Essay: Comparison Between Sociological Theories (Sociology 2020)

This essay provides a detailed comparison between two key sociological theories: conflict theory and symbolic interactionism. It begins by defining each theory, tracing their origins and core tenets. Conflict theory, rooted in the works of Karl Marx, is presented as a macro-level analysis emphasizing power dynamics and economic inequalities within society, particularly the struggle between the capitalist class and the proletariat. Symbolic interactionism, developed by Charles Horton Cooley and George Herbert Mead, is explored as a micro-level approach focusing on how individuals create meaning through symbols and interactions, shaping their behavior and understanding of society. The essay then compares the two theories, highlighting their differing perspectives on the relationship between individuals and society, and uses examples from the Australian society to demonstrate the application of these theories. The essay concludes by emphasizing the subjective and dynamic nature of societal differences and the value of sociological theories in understanding these complexities. It argues that conflict theory and symbolic interactionism, despite their different lenses, offer valuable insights into the workings of society and the interactions within it.

Running head: COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES
Comparison between sociological theories
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES
Introduction
The human society is divided and categorized across many spheres depending on the
extent and kind of interaction shared among the individuals living in that society. Such
distinctions are usually human made and therefore, in order to understand the differences
existing in the community, it is important to understand the theoretical under pinning of such
distinctions (Stepnisky, 2018). Many scholars across the centuries have tried to evolve a holistic
theory which would be able to explain the perceived distinctions present in the society. One of
the most important theories which have been able to capture the real image of the society within
its theoretical under pinning is that of conflict theory (Young, 2017). Furthermore, the
sociological theory of symbolic interactionism has also been able to explain the differences that
exist in the society. The purpose of this paper is to explain the two theories and compare between
them in order to understand their views on the relationship shared between the individuals and
the broader aspect of the society itself.
Meaning of conflict theory in sociology
The conflict theory as present within the society is seen to have its origin in the writings
on Karl Marx (Woods & Hammersley, 2017). Marx developed on dialectical materialism in
order to examine the critical stance under taken in order to understand the social arrangements
present in a community. The theory on conflict is able to emphasize on the aspect of differences
in power which is observed amongst the classes of the society. In this context, the conflict theory
can be observed to be a macro-level of analysis of the community itself (Simon, 2016).
The conflict theory as posited by Karl Marx in the nineteenth century is based on the
capitalist nature of the society which had just started to gain wide spread favoritism from the

2COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES
upper echelons of the society (Wehr, 2019). Capitalism advocated that the individuals with the
resources would have the power and the authority to function within the society as per their
wishes. A level playing platform would be provided to such individuals, without any
discrimination. However, the conflict theory a states that it is this very establishment of a
capitalist society which gave rise to internal discriminations in a community (Agu, 2019). The
common masses who did not possess any means of production were left out of the capitalist field
and they had to depend on the work provided by the capitalists for earning their daily survival.
The producers exploited the workers and did not pay them their due remuneration. This led to the
poor being further pushed in to poverty.
In order to counteract this aspect, Marx advocated the proletarian revolution within the
society. He was of the idea that the common masses should revolt against the capitalists and
capture the means to production. The proletariat should try to create a stateless society whereby
the entire power of the state would be in their hands (Woods & Hammersley, 2017).
This reveals the internal conflict within the society (Stepnisky, 2018). The capitalist class
wants to create a society based on the fulfillment of their profit motives. On the other hand, the
common masses or the proletariat class wants to establish a society based on the elements of
welfarism and well-being. It is such internal contradictions which has led to the basis of the
theoretical under pinning of the conflict theory (Young, 2017).
Meaning of symbolic interaction in sociology
The theory of symbolic interaction has developed from practical considerations in the
society. It was advocated by Charles Horton Cooley and George Herbert Mead (Waskul &
Vannini, 2016). It refers to the utilization of the dialect by the individuals of a society to form

3COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES
images and make deductions or implications from them. Thus, the theory on symbolic interaction
provides a framework in order to understand the creation of a symbolic world whereby the
interaction of the individuals is dependent on the images created by them. In a broader
perspective, it society to shape thee behavior and attitudes of the individuals themselves
(Puddephatt & Price, 2017). Every time an interaction occurs, the level of interpretation assumes
a new meaning. Thus, the nature of the society is recreated again for enough number of times, in
order to suit the nature of the individuals who are inhabiting it in the present world order. In
other words, the theory of symbolic interaction is based on shared and mutual understanding
(Ruiz‐Junco, 2017). In the event that an individual is unable to understand what is being
communicated by the opposite party, then the entire theoretical under pinning of symbolic
interaction decomposes.
This has led to the generation of differences among the individuals of the society. A
group of individuals is formed who are able to derive the same meaning and understanding with
respect o a particular symbol present in the society (DeGloma, 2019). Thus, their flow of
communication is not affected and they are bale to express their feelings and emotions to one
another in a seamless manner. However, on the other hand, there might exist certain individuals
of the society who are unable to derive the same meaning form the same symbols (Blumer,
2017). Therefore, they cannot understand the flow of interaction and this affects the effectiveness
with which they can communicate with the other individuals present in the society (Deegan,
2016). Thus, a difference is created between the two different groups. This has been explained
with the aid of symbolic interaction.
Comparison between the two theories based on the manner in which they view the
relationship between individuals and the society

4COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES
Comparing the two theories of conflict theory and the theory in symbolic interaction, it
can be seen that both have tried to understand the structuring of the society. Conflict theory have
laid more emphasis on the economic aspect of the society which has led to the rise of differences
amongst the people (Woods & Hammersley, 2017). The individuals with more resources hold
the authority to function as per their aspirations while the majority of the individuals of the
community are unable to exploit the resources for their own gain. Thus, they have to remain
dependent on the capitalists of the society in order to earn their basic means of subsistence
(Woods & Hammersley, 2017). This is observed in the present day Australian society. Australia
is structured on a liberal economic platform whereby only a small section of the population is
able to exploit the resources and fulfill their needs and wants. On the other hand, the majority of
the people of the society face a lack of opportunity by the way of not having enough financial
resources. Their misfortune in the society is further aggravated by certain other sociological
under pinning like that of racial discrimination, their migratory status and also that of gender
discrimination (Woods & Hammersley, 2017). All of them have a significant influence over the
rise of poverty of such individuals in the society.
The theory on symbolic interaction is also significant from the angle that it has been able
to explain the differences that exists in the society based on the communicative stance of the
individuals (Puddephatt & Price, 2017). The symbols which are present in the society hold a
deeper meaning for many individuals of the community. They ascribe their faith ad beliefs to
such symbols. The people who are able to share the same view with each other based on such
symbols, they form an effective interactive group amongst themselves. This means that there is a
generation of the idea of ‘us’ and ‘them’ within the folds of symbolic interaction (Puddephatt &
Price, 2017). For instance, in a country like Australia, the indigenous population have their own

5COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES
culture, traditional norms and practices. The have symbols which are important and central to
their belief system. However, the main stream population of the urban societies are unable to
understand them and hence, they indulge in instances of discrimination by the way of alienation.
This affects the communication flow between the two groups, giving rise to perceived
differences (Puddephatt & Price, 2017).
Thus, it can be seen that the two theories of conflict theory ad symbolic interaction has
been able to explain the differences which are present in the society. However, they view the
relationship between the individuals and the society through two different lenses.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it can be observed that the differences which are present in the society are
subjective in nature and is quite dynamic. They have been generated by the activities of the
human kind and therefore, can be eradicated with their will itself. The sociological theories are
advocated with the view of understanding the nature of the society. The conflict theory has been
able to effectively understand the difference present in the society with the aid of economic lens.
On the other hand, the theory of symbolic interactionism has placed emphasis on the manner in
which symbols are perceived in the society, thereby leading to the development of a shared and
mutual understanding amongst the individuals.

6COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES
References:
Agu, L. (2019). Book review: Ingleby, Ewan, Applied sociology for social work. Journal of
Social Work, 19(5), 690-691.
Blumer, H. (2017). The nature of symbolic interactions. In Communication theory (pp. 102-120).
Routledge.
Deegan, M. J. (2016). Jane Addams, the Chicago Schools of Sociology, and the Emergence of
Symbolic Interaction, 1889–1935', The Astructural Bias Charge: Myth or Reality. Studies
in Symbolic Interaction, 46, 57-76.
DeGloma, T. (2019). The Expanding Interactionist Community: On the Remarkable Breadth and
Depth of Symbolic Interactionism. Italian Sociological Review, 9(2), 165-169.
Puddephatt, A. J., & Price, T. (2017). Symbolic Interaction, Public Sociology, and the Potential
of Open-access Publishing. Qualitative Sociology Review, 13(4).
Ruiz‐Junco, N. (2017). Advancing the sociology of empathy: A proposal. Symbolic
Interaction, 40(3), 414-435.
Simon, R. M. (2016). The Conflict Paradigm in Sociology and the Study of Social Inequality:
Paradox and Possibility. Theory in Action, 9(1).
Stepnisky, J. (2018). Types of Sociological Theory. Core Concepts in Sociology, 295.
Waskul, D. D., & Vannini, P. (2016). Introduction: The body in symbolic interaction.
In Body/embodiment (pp. 15-32). Routledge.
Wehr, P. (2019). Conflict regulation. Routledge.

7COMPARISON BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES
Woods, P., & Hammersley, M. (2017). Introduction: School Experience:—Explorations in the
Sociology of Education 1. In School Experience (pp. 9-27). Routledge.
Young, T. R. (2017). The politics of sociology: Gouldner, Goffman, and Garfinkel. In The
Drama of Social Life (pp. 33-46). Routledge.