Major Sociological Paradigms and Their Major Thinkers

Student Full Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course Full Title

Instructor Full Name

Due Date
 Major Sociological Paradigms and Their Major Thinkers

When exploring social phenomena, sociologists operate within different theoretical

traditions and frameworks that guide their thoughts and practice, resulting in widely diverse

perspectives and explanations of the objects of study. Scientifically known as paradigms,

these traditions and frameworks are broad viewpoints that permit sociologists to describe

social phenomena from a particular perspective. In sociology, the major sociological

paradigms include functionalism, conflict, and symbolic interactionism, which explain

various social occurrences and eventualities from standpoints. The outcome of this scenario is

that rival paradigms, although exploring a similar subject, engender discrepancies in the

explanation of that particular social phenomenon. For instance, the functionalist paradigm

views societies as systems of interconnected parts which work together to address underlying

social needs, while the conflict perspective underscores the significance of rivalry, contest,

and competition in explaining social inequalities. Although the three major sociological

paradigms adopt different perspectives on social phenomena, they provide insightful

explanations for numerous social occurrences, including economic inequality in society.

Sociological Paradigms and Their Influences

The Conflict Paradigm

The conflict sociological paradigm asserts that contests, competitions, and rivalries

are central features of human experience and that societies are in perpetual conflict across

social arrangements and structures. Fraser and Campolo (1992) note that people and groups

are constantly trying to maximize their wealth, power, and influence, leading to conflicts and

tensions between individuals and classes. For instance, influential people exploit class

differences, ethnicity, gender, and race to sustain and entrench their socioeconomic

supremacy and dominance of societal life by offering low wages to their workers, capitalizing

on racial divisions, and class relations. In response, the oppressed classes, races, and
ethnicities are continually resisting the suppression and attempting to maximize their power

and wealth. As a result, the powerful and the oppressed are engaged in a perpetual state of

conflict, competition, and struggle. These contests ultimately function to sustain and deepen

the social inequalities between the dominant groups and other categories of people.

Major Thinkers Who Influenced the Conflict Sociological Paradigm

The philosophical foundation of the conflict paradigmatic perspective can be traced

back to Machiavelli, Hegel, and Polybius. These thinkers contended that social stratification

is critical to establishing the state. For instance, Polybus argued that such stratification should

elevate a minority who should exert control over the majority, establish an economic system

through which the capitalists exploit the subordinate groups, and the subordinates continually

strive to become dominant. Similarly, Hegel contended that conflicts and competition in

societies are unavoidable as different groups of people aim to gain power, influence, and

dominance over each other. Karl Marx corroborated and amplified the views of Polybus,

Machiavelli, and Hegel, and posited that competition over limited resources is an inherent

feature of societies (Fraser and Campolo, 1992). Indeed, Marx anchored his explanation of

the working class exploitation by capitalist societies on this theory.

The Functionalist Paradigm

The functionalist paradigm views societies as collective and cohesive establishments

with interconnected systems, mechanisms, and structures, which work together to maintain

social stability and address the society’s underlying needs. Fraser and Campolo (1992) note

that this sociological perspective comprises structures and institutions which sustain social

cohesion and prevent societies from degenerating and disintegrating into hostilities. This

implies that despite the inequalities, individualism, competitiveness, and self-interests that

characterize societies, there exist checks that limit people from disrupting social order. Under

this paradigm, social harmony and order are maintained by an elaborate system of structures,
institutions, and norms, which cumulatively contribute to the sustenance of equilibrium and

the survival of the whole society (Fraser and Campolo, 1992). In this regard, families,

governments, religion, laws, media, medicine, social values, and politics work collaboratively

to establish social solidarity and maintain societal balance. Moreover, for society to function

and realize stability, there ought to be specialization and division of labor, which elevate a

category of people above others and consider some individuals more important and superior

than the rest. Consequently, the functionalism paradigm views social inequalities as natural,

essential, and legitimate outcomes, which confer those with greater social worth with

privileges, power, and prestige.

