. (2001). Definition of Class,. Routledge Encyclopedia of International Political Economy: , 01.
4. Bronner, S. E. (1994). critical theory and its Theorists.
5. Erik, O. W. (2005). Approaches to Class Analysis. Cambridge, Uk: Cambridge University Press.
6. Fletcher, R. (1956). Functionalism as a Social Theory. The Sociological Review Foundation. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1956.tb00976.x
7. Guess, R. (1981). The idea of A critical Theory, Herbamas and the Frankfurt school. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
8. Hans, H., & Neil, J. S. (1992). Social Change and Modernity. Berkely: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS. Retrieved from https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft6000078s;chunk.id=0;doc.view=print
9. Jacques, B., & Stathis, K. (2008). Critical Companion to Contemporary Marxism (Vol. 16). Leiden, Netherlands: Hotei Publishing,IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. Retrieved from https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/621-2013/CRITICAL_COMPANION_TO_CONTEMPORARY_MARXISM.pdf
10. Karl, M., & Angels, F. (1848). Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei. London: J.E. Burghard.
11. Kemper, T. D. (1976). Marxist and Functionalist Theories in the Study of Stratification: Common Elements thatLead to a Test. Social Forces,, 54(03), 559-578. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2576282.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ae395cd708e033cd87c70ff700ffe8fdb
12. Kingsley, D., & Wilbert, M. (1945). Some Principles of Stratification. American Sociolog- ical Review, 10(02), 242-49. Retrieved from https://web.ics.purdue.edu/~hoganr/SOC%20602/Spring%202014/Davis%20and%20Moore%201945.pdf
13. Kuper, A. (2004). Social Class. The social science encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=2oES3pJufP4C&pg=PA111.
14. Lisa, A. Z., & Adrian, C. (1997). Putting Critical Theory to Work: Giving the Public Administrator the Critical Edge. Administrative Theory & Praxis,, 19(02), 208-224. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/25611214
15. Michael J. Thompson. (2017). Introduction: What Is Critical Theory? The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Theory, 1-14. doi:DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-55801-5_1
16. Milton, G. (1949). Social Class in American Sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 55(03), 262-268. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2771137
17. Polak, M. (2008). Class, Surplus and the Division of Labor: A post Marxian Exploration. East Eisenhower Parkway: ProQuest LLC. Retrieved from http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/2357/1/U615306.pdf
18. Pope, W. (975). Durkheim as a Functionalist. The Sociological Quarterly, 16(03), 361-379. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4105747.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A35fe0da3147b47461746012b899ebc42
19. Rubin, M., Denson, N., Kilpatrick, S., Matthews, K. E., Stehlik, T., & Zyngier, D. (2014). “I am workingclass”: Subjective self-definition as a missing measure of social class and socioeconomic status in higher education research. Educational Researcher, 43(04), 196-200. Retrieved from doi: 10.3102/0013189X14528373
20. The edittors of Encyclopedia Britannica. (2019). Social class, Social Differntiation. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-class

Life brings along a lot of good and bad affairs. However, we try to focus on the good which brings us happiness, but the bad affair sometimes tends to ruin the good times. One of the bad affairs that society today faces is homelessness. Homelessness can be defined as not having a fixed roof over one’s head or living in temporary accommodation under the threat of eviction. This paper focuses on societal views to try to explain the issue of homelessness in the United States of America.

Structural functionalism considers homelessness as an element of both functional and dysfunctional states in society. The functionalist perspective works on the basis of consensus and cohesion within a society. The theory provides a macro view of society that is seen as a codependent system that influences one another in various ways. For example, the case of a dysfunctional family institution is among the leading causes of homelessness in the country. This may arise from issues like domestic abuse, where the roles of individuals within the family institution are not being fulfilled. This leads to dysfunction hence breakdown. The abused party may hence be forced to move and live in the streets or an emergency shelter hence homeless. Evidently, a social problem that affects a particular society should and must be perceived as a problem that affects a sample of the population and needs to be resolved.

The conflict theory states that society is in a state of conflict due to scarce resources. According to the theory, capitalism is the main cause of homelessness. Capitalism creates power differences between the “haves” and the “have not’s” whereby the wealthy group gains control through power and competition hence can afford to live luxuriously. On the other hand, the poor are left homeless as they cannot pay the expensive housing prices in the country. Therefore, capitalism identifies the homeless as the losers in society.

In conclusion, homelessness is a major societal problem in the United States of America and is caused by a number of factors. From the above observations, it is evident that in as much as homelessness is caused by individual flaws, society also plays a big role in contributing to the issue. The government of the United States of America should therefore take charge to minimize the gap between the rich and the poor as well as finding ways to find ways to try to solve the individual flaws, like creating counseling groups to help solve the dysfunctional state.

Talcott Parsons is an American sociologist who was born on December 13th, 1902, and died on May 8th, 1979 in Germany. He is known for his social action theory and structural functionalism. Parsons looked at society as institutions such as the economy, education, media, law, religion, and family that all work together to keep society going. As individuals we all have a part to play to shape society, we become a product of society from the influences around us. Parson believed that the family had two functions: primary socialization, which is during early childhood and provides the base for all later learning, and secondary socialization, which happens later in childhood when the children are socializing more with people who are not in their family home. He also believes that families help adults to behave in a way that goes in line with social norms and values and to be caring to each other in times of stress, this then ties in with Parsons’ warm bath theory.

Parsons’ theory is that the family is a social institution and that it meets the needs of society. Parsons believed that the nuclear family fitted well in the industrial economy with families having their own roles. With one adult being the ‘breadwinner’, which was more looked at as a male figure, and the other adult’s role, which would more likely be a female would be to take care of the children and make a ‘house a home’. In the family home, the children start to learn to socialize, so they get taught not to hit, to be kind, to share, to acceptable behavior, life skills and the family’s economic role would be to have a job to make sure the children have all they need. Parsons was a major figure in the structural-functionalist school of thought, he believed that in society we have the same common values and we have different cultures within a society, and this causes conflict which is normally caused by disagreement in thoughts and ways of life because of different beliefs within religion.

