Review and FeaginReview and Feagin

Mid term: 10/22Mid term: 10/22Feagin: prominent conflict Feagin: prominent conflict

theoristtheorist

Mid termMid termThree part exam:Three part exam:

1.1. Multiple choice questions on reading.Multiple choice questions on reading.Like the quizLike the quiz

Covering ch. 1,2,3,4,5,9,Murray &FeaginCovering ch. 1,2,3,4,5,9,Murray &Feagin

2.2. Short answer questionsShort answer questionsOften given concept or finding, you state theorist Often given concept or finding, you state theorist and give an example.and give an example.

3.3. EssaysEssaysPrepare 20-min answers to review questionsPrepare 20-min answers to review questions

Email me any requests for clarification by Sunday, Email me any requests for clarification by Sunday, 10/20 so I can answer to everyone.10/20 so I can answer to everyone.

Conflict and Functional TheoryConflict and Functional Theory

Both ch. 1 and ch. 2 focus on differences Both ch. 1 and ch. 2 focus on differences between functional and conflict theory.between functional and conflict theory.

Interactionist theory often operates at a Interactionist theory often operates at a different (micro) level and is best seen as different (micro) level and is best seen as combining some elements of functional combining some elements of functional and conflict theory.and conflict theory.

Schematic contrastSchematic contrast

Functional theoryFunctional theory

1.1. Focus on norms and Focus on norms and valuesvalues

2.2. How is society held How is society held together and how are together and how are social needs met.social needs met.

3.3. Emile DurkheimEmile Durkheim

4.4. Robt. K. MertonRobt. K. Merton

5.5. Negative feedback: Negative feedback: social control systems.social control systems.

Conflict theoryConflict theory

1.1. Focus on inequalityFocus on inequality

2.2. Who gets what, and Who gets what, and How?How?

3.3. Karl marxKarl marx

4.4. Joe FeaginJoe Feagin

5.5. Positive feedback: Positive feedback: games of Monopolygames of Monopoly

Levels: Macro and micro: social Levels: Macro and micro: social structure as Chinese boxes:structure as Chinese boxes:

Individual actions are constrained by Individual actions are constrained by social position and social dynamics.social position and social dynamics.Human beings are social animals.Human beings are social animals.Therefore besides individual explanations Therefore besides individual explanations of individual acts, there are social of individual acts, there are social explanations of rates and structures:explanations of rates and structures:– E.g. Durkheim: social factsE.g. Durkheim: social facts– Eg. The Chicago school investigations of Eg. The Chicago school investigations of

neighborhood rates.neighborhood rates.

Chicago schoolChicago school

Different neighborhoods had very differfent Different neighborhoods had very differfent rates of social problems such as crime, rates of social problems such as crime, juvenile delinquency and academic failurejuvenile delinquency and academic failureEven when all the people, or the whole Even when all the people, or the whole ethnic composition of a a neighborhood ethnic composition of a a neighborhood changed, its rates often remained the changed, its rates often remained the same.same.Two main kinds of explanation: norms and Two main kinds of explanation: norms and rents.rents.

Durkheim Durkheim

SuicideSuicide1.1. Egoistic 2. Altruistic 3. Anomic 4.FatalisticEgoistic 2. Altruistic 3. Anomic 4.Fatalistic

Crime and punishmentCrime and punishment– Negative feedback of social controlNegative feedback of social control

Structural differentiationStructural differentiation– Social development leads to specialized Social development leads to specialized

organizations, jobs and heterogeneity.organizations, jobs and heterogeneity.

Organic solidarity.Organic solidarity.

Statistical methods and causal Statistical methods and causal analysisanalysis

Main sources of data in sociology:Main sources of data in sociology:– Experiments, observation, and surveysExperiments, observation, and surveys– Each have strengths and weaknesses for Each have strengths and weaknesses for

inferring causality.inferring causality.

To demonstrate causality requires controls:To demonstrate causality requires controls:– Experimental controls: treat the experimental Experimental controls: treat the experimental

group and the control group differently.group and the control group differently.– Statistical controls: analyze the data so that Statistical controls: analyze the data so that

people do not differ with regard to the people do not differ with regard to the controlled variable.controlled variable.

Spurious associationSpurious association

Without controls, an ob served association Without controls, an ob served association may give a misleading picture of the may give a misleading picture of the causal forces at work.causal forces at work.E.g. E.g. – even if fire engines reduce fire damage, even if fire engines reduce fire damage, – one may observe a positive association one may observe a positive association

between engines and damage, between engines and damage, – due to the size of the fire. due to the size of the fire. – Size of fire must be controlled.Size of fire must be controlled.

Murray’s LibertarianismMurray’s LibertarianismLibertarians are not liberalsLibertarians are not liberalsThey argue that government policies – They argue that government policies – particularly the “welfare state:” public particularly the “welfare state:” public education, social security, unemployment education, social security, unemployment compensation and labor laws – do more compensation and labor laws – do more harm than goodharm than goodThey suggest the “trendline test:” did They suggest the “trendline test:” did things get better after public policies were things get better after public policies were enacted.enacted.Murray illustrates the argument with speed Murray illustrates the argument with speed limits.limits.

Problems of systemic relationsProblems of systemic relations

Besides particular problems with Murray’s Besides particular problems with Murray’s analysis, there is a general one.analysis, there is a general one.

If and to the degree that government If and to the degree that government policies are a functional response to social policies are a functional response to social problems, the association of gov’t policy problems, the association of gov’t policy and social problems should be positive, and social problems should be positive, not negative, even if the policies reduce not negative, even if the policies reduce the problems.the problems.

Micro-theoriesMicro-theories

1.1. RolesRolesPossibly informal jobs that need to be donePossibly informal jobs that need to be done

Functionalist micro-theoryFunctionalist micro-theory

2.2. NetworksNetworksConcrete sets of relationships.Concrete sets of relationships.

Often conflict micro-theory. Often conflict micro-theory.

Functional analysis of rolesFunctional analysis of roles

Normatively regulatedNormatively regulated

Functions that need to be doneFunctions that need to be done

Failure to meet expectation will be sanctioned Failure to meet expectation will be sanctioned by role partners.by role partners.

Milgram’s Authority test shows the power of Milgram’s Authority test shows the power of roles.roles.

Networks:Networks:

Each individual has something like 1,000 Each individual has something like 1,000 persons in his or her networkpersons in his or her network

Networks may be more open or closedNetworks may be more open or closed

Grannovetter showed that networks are a major Grannovetter showed that networks are a major source of job information.source of job information.

Milgram’s Small World Experiment showed that Milgram’s Small World Experiment showed that modern networks tend to be openmodern networks tend to be open

Data on race illustrate ways that modern Data on race illustrate ways that modern networks are far from entirely open.networks are far from entirely open.

Macro-theoriesMacro-theories

GroupsGroups– Primary v. secondaryPrimary v. secondary– Ingroups v. outgroups: conflict and solidarityIngroups v. outgroups: conflict and solidarity– Reference groupsReference groups

OrganizationsOrganizations– Growth of bureaucratic structuresGrowth of bureaucratic structures– Characterized by specialization, hierarchy, rules, Characterized by specialization, hierarchy, rules,

impersonality, and technical qualifications.impersonality, and technical qualifications.

InstitutionsInstitutions– Large complexes of tasks such as government, the Large complexes of tasks such as government, the

economy or religion.economy or religion.

Reference groupsReference groups

Newcomb’s study of Bennington students, and Newcomb’s study of Bennington students, and several follow-up studies after 25 and 50 years. several follow-up studies after 25 and 50 years. Conservative students in a liberal college Conservative students in a liberal college environment.environment.

How much did students change? Qualitatively.How much did students change? Qualitatively.

Who changed? Students who were more involved.Who changed? Students who were more involved.

How long did it last? Often their whole life.How long did it last? Often their whole life.

For whom did it last? For the students who For whom did it last? For the students who developed a new reference group.developed a new reference group.

Feagin’s Presidential Address:Feagin’s Presidential Address:Social Justice and Sociology: Agendas for the 21Social Justice and Sociology: Agendas for the 21stst c. c.

The best of times for some groups have been the worst The best of times for some groups have been the worst of times for other groups.of times for other groups.Feagin argues that the last two decades have been a Feagin argues that the last two decades have been a period of unfettered markets.period of unfettered markets.That led to good times for groups at the top and the That led to good times for groups at the top and the worst of times for those at the bottomworst of times for those at the bottomFeagin’s conflict perspective is diametrically opposed Feagin’s conflict perspective is diametrically opposed to Murray’sto Murray’sIt is a conflict theory in that Feagin believes that the It is a conflict theory in that Feagin believes that the benefits of some have been purchased at the cost of benefits of some have been purchased at the cost of the misery of others.the misery of others.

The Increase in inequalityThe Increase in inequalityIn the world 1980-1999In the world 1980-1999

1.1. The richest 200 people now control $1 trillionThe richest 200 people now control $1 trillion– $1million per day since birth of Christ,$1million per day since birth of Christ,

2.2. while 59 countries showed actual declines.while 59 countries showed actual declines.

– In the U.SIn the U.S1.1. Large increase in inequalityLarge increase in inequality2.2. Reduction of government programs aimed at Reduction of government programs aimed at

equal opportunityequal opportunity

– Unrestained markets (capitalism) generate Unrestained markets (capitalism) generate increased inequality.increased inequality.

What’s justice got to do with it?What’s justice got to do with it?

Feagin believes that if as citizens, we want Feagin believes that if as citizens, we want peace,peace,

we need to think about social justice, we need to think about social justice,

And as social theorists, we cannot And as social theorists, we cannot understand the limitations and understand the limitations and breakdowns of social structures without breakdowns of social structures without considering social justice.considering social justice.

Spaceship earthSpaceship earth**

To attain a To attain a sustainablesustainable ecology, economy, ecology, economy, community, social system or political system community, social system or political system we need to get beyond self-interest.we need to get beyond self-interest.Soros and others suggest that it is possible to Soros and others suggest that it is possible to have a market economy, but not a market have a market economy, but not a market society or community.society or community.Pollutants, monoculture, high levels of Pollutants, monoculture, high levels of inequality or high levels of group inequality inequality or high levels of group inequality may not be sustainable in a closed system.may not be sustainable in a closed system.The society and the world is increasingly a The society and the world is increasingly a closed system.closed system.

InequalityInequalityConsider inequality of pay, wealth, power, education, Consider inequality of pay, wealth, power, education, housing, health care, etc. between the elite and the bottom housing, health care, etc. between the elite and the bottom third.third.Is there an optimum level?Is there an optimum level?Is there an intolerable level?Is there an intolerable level?

PAYPAY WEALTHWEALTH POWERPOWER EDED HOUSINGHOUSING HEALTHHEALTH

1:1 to 1:91:1 to 1:9

1:10 to 1:10 to 1:991:99

1:100 to 1:100 to

1:9991:999

1:1,000 to1:1,000 to

1:9,9991:9,999

1:10,0001:10,000

or moreor more

Inequality and Freedom:Inequality and Freedom:

Freedom is a dominant value in the U.S.Freedom is a dominant value in the U.S.

For some people, “freedom” either implies For some people, “freedom” either implies inequality, or is indifferent to it.inequality, or is indifferent to it.

For other people, large inequalities come into For other people, large inequalities come into conflict with “freedom.”conflict with “freedom.”

E.g. “In a free society, it is all right if a few E.g. “In a free society, it is all right if a few people accumulate a lot of wealth and property, people accumulate a lot of wealth and property, while many others live in poverty.while many others live in poverty.1. agree 2. Neither agree nor disagree 3. Disagree1. agree 2. Neither agree nor disagree 3. Disagree

An example of a research An example of a research hypothesis:hypothesis:

People who attend church less are more People who attend church less are more likely to agree. likely to agree.

Richer people are more likely to agree.Richer people are more likely to agree.

Men are more likely to agree.Men are more likely to agree.

Caucasians are more likely to agree.Caucasians are more likely to agree.

Republicans are more likely to agree.Republicans are more likely to agree.

……