Functionalism and conflict theories are both macro-sociological theories. They differ from micro-sociological theories because they deal with the study of a large number of people in a given nation or even the whole world. These theories cover a variety of topics on groups and major organizations of single or numerous societies. Micro sociological theories deal with small groups of people. This paper focuses on the two theories and their differences in perspectives.
The conflict theory indicates that each part of the society is interdependent and participates to the society role as a whole. This theory views the society as a balance between its parts. In the biological point of view, society is observed just like a human body which is checked to determine which parts of the body are working and which ones are not. Diagnosis is done to come with results to restore the body’s balance. Similarly, when the government gives education to its citizens it expects taxes from the family to keep it running.
The family depends on schools to educate children for them to get employment in their later lives, have their own families, and cater to the family’s needs. As the children grow and get their jobs, they start paying taxes and support the government and their parents. Therefore, each aspect of society becomes productive in an orderly way (Stark c.3).
However, if the order does not go well, each aspect of the society adapt to follow a new order to be stable and productive. For example, in case of financial difficulties, which render many people jobless due to inflation, people trim their budgets and schools cut the programs offered, thus the social order is changed while stability and productivity take place. Other functional processes in the society include friendships, health, peace, and population increase.
The conflict theory, on the other hand, presents the society differently than the functionalism theory. The conflict theory focuses on the negative while the functionalism focuses on the positive parts of the society. It assumes that those who are wealthy continue to increase their wealth while the poor continue to suffer. The power effort is gained by the wealthy and lost by the poor (Stark c.3).
Nevertheless, the conflict theorist’s support social change, unlike the functionalisms, which support the status quo. Karl Marx established the theory when he saw that powerful people were exploiting the less powerful or the poor in society. Marx, together with other theorists pointed out that we need inequity in order to survive and that different social classes are common.
In functionalism point of view, a scholar will view the range of sociological approaches which evaluate the law in the society. These lawmakers in countries like the U.S study the interaction between the law and different institutions such as social and non-social institutions and rules for social control in the society are set. Since the functionalism tends to support the wealthy because it does not support the social change, the law deals with those who violate the rights of others especially those from lower social classes.
The same case applies to the conflict theory because laws based on social institutions and interactions the laws are set. The law protects those who are oppressed and is supported by the conflict theory which emphasizes on social change.
In conclusion, functionalism or structural theory is concerned with how people join to build a society while also determining whether certain actions are right for the balancing of society. It views society as a system in which different aspects work together to achieve a goal of making the society work as a whole.
However, conflict theory does not focus on society’s unity but is rather concerned with society conflicts. Both theories are macro perspective, which means that they are concerned with the society as a whole rather than parts, as compared to the micro sociological theories which deal with small segments of groups.
Work Cited
Stark, Rodney. Sociology. 10th ed. Stamford: Cengage Learning, 2007. Print.