SOCIAL CHANGE
It is impossible for a man to step into the same river twice, Heraclitus said. It is impossible for two reasons: the second time it is not the same river and the second time it is not the same man. In the interval of time between the first and the second stepping, no matter how short, both the river and the man have change. Neither remains the same. This is the central theme of the Heralictean philosophy, the reality of change, the impermanence of being the inconsistency of everything but change itself.
Social change is the transformation of culture and social organization/structure over time. In the modern world we are aware that society is never static and that social, political, economic and cultural changes occur constantly. There are a whole range of classic theories and research methods available within sociology for the study of social change.
CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL CHANGE
There are four main characteristics of social change (Macionis 1996): -
1. It happens everywhere, but the rate of change varies from place to place.
For example, the United States would experience faster change, than a third world country that has limited access to technology and information.
2. Social change is sometimes intentional but often unplanned.
For example, when the airplane was invented people knew that this would increase and speed travel. However, it was probably not realized how this invention would affect society in the future. Families are spread throughout the country, because it is easier to return for visits. Companies are able to expand worldwide thanks to air travel. The numerous crashes and deaths related to airplanes was not predicted either.
3. Social change often generates controversy.
For example, the move over the recent years to accept homosexual rights has caused controversy involving the military, religion, and society overall.
4. Some changes matter more than others do.
For example, the invention of personal computers was more important than Cabbage Patch dolls.
THEORIES OF SOCIAL CHANGE
Evolutionary Theories
Cyclical Theories
Functionalist Theories
Conflict Theories
Evolutionary Theories: These are based on the assumption that societies gradually change from simple beginnings into ever more complex forms. This assumption rests on both cross-cultural and historical evidence. We know from the cross-cultural evidence that there have been and still are many small-scale and simple societies, such has those of hunters and gatherers, horticulturalists, and pastoralists. We know from the historical evidence that many small and simple societies have grown steadily larger, and some of them have been transformed into the huge industrial societies of the modern world.
Cyclical Theories: It also sees a series of stages through which societies must pass. But, instead of ending in a “final” stage of perfection, they see a return to the starting point for another round. According to Oswald Spengler (1880-1936), a German philosopher, each great civilization passing through successive stages of birth, growth and decline, with the completed cycle covering about a thousand years.
Pitrim Sorokin (1889-1968), claimed that all great civilizations are in an endless cycle of three cultural system:-
· The ideational culture, guided by supernatural beliefs and values
· The idealistic culture, in which a blend of supernatural beliefs and evidence based rationality created the ideal society and
· The sensate culture, in which sensations are the test of reality and the goal of life
Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975), an English historian also viewed the fate of great civilization as birth, growth, decay, and death. All these theories are interesting, and all are supported by mountain of supporting detail. But these theories do not explain “why” civilizations change as they do, or why different societies respond so differently to a challenge; the theories are entertaining but not entirely convincing.
Functionalist Theories: These theories of social change start with the advantage that they deal with social statics before dealing with social dynamics. In the opinion of some critics, however, their very emphasis an social order and stability has prevented them from giving an adequate theory of social change. The functionalist perspective was introduced into modern sociology be Emile Durkheim, who examined several aspects of society by asking what function they played in maintain the social order as a whole. Religion, he argued, had the function of providing a common set of values that enhanced the social solidarity of the believers; the education had the function of passing culture from one generation to the next; economic institution regulated the production and distribution of wealth; and family raises and socialized the children. Talcott Parson, and American sociologist, developed a general theory of social order based on the Functionalist perspective. He sees change not as something that disturbs the social equilibrium but as something that alters the state of the equilibrium so that a qualitatively new equilibrium results. He acknowledges that changes may arise from two sources. They may come either from outside the society, through contact with other societies, or they may come from inside the society, through adjustments that must be made to resolve strain within the system. According to him, in simple societies, institutions are undifferentiated: that is, a single institution serves many different functions. The family for example, is responsible for reproduction, education, economic production, and socialization. As a society becomes more complex a process of differentiation takes place. Different institutions, such as schools and corporations, emerge and take over the functions that were previously undifferentiated within a single institution. But the new institutions must be linked together once more, this time by the process of integration. New norms, for example, must evolve to govern the relationship between the school and the home, and bridging institutions, such as law courts must resolve conflicts between other components in the system.
Conflict Theories: Karl Marx is the prominent exponent of conflict theory. He believed that the character of social and cultural forms is influenced by the economic base of society specifically, by the mode or production that is used and by the relationship that exist between those who own and those who do not own the means of production. History is the story of conflict between the exploiting and the exploited class. This conflicts repeats itself again and again until capitalism is overthrown by the workers and a socialist state is created. Socialism is the forerunner to the ultimate social forms, communism. The essential point is that Marx and other conflict theorists after him see society as fundamentally dynamic, not static. They regard conflict as a normal, not an abnormal process, and they believe that the existing conditions on any society contain the seeds of future social changes.
Comments
Post a Comment