Parsons believed that education gave a sense of achievement and this helped individuals to have the skills to find a job in the industrial society because their status was chosen by ability not by birth Parson also believed that education was the right process for individuals to have a fair opportunity to succeed. Functionalists see society as consisting of many different parts that are linked and connected to keep the system going. Parsons’ theory is that the nuclear family plays an important part in society by building environments for loving relationships with children and spouses and teaching the social norm and values that are then beneficial for society. Murdock believed that the family is the most important institution to do this. Parsons’ nuclear family theory has a very positive look on the life of the family. The warm bath theory that Parsons came up with is the idea of a family man coming home from work and being greeted by a loving family where the woman takes care of the needs of the children and is ready to welcome the man home and take care of his needs so that he is refreshed before the next working day. Parsons argued that society can be understood by looking at the functions they do. Parsons said that the four functional requirements are adaption, goal attainment, integration, and pattern maintenance. Parsons believed that the needs of society would need to come before individual’s needs, this is why he is believing that it is so important that the family and education have an important job to teach the social norms and values in the family and education institutions because this will help to hold the people together in value consensus.

Parsons’ theory is like Murdock’s (1949) theory that the family teaches children the social norms and values to keep society going. Parsons and Murdock both believe that the nuclear family is the perfect type of family. But not everyone will agree with this theory, as it paints a picture of a perfect family, and not everyone’s family would be like that. Functionalism is important because it looks at every aspect of society, how it functions, and how that helps society. For example, a child goes to school the get their education which the government provides this then covers the taxes, so it is an institution running itself to keep that part of society going. In the nuclear family, the work life and home life were kept separate, and the only thing that linked them together was the male family member who worked to provide for the family.

In my childhood home growing up, my mother stayed at home while fostering, and my father went out to work, my mother took care of all of us and did all the house chores. My father was set in his way by being brought up by his grandparents who, like the nuclear family, the male went out to work and the wife stayed home and took care of the children and the house then provided a hot meal for the man to arrive home. This was common in my house and I thought it was normal. Until my mother had to go out to work because the times are changing, and children were growing up, my mother wanted to do something for herself because staying at home and looking after the children and the house all the time can make the women in the family feel like her purpose is not as great at the males. As times are changing, I feel the men are too. You also see examples of the nuclear family in adverts and they portray the perfect family which is misleading because there is no such thing as a perfect family.

Parsons’ approach has been criticized by a group of Marxist writers in the 1970s who argued that it exploits the free domestic work of the housewife. It is just expected that the woman of the house takes on the role of bringing up the children and taking care of the house, even though the man of the house can only work so many hours because the women of the house can look after their children. Marxist writers argued this because domestic labor is important for the capitalist economy, only the men get paid not the women who are helping so the male can go to work the women’s contribution is free. Many women did get part-time jobs, but they were always paid lower and only called in when there was a shortage of workers and normally got cheap labor from the women’s work.

In this day and age, both parents must go out and work because of the cost to live, but a lot of women are still needed to take on the role of the car giver too. But I do think that there is more of a shared role and fathers are more hands-on and will help to clean, cook, and tend to the needs of the children.

Marxism and functionalism do have one thing in common and that is that they see society as a whole, they see society as more than just the individuals who live in it, and the social institutions and structures are important when looking at society.

Human behavior is complex, so sociology is known for having more than one theory or thought as it would be very difficult to find an approach to cover lots of different behaviors and outlooks. Having lots of different thoughts and theories provides a good range of ideas for social scientific work.

Discussion

Yard sale, also known as Garage or rummage sale is an event which involves the sale of used goods or items by individual owners (Mangam 9). Examples of goods which are sold during the event include household items like furniture, sports and farm equipment among others. The individuals may sale the goods due to various reasons. For example, a person may want to move to another residence or may just want to clear old equipments from his or her house.

Some of the items may be new while others may be old. The event is usually publicized though various media so that potential buyers or customers may be made aware. The goods do not have fixed prices and for this reason, bargaining is usually very common. Some buyers may buy the items for use while others may buy them for sale at a profit (Pohl and Pohl 34).

Structural functionalism can be defined as sociological theory which views society as a system composed of various parts which are interrelated, and function together in harmony, for the stability and benefit of the whole. The theory uses the analogy of the human body, which is composed of various organs like the heart, the lungs, eyes, nose among others.

Each part or organ of the body plays a specific role. If one part dysfunctions, then the whole body is affected. For example, if our eyes cannot see well, then the whole body is affected because the legs for example may not walk, without being guided by the eyes on what direction to move to (Harrington, Marshall and Müller 602).

The theory makes some assumptions in explaining the functioning of systems. One of the assumptions is that all systems operate in a way that is aimed at maintaining equilibrium. Yard sales can be seen as an event which involves two parties; one being the person who sales the goods and the other being the one who buys them. The disposal of those goods by one person plays the role of helping another person possess the same, thereby maintaining equilibrium in terms of ownership of the goods (Ritzer 40).

The other assumption of the theory is that systems are composed of various interdepended units, each with a specific role to play for the benefit of the whole. Yard sales involve people selling goods which they may not attach a lot of value to. Even though the goods may be of less value to them, it does not mean that they are useless because somebody else may purchase and use them for a beneficial purpose.

The exchange of the goods with the money enables the seller to use the money obtained from the sales for other purposes, which could not have been met using the goods or items themselves (Ritzer 40).

The other assumption of the theory is that systems operate under the principle of consensus between various units. Yard sales involve exchange of ownership of goods from one person to the other, not through coercion or conflict, but through consensus, in which the owner of the goods advertise the sale and those who are willing or interested in purchasing them do so at their free will.

The sale itself involves bargaining, which is aimed at reaching consensus between the buyer and the seller. Whatever the price they agree is therefore based on consensus and therefore no individual feels as if he or she gets a raw deal (Ritzer 40).

Works Cited

Harrington Austin, Marshall Barbara and Müller Hans-Peter. Encyclopedia of Social Theory. New York, NY: Routledge Publishers., 2006.602.

Mangam, Bryan. The Essential Guide to a Successful Garage Sale. Raleigh, NC: Lulu.com Publishers., 2007.9.

Pohl Irma and Pohl. Rummage, Tag & Garage Sales: Nine Easy Steps to Turn Rummage into Cash. New York, NY: Mary Ellen Family Books., 1984.34.

