4687 SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY II

ASSIGNMENT NO. 1

Question No. 1
What are the documentary methods’ and “indexical”? Explain. (20)

Answer No. 1
Documentary Method:
Documentary method or research is defined as research conducted by using official documents
or personal documents as a source of information. The documents can be the Newspapers,
Diaries, Maps, Brochures, Directories, Government statistical publications, Audio records,
Photographs, Computer files, and Ribbons.

Some of these examples may not fit the traditional invoice of a “document”, but because they
contain information, they can be used for documentary research. Social scientists often conduct
documentary research. It is mainly carried out to evaluate various documents in the interest of
social or historical value. Sometimes researchers also conduct desk research to study various
documents about events or people.

Documentary research is similar to content analysis, which consists of studying the existing
information recorded in the media, texts and physical elements. In this case, the collection of
personal data is not required to conduct the research. This is an excellent example of secondary
research. It should be noted that, unlike surveys and research interviews, documents are
originally published / generated without regard to the purpose of the research. It is good practice
to check documents against similar ones before deciding.1

Documentary Method of Interpretation was used by Karl Mannheim and Alfred Schutz, but its
current meaning derives from Harold Garfinkel, the founder of ethnomethodology.
Documentary method of interpretation is used to categorize, investigate, interpret, and identify
the limitations of physical sources, most commonly written documents, whether in the private
or public domain. Harold Garfinkel asserts that the documentary method is a method which lay
persons and sociologists alike use in commonsense reasoning about the world. Documentary
method of interpretation consists of treating an actual appearance as the document of, or as
pointing to, a presupposed underlying pattern. People employ a documentary method of
interpretation, by treating actual appearances as the document of a presupposed underlying
pattern. A boy choosing a truck or a girl choosing a doll is seen as an indication of an underlying
pattern of biological preferences, or for the sociologist, of gender socialization. There is a
reciprocal relationship between the ‘document’ and the underlying pattern: the underlying
pattern is now given some legitimacy because of the observation of the individual ‘document’
which is the child's choice of toys.

The Documentary Method is the method of understanding utilized by everyone engaged in

trying to make sense of their social world, which includes the ethnomethodologist. Karl
Mannheim defined the term documentary method of interpretation as a search for an identical
homologous pattern of meaning underlying a variety of totally different realizations of that
meaning. Garfinkel states that the documentary method of interpretation consists of treating an
actual appearance as the "document of", "as pointing to", as "standing on behalf of", a
presupposed underlying pattern. These "documents" serve to constitute the underlying pattern
but are themselves interpreted on the basis of what is already known about that underlying
pattern. This seeming paradox is quite familiar to hermeneuticians who understand this
phenomenon as a version of the hermeneutic circle. This phenomenon is also subject to analysis

1
https://englopedia.com/what-is-documentary-research/
from the perspective of Gestalt theory [part/whole relationships], and the phenomenological
sociology theory of perception.2

The characteristic of documentary research is that if done thoroughly, it can help to develop a
hypothesis or to prove or disprove an existing hypothesis. This, of course, depends on the
applied methodology and the depth of the research carried out. The investigator should conduct
his or her own secondary research to analyze the content before extracting it. The data must be
scientifically managed.

Follow this 4-step approach to control content quality:

1. Authenticity of documents
2. Document credibility
3. Representativeness of the documents
4. Meaning derived from documents

Authenticity implies if the origin of the document is reliable, if the evidence is genuine, if the
intentions are sincere and what were the commitments to create the document. The authenticity
of the source is the main criterion of the documentary investigation. By credibility we
understand the subjective and objective components that make the information source believe
and if the data is free from distortion and error. The information must be reliable, and you must
have some level of expertise. Representativeness refers to whether the document represents a
larger collection of the data point and is an aggregation of the topic under study. Documents
become distorted over time due to the inclusion of new factors, and the documents must be
verified to be representative. It means if the findings are understandable and clear to be called
evidence. The goal of examining documents is to understand their meaning. Researchers must
find out whether the document fits the historical context or not.3

Some Advantages for Documentary Methods are:

1. Readily available data: Data is available from various sources. You just have to know
where to look and how to use them. Data is available in different forms, and leveraging
it is the real challenge.

