The Development of Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology

1. The Development of Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology Symbolic Interaction Structural - Functional Analysis Conflict Disciplined Eclecticism

2. Theoretical Perspective The term “theoretical perspective” refers to broad assumptions about society and social behavior that serve as a point of departure for sociological thinking and research. It focuses the analysts attention on some aspects of the social world rather than others; It defines some questions as especially relevant and important and others as trivial and uninteresting. In addition, these perspectives may be considered as interpretative schemes: they offer a framework for interpreting the results of specific studies.

3. Perspectives will both facilitate & constrain perception

4. The Analogy of Using a Flashlight in a Dark Room

5. The Burke Theorem “A way of seeing is also a way of not seeing - a focus upon object A involves a neglect of object B.” Kenneth Burke Literary Philosopher 1897-1993

6. Maslow’s Hammer An over-reliance on a familiar tool “It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.” The Psychology of Science, p. 15, 1966. Abraham Maslow 1908 – 1970

7. Theoretical Perspective No one perspective has successfully dealt with the entire range of sociologically interesting questions. Starting with different sets of assumptions, each perspective – structural-functionalist, conflict, symbolic interactionist, and disciplined eclecticism – focuses on a different range of social phenomena and, as a result, raises different questions. They should not, however, be thought of as being necessarily at odds with one another. Although sociologists adhering to different perspectives have marked disagreements with one another about the nature of the social world, these perspectives are not necessarily contradictory, nor mutually exclusive. As one noted theorist has commented, “Many ideas in structural analysis and symbolic interactionism . . . are opposed to one another in about the same sense as ham is opposed to eggs: they are perceptively different but mutually enriching” (Merton, 1976). Together, these three perspectives provide a broader and deeper understanding of the world.

9. “A Beethoven string-quartet is truly, as some one has said, a scraping of horses’ tails on cats’ bowels, and may be exhaustively described in such terms; but the application of this description in no way precludes the simultaneous applicability of an entirely different description.” William James, The Sentiment of Rationality, 1882

10. What is a Human being? Intellectual Setting - Review

11. Original Sin Michelangelo, Fall From Grace

12. Malevolent Spirits

13. Human Beings are constrained by their heredity: “Blood Tells”

14. Eugenicists

15. “The Apple Doesn’t Fall Far From the Tree”

16. Human Beings are bundles of Instincts

17. William James: Instincts Instinct: - “the faculty of acting in such a way as to produce certain ends, without foresight of the end, or without previous education in the performance.” i.e, climbing, emulation, rivalry, pugnacity, anger, resentment, hunting, jealousy Principles of Psychology, 1890 1842-1910

18. Human Beings are Learning Machines

19. “Behaviorism” - John B. Watson “Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select – doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief, and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors.” John B. Watson, Behaviorism, 1924 1878-1958

20. B. F. Skinner 1904 - 1990 S R rewards punishments

21. Human Beings are driven by Unconscious Motivations

22. Id Superego [Nature] [Nurture] Ego [Self] Sigmund Freud 1856 - 1939

23. Human Beings are “Personalities”

25. Human Beings are Rational Cost-Benefit Analysts

26. Deterrence Theory The human being is a rational actor Rationality involves an end/means calculation, People (freely) choose all behavior, both conforming and deviant, based on their rational calculations - the central element of calculation involves a “cost benefit analysis” Choice, with all other conditions equal, will be directed towards the maximization of individual benefit Choice can be controlled through the imposition of punishment that is “swift, certain, and severe.” Jeremy Bentham “utilitarianism” 1748 - 1832

27. Human Beings are driven by the “interests” of their Social Class

28. “. . . here individuals are dealt with only in so far as they are the personifications of economic categories, embodiments of particular class-relations and class-interests.” Karl Marx, Capital, 1867

29. Human Beings are Cultural Products

30. The Importance of Culture Franz Boas Boas, an anthropologist, embarked on a life-long assault on the idea that biology—race, in particular, was a primary source of the differences to be found in the mental or social capabilities of human groups. History, experience, and cultural differences supply the answer. 1858-1942