Ritzer George. Sociological Theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill., 2000.40.

Introduction

When it comes to designing sociopolitical and economic policies, it is important to have a sociological understanding of the basic principles of the society’s functioning. The reason for this is apparent – such an understanding will enable one to predict the long-term effects of these policies’ implementation. As Pitt (2010) pointed out, “Sociology focuses on the patterns and the intended and unintended consequences of purposive human action… Sociology is the key to understanding the development and the practices of social institutions” (p. 187). As of today, the sociological analysis is commonly conducted within the methodological framework of either the Functionalist or Conflictual paradigm, as such that appear to be the most discursively consistent with the realities of a contemporary living in the West. The main theoretical premise of Functionalism is that there are strongly defined systemic subtleties to the functioning of just about every human society – the suggestion reflective of the “whole is larger than the sum of the parts” principle.

In its turn, this implies the dialectically predetermined essence of the social, political, and cultural tensions within the society and presupposes the appropriateness of the specifically evolutionary (as opposed to revolutionary) approach to resolving them. The proponents of the Conflict Theory, on the other hand, suggest that the above-mentioned tensions come about as a result of the institutionalized oppression of the socially/economically underprivileged society members by the rich and powerful – something that presupposes the dialectical soundness of the society’s revolutionary (abrupt) transformations, as such that are being predetermined by the objective laws of history. Nevertheless, even though the Functionalist and Conflictual outlooks on the society, in general, and the qualitative aspects of how it functions, in particular, do differ rather substantially, there is a good reason to believe that they are mutually complementary to an extent. In my paper, I will aim to substantiate the validity of this suggestion at length while comparing/contrasting what can be deemed the three most distinctive societal conventions of both theories.

Conflict

As it can be inferred from the Conflict Theory’s very name, it is primarily concerned with identifying the major driving forces that induce the conflictual essence of the interrelationship between the society’s members. The theory’s main axiomatic assumption, in this respect, is that the concerned state of affairs is determined by the factor of class/cultural stratification – something that implies the thoroughly objective quintessence of conflict, as the actual instrument of keeping the society on the path of progress. Karl Marx is commonly referred to as someone who contributed to the theory’s development more than anyone else did. This simply could not be otherwise, as the Marxist conceptualization of human society presupposes that the latter never ceases to undergo a qualitative transformation – all because of the continually transforming essence of how the “surplus product” (Marxist term) is generated and distributed within it.

In its turn, the concerned process is defined by the ever increased effectiveness of “collective production” (due to the ongoing technological progress and the resulting “division of labor”), on one hand, and the fact that this is achieved at the expense of the representatives of the social elites being in the position to subject hired workers to the various forms of economic exploitation/societal oppression, on the other. As Nedelmann (1993) noted, “For Marx the contradiction between reason and reality in modem society is rooted in the contradiction between collective production and private appropriation, and between labor and capital in the modern capitalist economy” (p. 49). In its turn, this creates the objective prerequisites for the social antagonisms within the capitalist society to intensify as time goes on – something that eventually results in triggering a revolution. The inevitability of such an eventual scenario is prearranged by the fact that the most distinctive features of just about every modern society are: domination (by the elites), conflict (between the elites and those disadvantaged society members who aspire to attain a socially dominant status) and oppression (exercised by the representatives of the dominant social group).

As of today, the Conflict Theory has been effectively stripped of its Marxist overtones. Nevertheless, it continues to stress out that conflict is, in fact, the enabling tool of progress – even despite the fact that most people are naturally driven to think of it in the necessarily negative terms. The “modernized” version of the Conflict Theory is associated with Ralf Dahrendorf (1929-2009) – a British sociologist who suggested that the continuation of antagonistic tensions within the society is not always facilitated by the factor of class-stratification. According to Harris (2002), “For Dahrendorf conflict became central to social life, but not necessarily the large-scale schematic class conflict predicted by Marxists. Instead, all of us were engaged, in various ways and in various groupings, in the struggle for advantage” (p. 115). It is rather ironic that, despite its clearly Marxist roots, the “modernized” Conflict Theory serves the purpose of justifying Neoliberalism – the ideology that promotes the idea that one’s personal rights and freedoms (in the sense of how he or she goes about trying to attain a dominant status within the society) cannot be restricted, even if at the expense of undermining the society’s operational integrity from within.

The Functionalist explanation of conflict is much different. According to the theory’s advocates (such as Emil Durkheim and Georg Simmel), conflict is best discussed in terms of “dysfunction” and as such, it should be avoided, “Functionalists… specifically emphasize the importance of social order. In every society, it is important to maintain the status quo so that the society can function effectively. When this social order is not maintained, it results in a condition of conflict and disarray in the society” (“Difference between Functionalism and Conflict Theory, 2015, para. 3). Such a point of view naturally derives out of the Functionalist outlook on the society as a continually evolving organism, the qualitative characteristics of which are reflective of the essence of the relationship between its integral parts. In this respect, we need to mention the theory’s main conceptual provisions.

They are as follows: a) Society is a part of the surrounding reality. As such, it functions in accordance with basic societal laws, consistent with the laws of nature. b) Society is in the position to regulate the functioning of its systemic components. c) “Social facts” (as defined by Durkheim) studied by sociology, are thoroughly impartial, which in turn presupposes the possibility for them to be subjected to scientific inquiry. As Turner (1993) argued, regarding the Functionalist take on the “dysfunctional” nature of a conflict, “Society means durable associations between people living together… (enabled by) the existence of rules which are upheld as duties, and the fundamental relationship between the individual and the group is the reciprocal relationship between duty and interest” (p. 10). Hence, the sociology’s primary objective (as seen by Functionalists) – to be gaining analytical insights into what causes people to adhere to the communal forms of existence while willing to conform to the socially constructed code of public ethics. In its turn, this is supposed to serve the purpose of increasing the measure of the society’s resilience to conflict.

