Theoretical Frameworks of Sociology - Essay Example

?Sociology: Theoretical frameworks Introduction: This essay aims to analyse the three key theoretical frameworks, ly, conflict theory, structuralfunctionalism, and symbolic interaction with respect to the moral panic as a social phenomenon. It aims to examine the concept of social phenomenon from the perspective of diverse sociologists and early theorists such as Herbert Spencer, Karl Marx and George Herbert Mead. Through the perspectives of these theorists this essay aims to study the moral panic phenomenon with regard to various aspects such as the questions likely to be asked by these theorists, the manner in which it would be viewed by them, as well as the various aspects that they would be interested in. Moral panic refers to a sociological concept which explains the diverse reactions of various individuals or groups to a perceived social problem. It is associated with the process of analysing, exposing, and explaining the various processes involved in contributing to concerns about a social problem, issue or threat with little or no relationship with the reality of the problem (Rohloff and Wright 405). This concept has been applied to various social issues encountered by communities and societies over the years, including single and working mothers, same-sex marriages (Delamont 55; Strandb, 2008), abortion (Goode and Ben-Yahuda 110), issues related to gun control, state censorship and the likes. The sociology of morality can be described as essentially the debates and controversies arising out of differences in people's perceptions and ideas about the good and the right and the causes and implications of the same on the society as a whole. The concept of moral panic as viewed and described by different sociologists and theorists can help in providing novel insights into the social phenomenon and help in a better and clear understanding of the subject. Analysis of the theoretical perspectives: Herbert Spencer: Structural functionalism Herbert Spencer founded the concept of structural functionalism and referred to it as an idea that "society is comprised of an organized system of 'structures' that function harmoniously to satisfy certain individual or collective needs" (Carter 39). The concept of structural functionalism posits that society represents an interconnected system which cannot function effectively in the absence of balance and equilibrium. Hence any social phenomenon or change which threatens to disrupt the balance or harmony within a society is met with strong public opposition and outrage by the members of the governing society (Mooney 110). Moral panic has been witnessed in societies over the years as a response to drastic change in social dynamics which is perceived by certain groups and communities as a threat to the harmony and equilibrium enjoyed by them. The queer theory and the accompanying moral panic is a case in point. It accurately describes the manner in which functionalists would react to the concept of same-sex marriage and the moral panic arising out of it since it tends to deviate from the norm and is perceived as actions capable of disrupting the social equilibrium. Herbert Spencer’s theory of social functionalism largely built on an organismic analogy which likened the society with a human body. His theory put an emphasis on the evolutionary laws and stated that just as all parts of the human body must function effectively to remain healthy, it is imperative for all sections of the society to work together to ensure stability. According to this perspective, any deviance in the functioning of the society is hence likely to cause chaos and disharmony and cause moral panic. The questions likely to be asked by Herbert Spencer with regard to moral panic include: In what way does the concept of moral panic affect the society? Does it contribute to the betterment of the society or lead it toward disruption, disharmony and chaos? Has the concept of moral panic contributed in complicating the existing societal structure or assisted in resolving issues and providing solutions to it? Spencer was a political sociologist rather than a determinist. Hence he is more likely to be focused on examining and assessing the complexity of social structures over time due to a given social phenomenon, in this case, moral panic. He is likely to be interested in studying the fluctuating state of social and political equilibrium as a consequence of moral panic; the level and extent to which it may cause the societies to adapt and adjust to the pressures; and examine whether such moral panic would lead to disintegration or dissolution of the existing norms and bring about change in the society. Spencer believed that various external as well as internal social pressures often force the society to adapt or change. Moral panic hence is likely to influence strong reactions within a society which may threaten to disrupt the social and /or political equilibrium, causing it to evolve and change over time. This is mainly because of the fact that societies perceive any deviation to the established norms as a threat resulting in moral panic which in turn act as a catalyst for change. Karl Marx: Conflict theory The conflict theory is a political-economic theory developed by Karl Marx to describe the conflicts inherent in society and the factors that trigger such conflict. This theory posited that true social change can be initiated only through a process of revolutionary struggle. Based on this definition of the theory the concept of moral panic can be explained as the catalyst for such change brought about in the society. Moral panic is a mass reaction on the part of the public against opposing pressures or as retaliation against deviant forces existing in the society. Marx's perspectives regarding conflicts were based on the capitalist societal structures whereby he described the relentless pursuit of the capitalists for profit as catalyst for change. He argued that such desire for profits is likely to cause large scale exploitation of workers in the form of extended work hours and reduced wages (Bartos and Wehr 39). The stark differences in the interests and pursuits of the two parties i.e. the producers and workers with diverse set of goals and beliefs act as triggers causing conflict between them. Similarly, in case of moral panic it is a public outrage against deviant socio-economic or political changes which are unfairly tilted in favour