Introduction
Sociology is the study of human groups and their interaction with one another. Different people have a differing view of the world from an outside point of view, what is popularly called, social imagination or perception. The different theories in sociology avail the various sociological perspectives through which human beings view the social world. Bluntly stated, a perspective is basically a way of looking or viewing the world. As such, sociological perspectives make it possible for human beings to predict and explain the social world in which they inhabit. To this end, there are three major sociological perspectives to explain this social phenomenon. They include: the functionalist perspective, the conflict theory and the symbolic interactionist perspective. It is important to note that each of the sociological perspective offers its own varying explanation of the social world, as well as human behavior. This paper addresses the various perspectives and applies the theories to a social institution so as to lay bare the strengths and weaknesses of each theoretical perspective upon the social institution.
According to the functionalist perspective, the society is made up of interconnected parts that work harmoniously so as to achieve equilibrium and a state of balance in the society for the whole. This theoretical perspective mainly draws from the works of prominent sociologists such as Emile Durkheim, Robert Merton, Herbert Spencer and Talcott Parsons. It states that each of the various social institutions make a contribution to the society by playing various functions. For instance, the social institution of the family makes it possible for reproduction and the socialization of children while the institution of education plays the crucial function of transmitting cultural values, skills and knowledge of the particular society. On the other hand, religion serves to impart moral values and offer moral guidance, while economics offers a way of the production, distribution and uptake of goods and services. The social institution of politics provides a means of governing of the members of the society. In summary, the functionalist perspective lays emphasis on the interconnectedness of the society as it casts the spotlight on how each part of the society influences and is influenced by another. On the other hand, whereas the functionalist perspective holds that the society is made up of different parts that work harmoniously, the conflict theory perspective views the society in the converse as one made up of different parts with different interests and competing for resources and power. It examines the society and explains the society of the world by looking at the groups that have access to power and benefit depending on how the society is arranged. For instance, the feminist theory argues that human beings live in a patriarchal society where the control is done by the males and that there is a need for change. This conflict perspective borrows heavily form the works of Karl Marx who argued that as societies go through stages of economic development, the concern over meeting needs is fast replaced by the concern of making profits. Marx then argued that the classes of the haves and the have-nots whom he called proletariat and bourgeoisie emerged in a capitalistic economic system. The other major sociological perspective is the symbolic interactionist perspective.
Whilst both the conflict and the functionalist perspectives are majorly concerned with the broad aspects of the society such as social institutions and their influence on the world, symbolic interactionist perspective focuses on the social dynamics of individuals that interact in small groups. As such, this perspective may be said to be a micro-sociological analysis compared to the other sociological perspective which may be said to employ the macro-sociological analysis. The symbolic interactionism was heavily influenced by the works of prominent philosophers and sociologists such as George Simmel and Charles Cooley. This theory suggests that the behavior of human beings is influenced by definitions and meanings created though the symbolic interactions with other human beings. this sociological perspective further states that our sense of identity is shaped by our social interaction and that human beings develop their self-concept through an observation of the interaction of other people with them and how they label them.
Applying the various sociological perspectives to the social institution of the family, there emerges various strengths and weaknesses of each theory. The functionalist perspective considers the institution of the gamily as a singular mechanical entity where each member of the family, their roles and functions are beneficial to the good of the wider society. The functionalists believe that each family member ought to fulfill a variety of functions both collectively and in their individual capacity so as to result in growth and development. They thus see a family as a viable institution which prides its strength in that if the parents and the children play their roles well, the institutions can live harmoniously and be productive. On the other hand, the conflict theory is cynical about the family and the society as a whole as it perceives that human beings are always in competition for power and resources. In a family setting, the theory contends that conflict is bound to happen as family members jostle for positions and individual interests and competition sets in. Indeed, proponents of this theory argue that the family unit never seeks to achieve equilibrium or a state of balance as is the case in the functionalist perspective, but rather seeks to manage conflict. The theorists lay emphasis on the power differences that exist among family members based on gender, class and age. As such, conflict theorists see the family institutions as having both strengths and weaknesses. Strengths where family members are in cooperation and weaknesses where they are in competition or conflict. In summary, they maintain that order in the family is achieved through coercion, negotiation and bargaining. With respect to symbolic interactionists, families are living forms that are dynamic and the family unit is not predicated on any legal or cultural prescription but rather on shared meanings that emanate through interaction with members. “With the action of individuals being heavily emphasized, he stressed that social interactionism allowed the best, most direct observation of human behavior and interaction. Blumer believed that meaning has a forceful nature given to it through a self-interacting process”..
At an individual level, I am of the considered opinion that functionalism provides the better perspective of viewing the family unit and the whole society in that each member has their own roles which are complementary. I find the conflict theory to be quite cynical about the society though it may be true in a number of situations. Further, according to the functionalist theoretical perspective, there is primary socialization whereby core values and morality is passed from a generation to another and unto posterity. In addition and closely interlinked with the functioning of the whole institution of the family as different parts with various roles, the men usually go to work as breadwinners while the women stay at home to cater for the children. I find the functionalist view to be closely aligned as it holds that the family is a key institution which leads to maintenance of social order since it meets the needs of other institutions like the education system. They compare the family as the human body where each part of the body is crucial for the proper functioning of the whole. Similarly, just like the inability of a part of the body leads to the dysfunction of the body, so does the failure of a family member to take up their role leads to family dysfunction.
References
Adams, B. N., & Sydie, R. (2008). Sociological Theory. California: Pine Forge Press.
Alexander, J. C. (2009). Twenty Lectures: Sociological Theory Since World War II. New York: Columbia University Press.
Blumer, H. (2007). Symbolic interactionism: perspective and method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Frost, J. (2008). The Social Institution of Marriage. Journal of Comparative Family Studies , 507-514.
Mooney, Knox, & Schacht. (2007). Understanding Social Problems 5th Edition. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.