Public discourse

According to Functionalists, the more primitive a particular society happened to be; the higher is the measure of its members’ psychological similarity – something that explains the phenomenon of the primitive societies’ spatial longevity. At the same time, however, this is also the reason why such societies usually fall behind in terms of a sociocultural advancement – those who tend to perceive the surrounding reality similarly are incapable of evolving. Alternatively, the higher is the measure of the society’s complexity (technological advancement), the more likely it would be for it to remain utterly sensitive to the externally applied stimuli, which in turn results in undermining the extent of its resilience. The reason for this is apparent – along with enabling people to remain on the path of progress, industrial (complex) societies encourage them to work on refining their sense of self-identity.

As a result, this often results in prompting people to prioritize their personal interests above those of the society, as a whole. After all, the very paradigm of an industrialized/urban living implies that while remaining affiliated with it, people grow increasingly “atomized”, in the psychological sense of this word. Hence, Durkheim’s conceptualization of the Homo Duplex, “Homo Duplex… (is) the idea that embodied individuals are internally divided between their egoistic impulses and their capacity for “reaching beyond” these asocial passions” (Shilling & Mellor, 1998, p. 196). In its turn, this presupposes the necessity for the institutionalization of the “civilized living” public discourse, to which all of the society members would be able to relate, regardless of their socioeconomic status – the main precondition for the structurally complex society to continue evolving. This, of course, calls for the adoption of a particular ideology by the society. Functionalists believe that such a development would prove beneficial for all.

The proponents of the Conflict Theory do not quite agree. According to them, the governmentally endorsed public discourse serves one purpose only – it is there to strengthen the hegemonic dominance of the rich and powerful over the socially/economically disadvantaged citizens, “Conflict Theory portrays society as a class hierarchy and societal development as being shaped by class conflict and power. The power of a class is rooted in its solidarity and it is called forth in the struggle for its fair share in the pros­perity of society” (Nedelmann, 1993, p. 48). To prove the validity of such their point of view, they often refer to the role that organized religion plays within the society, as an integral part of justifying the relational status quo in it. Specifically, this role is concerned with providing the “spiritual” legitimation to the continual domination of the rich and powerful over the poor and weak.

The religion’s main goal, in this regard, is to make the exploited individuals believe that the lack of social justice in the capitalist society is thoroughly “natural”, so that these people would be less likely to consider shaking off the yoke of socioeconomic oppression. In fact, the advocates of the Conflict Theory point out to the fact that by exposing the exploited populations to the officially endorsed discourse of “behavioral propriety”, those at the society’s top seek to turn the former into their willing collaborators – the actual objective of the bourgeoisie’s hegemonic aspirations, “in the event of a revolutionary movement, the proletariat should support the bourgeoisie” (Cristea, 2013, p. 79). It is understood, of course, that this implies the counterproductive essence of the governmentally endorsed public discourses, as such that constitute a certain obstacle on the way of the society’s revolutionary transformation. The reason for this is that, contrary to the Functionalist point of view on the matter, the society’s prolonged socioeconomic stability results in more and more of the “surplus product” being accumulated in the hands of the elite members, which in turn slows down the process of the society’s infrastructural improvement and sub-sequentially makes it less competitive.

Evolution vs Revolution

As it was implied earlier, the Functionalist paradigm in sociology presupposes the appropriateness of the specifically evolutionary approach to increasing the extent of the society’s functional efficacy. The reason for this has to do with the paradigm’s close affiliation with the Systems Theory. According to it, the process of a particular system (such as human society) becoming progressively more complex results in the emergence of the qualitatively new patterns of this system’s functioning. These patterns, however, do not directly derive from what used to be the same system’s operative principles, before it has reached a new level of complexity. One of the main reasons for this is that, as a system grows ever more complex, its overall quality becomes increasingly affected by what happened to be the quality of the interactive relationship between this system’s integral elements, and less influenced by the actual quality of each of these elements.

Talcott Parsons (1902-1979) was the first Functionalist to discuss social issues in conjunction with the mentioned Systems Theory – all thanks to his realization that, “All social systems are defined in terms of the relations between their “internal” parts and between the system and its environment… the notion of functional contribution is essential in understanding the continuity of various parts of a system” (Turner, 1999, p. 168). Therefore, while implementing a particular policy, policy-makers must prioritize warranting the beneficence of the planned implementation’s long-term effects above everything else. What it means is that the highly systemic policy of a societal importance cannot be beneficial to the society’s overall well-being and abrupt (revolutionary) at the same time. The reason for this is that a particular revolutionary change taking place within the society is necessarily concerned with affecting only a few out of the whole spectrum of this society’s functional aspects – something that according to Functionalists presupposes the fallaciousness of the idea of “revolutionary change”, as the tool of the society’s betterment.

Conflictualists, on the other hand, insist on something entirely opposite. According to them, for the society to grow increasingly advanced, in the technological, societal, and cultural senses of this word, it must be willing to undergo revolutionary changes on a continual basis. And, it must be admitted that their line of reasoning, in this respect, is just as scientifically sound as the earlier outlined Functionalist one. While promoting the idea of revolutionary change, the proponents of the Conflict Theory refer to the foremost principle of Hegelian dialectics, concerned with the transformation of quantity into quality, “The intensification of quantification in each aspect of life… leads not to mechanistic stasis, but on the contrary to a discontinuous release of potential that is essentially qualitative and, as such, unquantifiable” (Robinson, 2003, p. 715). What this means is that, contrary to the Functionalist take on the subject matter in question, the prospect of a revolutionary change taking place within the society is highly desirable – not the least because it correlates perfectly well with the fundamental laws of nature. According to the Conflict Theory, revolution is bound to occur in the society which has “ripened” for such a turn of events – even if the overwhelming majority of its members does not recognize the signs of the “revolutionary situation” in the making. To illustrate the validity of such their suggestion, Conflictualists refer to the French Revolution of 1792 and the Russian Communist Revolution of 1917.

