Major Sociological Perspectives: Functionalist, Conflict, and Symbolic Interactionist

Sociological theories provide us with different perspectives with which to view our social world. Sociology includes three major theoretical perspectives: the functionalist perspective, the conflict perspective, and the symbolic interactionist perspective. Each perspective offers a variety of explanations about the social world and human behavior.

The functionalist perspective is based largely on the works of **Herbert Spencer, Emile Durkheim, Talcott Parsons, and Robert Merton**. According to functionalism, society is a system of interconnected parts that work together in harmony to maintain a state of balance and social equilibrium for the whole. For example, each of the social institutions contributes important functions for society:

• Family provides a context for reproducing, nurturing, and socializing children.
• Education offers a way to transmit a society’s skills, knowledge, and culture to its youth.

The functionalist perspective emphasizes the interconnectedness of society by focusing on how each part influences and is influenced by other parts. For example, the increase in single-parent and dual-earner families has contributed to the number of children who are failing in school because parents have become less available to supervise their children’s homework. Functionalists use the terms functional and dysfunctional to describe the effects of social elements on society. Elements of society are functional if they contribute to social stability and dysfunctional if they disrupt social stability. Some aspects of society can be both functional and dysfunctional. For example, crime is dysfunctional in that it is associated with physical violence, loss of property, and fear. But according to Durkheim and other functionalists, crime is also functional for society because it leads to heightened awareness of shared moral bonds and increased social cohesion.

In contrast, the conflict perspective views society as composed of different groups and interests competing for power and resources. The conflict perspective explains various aspects of our social world by looking at which groups have power and benefit from a particular social arrangement. For example, feminist theory argues that we live in a patriarchal society—a hierarchical system of organization controlled by men. The origins of the conflict perspective can be traced to the classic works of **Karl Marx**. Marx suggested that all societies go through stages of economic development. As societies evolve from agricultural to industrial, concern over meeting survival needs is replaced by concern over making a profit, the hallmark of a capitalist system. Industrialization leads to the development of two classes of people: the *bourgeoisie*, or the owners of the means of production (e.g., factories, farms, businesses); and the *proletariat*, or the workers who earn wages. According to Marx, the bourgeoisie use their power to control the institutions of society to their advantage. For example, Marx suggested that religion serves as an “opiate of the masses” in that it soothes the distress and suffering associated with the working-class lifestyle and focuses the workers’ attention on spirituality, God, and the afterlife rather than on such worldly concerns as living conditions.

Microsociology, another level of sociological analysis, is concerned with the social-psychological dynamics of individuals interacting in small groups. Symbolic interactionism reflects the microsociological perspective and was largely influenced by the work of early sociologists and philosophers, such as **George Simmel, Charles Cooley, George Herbert Mead, and Erving Goffman**. Symbolic interactionism emphasizes that human behavior is influenced by definitions and meanings that are created and maintained through symbolic interaction with others. Symbolic interactionism also suggests that our identity or sense of self is shaped by social interaction. We develop our self-concept by observing how others interact with us and label us. By observing how others view us, we see a reflection of ourselves that Cooley calls the “looking-glass self.”