Analyzing Social Structures: Conflict and Consensus Perspectives in Sociology

Introduction

Sociologist examine social events from different perspectives and at different levels. This essay will evaluate, compare, and contrast the conflict and consensus perspectives. Moreover, the Marxism (class conflict) and feminism (gender conflict) theories will be used to outline the conflict perspective while Functionalism will be used to outline the consensus perspective.

Main Body

Debatably, both the conflict and consensus approaches contribute to the understanding of society, as both approaches offer essential explanations on how the society works. The conflict approach perceives society as comprised of different interests and groups who are competing for power and resources. Furthermore, society is divided into a dominant and a subdominant group hence cannot be harmonious. The conflict approach views stratification as dysfunctional and harmful in a given society, a rise of inequality is seen when the powerful and rich benefit at the expense of the poor (Mooney, et al., 2007). In contrast, the consensus approach argues that there is harmony in society; that society works efficiently and as a result both society and individual benefit (Brown, et al., 2016).

Some sociologist argue that when it comes the understanding of society the conflict approach is more useful than the consensus approach due to the fact that the consensus approach ignores the dysfunctions present in society. As mentioned in the source, functionalists such as Parsons and Durkheim argue that society works together and that society is a system that wants to achieve equilibrium. Whereas the conflict approach views social life as a competition a select few (the bourgeoisie or men) benefit (Brown, 2013).

Firstly, the Marxist theory provides an important view on the workings of the society by identifying that the society is divided and that there is a group that has the power to exploit another group. Marx viewed the society as an economic system-capitalism, which is made up of two classes. As seen in the source Marxist believe that there is conflict in society due to the division between the ruling class (bourgeoisie) and the working class (proletariat) (Brown, et al., 2016). He suggested that societies will go through different stages of economic development. As societies become more industrialized (the shift from agriculture to industries), there is a shift from ensuring that survival needs are met to ensuring profits are made thus leading to the exploitation of one group (Anon., 2010).

Marxist sociologist identified that the bourgeoisie (dominantly made up of men) in a capitalist system make their profits by exploiting the proletariat. Marx argued that the exploitation is maintained because the proletariat is lead to believe that it is fair (Intriligator, 1982).In his base-superstructure model, he illustrates how the relationship between economic relations and the production of materials (the base) and the legal, cultural, and political aspects of society (superstructure). Since the working class lack control in the means of production they end up feeling frustrated and alienated. Also, as a result of the advancement in technology many of them lose their jobs and are made redundant (Brown, et al., 2016). According to Marx, the ruling class ensures that they use every aspects of society to their advantage by controlling all institutions. He suggested that religion as an institute, serves as an “opiate of the masses” as it appeases the distressed and suffering which is associated with the working class lifestyle. To some extent, religion distracts the workers from questioning their exploitation by making them concentrate on being rewarded in heaven (Mooney, et al., 2007).

Neo- Marxists such Gramsci’s expound on how control of the minority groups is achieved through ideas hegemony). He argues that need for coercion agents of control such as law enforces etc. is reduced by ensuring peoples support of capitalism (Brown, et al., 2016). Therefore, hegemony can be attained by the legitimation of power within the popular culture. Similarly, Althusser emphasises the importance of maintaining structures that ensure the support and sustain the transmission of such ideologies (ideological state apparatuses). He argues that institutions such as family, religion etc. ensure that inequalities are preserved by subtlety introducing certain ideas (Brown, et al., 2016). This demonstrates how society operates more than the consensus approach that focuses on the ‘social’ aspect of society which works harmoniously to ensure that individual and society needs. This is contrary to the view held by Marxist, who argue that society only aims to passively meet the needs of the bourgeoisie and produces a sense of harmony through false class consciousness via ideology.

Feminist view society as having been divided in terms of patriarchy; within a social system men hold positions of power compared to women who are in subordinate positions. According to liberal feminist the woman’s position has been improved. However, they still view gender inequality as arising as a result of ignorance shown by men due to the strength of primary and secondary socialisation and ‘sex-role conditioning’ (Lumumba-Kasongo, 2017). Okaely, notes that the power imbalance that is seen in the family and the workplace is as a result of the power of money held by men. Women working in in different industries still experience a ‘glass ceiling’ as much as they have gained increased rights in the workplace. Marxist feminist argue that capitalism has created the economic dependence women have on men. This dependence provides men with female workers that can be exploited as well as ensures that household chores are done cheaply (Brown, et al., 2016). However, consensus sociologist such as Parson would argue that gender roles are biological thus benefiting the individual more. Also, society would oppose the change in the women’s position as it oppose the change in gender roles. Other critics of feminism argue that it overlooks Third World women as the theories are more relevant to the First World countries. These theories also overlook the positive manner in which women view the family.

