Symbolic interactionism, functional perspective, and conflict approach are the three major types of sociological perspectives in sociology widely adopted by the thinkers to study the social reality.
As we know that sociology is the latest discipline or a field of study that emerged after global upheavals and the successive events of turbulences in the global politics, economies and societies.
So, expectedly, scholars across the world jumped in to recorrect the chaos and social disorder before it took ugly form. Let’s see what types of approaches all the thinkers took to study the society in question. Here, I’m going to present an overview of major sociological perspectives or approaches.
Major sociological perspectives in sociology
As of now, in the curriculum of most of the global educational institutions, sociology is being taught and learnt by vast majority of students and learners.
Symbolic interactionism, functional perspective, and conflict approach are the three major types of sociological perspectives widely adopted by the thinkers to study social reality.
A.Symbolic interactionism or micro sociology perspective
Symbolic interactionism is a gift of American school of sociology in general, and Chicago school of sociology in perticular.
Symbolic interactionism focuses on the relations or interactions people have with each other in society. They interact with the subjective meanings society assigned to the symbols or objects that culturally derived.
Subjective meanings means what you believe is true instead what is objectively true. American philosopher George Herbert Mead, Charles Horton Cooley, Herbert Blummer belong to the symbolic interactionism perspective.
All the three perspectives or approaches look conflicting with each other but are complementary and cooperative to one another in the process of understanding true state of social reality. So, it is totally unjust to criticize one and value other. First of all, let’s know what does Symbolic interactionism perspective of sociology mean?
Understanding symbolic interactionism in detail
Every culture has variety of cultural symbols, objects or things. And, people use these things or symbols as means to make association, relations or interactions among them.
Here, one thing is essential to know that objective meanings do not make any sense in the formation of interactions. Hence, subjective meanings assigned by society to these objects of culture has significant value as with these meanings people tend to interact or form relations.
What does subjective meanings mean?
There are two types of meanings the cultural objects or symbols we discuss carry. One is subjective meanings and other is objective truth.
Subjective meanings means what you believe is true instead what is objectively true. Suppose, you want visit a religious place. But, some visiters have already given bad response regarding that place citing some reasons. So, it is enough to change your plan as you value meanings of society even though the place is safer.
On the other hand, it is the individual who creates and shape social reality, once it lake larger form, become self sustaining and independent of those who created it.
With this argument, they have opposite stand of what the functionalists assert. Symbolic interactionism claim that higher level social reality always emerge out of lower level of social phenomenon.
B.Funcionalist sociological perspectives
Functionalist or macro sociological approach emphasis on the functional aspect of social reality. For, functionalist, society is a unified system of interdependent and interconnected parts that facilitates smooth functioning maintaining social order and stability.
State, economy, family, education are necessary and essential component of social system they study. Further, they argued that society is much more than mere individual and it the society that fulfill the demands of individuals entering in the pre existing social structure.
So, in short, they are more concerned about the functional and stability aspects, rather change and conflict. Actually, functionalist approach is the direct output of reactions to enlightenment, revolutions, and many more movements.
Emile Durkhiem, Talcott Parsons, Robert Merton are belong to functionalist school of sociology
Unfolding Functional perspective of sociology
Society is a system of different interdependent and interconnected parts including state, family, economy, education etc. And, their coordination is utmost importance for the smooth functioning, as well as stability of society as whole. This is what We call functional perspective of sociology.
Explaining the functional sociological perspectives
The major concern of functionalist theorists was to bring moral or social order in the society during post upheavals. So, though in the reaction of the possible changes and threats they unanimously focused on to improve the social solidarity, order, and stability. Obviously, this could be only possible by the virtue of functional perspective.
According to this functional sociological perspectives, they value society much more than individual, and argued that it the society that shapes, socializes and fulfills the demands of individuals who enter the already existing social structure. This is why they studied structural level or macro level of social reality.
Micro sociology vs macro sociology
Macro sociology deals with structural level social reality and favour and encourage functional aspects by the means of cooperation among vital interdependent and interconnected parts to solidify whole.
On the other hand, micro sociology deals with the small group level social reality and focuses on the individual interactions and relations. As per them, there is nothing like pre-existing social structure and higher level of social reality always emerge out of lower level of social reality.
This is the basic difference between functional perspective of sociology and Symbolic interactionism. Apart from both, conflict school of sociology advocates and encourage conflicting and cyclical changes in society that we see in other post.
C.The conflict school of sociology
Conflict school of sociology was in opposite views that of the functionalists. They think only peaceful cooperation in a dynamic social setting looks hypothetical, and they argued that conflict and social change is inevitable or unavoidable.
As per them, in any society groups having inequality of status, values or resources always aspire to either compete to oppose to those who tends to force social order on poor or weaker. So, in such condition, in quest of justice or equality conflict or social change become indispensable. Karl Marx is the pioneer of conflict school of sociology.
Explaining Conflict school of sociology in detail
Conflict school of sociology or conflict school of sociological perspectives speak in favour of conflicting and cyclical changes in the existing social structure due to host of reasons.
As per them perfect equality and peaceful cooperation without conflict and change look too hypothetical to believe and can’t be possible in the given circumstances.
Meaning of conflict school of sociology
In this approach, they perceived and noted that groups having differences, in terms of status, interests, values etc. compete with each other to capture more to bring equilibrium.
In this process, it is common tendency to force the social order against poor or weaker sections even though the weapon of positive discrimination that powers state to reverse inequality can’t prove instrumental.
Logically, it is believable that cooperation among individuals with unequal apportionment of resources, values, interests, status, etc. can’t be possible.
In such disparity, inequality and disequilibrium, it is futile to force social units to obey social order, cooperate and ensure stability. Naturally, social change is like a vent for social unrest, disgruntled feelings, and by this means, the real sustaining social stability could be achieved.
Cooperation, competition and conflict
It is true that no society ever be happy to be in the state of conflict or ever changing mode. Nor it can be forced to cooperate without considering its due demands.
Moreover, it is logical to believe that change hardly be peaceful when there are stark disparities and discrimination. And, healthy competition needs equal and level playing field for every units.
In such circumstances, whether it is managed or spontaneous, change is essential as per the conflict school of sociology. Karl Marx is the towering figure who advocated and encouraged change via conflict or revolution.
These are the three perspectives of sociology widely used by sociological thinkers to study and understand the complex phenomenon of social reality.
All the above approaches or sociological perspectives in sociology look conflicting with each other but without theirs complementary contribution, it is impossible to realise the true reality of society.
Dilectical approach of George Simmel
Accommodation and acculturation
Meaning and examples of perspective