2. Cheap and inexpensive: Data for research is already collected and published in print or
other forms. The researcher does not have to spend money and time as he does to gather
the knowledge of the market research and gather the data. You need to search and
compile the data available from different sources.

3. Saves time: Conducting market research is time consuming. Responses will not arrive
quickly as expected, and collecting global responses will take an enormous amount of
time. If you have all the referenced documents (or know where to find them), the
research is relatively quick.

4. No biases: The collection of primary data tends to be biased. This bias depends on many
factors, such as the age of the respondents, the time they spend on the survey, their
mindset when taking the survey, their gender, their feelings towards certain ideas, to
name a few. The list goes on and on when it comes to survey biases.

5. The presence of the researcher is not necessary during data collection: The researcher
does not need to be present during data collection. It is virtually impossible for the
2
http://sociologyindex.com/documentary_method_of_interpretation.htm
3
https://englopedia.com/what-is-documentary-research/
 researcher to be present at every point in the data source, especially with the various
data sources in mind.

6. Useful for hypotheses: Use historical data to make inferences from current or future
events. Conclusions can be drawn from the experience of past events and the data
available to them.4

Some Disadvantages for Documentary Method are:

1. Limited data: Data is not always available, especially when you need to verify a theory
or reinforce the argument based on different forms of data.
2. Inaccuracies: Since the data is historical and published, there is almost no way to
determine whether the data is accurate or not.
3. Incomplete documents: Often the documents can be incomplete, and there is no way of
knowing if there are additional documents to refer to on the subject.
4. Data out of context: The data that the researcher refers to may be out of context and
may not be consistent with the concept the researcher is trying to study. This is because
the purpose of the research is not thought about when creating the original data.
Researchers often have to settle for the data at hand.5

Indexicality:
The gestures, cues, words, and other information sent and received by interacting parties have
meaning in a particular context. Without some knowledge of the context the biographies of the
interacting parties, their avowed purpose, their past interactive experiences and so forth, it
would easily be possible to misinterpret the symbolic communication among interacting
individuals. This fact of interactive life is denoted by the concept of indexicality. To say that
an expression is indexical is to emphasize that the meaning of that expression is tied to a
particular context. This phenomenon of indexicality draws attention to the problem of how
actors in a context construct a vision of reality in that context. They develop expressions that
invoke their common vision about what is real in their situation. The concept of indexicality
directs an investigator's attention to actual interactive contexts in order to see how actors go
about creating indexical expressions i.e. words, facial and body gestures and other cues to
create and sustain the presumption that a particular reality governs their affairs. According to
Mehan and Wood, ''the ethnomethodological theory of the reality constructor is about the
procedures that accomplish reality. It is not about any specific reality. This emphasis has led
ethnomethodologists to isolate the general types of methods employed by interacting actors.6

Indexicality can be seen as a frequent feature of social concepts and sociological concepts, a
feature which means that social actors as well as sociologists must often undertake careful
interpretive work to determine the meanings prevailing within particular social settings.
Elements of indexicality can be seen as a feature of all concepts, including those in physical
science. While this certainly means that science can no longer reasonably be seen in simple
positivist or empiricist terms as directly referring to phenomena, this does not prevent general
theories being advanced. Likewise, elements of indexicality in sociological accounts need not
preclude workable general accounts.7

Question No. 2
What are the main features of gender difference, gender inequality and gender oppression? (20)

4
Ibid
5
Ibid
6
https://www.sociologyguide.com/ethnomethodology/indexicality-meaning.php
7
https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/indexical+expression
Answer No. 2
GENDER DIFFERENCES
It is the typical differences between men and women that are specific to a particular culture
and influenced by its attitudes and practices. Gender differences emerge in a variety of
domains, such as careers, communication, and interpersonal relationships.8

For Example, men as compared to women are more interested in things like cars, buildings,
and machines, and women are more interested in people like how people think, and how their
bodies work,9 and how people feel.

