Compare And Contrast Sociology Essay Essay

Sociology is based on two frameworks, namely amicable organisation-agency and affair-consensus. These frameworks center around three founders of sociology, Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx and Max weber. This essay pull up stakes prove to demonstrate which author condones sociology deep down which framework. The construction used for this essay will be a point-by-point mental synthesis. This essay will start off with social structure, fly the coop on to agency and then to conflict and lastly conclude with consensus. anatomical structure is the social patterns, which influence and may restrict the choices and opportunities of the single(a). Durkheim is a structuralist and explains structure by social accompaniments. Social particulars be the structures, set and norms, which surpass the individual and may lead to social constraint. Durkheim believes that structure together with hierarchy is the most big aspect of maintaining a civilized family. Similarly, Marx is in like manner a structuralist. However, he explains structure finished dialectical materialism. Through this, he believes that history is non compulsive by ideas only rather by economic and class interests.Thus, structure is based on what the interests of the most influential class (in an economic context) are. In contrast, Weber is non a structuralist and focuses on agency much than structure (this will be explained further later on). However he does explain structure through bureaucracy and a rational-legal model. He defines bureaucracy as routine tasks that become jurisdictional areas and are ordered by rules and regulations. Thus, structure can only optimally function if bureaucracy follows the strict rules and regulations confide in place without any corruption.On the other hand, agency is the superpower of individuals to make their own decisions and act independently through free will. Durkheim does not believe that confederacy is based on the individual but to a greater ext ent on the social structures around the individual. He maintains that individuals will come and go from social institutions, but institutions adopt a life everywhere and above the individual and therefore structure plays a more influential portion than agency. Likewise, Marx also believes that structure is more cardinal than agency but also emphasizes the fact that structure leads to the detriment of the majority of individuals. This operator that the majority of individuals interests are not taken into consideration and are over powered by the role of structure.On the contrary, Weber starts his argument with agency and explains agency through verstehen and the opening of social action. Weber maintains that it is important to understand why the individual does a certain action (verstehen) and that there are three divergent types of social action that make up a civilized social club Traditional action (actions carried out due to tradition and because thats they expressive s tyle things have always been done), affective action (actions carried out due to sense to express personal feelings) and rational action (actions carried out using causality to achieve a certain goal). Weber also believes that legitimate self-assurance is based on agency and the free choice of individuals.The conflict theory maintains that social, material and economic inequality are the forces of social change in spite of appearance a companionship. Durkheim is of the belief that conflict will not achieve social change, but rather consensus (will be explained further later on). He stresses the fact that conflict will only cause disorder and chaos within a conjunction and a society will not be able to move forward if there is too much conflict. However, Marx emphasizes conflict over consensus and that inequality and class conflict furthers one side of society (the bourgeoisie) and not the other (the proletariat) due to the economic interest of the upper class. Weber is in the middle of Durkheim and Marx on both conflict and consensus. Weber is of the feel that conflict is due to inequality within a society and the fact that there are certain people in power by force (are not chosen to be in power), which contributes even more to conflict.In contrast to conflict, consensus maintains that social and economic systems are fair and generate social order in society. Durkheim believes that for there to be a prescriptive basis for order within a society, there has to be deterrent example and normative consensus. This means that everyone within a society need to have the same values, and when everyone has the same values they become norms for a society to personify and act by. Marx on the other hand, does not believe in consensus but rather in conflict.He focuses on the fact that a society can only progress if there is conflict, not shared values and norms. If there is no economic interest within a society or class, a society will remain stagnant and not mov e forward. As stated before, Weber stands in the middle of Durkheim and Marx on consensus and states that for there to be consensus within a society, legitimate authority needs to be achieved through the consent of the people in a society. This means that all people should decide together on who should be abandoned authority to do what. However he also believes that for a society to progress forward, conflict and consensus need to occur simultaneously.In conclusion, the three antithetic authors all have very different but equally important viewpoints on society. Durkheim emphasizes structure over agency and consensus over conflict. Marx also focuses on structure over agency but rather conflict over consensus. And Weber stresses agency over structure and that conflict and consensus are equally important. Therefore Durkheim, Marx and Weber have many differences and similarities within the structure-agency and conflict-consensus frameworks.