I. Introduction
Social patterns and social structures have been considered as among the building blocks of theories pertaining to sociology. These two concepts form a huge part of the creation of theoretical frameworks and social theories. Numerous studies have been published regarding the principles of social theory. The area has considerably taken leaps from the classical to modern and post-modern theories. Nevertheless, the progression of this area of sociology wouldn’t have taken place without the claims of three of the most noted social scientists in history: Marx, Weber, and Durkheim. This study will attempt to provide an account of the claims that these academics have contributed to the existing principles of social theory.
II. Competing Methodological Approaches
There are two prevailing theories that appear to contradict each other, theories advanced by Marx and Weber. In this part of the discussion, let us focus on the works of Marx. Essentially, the theories of Marx are connected with the earlier claims of Hegel, with the former being one of the leading advocates of the latter’s principles particularly on the concept of history. Specifically, Marx has adopted the theory of Hegel indicating history as a social process. (MacDonald, 2002, 259) And being a social process, history is thus held tightly with change in society and inevitable contradictions.
Later on his theories, Marx have immersed himself on the study of the political, cultural and economic manifestations in Europe during his lifetime. Specifically, the timeframe in which Marx started his studies involved the early rise of the industrial revolution in the said continent.(2000, 85) A more popular theory that Marx advanced is the concept of Communism. It is this theory that Marx revealed his enthusiasm to the contradiction in society, particularly of those existing in poverty, the working class (proletariat) and the ruling class (bourgeois). (Peterson, 1994, 377)
On the part of Weber, he views society and its history as a sequence composed of modes of production. Basically, the social structure and frame work according to him is based on social actions held by man. (Svedberg, 2003, 283) Specifically, he indicated that the motivations on these actions are actually the core elements that one should understand in order to effectively analyse a society. It is thus important, in the view of Weber, that the motivations underlying the actions of man be analysed along with the consequent actions triggered by the said motivations. Additional indications held by Weber come in the form of ideal-types of social action. These actions include the effectual social action, traditional social action, value-rational social action, and instrumental-rational social action. (p291)
III. Consensus, Conflict and Social Issues
The theory of Marx is manifested mainly on the Communist Manifesto. The issues of consensus conflict and issues of society are held tightly on its passages. The Communist Manifesto reveals the effort to clarify the intentions of Communism along with the principles that serves as a basis of its existence. (MacDonald, 2002, 259) It shows the existence of exploitation of one class to another, one being the more dominant class than the other. It claims that it is these exploitations that trigger the developments in history. The relationships between the classes are predetermined by the means of production present in a specific period. Nonetheless, there will come a time that these elements would not be complementary on the forces of production. (2000, 85) The manifesto indicates that once this needed to take place, a revolution is bound to happen. It is these revolutions that generate new seats of power for the new breed of ruling class. It also claimed that large economies are among those that influence such changes.
The manifesto establishes a number of the major principles of his theory. Among the major principles is that all of history up till now is an account of a chain of class struggles. ( 2000, 85) The foundation of history, in that case, is this basic economic premise. The most essential idea being argued here is the idea that each social order has a distinctive economic arrangement. This arrangement rears diverse classes, which are in disagreement as they dominate or are exploited by each other. Nevertheless, this condition is not everlasting. Ultimately the resources of production stop being well suited with the class structure in its present condition. In its place, the arrangement starts to hinder the improvement of productive forces. (MacDonald, 2002, 259) At this instant, the pre-existing arrangement has to be annihilated. This explicates the materialization of the bourgeoisie out of feudalism. It will similarly explicate the eventual eradication of the bourgeoisie. (Peterson, 1994, 377) Marx considers that all of history is supposed to be construed in this manner. This means that it should be seen as the course in which classes realign themselves in conformity with varying means of production.
The said section starts to advocate the reason this might be, indicating a number of the means in which the modern age is distinctive. One of such reasons is that class rivalries have been made simpler as a couple of differing groups, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, materialized. ( a, 2000, 85) Another reason as stated in the passage indicated that whereas unequal relationships were formerly concealed in the wake of elements like principles, now the shroud has been raised and the whole thing is perceived in the context of self-interest. (MacDonald, 2002, 259) Moreover, the passage also considers that so as for the bourgeoisie to carry on living, they have to recurrently transform the tools of production.