of those governing them and hence contributing to conflict between the two parties. The recent Reading riots which occurred in the UK in 2011 illustrates the consequences of moral panic and the manner in which society reacts to opposing pressures which threaten or appear to threaten the equilibrium of the society. It clearly explains the differences in the objectives of the two parties involved which eventually lead to a conflict. In this case, the riots which broke out across London were described as a direct consequence of the conflict between a group of racial minorities and the police (The Guardian, 2012). Karl Marx who is referred to as the father of conflict theory described it as the conflicts arising between two groups due to ideological differences and deviation from conventional approaches. He posited that the materialistic objective of certain groups in a capitalist society are likely to cause serious social conflicts within a society leading to disruption and chaos and enforcing change over time. He described the origin and implications of such conflicts as arising out of increasing social pressures on certain groups and resulting in radical change triggered by moral panic. Based on these perspectives put forward by Marx, he is likely to pose the following questions with regard to moral panic: What is the role of socio-economic systems in causing moral panic? Are any of the parties involved i.e. the protestors (in the case of the London riots, the rioters) or the police likely to benefit from such opposition? Who commands more power over the other – the rioters or the police? Marx is more likely to study the phenomenon from the socio-economic perspective and focus on establishing and analysing the relationship between the economic disparity among the rioters and its impact on causing moral panic among them. He is likely to define and describe the phenomenon as an outcome of individual shortcomings rather than that of society as a whole. He would have studied the concept of moral panic in this case as unification of the oppressed class i.e. the rioters against the powerful capitalist system i.e. the police and public administration in general, resulting in the eventual success of the public against the system triggering positive social change. Although the violence and destruction of property is inexcusable and cannot be supported regardless of the purity of intent, the focus here is more on the study of the differences that led to the conflict rather than the means and methods used to convey the same. George Herbert Mead: Symbolic interaction George Herbert Mead is known for his immense contribution to the theory of symbolic interaction. This theory is concerned with the manner in which individuals use symbols or language as a means of communication in order to attribute meaning to certain objects or events and create a shared social reality. He argued that social norms can best be understood by examining and evaluating the process of role taking which entails perceiving a social reality by imagining oneself in the role of others (White and Ortega 60). Mead’s views on symbolic interaction were based on the argument that any given theory can be most effectively tested / proved if it is capable of resolving complex social problems (Herman and Reynolds 10). Based on the definitions and explanations provided by Mead, the following questions are likely to be raised: How is the concept of 'abortion' interpreted by diverse cultural groups within a given society? How do people on either side of the debate, i.e., the pro-lifers and pro-choice groups interpret and evaluate their ideologies in the context of the society to which they belong? To what extent, if any, are their opinions and perspectives likely to change or influenced by the manner in which others interpret the concept of abortion? Whether the concept of moral panic associated with abortion tend to criminalize the phenomenon? Mead, along with other proponents of this theory believed that individuals derive meanings of social phenomenon around them by the definitions assigned to each social concept rather than by judging each concept by its objective reality. He argued that individuals and groups associate meanings and sense of self based on these fixed definitions and perspectives of social issues (Mooney, Knox, and Schacht 10) and hence any deviation from the fixed norm is likely to generate moral panic among the members of the society. In the case of abortion for instance, there are contradictory views between two opposing groups i.e., the pro-lifers and pro-choice groups. This social problem has given rise to moral panic among certain sections of the society. This concept would most likely be perceived by symbolic interaction theorists as a social problem that arises due to the definitions assigned by individuals or societies to a good conduct or what comprises of moral behaviour and the problems arising out of deviation from the set norms. The meanings associated with acceptable or unacceptable behaviour or moral or immoral acts are derived from interactions between individuals and groups. These meanings in turn are modified, edited and redefined based on various interactions taking place between people within a society. Various theories tend to interpret moral panic differently and provide an opportunity to analyse and understand the concept in greater detail. Works Cited Bartos, Otomar, and Paul Wehr. Using Conflict Theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Print. Delamont, Sara. Changing Women, Unchanged Men? Sociological perspectives on gender in a post-industrial society. Buckingham: McGraw Hill Publishing, 2001. Print. Goode, Erich, and Nachman Ben-Yahuda. Moral Panics: The Social Construction of Deviance. Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons Publication, 2010. Print. Mooney, Linda. Understanding Social Problems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Cengage Learning Publication, 2011. Print. Mooney, Linda, Knox, David, and Caroline Schacht. Understanding Social Problems. California: Cengage Learning Publishers, 2012. Print. Rohloff, Amanda, and Sarah Wright. “Moral Panic and Social Theory.” Beyond the Heuristic. Current Sociology, 2010. Vol. 58 (3): p. 403-419. White, Lynn, and Suzanne Ortega. Essentials of Sociology. California: Cengage Learning, 2007. Print. The Guardian (2012). “Reading the Riots: Investigating England's summer of disorder.” Web. 22 May 2013. Read More