GENDER INEQUALITY
Gender Inequality refers to legal, social and cultural situation in which sex and/or gender
determine different rights and dignity for women and men, which are reflected in their unequal
access to or enjoyment of rights, as well as the assumption of stereotyped social and cultural
roles. These affect their status in all areas of life in society, whether public or private, in the
family or the labor market, in economic or political life, in power and decision-making, as well
as in social gender relations. In virtually all societies, women are in an inferior position to
men.10

For Example, women in the Middle East do not have the right to pass citizenship on to their
children while men could not only pass it to their children, but also to their non-national
wives.11

GENDER OPPRESSION
Gender oppression is defined as oppression associated with the gender norms, relations and
stratification of a given society. Modern norms of gender consist of mutually exclusive
categories of masculinity and femininity.12

For Example, Women work two-thirds of the world’s working hours but only earn 10% of
global income. Women continue to be unfairly burdened with unpaid domestic and care work,
which limits their ability to participate in paid employment.13

Gender Differences are differences in a particular cultural between the roles of men and women
and associated social norms and values. Gender Inequality is the inequal treatment of men and
women in a society between men and women. However, this is often due to the application of
modern liberal principles on a society and cultural that do not follow such liberal principles
and had its own social principles. Gender Oppression is mistreatment of any gender based on
the gender norms and value of a particular culture or society.

Question No. 3
What are the most important developments in recent sociological theory? (20)

Answer No. 3
Our current period in history has been called by many the postmodern age and many
contemporary critics are understandably interested in making sense of the time in which they
live. Critics run into difficulties given the sheer complexity of living in history: we do not yet
know which elements in our culture will win out and we do not always recognize the subtle but

8
https://dictionary.apa.org/gender-differences
9
http://psychology.iresearchnet.com/social-psychology/personality/gender-differences/
10
https://eige.europa.eu/thesaurus/terms/1182
11
https://www.borgenmagazine.com/10-examples-gender-inequality-world/
12
https://www.sociologyguide.com/gender/gender-oppression.php
13
https://www.concern.net/news/what-are-examples-gender-discrimination
insistent ways that changes in our society affect our ways of thinking and being in the world.
One symptom of the present's complexity is just how divided critics are on the question of
postmodern culture, with a number of critics celebrating our liberation and a number of others
lamenting our enslavement.14

One of the problems in dealing with postmodernism is in distinguishing it from modernism. In

many ways, postmodern artists and theorists continue the sorts of experimentation that we can
also find in modernist works, including the use of self-consciousness, parody, irony,
fragmentation, generic mixing, ambiguity, simultaneity, and the breakdown between high and
low forms of expression. In this way, postmodern artistic forms can be seen as an extension of
modernist experimentation; however, others prefer to represent the move into postmodernism
as a more radical break, one that is a result of new ways of representing the world including
television, film (especially after the introduction of color and sound), and the computer. Many
date postmodernity from the sixties when we witnessed the rise of postmodern architecture;
however, some critics prefer to see WWII as the radical break from modernity, since the horrors
of nazism and of other modernist revolutions like communism and Maoism were made evident
at this time. The very term "postmodern" was, in fact, coined in the forties by the historian,
Arnold Toynbee.15

Postmodernist often consider this current era as their contemporary or representative which is
characterized by rapid scientific advancement and technological development. However, at the
turn of new century and increasing globalization and beginning of the new age of information
many critics now limits Postmodernism to late 1990s and others insists it still continues and
the age of information just one ongoing phase of this postmodern era.

Sociology itself originated in the challenge of understanding the modern world as it contrasted
with the ancient and medieval worlds. The worldview associated with modernity, was
grounded in the belief that the steady growth of scientific knowledge would insure continued
social and intellectual progress. Postmodern theorists, would dispute the notion that any system
of knowledge, including science itself, can provide assurance of ultimate truth or guarantee
continued progress. Definitions of valid knowledge and progress are relative and vary for
people with divergent cultural traditions or different social locations. They see many of the
defining features of modernity as having been superseded, rejected, or radically transformed in
ways that mark a major transition to a new era.