Conclusion

As it was suggested in the Introduction, there is a certain rationale to think that despite their formal incompatibility, the Functionalist and Conflictual theories are, in fact, mutually complimentary. I believe that what has been said earlier, regarding the axiomatic premises of both theories, is fully consistent with the paper’s initial thesis. The reason for this is that in the aftermath of having read through the analytical part of this paper, one should gain a better awareness of what account for the circumstantial determinants of taking practical advantage of the discussed theories. After all, the provided analysis helps to highlight the main weaknesses of Functionalism and Conflictualism. For example, Functionalism clearly downplays the fact that the Darwinian laws of biological evolution (which apply to people as much as they do to plants and animals) predetermine the impossibility of reaching a consensus among the society members, as to what should be deemed the universally applicable values of one’s socially integrated living. The Conflict Theory, on the other hand, fails to explain how it is possible for human societies to preserve their structural integrity – despite the uniqueness of the existential agenda, on the part of every particular individual. At the same time, however, both Functionalism and the Conflict Theory appear thoroughly observant of the empirically tested principles of the society’s functioning.

It is most likely that the proponents of both theories will continue to accuse each other of “short-sightedness” in the future. However, there is a good reason to expect that, as time goes on, Functionalism and the Conflict Theory will be deemed progressively less antagonistic, at least for as long as their practical deployment is being concerned. In this respect, a certain parallel can be drawn between these theories, on one hand, and the Theory of Relativity/Quantum Mechanics, on the other. After all, as the example of the latter indicates, it is indeed possible for two clearly dichotomic scientific theories to be considered equally useful, in the practical sense of this word. Apparently, the manifestations of the surrounding physical/social reality are much more phenomenological than most people tend to think of them. This again goes to substantiate the validity of the paper’s original thesis. Therefore, it will only be logical to conclude this paper by reinstating that it is indeed appropriate to expect the eventual unification of Functionalism and Conflictualism within the methodological framework of a single sociological theory.

References

Cristea, I. (2013). The evolution of the concept of hegemony in Antonio Gramsci’s works. Cogito, 5(3), 76-86.

Difference between Functionalism and Conflict Theory. (2015). Web.

Harris, D. (2002). Teaching yourself social theory. London, GB: SAGE Publications.

Nedelmann, B. (1993). Sociology in Europe: In search of identity. Berlin/Boston, DE: De Gruyter.

Pitt, B. (2010). What is sociology’s contribution beyond the humanities and other social sciences? Society, 47(3), 186-192.

Robinson, B. (2003). Socialism’s other modernity: Quality, quantity and the measure of the human. Modernism/Modernity, 10(4), 705-728.

Shilling, C., & Mellor, P. (1998). Durkheim, morality and modernity: Collective effervescence homo duplex and the sources of moral action. British Journal of Sociology, 49(2), 193-209.

Turner, B. (1999). Classical sociology. London, GB: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Turner, S. (1993). Emile Durkheim: Sociologist and moralist. Florence, US: Routledge.

State and the citizens are interdependent. The state provides education to its population with the hope that the educated population will later be tax-paying citizens. The state depends on taxes for the daily running of its obligations (Schaefer, 2011). The citizens in turn depend on the government to provide them with the necessary environment to acquire the education. This includes but is not limited to subsidizing the cost of education, providing student loans with low-interest rates, and scholarships. An educated person depends on education to get a good job and live a quality life.

The acquisition of a good education is dependent on the availability of money. Without money, it is almost impossible to acquire education. Money serves to enable us to get an education. With the academic papers, we can then apply for the desired job. Education thus indirectly enables us to get paid. A good income enables one to buy and acquire some things that are necessary for the daily smooth running of one’s life and activities accompanying it. In this transcript, Americans have resorted to attending school in Canada because of financial constraints. The students who study in Canada report cost as being among the important factors they considered before deciding to study in Canada.

Lending institutions give loans to students either studying at home or abroad. The institutions depend on these loans to make a profit. Profit earned by an institution is then used to run the institution. Operations funded in this way may include paying staff salaries and acquiring fixed assets. Failure to fund these operations adequately may lead to poor performance. Without the institution, jobs would be lost. So, while the loans help students get an education, interest generated through this business is necessary for the lending institutions to continue being in existence.

Sporting activities are necessary for some people to unwind after a day’s work. For some people, entertainment is more or less the same as sport. In this case, people depend on sport for good entertainment. Proper relaxation after work has been found to boost the productivity of an individual. Good productivity of workers is desired by many companies.

To travel to another country, one needs a passport. The passport enables a traveler to get into another country easily and legally. The existence of the passport is pegged on the need by people to travel to another country. If people were to stop traveling abroad, passports would not exist. The immigration department owes its existence in part to people traveling in and out of the country. Good infrastructure enables ease of travel between countries and within the country. Vehicles are bought because there is a need for transportation and the presence of at least some road network. On the other hand, existence of roads and the need for better and faster transport enables the sale of vehicles.

The functionalist theory, therefore, presupposes that everything happens for a reason. It claims that everything in our social environment is a complex whole that has constituent parts. The whole system depends on the functions of its parts.

References

Schaefer, R.T. (2011). Sociology: A Brief Introduction (9^th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill

The relationship between the individual and society is a multifaceted research question characterized by diverse opinions. Numerous social needs as education, depend on their connection and communication. The sociology of education includes a set of types and activities of various educational institutions, which provide members of society with knowledge, fundamental ideas, and professional skills. Structural functionalism and symbolic interactionism are concepts that enable comprehension of the nature of the interaction between society and the individual and explain the educational process.

Firstly, it is worth beginning with structural functionalism and its primary categories. Its creator is Parsons, whose theory explores the individual and his basic actions in society. Social systems are formed by processes and states of social interaction between the main subjects actively interacting with each other (Stolley, 2005). Since the social system is formed of individuals, each participant is endowed with ideas, goals and attitudes correlated with cultural values and norms of life. Each person unwittingly opposes the other, which characterizes group, class, and personal relationships. If such relations are preserved, the system can be considered viable. The development of Parsons’ theory was carried out by Robert Merton, who improved and modified the structural functionalism of his predecessor (Stolley, 2005). He believed Parsons’ theory was essentially a philosophical system challenging to reconcile with empirical analysis.

Functionalism in the sociology of education deserves an exceptionally detailed analysis. According to it, societies, like living organisms, consist of objectively necessary and interrelated parts, each of which performs a specific function (Musgrave, 2017). These include the transmission of culture, the reproduction of the whole model, the exercise of control and power, the distribution of benefits, and more. All organs must act in concert, achieving the balance of society. Functionalist sociologists consider the family, the Church, and education the leading institutions of cultural transmission (Musgrave, 2017). If one is dysfunctional, the others take over some of its functions for societal balance. Teachers and students are not bound together by personal feelings and attachments but by common and abstract grounds (Musgrave, 2017). However, school is not a mirror image of adult society; it resembles other social institutions without fully reproducing them, which makes it a link between family and adult society.

