Critical Evaluation
This school of thought has a large following.
This paradigm highlights inequality and division in society, but it largely ignores how shared values and
interdependence can generate unity among members of a society.
To a great extent, this paradigm has political goals, therefore it cannot claim objectivity. Conflict theorists
counter that all approaches have political consequences.
3. The Symbolic-Interaction Paradigm
The structural-functionalists and social-conflict paradigms share a macro-level orientation,meaning a focus
on broad social structures that shape society as a whole.
The symbolic interaction paradigm provides a micro-level orientation, meaning a focus on social interaction in specific situations.
The symbolic-interaction paradigm sees society as the product of the everyday interactions of individuals. “Society” amounts to the shared realitythat people construct as they interact with one another.
• Without symbols we would have no mechanism of perceiving others in terms of relationships
(aunts and uncles, employers and teachers). Onlybecause we have these symbols like aunts and
uncles that define for us what such relationships entail. Compare these symbols with symbols like
boyfriend or girlfriend; you will see that the relationships change quite differently.
• Without symbols we cannot coordinate our actions with others; we would be unable to plan for a
future date, time, and place. Without symbols there will be no books, movies, no schools, no
hospitals, and no governments. Symbols make social life possible.
• Even self is symbol, for it consists of the ideas that we have about who we are. May be changing.
As we interact with others we may constantly adjust our views of the self, based on how we
interpret the reactions of others.
We define our realities. The definitions could vary. The definitions could be subjective. For example who
is a homeless? Who is a police officer – a provider of security or creator of anxiety. It has a subjective
meaning.
Max Weber is an exponent of this paradigm. He emphasized the need to understand any social setting from
the point of view of the people in it.
A person is the product of his experiences with others
Critical Evaluation
Without denying the usefulness of abstract social structures like the family, and social class this paradigm
reminds us that society basically amounts to people interacting.How individuals experience society.
This approach ignores the widespread effects of culture as well as factors like socialclass, gender, and race.
This school of thought has a large following.
This paradigm highlights inequality and division in society, but it largely ignores how shared values and
interdependence can generate unity among members of a society.
To a great extent, this paradigm has political goals, therefore it cannot claim objectivity. Conflict theorists
counter that all approaches have political consequences.
3. The Symbolic-Interaction Paradigm
The structural-functionalists and social-conflict paradigms share a macro-level orientation,meaning a focus
on broad social structures that shape society as a whole.
The symbolic interaction paradigm provides a micro-level orientation, meaning a focus on social interaction in specific situations.
The symbolic-interaction paradigm sees society as the product of the everyday interactions of individuals. “Society” amounts to the shared realitythat people construct as they interact with one another.
- Human beings are the creatures who live in the world of symbols, attaching meaningto virtually everything.
- Symbols attached to reality (material or non material).
- Meanings attached to symbols.
- Symbols are the means of communication. Therefore:
- Symbols as the basis of social life
• Without symbols we would have no mechanism of perceiving others in terms of relationships
(aunts and uncles, employers and teachers). Onlybecause we have these symbols like aunts and
uncles that define for us what such relationships entail. Compare these symbols with symbols like
boyfriend or girlfriend; you will see that the relationships change quite differently.
• Without symbols we cannot coordinate our actions with others; we would be unable to plan for a
future date, time, and place. Without symbols there will be no books, movies, no schools, no
hospitals, and no governments. Symbols make social life possible.
• Even self is symbol, for it consists of the ideas that we have about who we are. May be changing.
As we interact with others we may constantly adjust our views of the self, based on how we
interpret the reactions of others.
We define our realities. The definitions could vary. The definitions could be subjective. For example who
is a homeless? Who is a police officer – a provider of security or creator of anxiety. It has a subjective
meaning.
Max Weber is an exponent of this paradigm. He emphasized the need to understand any social setting from
the point of view of the people in it.
A person is the product of his experiences with others
Critical Evaluation
Without denying the usefulness of abstract social structures like the family, and social class this paradigm
reminds us that society basically amounts to people interacting.How individuals experience society.
This approach ignores the widespread effects of culture as well as factors like socialclass, gender, and race.
Comments
Post a Comment