The postmodern perspective has been widely influential in many academic areas outside
sociology. Postmodern theorists in sociology vary in terms of their primary focus of analysis,
but they concentrate heavily on contemporary issues and trends. They would generally argue
that current trends mark the end of the period of human history associated with the development
of modern society, which has long been characterized and largely defined by scientific advance,
industrialism, capitalism, urbanism, and bureaucracy. Although these features of the social
world continue to be relevant, the focus is on the emergence of a radically different postmodern
period. The distinctive characteristics of this new postmodern period are evident in many areas
of social life, including personal relationships, lifestyles, and identity formation at the micro
level and restructuring of economic hierarchies, increased cultural fragmentation and
relativism, and globalization in all its different dimensions at the macro level.16

Despite the major shift in worldview represented in postmodern theory, many aspects of the
culture of modernity, especially technology and other forms of material culture, continue to be

14
https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism/modules/introduction.html
15
Ibid
16
Contemporary Sociological Theory: An Integrated Multi Level Approach, D.P. Johnson, Springer 2008, pg.
543
highly relevant in the contemporary world. Continuing progress in such areas as transportation,
communication, production, information systems, and computer technology are a significant
part of the material environment and exert a major influence on the worldviews and lifestyles
emerging in our postmodern era. In addition, scientific work in all disciplines, including
sociology, continues to move forward on the basis of the implicit belief that continued progress
can be achieved through systematic empirical research and disciplined intellectual inquiry.
Likewise, despite the important current transformations that can be identified, many of the most
distinctive features of the bureaucratic structures that dominate our economic and political
landscape represent a continuation of some of the most important defining characteristics of
modernity.17

Modern era is distinguished from the postmodern by hallmark developments of that era which
would include bureaucracy, capitalism, and centralization,

In his 1990 book, The Consequences of Modernity, Anthony Giddens argues that despite the
major transformations and new developments that have occurred in recent times, the
continuities with modernity are sufficiently great that the present era should be characterized
as a period of “late modernity” or “radicalized modernity” rather than as a new postmodern
period. In spite of the historical discontinuities that can be identified, the fundamental
characteristics of modernity are still evident in the continuation of the capitalist organization
of economic activity, the use of industrial technology in production, the nation-state as the
principal source of societal administration and social control, and reliance on military power
in defending and promoting national interests.18

One of the major contemporary changes Giddens emphasizes is the globalization of modernity,
which is made possible by the development of more and more effective means of transportation
and communication. These technological developments allow for a “disembedding” of social
processes from local spatial and temporal limitations. According to Giddeon “By disembedding
I mean the ‘lifting out’ of social relations from local contexts of interaction and their
restructuring across indefinite spans of time-space”. However, this technology also provides
the means for reembedding, the constructing or reconstructing of new forms of social relations.
People are able to maintain personal relationships and transact business at great distances from
one another because of the way technology allows real-time electronic communication between
people almost anywhere in the world. These communication linkages are also supported by
rapid global travel as well.19

A key feature of postmodern forms of thought is that no system of knowledge can be regarded
as providing absolute or ultimate truth. Instead, all types of knowledge are conditioned by the
social locations and interests of those who develop them and reflect the implicit biases and
limitations of the knower’s particular perspective. This skeptical orientation applies to
scientific knowledge as well as to all other belief systems. Like other forms of knowledge,
scientific knowledge also reflects the specific social and material circumstances of its
development. This skepticism represents a break with the “modern” era’s faith in scientific
knowledge, as well as implicit reliance on rational analysis to discern “ultimate” or at least
objective truth. This type of critique is consistent with Michel Foucault’s perspective regarding
the linkage between knowledge and power, and also with Dorothy Smith’s analysis of how
mainstream sociology inevitably reflects the biases resulting from the social standpoint of its

17
Contemporary Sociological Theory: An Integrated Multi Level Approach, D.P. Johnson, Springer 2008, pg.
544
18
Contemporary Sociological Theory: An Integrated Multi Level Approach, D.P. Johnson, Springer 2008, pp.
544-545
19
Contemporary Sociological Theory: An Integrated Multi Level Approach, D.P. Johnson, Springer 2008, pg.
545
male founders and dominant representatives. This skeptical orientation is actually consistent
with Auguste Comte’s 19th century criticism of the 18th century Enlightenment faith in reason
which he categorized as reflecting the “metaphysical” stage of human evolution, and which
would eventually be replaced by the “positive” stage and its more open-ended commitment to
the growth of scientific knowledge through detailed empirical research. For sociologists today,
the implication is that no theoretical orientation can be seen as providing an objective and
authoritative account of the social world or a scientific explanation of it that must be regarded
as universally true.20