Major Thinkers Who Influenced the Functionalist Sociological Paradigm

The philosophical roots of the functionalist paradigm can be linked to Plato in his

publication, Republic, and Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan. However, Emile Durkheim, a French

sociologist, amplified Plato’s and Hobbes’ philosophies in Rules of the Sociological Methods

and Suicide (Fraser and Campolo, 1992). For instance, Plato argued that education is a

critical social institution that enables societies to meet their needs, maintain stability, and

facilitate the progression of some community members to rise above the rest. Alexis de

Tocqueville also significantly influenced the functionalist paradigm by depicting the ability

of some individuals to impose their will on everyone else in society and how social values

and attitudes that are collectively shared promote the acceptability of such occurrences and

discourage hostilities which could upset the established stability.

Symbolic Interactionism Sociological Paradigm

People derive social meanings and make sense of the world through interactions and

the subsequent interpretation of cultural symbols, including spoken, written, and non-verbal

communication. Fraser and Campolo (1992) argue that societies are the products of shared

cultural symbols, patterned meanings, and role relationships. This implies that people’s
behaviors reflect their culture, and their actions depict their shared comprehension and

understanding of cultural symbols. As a result, all occurrences and eventualities in society are

based on how people interpret cultural symbols. In this regard, social interactionism argues

that some social phenomena are reinforced, maintained, or altered through engagements. For

instance, people primarily interact, associate, and socialize with others with whom they share

a social standing because of the built-in systems and structures of social stratification. It is for

this stratified nature of society that people tend to interact, work, and live with those they

have common income levels, racial backgrounds, and educational status.

Major Thinkers Who Influenced the Symbolic Interactionism Sociological Paradigm

While the symbolic interactionism paradigm can be traced to Kant and Nietzsche, it

was advanced by Max Weber, George Herbert Mead, and Alfred Schutz. Through their works

and publications, these sociologists and philosophers illustrate how societies are created

through human interactions, particularly among individuals with some aspects in common.

Further, these scholars noted that in modern societies where occupations play influential

roles, people’s positions and responsibilities determine their power and authority in

communities.

Different Sociological Paradigms and Their Approach to Economic Inequalities in

Society

Conflict, functionalist, and symbolic interactionism paradigms have different

perspectives and explanations of economic inequalities in society. The conflict paradigm

suggests that the powerful elites, the wealthy, and other influential people maintain their

dominance in society by controlling resources, opportunities, and institutions, which allow

them to exploit the working class, thereby generating and deepening economic inequalities.

From this perspective, the conflict paradigm indicates that those at the top of the social strata

take advantage of their high-ranking status to maintain their position by exploiting and
oppressing those at the bottom. The institutionalized power structures ultimately create and

sustain economic inequalities between different groups.

The functionalist dimension argues that the various processes and structures in society

engender social stratification and subsequent allocation of varying significance to different

strata. Consequently, society considers some roles more valuable than others and confers

them higher rewards, indicating that people who occupy those positions get to earn and

progress further compared to those in lower-ranking roles. The outcome of this phenomenon

is economic inequality.

According to the symbolic interactionism paradigm, people’s social standing

influences everyday interactions. Indeed, in most societies, people primarily interact with

those with whom they share social status. As a result, the interactions reflect underlying

stratifications, and eventually determine how power is shared, exchanged, and retained. This

implies that social interactions perpetuate and sustain the already existing inequalities which

occur as a result of the value and power attached to occupations and roles.

Conclusion

Sociologists, like other scientists, operate within defined theoretical perspectives or

frameworks through which they explain various social phenomena. The conflict,

functionalism, and symbolic interactions paradigms are the most prominently used

perspectives. Although these frameworks have been widely deployed to explain diverse

social phenomena, their illustrations, and depictions of economic inequalities are insightful

and demonstrate the underlying reasons for such disparities to exist.

Reference

Fraser, D. A., & Campolo, A. (1992). Sociology through the eyes of faith (1st ed.).

HarperOne.