Social changes are more than imminent in the current society, with cultures, social institutions and functions significantly shifting and transforming with agents of change in society. The change is visible given the wide variations between the cultural practices in the previous societies and the current ones, and how social institutions were run in the previous centuries and how they are currently run. These changes have been caused by several agents of change such as conflicts, demographics and cultures, which have either gone towards the best direction or the worst. Several theories have been fronted to explain these changes; the functionalist theory by Emil Durkheim suggests that the constant state of equilibrium in society has to be maintained by the self-adjusting parts while Karl Marx, with his conflict theory, said that society’s vulnerable groups champion for change as a counteraction for injustices.
The two theories are similar in that they view society as a system and not an individual. Society as a system has different components, which according to Marx, is made up of the less fortunate weak groups and the rich, powerful groups both from an individual and institutional perspective (Farrés-Fernández, 2019). Likewise, Durkheim’s societal system is viewed as having different aspects that work together to make society whole. All the institutions in a society named in the functionalist theory are seen as indispensable; they cannot be eliminated. Their purposes are key to the long-term survival of society. In addition to that, the two theories have the same scope in the society, with both viewing the society in forms of classes that have to change to adapt.
However, the main difference between the two is that functionalism derives its meaning from societal aspects while conflict theory sees meaning in the distribution of resources. Functionalism, therefore, takes its approach that all the components in a societal system are interdependent; that is why change within one will force the rest to adapt to avoid being left out or considered redundant (Ormerod, 2019). On the other hand, conflict theory takes no joy in the interdependence of the classes; the upper class inequitably distributes resources to trigger change. So the cause of change is known in conflict theory but not in functionalist theory.
Despite the similarities in these theories, one that must be agreed on is that change in society is a must; some might be for the better while others might be for the worst. Some good changes that might force the societal institutions to adapt for the better include advances in technology, discoveries in science, bureaucratization, and the increasing formation of the civil rights movement to help equitable distribution of resources. Bad changes in society could be increasing environmental degradation due to climate change, eroding of cultural structures of the community, and when societal values are eroded.
To conclude, functionalist and conflict theory are both theoretical in the field of sociology. Though distinct, the two theories attempt to explain how society functions in structure and composition. Therefore, the similarity between the two lies in how their scope is defined as a system with components. On the other hand, the difference between the two can be seen in their absolute meaning. Conflict theory is about the unequal distribution of resources and power, while functionalist theory is about the interdependence between the societal institutions to drive change. Hence, the two theories give reason to insinuate that changes in society occur both for good and bad reasons.
References
Farrés-Fernández, G. (2019). Reanalysing international conflicts: Proposals from the sociology of power. International Studies, 56(4), 255-271. Web.
Ormerod, R. (2019). The history and ideas of sociological functionalism: Talcott parsons, modern sociological theory, and the relevance for OR. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 71(12), 1873-1899. Web.