I: MAJOR THEORITICAL PERSPECTIVES IN SOCIOLOGY

Structural Functionalist theory (Functionailsm)

Functionalism, also called structural-functional theory, sees society as a structure with

interrelated parts designed to meet the biological and social needs of the individuals in
that society. Functionalism grew out of the writings of English philosopher and biologist,
Hebert Spencer (1820–1903), who saw similarities between society and the human
body; he argued that just as the various organs of the body work together to keep the
body functioning, the various parts of society work together to keep society functioning
(Spencer 1898). The parts of society that Spencer referred to were the social institutions,
or patterns of beliefs and behaviors focused on meeting social needs, such as
government, education, family, healthcare, religion, and the economy

Émile Durkheim, another early sociologist believed that society is a complex system of
interrelated and interdependent parts that work together to maintain stability
(Durkheim 1893), and that society is held together by shared values, languages, and
symbols. He believed that to study society, a sociologist must look beyond individuals to
social facts such as laws, morals, values, religious beliefs, customs, fashion, and rituals,
which all serve to govern social life. Alfred Radcliff-Brown (1881–1955) defined the
function of any recurrent activity as the part it played in social life as a whole, and
therefore the contribution it makes to social stability and continuity (Radcliff-Brown
1952). In a healthy society, all parts work together to maintain stability, a state called
dynamic equilibrium by later sociologists such as Parsons (1961).

Social facts are the laws, morals, values, religious beliefs, customs, fashions, rituals, and
all of the cultural rules that govern social life (Durkheim 1895). Each of these social facts
serves one or more functions within a society. For example, one function of a society’s
laws may be to protect society from violence, while another is to punish criminal
behavior, while another is to preserve public health.

Robert Merton (1910–2003), pointed out that social processes often have many
functions. Manifest functions are the consequences of a social process that are sought
or anticipated, while latent functions are the unsought consequences of a social
process. A manifest function of college education, for example, includes gaining
knowledge, preparing for a career, and finding a good job that utilizes that education.
Latent functions of your college years include meeting new people, participating in
extracurricular activities, or even finding a spouse or partner. Another latent function of
education is creating a hierarchy of employment based on the level of education
attained. Latent functions can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful. Social processes that
have undesirable consequences for the operation of society are called dysfunctions. In
education, examples of dysfunction include getting bad grades, truancy, dropping out,
not graduating, and not finding suitable employment.
Conflict Theory

Conflict theory looks at society as a competition for limited resources. This perspective is
a macro-level approach most identified with the writings of German philosopher and
sociologist Karl Marx (1818–1883), who saw society as being made up of individuals in
different social classes who must compete for social, material, and political resources
such as food and housing, employment, education, and leisure time. Social institutions
like government, education, and religion reflect this competition in their inherent
inequalities and help maintain the unequal social structure. Some individuals and
organizations are able to obtain and keep more resources than others, and these
“winners” use their power and influence to maintain social institutions.

Marx saw conflict in society as the primary means of change. Economically, he saw
conflict existing between the owners of the means of production—the bourgeoisie—
and the laborers, called the proletariat.

Symbolic interactionism is a micro-level theory that focuses on the relationships among

individuals within a society. Communication—the exchange of meaning through
language and symbols—is believed to be the way in which people make sense of their
social worlds. Theorists Herman and Reynolds (1994) note that this perspective sees
people as being active in shaping the social world rather than simply being acted
upon.

George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) is considered a founder of symbolic interactionism

though he never published his work on it (LaRossa and Reitzes 1993). Mead’s student,
Herbert Blumer, coined the term “symbolic interactionism” and outlined these basic
premises: humans interact with things based on meanings ascribed to those things; the
ascribed meaning of things comes from our interactions with others and society; the
meanings of things are interpreted by a person when dealing with things in specific
circumstances (Blumer 1969)

The focus on the importance of symbols in building a society led sociologists like Erving
Goffman (1922–1982) to develop a technique called dramaturgical analysis. Goffman
used theater as an analogy for social interaction and recognized that people’s
interactions showed patterns of cultural “scripts.” Because it can be unclear what part
a person may play in a given situation, he or she has to improvise his or her role as the
situation unfolds (Goffman 1958).

The looking-glass self is a social psychological concept stating that a person’s self
grows out of society’s interpersonal interactions and the perceptions of others.

There are three components of the looking-glass self: We imagine how we appear to
others, we imagine the judgment of that appearance, and we develop our (self
identity) through the judgments of others.

