Here is a short comparison of three social theories. By applying them we can use them to help understand social interactions.

Three Main Social Theories in Brevity

     We can use three main theories to view social structure. All three theories, interestingly, contain a self-leveling aspect that keeps itself within certain perimeters over time. There is also a “let the chips fall where they may” element in all three as well if you just let it play out.

     The functionalist theory (Parsons, et al.) describes society as a large body with many different parts that seek their own goals but ultimately work together to create a system that works for everyone. Each achieved goal has a manifest function (Merton), which is the main goal of the part, but also a latent function, which is an unintended result of its activities. When we don’t meet these manifest goals, the individual part begins to change and readjust itself, which then causes changes in other parts. Society readjusts constantly, as if a living organism (Sullivan, 2015).

     The functionalist theory de-emphasizes the competitive nature of groups by emphasizing the harmony and interdependence we have with all groups present and functioning. For instance, environmentalists’ actions slow down the damage caused by consumption but create an economic hardship for log workers and a shortage of new construction. A shortage of homes raises the price of houses until only certain income levels can afford them. At that point, people in lower income brackets stop buying houses, which forces home prices to decrease. It is a self-leveling.

     The conflict theory, put forth by Karl Marx, describes society as different social classes that constantly compete for “societal” resources like money and power. The social classes are constantly struggling to dominate each other. Marx believed there was no way to reconcile this struggle. Anytime a group, or class, achieves their goals, it is always at the expense of other groups, according to Marx. The group holding the power utilizes dominance and coercion to remain there, until another group comes along that is willing to take it further (2015).

     The conflict theory, which describes life as constant turmoil within groups at every level from the nuclear family unit to world governments, appears to me to be the most accurate theory of the three, though certainly some aspects of all three seem present in society. This vicious cycle of conquering and domination plays out over and over. As different groups fight and claw their way to the top, they get knocked down by another group who is more willing to engage in tactics that shock and surprise. Now, with technology, some of these tactics are global in nature and no one can hide from the treachery of determination. I remember reading about the women’s suffrage movement in the 1800’s while taking Applied History (I can no longer access the textbook, or I would quote) that described the struggle women faced in breaking into a man’s world. They were determined to make progress, but sadly, imitating men and their aggressive behavior is what finally helped them gain ground.

     The interactionist perspective implies that society changes at the individual level from interactions between individuals, and then rises through society like a consciousness that aligns new ideas and beliefs that create sociological change. These ideas and beliefs are borne in the mind of the individual based on his perceptions (2015).

     The interactionist perspective puts an emphasis on the individual and his ability to change society if he is charismatic enough. The “movement” he creates continues until everyone agrees, or it reaches a group that perceives it as harmful or damaging or weird, and they overcome the movement. If the movement is positive and helpful, it can expand, so there is an element of a self-leveling process in the theory. These movements occur from an individual’s thought and gain momentum that reaches the public. This idea can cause problems if the person is mentally unstable, yet charismatic, or the person appears unstable to the public, even though he has a good grasp of the problem, like the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski (n.d.).

     Regardless of which theory you prefer, there are elements of all three that play out in society.

Resources

Industrial Society and Its Future. Theodore Kaczynski : Industrial Society and Its Future (Hache). (n.d.). Retrieved June 29, 2022, from http://editions-hache.com/essais/kaczynski/kaczynski2.html?nu=oui

Sullivan, T. J. (2015). Introduction to Social Problems (10th Edition). Pearson Education (US). https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/books/9780134054612