Postmodernism with its effective skeptical nature destroyed many notions of absoluteness but
have fail to provide a reliable source of knowledge to follow and grow the human mind. It
emphasizes whatever is happening, is the main truth and the essence of knowledge.

Question No. 4
Explain in detail the micro-macro integration in details. (20)

Answer No. 4
Beginning in the 1980s there was renewed interest in the micro-macro linkage. Despite the
early integrationist tendencies of the classical theorists, much of 20th-century theory was either
micro-extremist or macro-extremist in its orientation. On the macro side are theories such as
structural functionalism, some variants of neo-Marxian theory, and conflict theory. Conversely,
symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, exchange and rational-choice theory are all
examples of micro-extremism. This micro- and macro- extremism can be seen as a
development in modern theory, and indeed, many of the classical theorists can be understood
as having an interest in the micro-macro linkage. A renewed interest in micro-macro integration
arose in the 1980s.21

Macro properties are properties of a collectivity or a set of micro-level entities that are not
definable for a single microlevel entity. Important examples of such macro-level properties
include typical actions, beliefs, desires, etc. among members of the collectivity as well as
distributions and aggregate patterns characterizing the collectivity such as inequality, spatial
segregation, and networks. The relation between micro and macro is similar to what in
philosophical analyses of the mind–body problem sometimes is referred to as ‘supervenience’.
Using the language of supervenience, a macro property, M, supervenes on a set of micro-level
properties, P, if identity in P necessarily implies identity in M. If the macro property is
supervenient upon the micro it means that, if two collectivities or societies are identical to one
another in terms of their micro-level properties, then their macro-level properties also will be
identical. It also implies that two collectivities that differ in their macro-level properties will
necessarily differ in their micro-level properties as well. But it does not imply that two
collectivities with an identical macro-level property will necessarily have identical microlevel
properties, because identical macro-level properties can be brought about in different ways.

Although macro is dependent upon micro, micro-to-macro or P-to-M relations should not be
viewed as causal relations. Macro properties are always instantiated at the same time as the
micro properties upon which they supervene, and a group or a society has the macro properties
it has in virtue of the properties and relations of its micro-level entities. The micro-to-macro
relationship is a parts-to-a-whole relationship rather than cause-to-an-effect relationship. For
example, if a set of dyadic relations exists between the members of a group, these dyadic
relations do not cause the network structure linking the individuals to one another; they
constitute it. The properties of the individuals residing in different spatial locations do not cause

20
Contemporary Sociological Theory: An Integrated Multi Level Approach, D.P. Johnson, Springer 2008, pg.
548
21
http://sociology-article.blogspot.com/2015/04/micro-macro-integration.html
the extent of residential segregation; they constitute it. Another important implication of the
supervenience perspective is that if a macro or micro property at an earlier time period, P1 or
M1, causally influences a macro-level property in the present, M2, it must do so by influencing
its supervenience base, P2. Sociological examples of causal relations of the M1-to-P2 kind
include processes that operate ‘behind the back’ of individuals, such as various socialization
processes, but macro-level properties also can have causal efficacy by being components which
individuals consciously take into account when deciding what to do. One such example is when
an individual’s decision of whether or not to join a social movement is influenced by the
number of other individuals who already have joined the movement. systematic regularities
can be observed at the M level, such associations typically say little about why we observe
what we observe. From this perspective such associations are surface phenomena arising from
and requiring explanations in terms of deeper underlying processes. The important point is that
at each instance of time, macro, M, is supervenient on micro, P, and in order to explain changes
in M we must explain changes in this micro base.22