Symbolic interactionism operates with various categories, the consideration of which is no less critical. The concept pays special attention to communication, through which the essential characteristics of society and the individual and their unity achieved in the interaction process are manifested (Stolley, 2005). Due to socialization, people can interpret stimuli and expected responses more or less consciously. Symbols are what make it possible to do what animals cannot. Consequently, symbolic interactionism states that the symbolic environment mediates people’s interrelation with physical and objective reality (Stolley, 2005). In other words, people’s meanings of signs and symbols define them and the reality they feel.

In the process of socialization, common cultural meanings control how individuals interact with the environment. Thus, symbolic interactionists perceive society as an interconnected system of positions, roles, statuses, group expectations, and reactions to actual behavior, which always deviate from set norms. A mutually consistent set of attitudes, directions, and meanings toward others and oneself is gradually formed. Concerning the education system, this approach aims to study not only educational associations in which direct communication and psychological interaction prevail but also to explain the features of management (Musgrave, 2017). It is of great theoretical and methodological importance when studying such components of managerial activity as attitudes or behavior motivation because a manager’s behavior, to a certain extent, can be considered a role with its own stable socio-psychological structure.

Thus, it can be concluded that both concepts are based on different approaches and categories. Structural functionalism interprets society as a system with its own structure and mechanisms of interaction of structural elements, each of which performs its own function. Symbolic interactionism puts forward the idea that the social world can be represented as a diversity of symbols that create the basis for human interaction.

References

Musgrave, P. W. (2017). The sociology of education. Routledge.

Stolley, K. S. (2005). The basics of sociology. Greenwood Publishing Group.

Introduction

Sociology uses models and concepts to analyze social groups, elucidate problems in them, such as social tensions, and propose ways to solve them. Nowadays, despite all social and technological advances, conflicts are still present at all levels of society and personality. The rate of suicides is quite high, and the problem of crime and international terrorism is very actual. Emile Durkheim, a 19th – 20th centuries sociologist, proposed the concept that personal and social conflicts are interconnected. They, and, subsequently, the violence toward others or self, is caused by anomia, a lack of any internal norms and morals that direct one’s life and grant it meaning. The anomia is caused by unsuccessful social integration when no connection and cooperation are present between society members, and everyone feels lonely and trustless toward each other.

The Problem of Violence and Self-Violence in Society

Violence is present in society in many forms, but one may divide it into external violence, aimed at other people and social norms, and internal one, aimed at oneself: exam. According to various studies, social violence, such as aggressive riots or terrorist attacks, is often caused by existential reasons such as despair (Troian et al., 2019). For example, when studying people’s tendency to engage in violent action, in light of the December 2018 French protests, researchers found that this tendency correlates with the loss of life meaning (Mahfud & Adam-Troian, 2019). It means that internally lonely and desperate people who see no future for themselves are more ready to participate in violent acts and tend to engage in criminal activity.

Internal violence is found to be connected with similar issues, too. When studying the suicidal tendencies among Kurd migrants in the UK, it was found that they are correlated with the loss of the sense of self-identity and usual social norms (Cetin, 2016). Thus, the problem of violence and self-harm is actual and deeply interconnected with existential problems and a lack of cultural norms, called anomia. In my opinion, by analyzing the anomia and ways to solve it, one may find clues to healing society.

Durkheim’s Theory: Anomia, Suicide, and Social Integration

A social fact

Durkheim’s theory consists of various terms, elements, and models, and to describe the anomia, one should define the concept of social fact first. It is some phenomena, ideas, or events that exist in one’s life without their consent and sometimes even without their notice but have a profound influence on them. A typical example of a social fact is norms of behavior that were introduced to a person in early childhood and are unconsciously followed by them (Blommaert, 2018). Sociologists usually “regard social roles as unchanging parts of a society’s culture; they are social facts,” which means that those norms define social roles (Giddens et al., 2020, p. 99). Another example is a crime that, according to Durkheim, always exists in society, and criminals play a particular role there (Dillon, 2019). The first example is internal, and the second is external, but both of them are social facts, as they are formed and maintained by societal structure.

Social facts, according to Durkheim, are the basis on which the social structure is formed. As a functionalist, he sees society as a unified living organism where each part exists for a specific purpose (Dillon, 2019). He insists that it is not enough to use simple psychological methods when evaluating a person’s condition: they are limited as they ignore a significant layer of impersonal influences (Barnwell, 2017). This layer is created by cultural norms present in society, the cultural background of a certain social group, opportunities for this group, and other people’s behaviors. It may be indirectly measured by sociologic parameters, statistics, and case analyses: for example, suicide rates and news analysis.

Anomia (Anomie)

It is a situation where no organic, working social norms are present, and people feel disconnected. Anomia, originally called Anomie by Durkheim, is a major moral crisis and a social disease in functionalist terms (Serpa & Ferreira, 2018). It may end with society’s dissolution and death, which is highly uncomfortable for everyone living there. Cooperation is much hindered in this situation: people feel deeply lonely, everyone is considered alien, and all prerequisites for violent actions are present. It is interconnected with Karl Marx’s concept of alienation, which “refers to feelings of estrangement and even hostility— initially to one’s job and eventually to the overall framework of capitalist-industrial production” (Giddens et al., 2020, p. 445). People start to fear each other, lose the sense to live, and finally stop seeing any value in life at all. When great frustration is present, along with the absence of any moral values, a society becomes very prone to destruction: crime, riots, and suicides (Cetin, 2016; Mahfud & Adam-Troian, 2019; Troian et al., 2019). This social disease is hazardous and signalizes the necessity of formulating new actual moral norms.