31. Units of Analysis Macro-level Micro-level Dyad Individual

33. Units of Analysis Macro-level Micro-level Group Dyad Individual Triad

35. Units of Analysis Macro-level Micro-level Social Institutions Group Dyad Formal Org Bureaucracy Individual Triad

36. Social Institutions Education Family Religion Polity Science Economy

37. Units of Analysis Macro-level Micro-level Social Institutions Group Dyad Formal Org Bureaucracy Society Individual Triad

38. Politics The Social System Economy Science Family Education Institutional Autonomy & Interdependence Religion

39. Units of Analysis Macro-level Micro-level Structural-Functional Symbolic Interaction Conflict Social Institutions World Group Dyad Formal Org Bureaucracy Society Individual Triad

40. Symbolic Interaction

41. Symbolic Interactionist Approach George Herbert Mead Mead – and others who followed his footsteps – believed that previous approaches ignored the fundamental fact that individuals “think” – they actively perceive, define, and interpret the world around them. Rather than see the actor as a passive puppet blindly responding to stimuli – as did Watson (in Mead’s view) – Mead wanted to understand what goes on between stimulus and response. Do all individuals interpret and define the stimulus in the same manner? 1863 - 1931

42. Symbolic Interactionist Approach George Herbert Mead According to Mead, we can train a dog using reward and punishment – the behaviorist approach advocated by Watson – but the dog does not attach meaning to its actions. A dog responds to what you do, but a human responds to what you have in mind as you do it. You can train a dog to fetch your umbrella from the hallway, but if he can’t find it, not knowing your true intention, it won’t now look for your raincoat. 1863 - 1931

43. Symbolic Interactionist Approach George Herbert Mead Rather than see individuals behavior largely affected by either psychological factors – as did Freud – or genetically determined impulses – as did Davenport, over which people had no control, Mead wanted to focus on how actors, when confronted with situations, define the objects and situation they encounter, (2) creatively think about possible modes of conduct, (3) imagine the consequences of alternative courses of action, (4) eliminate unlikely possibilities, and finally 1863 - 1931 (5) select what they believe to be the best course of action.

44. Symbolic Interactionist Approach George Herbert Mead Rather than focus attention on the larger structure of society – the inequalities inherent in a capitalist economy that were stressed by Marx – Mead wanted to focus on the practical face-to-face, day-to-day activities of people in their more immediate social setting. How do they communicate? How are “symbols” created, defined, and shared by interacting individuals? How is “reality” socially constructed from the ground up? Since action is created by the actor out of what he perceives, interprets, and judges, to fully understand it the analyst would have to see the situation as the actor sees it, perceive objects as the actor perceives them, ascertain the meanings they have for the actor, and follow the actor’s line of conduct as the actor organizes it and modifies it during its course. 1863 - 1931

45. The “Subjective Element” in Social Action The Thomas Theorem “The Definition of the Situation” “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.” Interpretative flexibility W. I. Thomas 1863-1947

46. Symbolic Interactionist Approach Charles Horton Cooley How do we acquire a sense of “self?” “Looking-glass self” “Each to each a looking glass Reflects the other that doth pass.” Three elements: The imagination of our appearance to the other person 1864-1929 The imagination of his judgment of that appearance 3. Some sort of self-feeling, such as pride or mortification.

47. Symbolic Interactionist Approach Charles Horton Cooley How do we acquire a sense of “self?” “Primary Groups” “By primary groups I mean those characterized by intimate face-to-face associations and cooperation. They are primary in several senses, but chiefly in that they are fundamental in forming the social nature and ideals of the individual.” 1864-1929

48. Symbolic Interaction Herbert Blumer 1900-1987 How do people go about creating, defining, sharing and using “symbols” to facilitate interaction? “Interpretative flexibility”

49. What is a “Symbol?” Anything that stands for something other than itself. Anything that carries a particular meaning that is recognized and shared by people. A word A hairstyle A cross A whistle A piece of jewelry on a finger A flashing light A flag A raised fist A gesture A manner of dressing