SOC 101 1st Edition Lecture 2 Outline of Critiques of Functionalism from the Instructor Erin HattonI. Like any perspective, the functionalist perspective has its shortcomings.II. Complex society such as ours has a multitude of competing values, rather than just one stable set of shared beliefs, so it’s actually quite difficult to argue that a social structure serves to reinforce a social value—because there is no single social value, there are lots of competing ones.III. For one, we might argue that an It’s also important to note that people’s actual behavior usually falls short of the values they claim to holdIV. This makes it even more difficult to identify one set of “shared beliefs” because not only do different people believe in different things, they also DO different things thanthey say they believe. V. Functionalism can also be tricky because it may be used (inappropriately) to justify and legitimize the existence of an undesirable parts of society, such as poverty or unemployment.VI. For instance, recall how Herbert Spencer argued that poverty was just a natural part of society—a part, which, according to him, would eventually die out because the poor weren’t among the fittest in this life which he believed was the “survival of the fittest.” VII. This was an inappropriate use of functionalism, one based on racism and conjecture, rather than actual research. VIII. A final critique is that functionalists’ focus on shared values and beliefs leaves out the issue of power: IX. In particular, the power that only some people within any particular society have to define that society’svalues, and, moreover, the power that those same people have to evade punishment when those values are violated. X. So by focusing on shared traits and shared values, functionalists can overlook power dynamics and maymistake some people’s values for everyone’s values.XI. This question of power—and conflict between those with power and those without power—is the primary concern behind the third and final theoretical perspective: 1. Yet, in this perspective, conflict is not only a negative aspect of society, since it may also produce social change.XII. Conflict theorists understand conflict as an inevitable part of social life.1. According to conflict theorists, societies are characterized by inequalitya) There are dominant and subordinate groups which compete for resources.These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.b) And this competition which is wrought by inequality, according to conflict theorists, produces conflict, rather than social order and consensus.XIII. This conflict can only be overcome through a fundamental transformation of existing relations in the society.- Now, if this reminds you of Karl Marx, well, it should. Marx was a classic conflict theorist who argued, as you will recall, that the proletariat and capitalist classes would always be in conflict in the industrial capitalist system, and that the only way to change this would be to fundamentally get rid of industrial capitalism. But you don’t have to be against capitalism to be a conflict theorist. Rather, conflict theorists analyze power differentials and the struggles between them.XVI. According to conflict theorists, the idea of social “consensus” is simply a euphemism for ideology. - They believe that genuine consensus can never actually be achieved, and that the more powerful in societies are able to impose their ideas on others, and thus their discourse, their beliefs become the dominant discourse, and the dominant beliefs. - Thus, from this perspective, consensus does not maintain social order, rather, it entrenches stratification or inequality.XVII. Here’s an example of conflict theory in action. Take, for instance, the “American Dream.” • Most people in America define our country as the “land of opportunity.” • The “American Dream” says that everyone—no matter their race, sex, or creed—has the opportunity to work hard and succeed. • People are said to be “living the American Dream” when they work their way up from poverty. And we’ve all heard countless of these “rages to riches” stories about people like Oprah, Bill Clinton, Elvis Presley, Mark Wahlberg, and many more.• So, if you think about it, this “American Dream” is fundamentally a belief in the impermanence of poverty; it’s the belief that it is possible to move out of poverty through hard work and thrift, by keeping your eyes open and your head about you. • And, thus, the American Dream is ALSO a belief about those who are still poor—as it implies that are not doing things right; that they are NOT working hard enough; they are NOT saving as they should; or that they are making bad decisions.• So, while functionalists might say that our cultural belief in the “American Dream” gives us a sense of shared understanding and therefore fosters social order; Conflict theorists would say that it serves to preserve social inequality, by putting the onus (the responsibility) for achievement on poor people themselves, while covering up the many structural barriers that impede their ability to move out of poverty.XVII. Like the other perspectives, there are critiques of conflict theory• For instance, critics would say that conflict theorists tend to overemphasize tensions anddivisions within a society, and ignore shared values and sources of social stability within a society. • In addition, critics would argue that relationships between groups of people—including workers and employers—is more complex, their relationship can’t simply be reduced to conflict and