Essay about Symbolic Interactionism

Society is defined as people who interact in a defined geographic territory and share elements of a common culture (Macionis and Gerber, 2014). There are numerous components to society: class, gender, family, and much more. However, ethnicity has become of greater influence in academia over the last 50 years (Adlparvar and Tadros, 2016). Ethnicity is a shared cultural heritage. People identify or are defined as members of an ethnic group based on commonalities like language, religion, beliefs, practices, and ancestry. Essentially, an ethnic group is a bond characterized by a common culture. Much like race, ethnicity has developed as an identification method used by individuals and institutions. There are five major theoretical approaches that explore the power and stratification of ethnicity in society: structural functionalism, conflict theory, symbolic interactionism – two newer ones- feminism, and post-modernism. They each differ in their view of human nature, social change, and their view of how to study and observe society. Through this essay, I seek to compare two sociological paradigms: structural functionalism and symbolic interactionism; as well as explain why I believe symbolic interactionism is most effective in understanding minority relations.

Structural functionalism is a sociological approach that explains why society functions the way it does by exploring the relationships between social institutions. This perspective views society as a complex and coherent system with various parts functioning together to achieve social stability and solidarity. With this emphasis on equilibrium, structural functionalism holds that society is normative order; people’s behavior is organized around social institutions comprised of norms and rules. The Hobbesian view of the state of nature foregrounds structural functionalism. The Hobbesian view, which was introduced by Thomas Hobbes, explains that hierarchy is inevitable because society is biologically based. This view – heavily rooted in social Darwinism – affirms that status differences are natural and functional. The Porter thesis about the vertical mosaic is a good example of a structural functionalist theory of stratification: Porter accepts the stratification system that views the mosaic as natural and historic, as it is bound with the Canadian ideology of multiculturalism and tolerance. This paradigm also incorporates a primordialist approach, which explains ethnicity as a fixed characteristic of individuals and communities (Reuter, 2017). Thus, viewing ethnicity as embedded in inherited biological attributes (Reuter, 2017).

Following, structural functionalists believe ethnic identification is functional because it generates social integration by providing belonging and discouraging anomie (Reuter, 2017). Structural functionalism views ethnic stratification as a useful outcome of ethnocentrism. This perspective analyzes social stratification at a macro level since it has to do with the way a society is organized (Macionis and Gerber, 2014). For structural functionalists, social stratification is a system of unequal rewards that benefit society (Macionis and Gerber, 2014). This inequality is fine because it aids in economic production by encouraging people to work harder. Ethnocentrism allows society to develop a shared identity and works towards cooperation of its social institutions through shared norms and values (Reuter, 2017). During times of stress and rapid social change, elements of the system unravel; thus, structural functionalism is mainly concerned with majority-minority relations due to the potential for social disruption. Ethnic minorities play an important role in society due to their willingness to work at jobs, or for wages that are unappealing (Macionis and Gerber, 2014). For example, Latinx immigrants often work as maids, gardeners, and janitors, this is the product of ethnic disparities in society. For structural functionalists, ethnic inequalities are useful to society by creating incentives for people to work harder, thus maintaining social stability. Essentially, this perspective concludes that socioeconomic inequalities that affect ethnicity are inevitable and in fact necessary for the maintenance of social equilibrium.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

On the other hand, symbolic interactionism provides an interpretative approach to ethnicity. Symbolic interactionism seeks to understand the social world by exploring the processes that occur within and between groups through ongoing activities. This approach adopts qualitative methods, it focuses on the micro-sociological level of intersubjective experiences. Symbolic Interactionists study the world from the bottom up, macro-levels are constructed by the micro-level. Their approach is inductive rather than deductive. An example of how the interactionist perspective is applied is apparent when we look at how people define their race and how they define the race of others. In relation to the social construction of race, some people who identify as white may have more pigmentation in their skin than some people that identify as black, so how did they come to identify themselves (Little, 2016)? Symbolic interactionists work to portray the social world as meaningfully constructed by interpreting members’ points of view. This perspective highlights social reality as fluid; and reality as constructed. Max Weber’s work aided in the development of the symbolic interactionist paradigm. Weber understood the power of technology and he shared many of Karl Marx’s ideas about social conflict (Macionis and Gerber, 2014). However, he disagreed with Marx’s philosophy of materialism (Macionis and Gerber, 2014). Thus, Weber’s philosophical approach, called idealism emphasized how human ideas, values, and beliefs shape society (Macionis and Gerber, 2014). He proposed that capitalism was not entirely determined by ideology, but that people valued capitalism. To Weber, status groups underly social class, a status-determined badge of honor.

Symbolic Interactionism highlights ethnic association as a part of membership and political advantage. Symbolic interactionism posits that for an ethnic group to exist, its members must develop a “consciousness of kind”, or a feeling of being different from others (Curry et al, 2008). This shared sense of community stems from the interactions between ethnic groups and the rest of society (Curry et al, 2008). For example, in Canadian society, Indigenous peoples have been often grouped together as one large community; rather than being acknowledged by a specific tribe. It also promotes the re-emergence of ethnicity as a strategic choice in a competitive environment. Essentially, symbolic interaction highlights ethnicity as a social psychological process.

Symbolic interactionism and structural functionalism both have two different perspectives on ethnicity and the problems of ethnic inequalities. The functionalist perspective views inequality as beneficial for the smooth functioning of societies. While symbolic interactionism views ethnicities as created and reproduced through social interactions. I believe symbolic interactionism is most effective in understanding minority relations because it shifts focus from social structure to social context. I believe that by focusing on the symbolic exchanges that occur during interactions, we are better able to understand minority relations. When we interact with people from different ethnic backgrounds, we use our language, mannerisms, and gestures to communicate our own ethnic identity as well as receive information about theirs. Whereas, structural functionalism uses an ahistorical, static, conservative approach. It fails to account for the historical processes that have produced social and ethnic inequality, and rather just accepts everything as it is. With this perspective meritocracy and achievement are inevitable. Structural functionalism also does not develop analyses of ethnicity, but simply views them as constituent elements of society that contribute to effective functioning. Structural functionalism also fails to account for social conflict since it accentuates the importance of cultural unity; it is incapable of understanding disruptive forces like discrimination.