It is stated that society, by the nature of it’s contents, is an existing paradox. Being a product and a process simultaneously and excesses an equilibrium amount of both. Consisting various components that relate to each other negative and positively – with their own duties and goals. Whilst the society needs to be built under a rule of discipline – based on the agreement of the individuals that live in it, it still has it’s conflict between groups that lives inside the society. Those conflicts exists as a part of the society itself. A collection of many series of conflicts between components to find – or to illuminate – a fair point that can be used as a new agreement, which then can be applied as a rule (in a form of consensus) to maintain the society. But a serious pressure of social change (as in conflict) may de-stabilize society, coming as a threat.
Social studies, unlike science, is not a fixed knowledge. All theories that it has gain through the years are merely assumption that fits the situation during the era, of which it happened. It is not limited since, society is based by the major components that shapes it every single second, which is human nature (necessities and wants – it could not be stated as rights, until it is declared as a part of rights). These assumptions, if gathered systematically develops a social paradigm. Specifying the problem, making it more understandable.
There are a few images that portray society and it’s components. Describing each social changes and all of it’s details. But, society itself is emphasizing more and more towards the condition that happened because of human nature, the one who made it into a society. Marx sees it as a series of never-ending conflicts and resolution that came from inequality, then offered a utopian outcome. Yet, the pluralist sees society is built by individual goals that relate to each person. Hence stating it as a society.
state of the bourgeoise and the proletariat inequality as a living problem that needed to be solved by the society.
Pluralist models of theory are most likely based on J. J. Rousseau’s studies, which focuses on liberty inside society. The last, is positivist social theories. In the early development, this theory is most likely to be a science theory rather than a social theory because the roots if it are based on Darwin’s argument about evolution. But, it has been clarified by Comte and also Emphasized by Herbert Spencer’s studies. In their argument it is stated that a necessary hierarchy is needed inside society to fit the social changes that is happening and has happened.
Historically speaking, it is unknown when did these theories and studies came onto the world. All that is known, is that these studies and theories are based on the social settings. Early 19th and 20th century is the social setting that stands out the most. Political revolution by the French and industrial revolution of The Great Britain, triggered academics interest to find out about the condition of the society thus creating a social theory (loosely termed). Because of this rapid social changes, a horrible form of instability arise, which is chaos. A part of social construction that needs to be solved.
summarized from:
William D. Perdue (1986), Sociological Theory. Palo Alto: Mayfield Publishing