On the other hand, contrary to what Marx claimed about capitalism being an offshoot of an economic phenomenon, Weber indicated that capitalism is actually a consequence of an inherent social action. Specifically, he noted that Instrumental-Rational manifest the attributes effective in bringing about outcomes similar to capitalism. (Svedberg, 2003, 285) Basically, the said social action is a whole lot of intentions that represents immediate and transitory goals. In addition, Weber indicated that it emulates some of classical Machiavellian “means to an end” principle. (Svedberg, 2003, 286)
Essentially, this line of reasoning presented by Weber is highly representative of what he called protestant ethic. (Svedberg, 2003, 283) Specifically, the changes that society has displayed on other aspects like religion, is also manifested in the area of capitalism. Thus, societal changes, developments, and other economically motivated outcomes attributed to capitalism are held by Weber as a consequence brought about by the inevitable changes in individuals. (Svedberg, 2003, 283) This is particularly true on account of modern societies which, as it has been stated earlier, are constructed by the implications held by individuals and consequently the general public.
IV. Contribution of Social Theories
The indicated theories here have influenced the way in which societies have held themselves. In the theory of Marx, his work has spawned a radical form of political perspective that nations like Cuba, China, and the Former Soviet Union have implemented. The Communists mean to encourage this revolution, and will encourage the parties and associations that are shaping history towards its expected end. They contend that the removal of social classes is not able to happen by means of restructurings or alterations in government. In its place, a revolution will be necessary. However, the discussions above show that there are inherent flaws in the theory. The collapse of the Soviet Union is representative of that flaw along with the inability of the ruling party to mould the economy to a stable one. In the end, regions like Europe and the European Union come to be more successful in achieving economic success because it held on one of the claims of Marx, to continuously change the tools of production.
Weber, on the other hand, contributed a different manner for sociologist to study society in itself. Given that, in his view, the motivation underlying the individual actions of people is important, it is implied that studying society entails one to identify with the society itself. One must understand the reasons behind every action. In learning these fundamental principles on Weber’s views, then the sociologist could go further and understand the social institutions in which man has created. As Weber noted, these institutions are constructed by man in consequence of the social actions he/she acquired.
V. Durkheim’s Social Theory
Emile Durkheim is considered to be one of the founding fathers of modern sociology. Basically, he is the one who were in the forefront in advocating the Structural-Functionalist Approach in the sociological community. (Thompson, 2002, 19) The following discussion will present a hypothetical personal trouble and a perceived public issue, both of which are going to be discussed using the views of Durkheim.
A. Personal Troubles
Based on the work of Mills, a personal trouble is an occurrence within an individual with limited effect on its surroundings and other individuals. Let us look in a situation where it appears to fit in the context of a personal trouble. An instance is a case where a community of a thousand have a single homeless individual. Issues relating to vagrancy and homelessness represent a whole lot of concerns for society. It could simply be a sign that there is not enough affordable housing provided by the government. Low income could be a factor, thus leading to an impoverished state of living. In this category, the values of an individual may well be compromised and even threatened. In this case, sociological analysis of such a situation will present that a homeless individual may have compromised his values with regards to finances and health as a result of having transitory dwelling conditions. Thus, his/her innate values of having a normal life are threatened because of his condition.
When using the views of Durkheim in explaining this phenomenon, it might go in such a way that the vagrant is seen as a part of the community, not some illness that needs to be remedied. The vagrant is seen as an individual doing its role in society. Particularly, he/she is works as a representation of the public service that the community possess. It gives emphasis on problems of the social structure in which the community represents. And in so doing, the vagrant thus has a role in society. Without these homeless people, social services may have trouble finding ways to actually be relevant.
B. Public Issues
On the other hand, the issue indicated above becomes a public issue when it goes above the jurisdiction of the local environment. Thus, when the issue becomes over a hundred thousand homeless individuals in a small state, it becomes a public issue. In this sense, the values of public as a whole are threatened. Such values include those pertaining to safety and even security provided by the state. Another issue represents the capacity of the state to provide such affordable housing to the public. A considerable amount of homeless individuals may suggest that a lot could not afford to rent a decent home. On the side of the government officials, the presence of homeless individuals may present an impression of embarrassment, provided that the mere presence of such people reflects their inadequacies in handling their posts.
