Structural Functionalism Vs Symbolic Interactionism

There are two kinds of people in the world when analyzing a problem; one kind that search for details to break the problem down and the other that view the subject as a whole. Each type of method works in today’s world on many disciplines. In the field of sociology, symbolic interactionism and structural functionalism are two of the main theories to apply as sociologists are analyzing social problems. The two perspectives are quite different on the usual level of analysis; Symbolic interactionism examines small patterns of social interactions while structural functionalism examines large-scale patterns of society. An analogic thinking can be applied to the two theories whereas symbolic interactionism is like looking subjects through microscope

for details, but structural functionalism is like stepping away from the subject in order to see the big picture.
Through the lens of a microscope, people see organisms in the way they are consisted by cells and microorganisms.

Subject is broke down to smaller parts and showed in great details. I still remember the first time I was introduced to a microscope on science class; the drop of water under the lens became completely unfamiliar since all I saw was colorful free-floating plankton. It’s fascinating because the water seemed transparent through my naked eyes. Later I learned how the microscope enables people to see things in a whole new level of perspective. Symbolic interactionism works the similar way as a microscope of the society since it is micro sociological. The theory studies the symbols of everything within the society. In the perspective of symbolic interactionism, symbols tell people how they are related to others and know they should act towards them. At the micro level of face to face interaction, symbolic interactionists study how people use symbols to create social life. The theory studies every subject’s meaning within the society in order to examine how one certain subject is related to a social problem. One of the key aspects of symbolic interactionism is that a single thing does not exist objectively unless it interacts within the society. People's understanding of things’ meanings can change due to the process of social interaction. Overall, symbolic interactionism is everything about analyzing how social life depends on the way we define ourselves and others and looking at smaller parts of the big picture. This concept is much like seeing the society through the lens of a

microscope.
Turning now to the topic of structural functionalism, which is the perspective that is macro sociological. The essence of structural functionalism is stressing the idea of a social system being made up of interrelated parts. When working properly, each part contributes to the system’s equilibrium. Functionalists view the society as a whole in order to see how each department works with each other. This certain idea resembles when the way a giant puzzle is fitted. Each piece of a puzzle is indispensable of the big picture. The pieces are related to each other in certain ways. While fitting the puzzle of the big picture, people must not only find useful pieces but also step back to see whether the whole image is making sense. When each piece of the puzzle fulfills its functions, the picture the puzzle illustrates becomes clear and correct. Stepping back to see the society as a whole is what structure functionalists do when they study the function of the society. It is worth noting that functions can be either manifest or latent. If an action is intended to help some part of a system, it is therefore a manifest function. As the opposite, a latent action hurts some part of a system. Since the functions are varied, study the society as a whole becomes important for structure functionalists.
Ideally, symbolic interactionist and structural functionalists can have very different opinions on a single issue. For example, let’ talk about the topic of unemployment. Symbolic interactionists break the problem into smaller topics such like job, wage, life standard and family. Then, according to the current social status symbolic interactionists work on how to define the meaning of the each topic. As the changing ideas of each topic are sorted out clearly, symbolic interactionists use them to study how the job, wage and life standards affect people and eventually the unemployment rate. By using the socio-microscope, symbolic interactionists are able to seek the symbolic detail and component to explain complex social problems. On the other hand, structure functionalists tend to look at the greater picture in order to find and connect the important puzzle pieces which are essential to the issue. The functions of employment in today’s society changes over time; functionalists work on how to define and connect them. Additionally, a function bounds to other functions in today’s society because more functions are added to the society after industrialization. The function of economic system, family and insurance are very much influenced by each other and structure functionalists connect them to illustrate the overview of our society.
Therefore, people may ask the question: “which one is the ‘right’ theoretical perspective to use?” Both symbolic interactionism and structural functionalism are major theories in studying sociology today from two opposite strategies. As you can see each is a lens that produces a contrasting picture of unemployment. Each theory also focuses on different features of social life and provides a distinct interpretation. Although the two theories might seem literally abstract; the way they analyze the social problem are simple to relate when comparing them to the analogy of using microscope and stepping back to expand one’s view. Consequently, we need to use both theoretical lenses to analyze human behavior. By combining the two, we gain a more comprehensive picture of social life.