First, it is important to contrast the way the two men understood the formation and evolution of societies, or cultures. Durkheim’s understanding of society was functionalist in nature (Pope, 1975, p. 361). This means, more specifically, that he viewed society as a whole composed of interrelated parts, assumed the tendency toward system stability, considered how society and social order is possible, and viewed structures in terms of their perpetuation or evolutionary development (Pope, 1975, p. 361). In contrast, however, Boas “felt that 19th century cultural evolutionists made premature generalizations based on poor and inadequate information (Helm, 2001, p.41). Instead, Boas, a trained scientist who did extensive fieldwork in the Pacific
Nor is it constrained by instrumental goals. In addressing concerns about the validity of interpretive sociological research, the noted sociologist Anthony Giddens proposed three kinds of sociological imagination, which he hoped would further understanding of social structure. He categorized them as: historical, cultural and critical. Given that the sociological imagination can be described as an attempt to understand what is going on around us in order to “seek to understand the present”, Gidden (1997, p. 578) notes that the complexity of human behavior means that “it is very unlikely that a single theoretical perspective could cover all its
The social structure as involving an assessment of the nature, number, arrangement and interrelations among components, whether these components were individuals or corporate units, such as groups and organizations. Durkheim termed it “Morphology”. The fourth issue is Mechanical and organic solidarity. Durkheim developed a typology of societies predicated on their modes of integration or solidarity. One type is mechanical and the other is organic.
Regardless of the term, it is evident that many people fail to see that an individual is anything but singular or guided by a single motivation; each of us is an amalgamation of many motives and influences that can be described using three realms: history, biography, and social structure. These three terms are the centerpiece of the sociological imagination, a tool created by American sociologist Charles Wright Mills to analyze the social world.
1.3. Theories Underpinning Digital Storytelling 1.3.1. Social Constructivism Social constructivism theory is based on a core principle which is that knowledge is constructed and negotiated socially (Bruner, 1990; Fosnot, 1996; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Vygotsky, 1978; Wenger, 2000). This theory supports collaboration and meaning construction distribution roles in learning that occurs through social interaction. The concept of Collaboration is purely rooted in Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory that claims that learning occurs and cannot be disconnected or detached from the social context (Vygotsky, 1978).
Perspective is a chosen approach that can be used to study any subject in the field of sociology. These perspectives highlight the diverse methods an individual selects to analyze a theme and how they perceive the society in general. Three sociological perspectives include functionalist, conflict and interactionist perspectives (Thompson, Hickey, & Thompson, 2016, p. 2). Throughout this paper, I examine how we analyze the role of television from the functional, conflict, and interactionist approaches. Functionalist perspective on a macro-sociological level places far more emphasis on “the collective life or communal existence than on the individual” (Thompson, Hickey, & Thompson, 2016).
In France, it is focused in particular by sociologist Raymond Boudon. Methodological individualism is the idea, consistent with the nominalist tradition that social groups are metaphors that exist only in the human mind and have no substance other than that of the individuals that compose them. Lend some attributes of individuals (motivation, a will, a possibility for autonomous action) is a
Tajfel (1979) considered “a group” as a cognitive component, an evaluative component and an emotional component. Thus, he suggested four main basics of social identity theory which are social categorization, social identification, social comparison, and self-esteem achievement (Trepte, 2006). 2.1.1 Social categorization Tajfel (1979) claims that one can only facilitate the process of decoding and encoding messages by defining information into schemes and categories, and it is the same with the other entities in our environment, we divide people into groups to build and comprehend a social interaction (Trepte, 2006). Tajfel and Turner state that social categorizations are conceived here as cognitive tools that segment, classify, and order the social environment, and thus enable the individual to undertake many forms of social action; these tools create and define individual’s place in society (Tajfel & Turner, 1979: 40). 2.1.2 Social
Human subjectivity upholds an objectifying relation to the world mediated through representation. As Dudley’s notion, the relationship between the world and body is sketched out through communication. Every mode of communication is created its own world. So representation is not re-presentation, which is always presentation. There is a matter of fact presentative in presentation.
Mills (1959) Theorised that every individual was shaped by the society they lived in, and vice versa, to a certain extent so did people help shape their society to suit them, “By the fact of this living, he contributes, however minutely, to the shaping of society and to the course of its history, even as he is made by society and by its historical push and shove.” (Mills, 1959: 12). With saying that, sociological imagination allowed people to receive necessary expertise and skills of comprehension to engage in political issues. Mills’ ‘Personal troubles of Milieu’ is all troubles and issues that individuals experience, however sociological imagination enables people to see that it is actually the structure and arrangements of societies, as well as failure of institutions in a society that cause an individual to experience troubles and issues (Mills, 1959). In a society, privileged people believe in individual responsibilities and controlling their own lives, however the less privileged see aspects such as race, culture, class and gender as fundamental factors in shaping their lives. Troubles are defined as problems which are privately felt from an individual and would come from events, situations or feelings in one’s own life, however, issues affect a larger number of people, and would originate in societal arrangements and