Anomia is especially prevalent in situations when old norms, cultures, and religions die out due to irrelevancy, and new ones are not formed yet. Durkheim said that “processes of change in the modern world are so rapid and intense that they give rise to major social difficulties” (Giddens et al., 2020, p. 13). The 2020s is a time of rapid technological progress, globalization, cultural mixing, and global power confrontation. It means that the processes mentioned by Durkheim and Marx are much more intense today than they were in their times. People become alienated from their jobs as technologies push them out of them; diverse cultures make interpersonal communication much harder than in a monocultural society. One can conclude that we are living in the age of mass anomia: this explains the prevalence of social violence and, hopefully, opens some ways to solve this.

Collective consciousness and social integration

Integration is the process of the social structure’s formation when various social norms are set in the society, and the resulting structure is called the collective consciousness. In all cases, the social atmosphere determines people’s behavior, along with their personality: this atmosphere is the structure made of many interconnected social facts (Barnwell, 2017). Durkheim argues that the very existence of the society “depends on cooperation, which presumes a general consensus among its members regarding basic values and customs” (Giddens et al., 2020, p. 12). While forcefully imposed cooperation leads to the alienation of people from their jobs and one another, only increasing the anomia, organic cooperation makes everyone feel safer and better (Dillon, 2019). Thus, if people are interconnected based on their cultural values and ability to understand each other, society becomes stable, safe, and very productive for its people.

Social Disintegration as the Cause of Violence

Social disintegration is the process when anomy is significant, and social norms cease to exist in society at all. Everyone begins to feel alone, and only strict mechanical responsibilities, such as the necessity to be alive, have a place to live, and obey the law, group society members together. They cannot or do not want to follow old moral orders, and no new social game rules are available (Blommaert, 2018). People become disorientated and often disappointed: while it may be the time when new original ideas are created, it is also a time of suicides, mass depression, criminality, and violent riots.

Durkheim shows that laws and punishment should exist in a healthy society, along with criminals and other deviant elements. Repressive laws are ineffective, as they create only mechanical solidarity when people are connected with each other by external brute force (Serpa & Ferreira, 2018). As there are directed social influences and social currents, which influence people’s behavior, it is unlikely that repressive laws and severe punishments will make them better, as they heavily evoke negative emotions in people (Barnwell, 2017). According to the textbook, “the harsher and more oppressive prison conditions are, the more likely it is that inmates will be brutalized by the experience” (Giddens et al., 2020, p. 204). Thus, social disintegration is a lack of cooperation and connection between society’s members caused by large anomia, and repressive methods cannot heal it. Conversely, such methods are more likely to destabilize society even more, increasing the negative emotions accumulated in it and eventually destroying it totally.

Toward the Social Integrity

Social integration is when all people have a cooperative position toward each other, which means they are ready to communicate and solve any problems without coercion. Law, according to Durkheim, should not concentrate on punishments but on restoring and maintaining the social order via the upbringing of morality in people (Serpa & Ferreira, 2018). However, he “argued that punishment not only helps guarantee conformity among those who would violate a culture’s norms and values but also vividly reminds others what the norms and values are” (Giddens et al., 2020, p. 75). He considers punishment an essential social element, but its purpose is to educate criminals rather than inflict pain and harm on them.

A functionalist approach, followed by Durkheim, sees society as an organism: thus, its integrity may be reached by defining and healing its problems. As many social facts should be studied as possible, and people’s problems should be seen in the light of social facts, as they will determine their choices (Barnwell, 2017). For example, in the case of violent protests, processes that make people desperate must be elucidated (Troian et al., 2019). Sometimes they are apparent, such as a lack of social mobility, and sometimes vague, such as the loss of cultural values.

Durkheim called successful social integrity integration organic solidarity: it is alive, self-regulating, and evolving over time. It is when “all members of society are engaged in highly specialized roles (or functions, in Durkheim’s terminology), with functional interdependence” (Giddens et al., 2020, p. 70). As mentioned, it cannot be reached by the repressive approach, as it will only have a temporary effect but eventually destabilize society even more. In the following discussion and conclusion, I will propose my ideas about how integrity may be reached: by introducing new concepts of moral education and punishments.

Discussion

I think that Durkheim’s theory of social integration is actual and important for the modern world, full of social tensions between various groups, classes, races, cultures, and genders. People are often disorientated and disintegrated: they do not know what is important to them and often are in fear. They often fear the punishment, in case they will break the law somehow, and the violence from other people. The situation may be slowly changed by creating new, more universal moral principles and educating people from childhood. Knowledge of cultural diversity and technological advances must be included, as they will allow communication with people of various cultures more freely and be on pace with the world’s high development speed. In addition, the concept of punishment should be changed: it is not a tool for revenge but for reeducation and demonstration of the power of law and morals. I believe that those two ideas, new moral principles and the new concept of punishment, will help to reach social integration and, thus, solve many problems caused by anomia.

Conclusion

The problem of violence in society is actual: crime, terror attacks, and suicide rates are major challenges to people’s security. Internal violence, such as self-harm and suicide, and external violence, such as the desire to participate in terrorism or criminality, are interconnected and usually have similar reasons. Anomia, the stage of losing social norms and moral guidance, is shown to be this reason: desperate people, who feel that they have nothing to value and lose, are prone to kill others or themselves. The situation may be seen from the functionalist perspective: as an ill society that should be healed by successful social integration. Thus, methods of moral education and punishments should be reviewed: the former should be actual and consider all modern challenges, such as cultural diversity and technological advances. Punishments should be aimed at restoring the societal order and re-educating deviant elements rather than harming them. Those changes may help reduce anomia and solve the problem of violence in society.

References

Barnwell, A. (2017). Durkheim as affect theorist. Journal of Classical Sociology, 18(1), 21–35.

Blommaert, J. (2018). Durkheim and the Internet: Sociolinguistics and the sociological imagination. Bloomsbury.

Cetin, U. (2016). Cosmopolitanism and the relevance of “zombie concepts”: The case of anomic suicide amongst Alevi Kurd youth. The British Journal of Sociology, 68(2), 145–166.

Dillon, M. (2019). Introduction to sociological theory: Theorists, concepts, and their applicability to the twenty-first century. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Giddens, A., Duneier, M., Appelbaum, R. P., & Carr, D. (2020). Introduction to sociology (12th ed.). Norton.