George Ritzer attempted to construct an Integrated Sociological Paradigm built upon two
distinctions: between micro and macro levels, and between the objective and subjective. This
produces four dimensions: macro-objective, large-scale material phenomena such as
bureaucracies; macro-subjective, large-scale ideational or nonmaterial phenomena such as
norms; micro-objective, small-scale material phenomena such as patterns of behavior; and
micro-subjective, small-scale ideational or nonmaterial phenomena such as psychological
states or the cognitive processes involved in "constructing" reality. These are not
conceptualized as dichotomies, but rather as continuums. Ritzer argues that these dimensions
cannot be analyzed separately, and thus the dimensions are dialectically related, with no
particular dimension necessarily privileged over any other.23

Jeffrey Alexander has used an integrative approach in which the dimensions along which he
differentiates the levels of social phenomena differ, rather than micro-macro, Alexander uses
problems of order, which can be either individual or collective. Rather than subjective-
objective, Alexander uses problems of action, which range from materialist (instrumental,
rational) to idealist (normative, affective). Alexander sees micro-level theory as unable to
adequately deal with the unique nature of collective phenomena and unable to adequately
handle macro-level phenomena generally. More specifically, Alexander's sympathies lay with
collective/normative-level-oriented theory. Only this form of theory can sufficiently deal with
macro-level phenomena while remaining coherent and without constructing structural dopes
that act at the whim of macro-objective level phenomena.24

James Coleman attempted to apply micro-level rational-choice theory to macro-level

phenomena. Using Max Weber's (1864-1920) Protestant Ethic thesis, Coleman built a model
explicating his integrative model. To Coleman, these various levels of analysis were related
causally, and thus did not take into account feedback among the various levels. Allen Liska has
tried to improve upon this model by giving more attention to the macro-to-micro linkage and
to relationships among macro-level phenomena, though the relationships are still causal. Liska
also argues for the increased use of a particular way of describing macro phenomena,
aggregation.25

Randall Collins's integrative approach, which he calls radical microsociology, focuses on

interaction ritual chains, that, when linked together, produce large scale, macro-level

22
The Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology, Editors Peter Hendstōm and Peter Bearmen, OUP 2009, pp.10-
12
23
http://sociology-article.blogspot.com/2015/04/micro-macro-integration.html
24
Ibid
25
Ibid
phenomena. Hoping to centralize the role of human action and interaction in theory, Collins
rejects the idea that macro-level phenomena can act, instead focusing on the premise that,
ultimately, someone, an individual, must do something in order for action to occur. 26

Norbert Elias (1897-1990) has contributed significantly to an integrative sociology. Elias

developed the notion of figuration to avoid analytically dichotomizing levels of analysis.
Figurations are social processes that interweave people in relationships, creating
interrelationships. Figurations are not static, coercive macro-structures, but rather are
conceptualized as relatively fluid processes of inter-relationships among individuals that create
shifting relations of power and interdependence. Elias makes relationships between people
central, particularly relations of interdependence, in contradistinction to individualistic and
atomistic approaches.27

One of the most important developments in recent European social theory has been the move
toward an integration of agency and structure theories and theorists. This development parallels
the rise of interest found in (generally) American sociology in the micro-macro integration.
There are, however, important differences to be noted. Agency, although it generally refers to
microlevel actors, can also refer to macrolevel collectives that act. In other words, any social
being, whether an individual or a collective, can be considered to have agency. Similarly,
structure, although it usually refers to macrolevel structures, can also refer to microlevel
phenomena, such as human interaction. Thus, the definition of both structure and agency can
refer to either micro- or macrolevel phenomena.28

Many contemporary sociologist are either attempting to merge and form new integration based
theories about micro and macro issues and elements of society and social life or to attempt to
develop a comprehensive sociological theory of integration that could explain sociality at micro
meso- and macro level.

