..
|
Some things
vary according to how you look at them
|
.
| Introduction:
A Matter of How You Look at It: |
....
| In
many ways, sociology is the study of things we see in every
day life, but that we do not see in the same way..
This is a characteristic of many sciences. |
.
| We
talk, for example, of the "sun coming up every morning," or "going down
every evening." |
.
| The
science of astronomy, however, taught us long ago that the world is not
flat and not the centre of the universe, but is a globe turning on its
axis and, as it turns, it only appears that the sun is coming up or going
down: it is not. |
.
| When
we look around us and see walls and/or objects, we see them a solid things. |
.
| Nuclear
physics, however, teaches us that what we see as solid, continuous matter,
consists mainly of nothing.. |
.
.
| It
is mainly atomic nuclei surrounded by vacuum, around which a few things
such as electrons buzz. |
.
| In
relative sizes, it is like a fly on a football field. |
.
| With
the limited ability of our eyes, we look at those millions of nuclei and
electrons, and see solid matter. |
.
| Empiricists
are people who say we can understand only things we can observe, that we
do not need theory to interpret those things. |
.
| Astronomy,
nuclear physics, and sociology teach us that we need perspective before
we can see things
–– that raw observations
can not in themselves lead to understanding. |
.
| In
everyday life, we may think of society of consisting of people. |
.
| In
sociology, society is not people. |
.
| Individual
persons carry society in their beliefs and actions (and interactions),
but are not society in themselves.. |
.
| Society
is a system of beliefs and actions carried by human beings, but it is something
which transcends those same carriers. |
.
| That
means, then, that social organisations, such as family or community, are
not people. |
.
| They
are systems, or patterns, of beliefs and actions, by people, which are
carried by people. |
.
| This
is not to say we can define society (or social institutions) any
way we want, or see it in any way we personally wish. |
.
| Sociology
is a discipline, and it takes discipline to understand it. |
.
| For
those involved in applied sociology, interventions that will affect families
or communities, |
.
| it
is necessary to understand sociology..
That means to be able to understand the sociological perspective. |
.
.
....
| There
is an old proverb, saying that we, "Can not see the forest for the trees." |
.
| We
can apply this idea to the sociological perspective. |
.
| The
proverb implies that a forest is large, too large to see all at once, and
up close, all we can see is trees. |
.
| We
may be seeing part of the forest, but that does not give us a good understanding
of the forest as a whole. |
.
| In
everyday life, we come into contact with other people. |
.
| We
can see them; we can (usually) talk with them. |
.
| Sometimes
we can touch them (but we have to be careful where). |
.
| We
can not see a society, a community or a family, and we can not touch a
society, a community or a family. |
.
| Even
if we were to take an aeroplane up into the sky we could not see a forest,
because it is an ecosystem, and includes all the interactions between the
soil, the plants, the animals and the air in that system. |
.
| It
is far more than a collection of trees. |
.
.
| It
does not consist of people (that we can see), but of beliefs and actions,
and is a system; there is no physical position from which we can see a
society. |
.
| Families
and communities are social organisations, and are therefore something other
than the individuals in them. |
.
| An
Atomistic Perspective: |
....
| We
can use the word "atomistic" to indicate a non sociological (or anti-sociological)
perspective. |
.
| From
what we know about atoms, which tend to stick together, perhaps it is not
the best word coined. |
.
| It
implies that people are separate individuals and that there is nothing
beyond the individual. |
.
| I
would say that the best illustration of an atomistic perspective is a quote
from Margaret Thatcher, a right wing conservative prime minister of the
UK. |
.
| She
said, "There is no such thing as society; there are only individuals." |
.
| So
long as you do not believe that society exists, you will not see it, nor
will you be able to have any influence on its organisation or direction
of change and growth. |
.
| One
way to compare differences in perspective is to observe a game of competition
such as poker. |
.
| The
players are focused on winning, and on competing with each other. |
.
| For
them, that competition affects their perspective, and they see the competition
as the most important element of the game. |
.
| If
we are standing by, we can also see there is a considerable amount of co-operation
in the game. |
.
| Shared
values and shared meanings are manifested in that co-operation. |
.
| There
is agreement, for example, about the value of each card, and that a three
is higher than a two. |
.
| Most
of these agreements are unspoken and taken for granted, which contributes
to them not being at the forefront of consciousness or awareness of the
players.. See Poker
Game. |
.
