Functionalist and Conflict theories Essay Essays

Functionalist and Conflict theories Essay Essays Functionalist and Conflict theories Essay Essay Functionalist and Conflict theories Essay Essay Sociology is the survey of society and the behavior forms of a peculiar group or civilization. In modern-day Australian society. a good apprehension of this is needed in order to do better societal alterations to run into societal demands. When it comes to seeking to explicate and understand society. there are two chief points of position that a individual can take. These are the functionalist position. which is mostly based on plants by Talcott Parsons. and the struggle position. sometimes referred to as Marxism. as Karl Marx made a important part towards this theory. Although in most ways these positions straight oppose each other. finally. they are both seeking to make the same thing. that is. explicate why society is like it is today. : Functionalists see society in a comparatively optimistic manner. They see groups as interdependent. working together for the good of the whole society. They claim that administrations and groups are mostly benevolent. and that they are at that place for utile intents. A individual who takes the functionalist position sees society as by and large runing swimmingly. and perceives that really small alteration is needed. as groups being interrelated agencies that alteration in one country will hold an consequence on the whole society. The functionalist position. while utile in explicating constructions and maps of assorted groups in society. tends to gloss over the negative facets of society. over-explaining them so that occurrences which could hold a big negative impact on society seem fiddling and unimportant. Where consensus is non go oning. it is the struggle position that has the better account. The struggle theory perceives society as stratified. that is. holding important divisions. It puts frontward a more ambitious. oppugning position on society. Peoples who support this position claim that in every establishment there are some people with more power. chances and position than others. This position is about inequalities. dissension. and the usage of power to advantage some while disfavoring others. The struggle theory is the direct antonym of functionalism in that it focuses on the negative facets of society. and even when something is working comparatively good. struggle theoreticians tend to analyze it until they do happen something incorrect. doing a mountain out of a metaphoric molehill. So while the functionalist theory and the struggle theory are two extremes of sociological thought. it is non necessary to take the position of either one or the other. Very seldom are state of affairss clearly black and white. Most frequently. if non ever. there are many sunglassess of Grey in between. Therefore it is of import to take on the position of both theories. and figure out which facet of a peculiar state of affairs applies to which theory. A good illustration of merely how much the two opposing positions differ is to use them both to the cosmopolitan establishment. the household. Functionalists see the household as a critical establishment that is needed to transport out several of import maps. These maps are: ?Regulating sexual behavior and reproduction ?Socialising kids ?Protecting kids and the aged ?Providing emotional support and fondness for its members ?Serving as an of import ingestion unit for society’s merchandises ( Earle and Fopp. 1999 ) These maps by and large still work good in the instances of socialization and reproduction. attention of the kids and the aged. and as an economic unit. earning and consuming. However in today’s society. where there is an increasing sum of domestic maltreatment every bit good as working individual parents or two working parents. members of a household aren’t ever able to supply emotional support and fondness for other members. Besides in today’s modern society there are a great sum of people holding sex before matrimony. and an alarmingly big sum of teenage gestation. Therefore households are non transporting out the map of modulating sexual behavior and reproduction every bit much as they were 20 or thirty old ages ago. Functionalists frequently use biological comparings. claiming that a household is like an being. with each member holding a peculiar function. These functions are considered natural. and must be carried out for the good of the whole household. These functions involve work forces traveling out into the work force and taking economic leading while the adult females stay at place looking after her kids and hubby and making all the housekeeping. The functionalist theory claims the atomic household as the ‘norm’ . The atomic household consists of two parents. one of each gender. and their kids populating together in one family. Although this construction is still reasonably typical of today’s society. it was much more prevalent in the 1950’s. Today there are many fluctuations of the household. and merely about half of households are atomic. With divorce and individual parent households steadily on the rise. and adult females desiring the same rights as work forces. functionalists are holding to come up with ways to explicate these happenings. For illustration. with divorce. a functionalist would reason that divorce is a good thing because it means that when people marry the 2nd clip unit of ammunition they will hold more experience and it will be more likely to last. However. this theory is considered out-of-date. In today’s society with a lifting economic system more and more adult females are traveling out into the work force. But this excess function does non intend giving up their other function as carer. Womans end up taking on two functions – that of the carer and the homemaker. every bit good as that of a worker. This is going unwanted for adult females. doing them loath to get married. The functionalist theory fails to take into consideration the simple fact that things change. And where the functionalist theory doesn’t rather apply. the struggle theory has the better account. The struggle position sees traditional functions in households as restricting women’s lives to caring for their hubby and kids. They claim that this agreement is non biological at all. but socially constructed. that is. created by people. These functions have been around and accepted for so long that they seem natural. but the struggle position argues that in existent fact people have been trained over many old ages into believing this manner. The struggle theory emphasises disagreement and battle as a portion of any human group. Conflict theoreticians say that in any group there will be position issues. something will be unjust. and the power will be divided – some will give orders. others will obey. This applies to the household in that it is frequently. if non ever. the parents giving orders to their children/teenagers. who are supposed to obey. Besides. even in today’s altering society. work forces still frequently have more power than their married womans. In modern Australian society. there are demographic alterations in household signifier. and household families are well smaller. The alterations in household agreement and in household values have of import effects for the household as an establishment. Fewer adult females are holding big households and the matrimony rate has declined. mostly because of alterations in attitudes to marriage and populating agreements. There is an increasing sum of non merely de facto relationships. but besides in the societal credence of these relationships. The divorce rate has besides increased. which so in bend influences the figure of blended every bit good as individual parent households. The struggle theory addresses these issues. and asks the of import inquiry ‘what needs to be changed in order for the household unit to last? ’ On the other manus. the functionalist theory attempts to explicate why these things are go oning and how they benefit society. Both the functionalist and struggle theories raise some really valid and of import points. Functionalism sometimes has a inclination to concentrate on the past. while the struggle theory places a bigger accent on the present. However. both theories are needed if the household is to last in the hereafter.