Question No. 5
What are different broader theories in sociology? Discuss (20)

Answer No. 5
In sociology, a few theories provide broad perspectives that help explain many different aspects
of social life, and these are called paradigms. Paradigms are philosophical and theoretical
frameworks used within a discipline to formulate theories, generalizations, and the experiments
performed in support of them. Three paradigms have come to dominate sociological thinking
because they provide useful explanations: structural functionalism, conflict theory, and
symbolic interactionism.29

Functionalism
It is also called structural-functional theory, sees society as a structure with interrelated parts
designed to meet the biological and social needs of the individuals in that society.
Functionalism grew out of the writings of English philosopher and biologist, Herbert Spencer,
who saw similarities between society and the human body. He argued that just as the various
organs of the body work together to keep the body functioning, the various parts of society
work together to keep society functioning. The parts of society that Spencer referred to, were
the social institutions, or patterns of beliefs and behaviors focused on meeting social needs,
such as government, education, family, healthcare, religion, and the economy.

26
Ibid
27
Ibid
28
Encyclopedia of Social Theory, George Ritzer (ED), SAGE 2005, pg. 5
29
An Introduction to Sociology, Open Stax, 3e, pg 18.
Émile Durkheim applied Spencer’s theory to explain how societies change and survive over
time. Durkheim believed that society is a complex system of interrelated and interdependent
parts that work together to maintain stability, and that society is held together by shared values,
languages, and symbols. He believed that to study society, a sociologist must look beyond
individuals to social facts such as laws, morals, values, religious beliefs, customs, fashion, and
rituals, which all serve to govern social life. Alfred Radcliff-Brown (1881–1955) defined the
function of any recurrent activity as the part it played in social life as a whole, and therefore
the contribution it makes to social stability and continuity. In a healthy society, all parts work
together to maintain stability, a state called dynamic equilibrium by later sociologists such as
Parsons. Durkheim believed that individuals may make up society, but in order to study society,
sociologists have to look beyond individuals to social facts. Each of these social facts serves
one or more functions within a society. For example, one function of a society’s laws may be
to protect society from violence, while another is to punish criminal behavior, while another is
to preserve public health.

Another noted structural functionalist, Robert Merton (1910–2003), pointed out that social
processes often have many functions. Manifest functions are the consequences of a social
process that are sought or anticipated, while latent functions are the unsought consequences of
a social process. A manifest function of education, includes gaining knowledge, preparing for
a career, and finding a good job that utilizes that education. Latent functions include meeting
new people, participating in extracurricular activities, or even finding a spouse or partner.
Another latent function of education is creating a hierarchy of employment based on the level
of education attained. Latent functions can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful. Social processes
that have undesirable consequences for the operation of society are called dysfunctions. In
education, examples of dysfunction include getting bad grades, truancy, dropping out, not
graduating, and not finding suitable employment.30

Functionalism claims that society is a collective of inter related and interdependent parts that
all have certain basic functions that they perform to keep the society alive,

Conflict Theory or Perspective

This perspective is a macro-level approach most identified with the writings of German
philosopher and sociologist Karl Marx, who saw society as being made up of individuals in
different social classes who must compete for social, material, and political resources such as
food and housing, employment, education, and leisure time. Social institutions like
government, education, and religion reflect this competition in their inherent inequalities and
help maintain the unequal social structure. Some individuals and organizations are able to
obtain and keep more resources than others, and these “winners” use their power and influence
to maintain social institutions. The perpetuation of power results in the perpetuation of
oppression.

Several theorists suggested variations on this basic theme like Polish-Austrian sociologist
Ludwig Gumplowicz (1838–1909) who expanded on Marx’s ideas by arguing that war and
conquest are the bases of civilizations. He believed that cultural and ethnic conflicts led to
states being identified and defined by a dominant group that had power over other groups.

German sociologist Max Weber agreed with Marx but also believed that, in addition to
economic inequalities, inequalities of political power and social structure cause conflict. Weber
noted that different groups were affected differently based on education, race, and gender, and
that people’s reactions to inequality were moderated by class differences and rates of social
mobility, as well as by perceptions about the legitimacy of those in power.

30
An Introduction to Sociology, Open Stax, 3e, pp 18-19
A reader of Marx, Georg Simmel believed that conflict can help integrate and stabilize a
society. He said that the intensity of the conflict varies depending on the emotional involvement
of the parties, the degree of solidarity within the opposing groups, and the clarity and limited
nature of the goals. Simmel also showed that groups work to create internal solidarity,
centralize power, and reduce dissent. The stronger the bond, the weaker the discord. Resolving
conflicts can reduce tension and hostility and can pave the way for future agreements.

