Society as an integral system

Sheethal Ramesh
la3-c-o-210(1)
Philosophy presentation
What Is Social Integration?

How do people from different groups in society come together?

And how is this maintained?

In sociology, the concept of social integration refers to a situation where minority groups come together or are
incorporated into mainstream society. Though, we should note, this doesn't mean in a forceful way.Social
integration also refers to a process of largely agreeing on a shared system of meaning, language, culture, and
the like. This doesn't mean there aren't any differences, but that we kind of agree to live together and, at least
to an extent, feel part of a larger community. Increased social integration helps reduce conflict in society, and
it can help us feel more connected to our community. Let's talk about some of the ways that influential
sociologists have thought about social integration.
Society
• Durkheim and Early SociologyÉmile Durkheim, considered one of the founders of modern
sociology, had a lot to say about social integration. He was one of the first to explore the
concept in a book called The Division of Labor in Society, written in 1892. Durkheim
considered society to be the collective consciousness of people. In other words, the way we
think, feel, and behave is influenced by society in a major way. But, how do we remain a
cohesive whole and avoid too much conflict? Durkheim came up with a couple different
types of social integration, which he referred to as kinds of solidarity.First, mechanical
solidarity is what binds more primitive, or smaller, societies together. In this kind of
solidarity, it's things like kinship and shared beliefs that hold us together. We're integrated
because we're all pretty similar. In more advanced societies, we see the emergence of
organic solidarity. In a more complex society, a complex division of labor requires us to rely
on each other more. This kind of interdependence creates increased social integration,
instead of simply our similarities.But what if we don't achieve this integration? In Durkheim's
view, this leads to a problem known as anomie, or a sense of feeling very disconnected from
others and from our community. Decreased social integration leads to anomie and,
potentially, conflict. Now that we know a little about the foundation of social integration
theory, let's talk about a more contemporary take.
Blau and social integration
• Blau and Social IntegrationAnother important perspective on social
integration comes from Peter Blau, a sociologist who began writing about
social integration and related issues in the 1960s. Not unlike Durkheim, Blau
saw social integration and how we might achieve it as key concerns in
modern society. Group life consists of the different kinds of exchanges that
groups have, and Blau saw some specific things that lead to group formation
and, hopefully, social integration.First, attraction is key to Blau's theory of
social integration. Now, this doesn't mean exactly what we might think it
means. Attraction is not necessarily based on physical appearance but
instead on how well a person is able to demonstrate his or her value to a
group. Blau saw potential members of a group making an effort to present
themselves as very attractive to existing group members. The hope is that
existing group members will see a new member as potentially making an
important contribution to the group
• 6 Social Integration and Systems IntegrationSocial
• integration becomes increasingly complex and increasingly requires a balance with elements of disintegration the
more we proceed in the evolution of human societies. Clan societies in the early stages of sociocultural evolution are
integrated by blood and rules of intermarriage. Traditional estate societies are integrated by every estate serving a
specific function for the living of the whole and the attribution of privileges according to the inherited status. Cohesion
and the integration of actions is promoted by the hierarchical order of inherited ranks (Weber 1976 pp. 133–5, 148–
55). Modern societies are integrated in a much more complex way. Their cohesion is based on comprehensive
inclusion according to achievement and the constitution of citizenship with civil, political, social, and cultural rights as
an abstract community beyond any primordial ties of ethnicity, color, gender, or any other kind of group.Beyond social
integration, modern societies are systemically integrated in as far as they have established functionally specified
systems like economy, polity, law, science, education, the media, arts and literature, or religion. Money and
democratically legitimated political power are examples of media of communication which serve as means of systemic
integration in as much as they allow for the coordination of extremely differentiated economic interests or political
goals, irrespective of time, place, and persons involved (Lockwood 1964, Luhmann 1988).In the process of
globalization the functionally specialized systems increasingly reach beyond the nation-state with its relatively strong
social integration and produce a world society which is much more integrated systemically than socially through
solidarity production and a binding social order (Luhmann 1997). It is disputed whether we approach worldwide
systemic integration without social integration or whether there is a necessity and also a chance of a subsequently
growing social integration on the supranational and even global levels. If we understand social integration in terms of
the relatively strong positive integration of the nation-state, there are little chances for social integration on the
supranational and global levels. If we realize, however, that this process involves a transformation of social integration
in terms of farther-reaching and internally more differentiated solidarity of networks instead of homogeneous social
units, which is accompanied by a corresponding abstraction and formalization of justice, we can imagine that
supranational and global systemic integration can still be complemented by social integration
 Social cohesion ;
• Social Cohesion PerspectiveIn the social cohesion approach, interdependence derives from a motive of
care and concern experienced by group members for one another (Johnson and Johnson, 1994). Group
members help one another because they are concerned about their peers. Teaching social skills that will
support this kind of interdependence is an important emphasis in a social cohesion approach. Depending
on their prior experiences, students may be unskilled at productive interaction. Classroom teachers need
to spend time to encourage positive social norms, modeling helping behavior, and providing feedback on
students' social interactions.The Johnson's Learning Together technique (Johnson and Johnson, 1994)
illustrates the social cohesion approach. The empirical evidence supporting this orientation toward
collaborative learning as a method for enhancing academic achievement is much weaker than that
supporting the motivational perspective. Slavin (1996) notes that cooperative learning methods that
emphasize team building and group process, but do not provide group rewards, are not effective but
when they are combined with the use of rewards or require accountability, student achievement from
group learning exceeds individualistic learning. Slavin concluded that individual accountability and group
rewards are critical to the success of cooperative learning methods.Not everyone subscribes to the idea
that rewards are necessary to create cohesion or interdependence. Cohen (1994) believes that
cooperative learning that uses group rewards may be useful for lower-level skills but may not either be
necessary or helpful for promoting higher-order skills. Thus, decisions about whether to adopt a
motivational or social cohesion approach to peer learning may depend on the desired outcomes from
• The major source of social integration which sociologists have identified in
advanced capitalist societies is the class system. In feudal society, the system of
estates played an equivalent role, as did caste in Indian society. In general (and
following Max Weber's precepts about social stratification), status-based
societies are likely to lead to harmonious forms of social integration, and class
societies to conflictful forms of social integration. System integration, on the
other hand, is a reference to the way in which different parts of a social system
(its institutions) interrelate. Any adequate macro-sociological theory of change
must attempt to link social integration with system integration. However, in
Lockwood's original essay on social integration and system integration, he
noted how conflict theorists emphasize the conflict between groups of actors as
the basic motor of social change, while normative functionalists downplay the
role of actors and seek to emphasize the (functional or dysfunctional)
relationships between the institutions of society. For Lockwood, neither
approach is adequate, precisely because each deals with only one side of the
agency versus structure problem or couplet. The task of sociological theory is to
overcome this dualism.
• In conclusion,

• while social integration offers society potential benefits in the long run,
such as economic growth and stronger community resilience, the journey
towards integration is often fraught with difficulties that challenged
community cohesion
Thank you