| In
a similar way, in society, "players" in such games as "marketing"
may see the competition more easily than the underlying ground rules and
shared meanings. |
.
| Margaret
Thatcher, a declared champion of corporations and private enterprise, had
a perspective that magnified the competition and overlooked the co-operation. |
.
| Three
Classical Sociological Perspectives: |
....
| In
the history and development of sociology, three separate perspectives
were created and elaborated. |
.
| They
all owe their origins to thinking about applying the scientific method
to the study of society in the middle and late nineteenth century. |
.
| Karl
Marx, who never called himself a sociologist, was concerned with the underlying
competition between resources. |
.
| He
concentrated on the differences between the class of people who owned the
factors of production, the bourgeoisie, and the class of people who had
only their labour to sell in return for survival, the proletariat. |
.
| From
his analysis has grown the perspective in sociology which we now call "Conflict.".
The dynamics and changes in society are linked to various conflicts..
See Karl Marx. |
.
| Emile
Durkheim took a different approach. |
.
| He
argued that we can look at rates of behaviour and find explanations outside
the individuals who are doing the acting. |
.
| He
saw some sort of a conscience which acted as if it were external to individuals
even though it was carried in the thoughts of individuals. |
.
| He
argued, in contrast to Marx, that various characteristics of social elements
contribute to the living and growing of society and its institutions. |
.
| This
idea is carried through today as the "Functionalist" perspective in sociology..
See
Durkheim. |
.
| Max
Weber also disagreed with Marx, but went in a different direction. |
.
| He
said we can not understand society unless we understand the meanings that
people put on their actions and beliefs. |
.
| He
argued that the industrial revolution was caused by a shift in values and
beliefs associated with the ideas of John Calvin and the Protestant Reformation.. |
.
| From
his analysis is derived the third main sociological perspective, "Symbolic
Interaction." .See
Weber. |
.
| For
over a century, sociologist have fought great battles based on these three
radically different ways of perceiving society. |
.
| Sometimes
those battles are echoed in debates today. |
.
| Like
the famous feuding pair of Appalachian extended families, the Hatfields
and McCoys, the battles have been now put to rest, and there is much effort
in finding ways to reconcile them. |
.
| I
support the idea that all three are valuable, and we should try to internalize
them as merely different ways of looking at the same things. |
.
.
| In
each of the historical or classical perspectives, the intent is to justify
or use a sociological approach. |
.
| Social
behaviour is not explained by psychological theories, nor is it a product
of genetic inheritance. (That is called "reductionism"). |
....
| While
some people have tried to call Feminist Sociology a fourth perspective,
the practitioners themselves use all three of the historical perspectives
in their analyses. |
.
| While
there are inequities and inequalities based upon sex, these are similar
to those based upon age or race. |
.
| Biological
differences in people (age, race, sex) are extrapolated
by people who make social assumptions about each of them. |
..
| These
are important topics in sociology, but are not separate perspectives. |
.
.
| Sociology
borrows terminology from linguistics here. |
.
| Biological
(genetically inherited) differences between males and females are
called differences in "sex." |
.
| Sociological
differences (transmitted and stored by symbols) between masculine
and feminine are called differences in "gender." |
.
....
| If
we define culture and society as the sum total of everything we learn,
then it is useful to identify six dimensions of culture or society. |
.
| In
mathematics we define three dimensions as height, width and depth. |
.
| (Some
mathematicians, since Einstein, have added time as fourth). |
.
| These
are analytical constructs, and do not exist in themselves in empirical
reality. |
.
| I
find that many of the perspectives and theories can be better understood
by using the concept of dimensions. |
.
| As
in mathematics, these are constructs which exist in the minds of the observers. |
.
| In
mathematics, if we remove any one dimension, say height, then, by definition
and analysis, the whole object disappears. |
.
.
| They
are technological, economic, political, institutional (or interactional),
values and beliefs. |
.
| These
are not simply aspects of society, but dimensions. |
.
| If
any one is removed, all six are removed. |
.
| They
all extend from the broad sweep of the whole of humanity and macro theories,
to micro sociology and the local interaction between as few as two people. |
.
.
....
| The
sociological study of society is an interesting and challenging adventure. |
.
| For
the pure scientist, it reveals more about how things work, and sociological
perspectives give us immense insight into social phenomena. |
.
| For
the applied social scientist, especially one considering interventions
into families, communities, or organisations, the social perspectives provide
very valuable material to understanding those institutions, and predicting
what things may result from those interventions. |
. |