In the 1930s and 1940s, German philosophers, known as the Frankfurt School, developed
critical theory as an elaboration on Marxist principles. Critical theory is an expansion of
conflict theory and is broader than just sociology, incorporating other social sciences and
philosophy. A critical theory is a holistic theory and attempts to address structural issues
causing inequality. It must explain what’s wrong in current social reality, identify the people
who can make changes, and provide practical goals for social transformation.

More recently, inequality based on gender or race has been explained in a similar manner and
has identified institutionalized power structures that help to maintain inequality between
groups. Janet Saltzman Chafetz (1941–2006) presented a model of feminist theory that attempts
to explain the forces that maintain gender inequality as well as a theory of how such a system
can be changed. Similarly, critical race theory grew out of a critical analysis of race and racism
from a legal point of view. Critical race theory looks at structural inequality based on white
privilege and associated wealth, power, and prestige.31

Conflict theory discussed that every society have competing parts and these competing forces
are always in conflict until one becomes dominant and controls the society.

Symbolic Interactionism:
Symbolic interactionism is a micro-level theory that focuses on the relationships among
individuals within a society. Communication, the exchange of meaning through language and
symbols, is believed to be the way in which people make sense of their social worlds. Theorists
Herman and Reynolds (1994) note that this perspective sees people as being active in shaping
the social world rather than simply being acted upon.

George Herbert Mead is considered a founder of symbolic interactionism though he never

published his work on it. Mead’s student, Herbert Blumer (1900-1987), coined the term
“symbolic interactionism” and outlined these basic premises: humans interact with things
based on meanings ascribed to those things; the ascribed meaning of things comes from our
interactions with others and society; the meanings of things are interpreted by a person when
dealing with things in specific circumstances. If you love books, for example, a symbolic
interactionist might propose that you learned that books are good or important in the
interactions you had with family, friends, school. Maybe your family had a special reading time
each week, getting your library card was treated as a special event, or bedtime stories were
associated with warmth and comfort. Social scientists who apply symbolic-interactionist
thinking look for patterns of interaction between individuals. Their studies often involve
observation of one-on-one interactions. For example, while a conflict theorist studying a
political protest might focus on class difference, a symbolic interactionist would be more
interested in how individuals in the protesting group interact, as well as the signs and symbols
protesters use to communicate their message.

The focus on the importance of symbols in building a society led sociologists like Erving
Goffman (1922-1982) to develop a technique called dramaturgical analysis. Goffman used
theater as an analogy for social interaction and recognized that people’s interactions showed
patterns of cultural “scripts.” He argued that individuals were actors in a play. We switched
31
An Introduction to Sociology, Open Stax, 3e, pg. 20
roles, sometimes minute to minute, for example, from student or daughter to dog walker.
Because it can be unclear what part a person may play in a given situation, he or she has to
improvise his or her role as the situation unfolds. Studies that use the symbolic interactionist
perspective are more likely to use qualitative research methods, such as in-depth interviews or
participant observation, because they seek to understand the symbolic worlds in which research
subjects live.

Constructivism is an extension of symbolic interaction theory which proposes that reality is

what humans cognitively construct it to be. We develop social constructs based on interactions
with others, and those constructs that last over time are those that have meanings which are
widely agreed-upon or generally accepted by most within the society. This approach is often
used to examine what’s defined as deviant within a society. There is no absolute definition of
deviance, and different societies have constructed different meanings for deviance, as well as
associating different behaviors with deviance. One situation that illustrates this is what you
believe you’re to do if you find a wallet in the street. In the West, turning the wallet in to local
authorities would be considered the appropriate action, and to keep the wallet would be seen
as deviant. In contrast, many Eastern societies would consider it much more appropriate to
keep the wallet and search for the owner yourself. Turning it over to someone else, even the
authorities, would be considered deviant behavior.32

The interaction between different actors and components of social system in a social setting
give life and growth to society.

32
An Introduction to Sociology, Open Stax, 3e, pp. 21-22