Core ideas of structural functionalism:
Inequality is functional for society
Society made of structures, and they all contain certain functions
Reframing structural functionalism (merton)
Offered several critiques of underlying postulates of structural functionalism (while still using this paradigmatic lens)
Not all structures in society are necessarily functional or integrated
Not all social structured and cultural forms are beneficial for society
Not all social systems and structured are to society
Manifest and latent function (merton)
Manifest functions: intended or obvious consequences of a particular structure
Latent functions: unintended or unrecognized consequences
dysfunctions:harmful or negative functions
nonfunctions: consequences that are irrelevant to the system
Conflict perspectives
Remember marx?
Stratification is based on different relationships ot the means of production
One class controls production (bourgeoise) which allows them to extract labor form workers (proletariat)
Prediction: as capitalism progress, inequality will get worse until the proletariat unite and force an end to capitalism
Conflict paradigm
Society is a competition for resources, status and power
3 underlying assumptions
Humans are rational beings who will act to maximize their self interest
Resources are limited
This makes conflict normal and inevitable
First two “consensus theories” (structural functionalism)_ would agree with the first two
Conflict can be functional
Social order is maintained by power and domination
Social and economic institutions are used to maintaining inequality
Conflict can lead to
Conflict cycle:
Society is made of controlling and oppressed groups- always at odds:
Controlling group oppressed another group, they are largely blind to this
The oppressed group biomes frustrated and conflict arises
A solution of some kind is reached and a new control order/oppressed group emerges
Repeat steps 1-3
Philosophical influence: Hegel's dialectic
Current status quo
Contradiction or negation (conflict)
A new viewpoint that resolved problems of the theise
Wednesday march 12th:
Authority and conflict (Dahrendorf)
Structural functionalism
The social system is held together by voluntary cooperation or consensus
Conflict
The social system is held together enforced constraint
Dahrendorf: systematic social conflicts are always caused by the differential distribution of authority
Authority and conflict
Positions in society have different amounts of vested authority
Dichotomous: superordination and subordination
Legitimate: can expect commands/decisions will be obeyed
Sanctions: non compliance ro deviance carries consequences
Positional:not personal
Not constant: authority in one contact does not necessarily travel to other context
Interests and conflict:
Society is composed of imperatively coordinated associations: interconnected groups or organizations where some people hold positions of authority and others are subject to that authority
Groups on the top and the bottom are defined by their common interests:
superordinate groups: maintain status quo
Subordinate groups:create change
These interests don't have to be conscious
Quasi groups: common interests are latent (unconscious)
Interest groups: common interests have become manifest (conscious) and structure/goals have emerged
Conflict groups: actively engage in conflict
Case study:
In 2014 in flint michigan made a cost saving decision to switch their water source, this resulted in lead and bacterial contamination that killed at least 12 people and sickened dozens more
Key demographics
Roughy 100,000 residents
Nearly half live below the poverty line
⅔ residents of color, predominantly black
Applying conflict theory
How many interest groups can you identify
Political groups, govt. agencies, researchers, residents living in the conditions, new reporters,
So many interest groups that can come from this
Superordinate or subordinate
What are their interests? Are they latent or manifest
What are the sources of conflict?
What are groups competing over (resources power status etc)
How do latent groups eventually become conflict groups
Analyze the outcome
Was it inevitable
What are the negative consequences
are tehre any positive consequences as a result