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