Sociology Question about functionalism/conflict theory

In summary, functionalism, a theory that was popular in sociology in the past, suggests that societies have needs and institutions exist to fulfill those needs. However, this theory has faced criticism for its oversimplification and failure to explain why certain institutions exist. On the other hand, conflict theory, which is more prevalent in sociology today, focuses on the competition for resources between different groups in society. Other theories, such as institutionalism and culturalism, also exist in sociology.
  • #1
JRDunassigned
I'm having trouble grasping my hands right around the ideas of functionalists view the politics of America?

Politics I like, sociology I'm not convinced of yet.

Also, how do their views differ, at all, from conflict theorists? I don't understand what their basis of thought is...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Actually, functionalism is pretty dead in sociology. The idea pushed by Parsons and his colleagues was that societies had needs and so people's behavior occurred to accommodate those needs. So the system needs a way to cure people, so the medical profession exists. But notice the difficulties with functionalism. The world's needs are always satisfied by those institutions; else, why would those institutions exist?

To my knowledge, the only social scientists to persist with functionalist thinking are economists. Economists say that technologies exist to make things more efficient. So if you look around you, the world is efficient; otherwise, those technologies would not exist. It's another form of functionalist thinking. The world is always efficient because new technologies come about, those that are not efficient are weeded out, and those that survive are the most efficient. They ignore that the "best technology" may not win out because of personal preferences, fads, social networks (not the network effects economists talk about but the ones that create gatekeepers who determine who adopts a technology because they are in the network and who doesn't because they are disconnected from the people in the know).

Conflict theory persists in sociology today. The idea is that the world is made up of elites and non elites, haves and non haves, whether these are people and groups. They compete for resources, and those who form the strongest coalitions win; the others either lose a battle but not the war, or are completely vanquished. A lot of effort goes into defining why some people identify with some groups and not others (in-group vs. out-group phenomenon). Humans seem to form groups around the most trivial things. Even children who are labeled into the red team versus the blue team end up in conflict.

But there are other theories in sociology such as institutionalism, culturalism, etc. Why the focus on conflict vs. functionalism?


JRDunassigned said:
I'm having trouble grasping my hands right around the ideas of functionalists view the politics of America?

Politics I like, sociology I'm not convinced of yet.

Also, how do their views differ, at all, from conflict theorists? I don't understand what their basis of thought is...
 
  • #3


I understand your struggle to grasp the concepts of functionalism and conflict theory within the context of politics in America. These theories are often used in sociology to understand the social structures and systems in society, including the political system.

Functionalism views society as a system with interconnected parts that work together to maintain social order and stability. This perspective sees politics as a necessary function in society that helps maintain social harmony and ensure the needs of individuals are met. In other words, functionalists view politics as a means to maintain social equilibrium and promote the well-being of society as a whole.

On the other hand, conflict theory sees society as a constantly changing and evolving system that is characterized by inequality and power struggles between different groups. Within the context of politics, conflict theorists view the political system as a reflection of these power struggles, with those in power using their influence to maintain their status and control over marginalized groups. This theory highlights the unequal distribution of resources and opportunities in society and how it is perpetuated through political institutions.

The main difference between functionalism and conflict theory is in their focus and perspective. While functionalism emphasizes the importance of social order and harmony, conflict theory highlights the role of power dynamics and inequality in shaping society.

In terms of their basis of thought, functionalism is grounded in the idea that society is a complex system that functions to meet the needs of its members, while conflict theory is based on the idea that society is characterized by constant struggles for power and resources.

I hope this brief explanation helps you better understand these theories and their application to the politics of America. It's important to note that both functionalism and conflict theory offer valuable insights into understanding the complexities of society and can be used together to gain a more comprehensive understanding. Keep exploring and questioning to deepen your understanding of sociology and its various perspectives.
 

What is the main difference between functionalism and conflict theory?

Functionalism views society as a system in which different parts work together to maintain social order and stability. Conflict theory, on the other hand, sees society as being in a constant state of conflict and competition between different groups for resources and power.

How do functionalism and conflict theory explain social change?

Functionalism sees social change as a gradual process that occurs in response to the needs of society. Conflict theory, on the other hand, sees social change as a result of the struggle between different groups for resources and power.

Which theory is more applicable to modern society?

Functionalism is often criticized for being too conservative and not accounting for inequalities and social issues. Conflict theory, on the other hand, is seen as more relevant in explaining modern society's complexities and inequalities.

What are some examples of institutions in functionalism and conflict theory?

In functionalism, institutions such as family, education, and religion are seen as necessary for maintaining social order and stability. In conflict theory, institutions such as the government, economy, and media are seen as tools used by dominant groups to maintain their power and control over marginalized groups.

How do functionalism and conflict theory explain social stratification?

Functionalism sees social stratification as necessary for maintaining social order and stability, with each social class playing a specific role in society. Conflict theory, on the other hand, sees social stratification as a result of the competition and conflict between different social classes for resources and power.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
6K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
13
Views
630
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
179
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
825
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
47
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
6
Replies
190
Views
9K
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
586
  • General Discussion
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top