Functionalist sociologist would disagree with the conflict arguments, suggesting that order and stability are essential in society and that each institution serves a function. As outlined in the source, functionalist see society as based on shared values and value consensus that create a state of harmony. The organic analogy by Parsons, uses organs to illustrate the institutions (family, education, religion etc.) found within society. These organs, similar the ones found in the human body work together to help society work (Cross & Albury, 1987). He argues that a society that operates in this manner should be able to meet everyone’s needs. However, this approach does not explain why there still some individual that are still marginalised and deprived as much as they conform to societies shared values. Parson also fails to discuss what happens when institutions don’t work together. To explain what the society does for an individual, he uses the AGIL scheme (adaptation, goal, attainment, integration and latency) (Cross & Albury, 1987). Nonetheless, this scheme doesn’t take into account individuals who aren’t part of a society and those who don’t have access to a goal thus showing that the conflict approach is more useful.

Other theories also disagree with the consensus approach. From the source it can be seen that the labelling theory looks at the power structures present in society, whereby groups have the power to label other groups. Becker identified that in schools, teachers who are the authoritative figure have the power to label certain students negatively (Brown, et al., 2016). Every so often these students come from working class or ethnic minority backgrounds. Consequently, students internalise these remarks leading to them thinking that they are incapable of achieving more and they therefore stop trying- self-fulfilling prophecy. Similarly, in crime the police (the authority) may use Typifications to decide who is a criminal thus leading to conflict in the society whereby certain groups (ethnic minorities) mistrust the police and their intentions (Intriligator, 1982). Although, the labelling is viewed as being determinist, there are number of cases where the individual didn’t live up to their label. More often than not, the label served as a motivator to do better. The labelling approach illustrate that society is more complex and shows that there is additional conflict that goes beyond the class conflict seen in the Marxist approach.

Max Weber described sociology as the study of social action as seen in the source. He believed that a ‘social action’ was an action implemented by an individual who had attached meaning to it. Moreover, he argued that the main institutions in society were bureaucratic organisations which consisted of individuals accomplishing rational social actions that are intended to achieve a specific goal (Brown, 2013). Before an individual approach a situation, they first think about, attempt to anticipate other individuals actions and then respond to the situation that will best meet their goals. Conflict can easily arise if the said individual holds contradictory views to other individual thus showing that society isn’t harmonious.

Conclusion

The conflict approach can be considered more useful as it offers a better insight of society by addressing conflict in power that unavoidably occurs within society. This approach creates a realistic opposition to the consensus approach that doesn’t show the negative side of society which is essential in understanding today’s society.

References

Brown, D., Pountney, L., Maric, T. & Meadows, N., 2016. Consensus, conflict structural and social action theories. In: AQA A-Level Sociology: Book 2. London: Hodder Education Group , pp. 8-20.

Brown, S., 2013. Social Structures, s.l.: Khan Academy.

Cross, S. J. & Albury, W. R., 1987. Walter B. Cannon, L. J. Henderson, and the Organic Analogy. Osiris, Volume 3, pp. 165-192.

Intriligator, M. D., 1982. Research on Conflict Theory: Analytic Approaches and Areas of Application. The Journal of Conflict Resolution , 26(2), pp. 307-327.

Lumumba-Kasongo, T., 2017. Contemporary Theories of Conflict and their Social and Political Implications. In: T. Lumumba-Kasongo & J. Gahama, eds. Peace, Security and Post-conflict Reconstruction in the Great Lakes Region of Africa. s.l.:Africa Books Collective , pp. 29-48.

Mooney, L. A., Knox, D. & Schacht, C., 2007. Sociology and the Study of Social Problems . In: R. Jucha, ed. Understanding Social Problems. Carolina: Thomson Learning Inc, pp. 1-27.

Take a deeper dive into Aging and Loneliness as a Contemporary Issue of Elderly with our additional resources.