A Comparison of the Functionalist View with the Marxist View
Sociologists may disagree in their interpretation of how society
works. Some have focused on what keeps society together; others have
focused on what divides society. Over the years the two major
paradigms have dominated sociology these are functionalism and the
conflict theory better know as Marxism. Both the Marxism view and the
functionalist view have their own totally different point of view.
Haralambos points out that ‘although functionalists emphasize the
importance of value in society they do recognize that conflict can
occur”. However functionalists consider such conflict as being the
result of temporary disturbances in the social system. Indeed, these
temporary disturbances are usually quickly corrected as society
evolves. What is deemed to be the most important interest for the
functionalists is that, which is shared by all social groups: What we
refer to as the ‘common interest’ which according to the
functionalists, caters for the smooth running of society. However, by
referring to common interest we are implying that their may be other
interests. In fact each and every group has its own particular
interests. In direct contrast to functionalists, conflict theories
advocate the belief that there are certain fundamental differences
amongst social groups. However such differences are not of temporary
nature (as functionalists believe) but are a common and persistent
feature of society.
Functionalism adopts an organical analogy in order to explain how
every society functions in order to attain and sustain its
functionality. Functionalist agree that just as an...
... middle of paper ...
... institution of capitalist society is private property, the system by
which capital (that is, money, machines, tools, factories, and other
material objects used in production) is controlled by a small minority
of the population. This arrangement leads to two opposed classes, the
owners of capital (called the bourgeoisie) and the workers (called the
proletariat), whose only property is their own labor time, which they
have to sell to the capitalists.
As we can see the two theories dispute about two totally different
factors in society. Functionalists in my opinion put too much emphasis
on value consensus. This may create instability due to competition.
Where as Marxists give us a very realistic view of the society we live
in, and not perceives society and the individuals as always to be in
harmony with one another.
Functionalism views society as the stability and assimilation of a range of forces that function within it. While society is a separate entity with a life of its own, there are individual elements contributing to that stability. Functionalism as a sociological theory emphasizes assimilation rather than the dissociation of society. Therefore, the society is seen as a whole that is compromised of parts which give one another their identity and their function. The part, whether that is education, such as a school, or sports, such as a football team, operates in relation to the other parts, and cannot be entirely understood in isolation from the other parts. All the parts are interrelated, and when there is a disturbance in any one of the parts, is when you can see the interdependence. But what is important about this theory is that “there will always be some reorganization and tendency to restore equilibrium” (Wallace and Wolf 17). Functionalist do not believe it’s crucial that the people involved in the society to be aware of this interconnectedness anymore than the brain and heart consciously realize that they work together as an organism.
Functionalism, explained by Emile Durkheim, states that each part of society is required for society to function as a whole. When the crops failed to grow, a
The functionalist paradigm focuses on the integration of society, and how society how its own groups which has their own functions to help improve the peoples lives. Functionalist paradigm fits in the category of macro-sociology, because it focuses on the patterns that shape an entire society. Functionalists believe that society is maintained through the thought of trust and consensus on moral values for ideal behavior. Working together will result in a stable social environment that will create equality. Conflicts or dysfunctions will be view as a disease in the social system. Social conflict paradigm believes that society is divided into many groups that have their own goals, and that certain parts of the world have the luck of benefiting economic dominan...
This economic study will define the dilution and variability of Marxist and Neo-Marxist Theory in the post-WWII era. The slow dilution of Marxist theory as a 19th century economic concept defines the rise of capitalism and the neoliberal ideology that has permeated the latter half of the 20th century. The fall of communism in the late 1980s reveals the bankruptcy of communism as a state ideology in the U.S.S.R., especially after the Unite States and other first world nations triumphed through the neoliberal capitalist ideology of the 1990s and into the 21st century. More so, the dilution of Marxism also occurs in the increasing cultural and social abstractions of Marxist ideology that stray from the objective “materialism” of traditional Marxist analysis, which shows a moderate rationalization for capitalism in the Neo-Marxist theory of social and cultural factors in 20th century economics. Various institutions and Neo-Marxists theorists, such as Max Weber and Antonio Gramsci, tend to moderate the effect
Structural-functionalist Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore concluded that stratification of society is inevitable because: for society to function its positions must be filled, some positions are more important than others, the more important positions must be filled by the more qualified people, and to motivate the more qualified people to fill these positions they must offer greater rewards. (2012:228) Example of Davis and Moore conclusion is if someone apply for a job as a teacher, they need to be highly qualify in area such as education and experience. For that person to be interest in the job, employer need to offer benefit like retirement plan, vacation time, health insurance, etc… Unlike the position as a teacher, if someone is applying
Despite the fact that many critics focus on the economic side of TPP, two sociological theories can be applied to analyze how the approval of TPP would lead to social problems. First of all, TPP will be enforced by the governments of the signatory nations, and will yield enormous changes to the economy of the countries. Thus, Structural Functionalism can be used to study the nature of the problem by focusing on those two major social institutions. Also, as trade and alliance usually involve frictions between nations due to the difference in the core values, social systems, and cultures. Therefore, these conflicts can be studied with non-Marxist Conflict Theory.