Mahfud, Y., & Adam-Troian, J. (2019). “Macron demission!”: Loss of significance generates violent extremism for the Yellow Vests through feelings of anomia. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 24(1), 136843021988095.

Serpa, S., & Ferreira, C. M. (2018). Anomie in the sociological perspective of Émile Durkheim. Sociology International Journal, 2(6).

Troian, J., Baidada, O., Arciszewski, T., Apostolidis, T., Celebi, E., & Yurtbakan, T. (2019). Evidence for indirect loss of significance effects on violent extremism: The potential mediating role of anomia. Aggressive Behavior, 45(6), 691–703.

Introduction

People have been treated differently in many parts of the world based on their gender. VOA News (2020) has recently uploaded a documentary that highlights cases of early marriage among girls from different countries. Poverty and backward culture in their communities are some of the factors leading to underage matrimony (VOA News, 2020). The illiteracy among parents who do not see the value of education and its benefits for a girl also contributes to early marriages. As a result, many youthful girls are left in forced relationships (VOA News, 2020). Moreover, existing governments are often not doing enough to deal with and prevent the global and unfortunate practice that is affecting young girls. It is evident that being forced into matrimony, especially when one gets married to a person twice their age, the emotional effect is quite intense and overwhelming (VOA News, 2020). Although it is perceived that underaged and forced marriages are common only in Africa, such practices are occurring in various areas of the world. The majority of these girls are not educated, meaning that they are not aware of family planning methods.

It is sad to see what is happening to young girls, who should otherwise be in school. These girls are not able to receive general education that could have presented them with opportunities to enter a college, build a career, and live freely. The issues related to underage forced marriages are not given enough attention, and global leadership appears to overlook the matter. While that is not enough, I believe that everyone deserves to live a better life, and such young girls should be allowed to receive an education, get jobs and change the state of their families. I was at the same time surprised to see governments not implementing stricter measures to ensure that the people participating in forcing young girls into matrimony are punished.

Analysis: Functionalism Theory

Functionalism theory can be used to address the problems from the above-discussed documentary. Institutions such as family, education, religion, and media can influence how people socialize and relate to one another. Consequently, functionalism perceives society as a whole concerning the functions of each constituent element (Okolo & Nwachukwu, 2022). The theory concentrates on how social institutions meet social needs and emphasizes either balance or purpose, noting separate and unique roles that shape society (Okolo & Nwachukwu, 2022). In particular, functionalism implies that each institution must perform specific functions to ensure the overall growth of society (Okolo & Nwachukwu, 2022). Accordingly, one can argue that communities that force underage girls into matrimony do so because such societies regard marriage as a function, that girls are obliged to enact for the benefit of the majority.

Firstly, some people view child marriages as necessary practices for financial survival. VOA News (2020) presents the story of Somaya from Afghanistan, who was pushed to marry when she was about to finish the seventh grade. Her father had made a bargain with their relative to exchange Somaya for 3300 dollars (VOA News, 2020). The documentary describes Somaya and countless similar young brides as powerless, poor, and barely educated people who serve as business deals for the grown-ups (VOA News, 2020). While Somaya’s father received money that hopefully was used to support the rest of their family, the girl’s new relatives acquired a daughter-in-law to do house chores (VOA News, 2020). However, it seems that no one in the community was concerned about Somaya’s suffering as she was faced with physical and verbal abuse (VOA News, 2020). Somaya, who can represent multiple individuals with similar stories, has performed a monetary function that benefited two families but not the little girl herself.

Secondly, people often perceive marriage as a tradition that every member of society must follow. Many functionalists argue that social institutions are meant to contribute to the construction of a stable system and that changes in one institution can cause alterations in others (Okolo & Nwachukwu, 2022). Consequently, the story of Qubra from Pakistan presents an example of the conviction that underage matrimony is important for the community’s balance (VOA News, 2020). The young woman shares that her father believed that once a girl is strong enough to fetch water, she should marry (VOA News, 2020). As it is regarded sinful if a female is unwedded before she reaches puberty, the girl’s family has a custom of early marriage, with the time and spouse chosen by the father (VOA News, 2020). Although Qubra states that she liked to study and wanted to continue her education, she was not given a choice because her desires could compromise the stability within the community (VOA News, 2020). Qubra and her female relatives enter matrimony at a young age to do household duties in order not to disturb the societal structure with the sinful life of a free person.

Thirdly, some people may consider child marriages ordinary because of gender-based stereotypes. Functionalism suggests that historically formed gender roles require women to take care of domestic responsibilities to keep the family system functioning properly (Okolo & Nwachukwu, 2022). A citizen of Tanzania, Mwanahamisi, was supposed to marry a stranger, and when she asked for the groom’s name, Mwanahamisi’s mother said that it was none of her business (VOA News, 2020). The girl’s relatives did not deem it necessary for the soon-to-be wife to know anything about her future husband, as girls were perceived to become wives and nothing more (VOA News, 2020). Eventually, Mwanahamisi found a way to claim her freedom and is now pursuing an education to build a career in fashion (VOA News, 2020). Mwanahamisi was expected to perform gender-stereotyped functions within a household but became one of the fortunate girls who managed to show society that its stability would not be shaken if girls were independent.

Conclusion

In conclusion, functionalist theory believes that a stable society has strong microelements from all sectors. For the family to be steady, the government is expected to be active and responsible for offering quality education, healthcare, and other social amenities. At the same time, the citizens are expected to pay taxes and obey the rules and regulations that are put in place. In case the government, for example, is not able to offer the services such as security and food during the crisis, it means that the cycle is not complete, and citizens would not be able to work and pay the taxes necessary to keep everything running. Regarding the video, it is rather disappointing to see the suffering young girls are going through in terms of young marriages and poverty in different parts of the world. While underage matrimony is perceived to function for the benefit of society, people often do not consider young women can contribute to communities in diverse ways that are not limited to doing house chores. World leaders should come together to develop appropriate policies that deal with forced marriages to offer girls opportunities to get educated and thrive like any other person.

References

Okolo, E. A., & Nwachukwu, C. C. (2022). Gender issues in African culture: An evaluation. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 20(1). 194-205.

VOA News. (2020). Worth of a Girl: Hope and Survival of Child’s Bride[Video]. YouTube. Web.