In the perspective of Durkheim, the situation may be seen similarly as stated in the personal issue. The public issue may represent some function for the entire society as a whole. Basically, without homelessness, some agencies of the government won’t have anything to do. And to some point, the presence of numerous homeless people will prove to be advantageous for no less than one part of the entire social structure. To a certain extent, the presence of a huge number of vagrants may trigger legislative bodies to look into the existing laws and even make amends such that the numbers of homeless people diminish progressively.
VI.Durkheim and Functionalism
The theory of Durkheim indicates that society is composed of different organs with a specific function for every part. Needless to say, the context in which Durkheim used emulates biological
A. Division of Labour
In the work of Durkheim, he indicated the existence of institutions of integration. These institutions include the social division of labour and the law. (Thompson, 2002, 15) As stated in his works, the division of labour in society is considerably more encompassing as compared to the established laws. This means that though it is not codified and is rather implied in a sense, this division of labour has a great effect on society as a whole. Basically, this is based on the reason that this division of labour has the capacity to assimilate the individuals into a single group forming a community. However, this could also work contrary to that scenario. The presence of division of labour could similarly discriminate people. (Thompson, 2002, 74) The social occupation of people, through the division of labour, thus could both build and destroy a community.
B. Functionalism
The core of the theory of Durkheim is the concept of functionalism. Specifically, this denotes that the society is an amalgamation of combined parts working towards a single goal, which is basically continued existence. (Thompson, 2002, 20) In his work, Durkheim frequently uses a correspondence with the human body and the workings in society. (Thompson, 2002, 105) The concept of functionalism starts on the premise that society is dynamic and animated such that any individual person is not above it or could be able to manipulate it. Nevertheless, it also claims that the circumstances surrounding a single individual in the population manifest a microcosm of the entire society as a whole. (Thompson, 2002, 51) Along with this hypothesis, it is important that a society possess an agreement in the principles and aspiration such that anomie could be averted.
C. Collective Conscience
Another important element of the functionalist theory made by Durkheim is the existence of a collective conscience. This is basically rooted from the set of rituals in which the society possesses. (Thompson, 2002, 131) These rituals, especially those held sacred by society; represent the factor that connects the society as a whole. In a sense, it is used as a means to jog the public’s memory on the identity of society. The works of Durkheim categorized these rituals as sacred and profane. (Thompson, 2002, 66) And essentially, these reflect the society’s collective representation. (Thompson, 2002, 60) This means that these reflect the actual image of society, including its flaws and exiting social problems. Durkheim further claimed that with the help of the existing and established social institutions, these collective representations could be developed, passed on, and even be shared by the entire society.
VII. Conclusion
The paper has presented the concept of conflict, consensus, and social issues present in society. As it has been presented, it is reflected in the different theories provided by Weber, Durkheim, and Marx. Specifically, these theories have provided the study of sociology an explanation on how social problems exist. To illustrate, the discussions above indicated that the claims of Weber presents a realisation that social problems are an offshoot of a sequence of social processes held in society. This means that social problems are not formed overnight. In the same manner, Marx has presented the source of conflict being the presence of inequalities among social classes. The alienation of one class to another entails an impending social problem in proportions much higher than the first one. The theory of Durkheim on the other hand represents how society could deal with these social issues. Specifically, the consequences of the structures held by society should be able to reflect nothing more than the actual problems that the society possess. In addressing such problems, the functionalist presents a rather optimistic way of addressing the problem, by seeing the actual benefits that the problem presents to a certain part of society. In this manner, the source of the social problem is made known.
At any rate, social problems entail action coming from society itself. The society has to take in hand these issues and collectively find out forms in which the issue could be amended. They could use policies in doing this. Changing the existing laws and rules that prevail over the land could entail change on a higher level. Programs and advocacy campaigns could also help the people in improving the social structure. The principles held by the theories presented by Marx, Durkheim, and Weber will seriously embrace such social actions.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment