Sociology

As we have learned, sociology, in and of itself, is perspective. It is a way of seeing the world around us. And there are three theoretical perspectives to sociology that I will define and utilize in briefly analyzing the issue of “Divorce”. The three perspectives are: “Structural-Functional, Conflict and Interactionism”. Now, before we analyze the issue of “Divorce”, let me first define the three perspectives. The first of the three, “structural-functionalism” is a theory that sees society as a complex system whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability. The second, “social conflict perspective” is a theory, which focuses on tensions and power struggles, and argues that individuals and groups within society have differing amounts of material and non-material resources struggle or compete with one another. The third perspective that we will use, is the “interactionism perspective”, which focuses on the concrete details of what goes on among individuals in everyday life.
Now, to the topic to be analyzed: “Divorce”. Divorce is defined as the termination of a marital union, and the canceling and/or reorganizing of the legal duties and responsibilities of marriage, thus dissolving the bonds of matrimony between a married couple. Let’s first look a a “structural-functional” with perspective about the issue. This theory again sees society as being composed of several parts, all performing vital roles that ensure ongoing operation of society in an organized way. So it is thought that any radical change in to the parts, could result in discord or dysfunction. To this point, the family is seen as an institution that is central to society, and is critical for the socialization of children into the norms, beliefs and values of society. So from this perspective, divorce, where a husband and wife decide to not continue in there marriage, is seen as a form of dysfunction. Divorce, because of the way that family is defined, is seen as a drastic attack on society causing a rippling effect upon society to include children, family and friends.
Now, lets move to the “social conflict perspective” of divorce. At the very core of social conflict, is the view that “conflict” among those in a society is essential. That without conflict, the process of development, and evolvement of society cannot be undertaken. In my research of the topic, I found something very interesting, and that is that very few attempts have been made to apply this perspective/theory to the family. The reason being, is the family is to be made up of relationships, that are about peace, love, togetherness, and not conflicting. The main area of conflict when encompassing the family, is in the area of feminism. So when addressing divorce, it can be said that the conflict theory can be viewed in some of the causes of why marriages fail. For instance, when the woman is seen as somewhat “less than”, and treated as such, but comes to the realization of her condition and wants to be valued as an equal, but the man resists the change, the resulting conflict leads to divorce.
To the final perspective, Interactionism, which relies mostly on individuality, and seeing how people interact with one another. This theory creates a carefree environment because it tends to ignore power and focuses more son on the individuals interaction with one another. Lets take this view to the family. Family depends on mutual affection, and being compatible to each other and understanding each other. So in times past, family “stuck together”, and divorce was seen as an act that is immoral, and one that disregards and abandons ones adult responsibility. However, times have changed, and today divorce is now more common, and for that matter even more acceptable. In times past it was perceived as negative, irresponsible, a failure, and immoral, but nowadays it is seen as a chance for a “new beginning”, or positive change in ones life. So, if symbolic interactionism is not meant for making relationships work and making sense in life, it can easily contribute to divorce because people will lack direct response to actions of other people.
In conclusion, those with a “structural-functional perspective” see divorce from a negative, macro point of view. Functionalists would blame divorce on the failure of social institutions as opposed to investigating the individuals involved in divorce. Their view is that institutions are not providing adequate guidance, and husbands and wives should fit with society standards. Ultimately, this view would look more so to traditional and historical family norms to lower the divorce rate. The second perspective, “conflict”, of who would raise the question, who would be benefitting from the divorce. This theory would strive to make people aware that the couple will suffer financially, and in many other ways, not to mention that divorce is the “easy way out.” Finally, the symbolic interactionist would examine divorce form a micro perspective. They would look for problems within the individuals as opposed to society in general. They would also argue that choices that one makes is based on a learned behavior of sorts. From this perspective, and from this way of understanding social issues, symbolic interactionist would say that divorce is a result of two individuals that have been influenced by outside influence. Personally, no matter the perspective, it is apparent that “divorce” effects the world around us in impactful ways.