Social Change On Conflict Between The Classes example essay topic

Social life is what an individual goes through on an everyday basis. This includes how we socialize in society and interact with others. Social life is very important when dealing with social life. Many sociological theorists have offered information in an effort to fully understand society and how it works. Some of these theorists are some such as Emile Durkheim, Max Weber and Karl Marx. These theorists have all influenced the subject of sociology in some way.

The have all offered their own theories on the issue. A theory is a set of ideas offered by someone to answer a specific question. These theories may be tested or untested. These theories help to make up the sociological thought. The most basic theories that have been used to try and explain society and social life is the Functionalist and Marxist theories.

These two theories were similar in the fact that they were both structural theories. This means basically that both theories are concerned with how the society influences the individual instead of how the individual affects society. These mostly stress and over exaggerate the fact that society influences and controls the individual instead of the individual controlling society. These structural sociologists are not really concerned on how society influences groups.

They are more concerned with how groups create, find meaning in and experience society. Functionalism is what is called a consensus theory. A man mostly influenced this by the name on Emile Durkhiem. It is also refered to as consensus structuralism. It is said to be like this because moral people in society have to have consensus (agreement) in order to maintain social order. On the other hand Marxist theory is know as a conflict theory.

Karl Marx influenced this. It stresses on conflict in society instead of consensus. It is important to know although functionalist press forward the thought of value consensus they know that conflict can and will occur but to them it will only be temporary. Functionalists know that social groups have differences but to them this is not as important as what social groups have in common. To a Marxist the society is always in conflict. In other words conflict is more permanent that temporary.

To them the differences in social groups are more important than the similarities. It is the differences that cause the conflict so to them it would be more important. Functionalist compare society to an organism. A good example of this is the human body. The human body depends on different critical organs in order to survive. Like the heart, brain and lungs.

They all work together to make sure that the body is working at optimum efficiency. Without one of them the body would not be able to function as well. Functionalists say that society operates the same way. Institution work together to make sure society operates well. They must work together to form a complete system. Theses institutions were interdependent on one another.

These institutions that help society to function may be economic, political, kinship (families), cultural and community organizations (schools and churches). All these help to make up the structure of society with regards to functionalists. Functionalists believed that the cohesive force in society was a set of values, norms and beliefs shared by all the members of that society. This was known as collective conscience.

On the other hand to a Marxist society was construct by different classes. To Marxist means of production determined which class a person was in. The most powerful class was the one the one that controlled the means of production. The lower class was the ones who sold their labor.

In order to survive humans must produce food and material objects. After doing this humans must come in contact with one another. Marx maintained that excluding societies of prehistory, societies couldn't exist in their existing form forever. This is because to him all historical societies contain basic contradictions. The fact of differences in class in this case causes conflict between the two classes.

This is mainly because the higher class which are the people who control the forces of production gains at the expense of the others, which would be the lower class. The lower class would be the others who sell their labor in order to make a living. For Marx class was the determinant of power. The higher class was more powerful. The higher class was more powerful because the owned property and wealth.

The richer someone became they did now want to lose what they owned. This gave them the means to defend what they owned. The main conflict was between classes. The lower class wanted power and the higher class was willing to defend their status and what they owned. The Functionalist unlike the Marxist did not tend to focus on the inequality of power within society.

The saw that their was inequality of power not because of wealth but because everyone in society has a role to play. Not everyone can rule so some have to follow while others rule. Only a limited number of people could rule and make important. If everyone ruled then they would be no one to lead and this would only lead to chaos and conflict. Social change is simply a change in society that is influenced by some factor of society. Functionalist and Marxist views differed in this area.

Functionalist saw social change as something that occurs when it is suppose to. Functionalist stated that social change occurs it is functionally necessary for it to do so. They used the example of educational systems in modern societies have the tendency to expand. It is said to be so because the societies require a more literate and numerate population than less advanced societies. They said that this social change could come in two ways. Social change could come either in adaptation or integration.

Adaptation means when a society readjusts to meet new needs. An example of this is the same one about the educational systems expanding because of the requirements of a more literate population. Integration means when society takes new elements of society and makes it part of themselves. A good example is when immigrants come into a society and influences its society to change to a society that they could fit in. Functionalist believed that social change was evolutionary and not revolutionary.