George Herbert Mead described self as “taking the role of the other,” the premise for
which the self is actualized. Through interaction with others, we begin to develop an
identity about who we are, as well as empathy for others.
II. Development of sociology in the Philippines

Development of sociology in the Philippines

The sociology in the Philippines was by Fr. Valentin Marin in 1896 as a course on
criminology at University of Santo Tomas.
Sociology as a study was introduced in 1911 by Professor A. E. W. Salt and President
Murray Bartlett. The first gave a course in the Principles of Sociology and the second
taught
Social Ethics. Since then, sociology has become a regular part of the University
curriculum.
Professor Conrado Benitez was the first Filipino to teach the subject and was succeeded
by the
late Professor Luis Rivera. In Silliman Institute, it was introduced by Mr. Helfin in 1919; and
the
National University, the Ateneo de Manila, Manila University, and the Union Theological
Seminary are now also conducting classes in sociology. There are no systematic writers
on
Philippine social conditions, but we have among us keen observers of Philippine social
life who
have analyzed and criticized our institutions and social problems thru the press and in
their
public utterances. Among the foremost of them are Dr. Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera,
President
Rafael Palma, Dean Jorge Bocobo, President Camilo Osias, and Director Teodoro M.
Kalaw. In
the field of practical sociology, we have Dr. Jose Fabella of the Public Welfare
Commission and
Director Ramon Victorio of the Bureau of Prisons.
Serafin Macaraig is the first filipino to receive a doctorate degree in sociology in 1939.
The introduction to sociology became the first text in the University of the Philippines
written
by Serafin Macaraig. Sociologists after Macaraig were:
Juan Ruiz offered courses in social work in the University of the Philippines.
Prof. Marcelo Tangco is the succeeded Dr. Macaraig.
Flora Diaz Catapusan who invited teach sociology at the Centro Escolar University in
1946.
Dr. Benicio Catapusan who invited to serve as a professional lecturer in sociology at
the
University of the Philippines in 1948.
Philippine Sociological Society was organized by a group of Filipino educators and
visiting
professors in the differet regions.
Its objectives are:
a. To increase knowledge about social behavior
b. To gather data on social problems for their possible solutions
c. To train teachers and researches in the field of sociology
d. Ro develop cooperation and unity among social scientists in the Philippines
In 1960 the research foundation of Philippine Anthropology and Archeology was
established.
In 1968 Philippine Social Science Council was formed to consolidate the Philippines
social
science resources whose objectives are:
a. To promote the quality and relevance of social science researches
b. To improve teaching skills in the social science
c. To finance researches along the social sciences
d. To encourage social science publications
In pursuit of its mission, the PSS aims to:
Promote sociology as a social science discipline in the Philippines
Facilitate and improve sociological teaching
Develop and nurture sociological research
Cultivate the contributions of sociology to society
Publish the Philippine Sociological Review and other materials
Organize forums and conferences
Seek, encourage, and maintain links with sociologists around the world
Enhance the professional development of PSS members
Factors and stages in the development of sociology in the Philippines in the words of
Catapusan
and Catapusan:
a. Considerable efforts have been made to define and to determine the fields of
sociology
b. There are considerable specializations in subject matter and in approach
c. Sociology principles are being employed in the analysis of an increasing number of
social
situations
d. The study of various problems led to discovering, refining and perfecting new
methods
of sociology investigations
The development of Sociology in the Philippines is marked by four distinct stages of
development, namely: 1. The stage where considerable effort was made in defining
and
determining the field of Sociology. 2. The period of considerable specialization in
subject
matter. Sociological principles were being employed as means of understanding local
social
conditions. 3. The stage when the problems of teaching Sociology were met with all
available
techniques, although greater emphasis was still needed in the discovery and analysis of
social
data; and on the developing, refining and perfecting of new methods of sociological
investigation. Thus, the search for solutions to all these may give rise to the fourth phase
of
sociological development, namely; 4. The stage of research, experimental and
dynamic
Sociology. A fifth stage should be devoted to the formulation of sound social
philosophical
thinking which will serve as the basis of future planning, a condition quite necessary in
nationbuilding.

Sources:

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/alamo-sociology/chapter/conflict-theory/

https://www.studocu.com/en/document/university-of-perpetual-help-system-dalta/humanities-and-
social-sciences/mandatory-assignments/development-of-sociology-in-the-
philippines/2568391/download/development-of-sociology-in-the-philippines.pdf