Functionalism and Marxism are two of the most influential perspectives within Sociology, and emerged in response to modernity. They are both structuralist theories, the individual is viewed with less importance than the social structure or organisation of society itself. They both advocate the idea that society can be improved through the application of human knowledge. However there are major contradictions in their explanations of society.
Functionalism is a theory of contemporary philosophy of the mind, designed to provide a solution to behaviourism and identity theory, but more importantly a solution to the mind/body problem. In this essay I will discuss the theory of functionalism, and what solution it offers in resolving the mind/body problem. The mind/body problem examines the relationship between the mind and physical matter, more specifically the relationship between consciousness and the brain that other theories of the mind have failed to account for. Solutions to the mind body problem attempt to explain one’s subjective experience of an objective physical world.
.... Functionalism is much too conservative, and does not have a way to explain major changes in society. The conflict theory does not explain some of the more orderly and stable parts of society. They both make good points, and both have good arguments. I however, cannot endorse one over the other for the simple reason that they are both essentially wrong and right at the same time. A conflict theorist is correct in saying that money and power do give you special considerations, and conflicts are at the base of most social change, however, they are wrong in assuming that all social institutions are unstable. A functionalist is correct in saying that the society is made up of interdependent and interacting parts, but wrong in their conservative assumptions. A blend of the two would probably provide the greatest base for an argument and would probably be the most real.
Functionalism sees society as a complex system whose parts interconnect. This perspective came from the works of Emile Durkheim, who was concerned with how society remains relatively stable. Emilie recognised that society exists beyond us—it has a life of its own. (Macionis & Plummer p.124) He recognised that society has the power to shape our thoughts and actions. Functionalism sees that studying society as a whole can only capture human experience. Durkheim saw crime as a ‘vital function for the ongoing life of society itself.’ (Macionis & Plummer p.125) He believed that crime is quite normal, and society would not exist without it. Functionalism sees society as a integrated whole where the parts work to hold it all together and sometimes it does not function well and falls apart. (Macionis & Plummer p.37) Durkheim did not precisely define the factors and dynamics accounting for the unity of society. He focused m...
Sructural functionalism has several major features and criticisms. The major features are social processes, the AGIL scheme, norms and values and the voluntaristic theory. Talcott Parsons received quite a lot of criticism over his ideas. The criticisms I will discuss are conflict theory, feminist criticism, Marxist criticism, rational actor approaches and neo-functionalism. Structural functionalism sees society as a complex system with parts that work together to promote solidarity and stability.
Ø In particular with Durkheim’s work, it is too optimistic and maintains the idea of social solidarity as the main theme, and simply believes pathologies can be solved through simple social reform, ignoring any problems or conflict and the affects. Ø Marxists argue that the modern family is organised to support and benefit the ruling class and the capitalist economy, rather than benefiting all of society. In particular, they accuse functionalists for ignoring the fact that power is not equally distributed in society. Some groups have more wealth and power than others and may be able to impose their norms and values as less powerful groups.
What are conflict and functionalist perspectives? The conflict perspective is “the sociological approach that views groups in society as engaged in a continuous power struggle for control of scarce resources” (Kendall, 25). These conflicts can result in forms such as politics and negotiations. Most conflicts form with discussion of family financial situations, due to the lack of resources (Kendall, 25). The functionalist perspective is defined as, “perspectives are based on the assumption that society is a stable, orderly system (Kendall, 23). Which perspective is more important for the well being of humans? In the global world today, the majority of individuals are involved in the functionalist perspective, which can lead to continuous
The major difference between the two theories is that from the Marxist perspective society is viewed as constantly changing, whereas from a functionalist mode of thought society is seen to be relatively stable. Marx viewed society as dynamic, or “continually evolving,” because of the recurrent replacement of the ruling cl...
Theories have been composed and exposed by various philosophers to clarify their reasoning about the mind. Dualism, Behaviorism, and Identity Theory, are well-known theories supported by well-written explanations. A modern theory, Functionalism provides ample insight to the main problem philosophers deal with, the mind/body problem.