In other words they believed in evolution instead of revolution. This means they believed change was gradual and not sudden. On the other hand the Marxist theorist blamed social change on conflict between the classes. For Marx class conflict was the dynamo of history. In the middle ages the main conflict was between the landed aristocracy and the rising bourgeoisie. In a capitalist society the major conflict was between the same bourgeoisie and the proletariats.

The bourgeoisie was the more powerful of the two classes. These were the ones who controlled the forces of production. The proletariats were the people who provided the labor for wages. The victory of a new class would represent a new historical period. This was when society would change. The Marxist analyzed this as the bourgeoisie rose.

As they rose the society this introduced the capitalist approach. The capital search for resources was so dynamic that it became a worldwide system. Marx believed in Revolution more that evolution. He believed change came about fast. Marxist theory is a conflict theory so to Marx society was in a state of conflict between classes. He used this theory to determine whether society was in orderly balance or in conflict.

He realized that balance and social order can occur but to him when this occurred it was only temporary. To him this couldn't last forever. He stated and argued the point that when this balance occurred the rich and the powerful would benefit more than the others. On the other hand now functionalist believed that balance in society was normal. Disequillibrium was an abnormal state. Disequillibrium would include things such as civil war.

To them this disequillibrium when comparing society to an organism was like a sickness to it. Social equilibrium was based on the existence of moral consensus. This simply means when everybody in the society shares the same values. In order to maintain social order in society it was essential for social values to be taught.

This was also needed to maintain order and conformity. Parents and teachers mostly performed this teaching and it was absolutely essential for them to do this. Functionalists believe that society shapes an individual. They believe that institutions of society play a major role in this.

Some of these institutions are the family, school and the workplace. They said that an individual couldn't control their life so how could they change society. Some functionalist sociologist such as Durkhiem believed that sociology is not about the individual. Not everyone believed and shared his views.

Like the functionalist Marx believed that the individual was powerless their life or the life of another person. Anyone who believed this said that class conflict and socialist revolution was inevitable don't matter what a single individual may try to do about it. Other Marxist sees the individual as having a more important role. Although they believe this they still see class as a person's prime identity. To functionalist they main purpose of sociological study is to analyze and explain how society functions. In doing this they look at the normal and abnormal functions in society.

To do this they study one part of society in relation to another. For example they would study education to work. Durkheim said that sociologists should discover and try to explain social facts like the same way natural scientist do with physical facts. In terms of the Marxist theory they main concern is analyzing and explaining conflicts between the different classes of society.

He would try to explain why there was conflict and the results of this conflict. Marxist also wanted to change the world as it was to a world where Marxist theory was dominant. The world did not take to this theory at the time. It is said that Karl Marx came before his time.

They used this as the reason why Marx did not fully succeed in what he was doing. In conclusion from the functionalist perspective, the society is made up of different parts and the needs of the social system must be met in order of it to survive. These needs are known as functional prerequisites. To them the major function of social institutions is to help to meet these functional prerequisites.

They believed society evolved. They saw that society would best progress is best achieved through maintaining social order and then allowing society to evolve by its self. Order and stability is essential in maintaining the social system. This largely provided by value consensus. This means the agreeing of people in the society helps to maintain the social system. This is why value consensus is so important to functionalist.

The agreement on values and beliefs is important for the proper running of the society. In conclusion for Marxist they perspective involves analyzing the infrastructure. They said in all societies they are contradictions in the forces and relations of production. Because of this there would be conflict between social groups.

Everyone would want to be on top so this would cause competition and with competition would come the conflict. Marx always talked about ruling class ideology. He believed that class conflict was the main cause of conflicts in the capitalist society. He stated the contradictions of infrastructure would break down society and revolve into a new society. Marx believed that a capitalist society was a good thing. He saw it as a system that would lead to the improvement in technology and this would free people from material need and therefore they would be enough goods and food for the population to consume.

This would lead to a better and happier social life. There are many differences between Marxist and functionalist theories but they are still some similarities. Marxism along with functionalism shares the modern belief that the human society will improve and that rational, scientific thinking can be used to ensure progress.