The Conflict Paradigm in Sociology and the Study of Social Inequality

Paradox and Possibility

Datos Bibliográficos

ID7103422
AutoresRichard Simon (0000-0002-4610-3887, autor de correspondencia)
Año2016
Volumen9
Número1
Páginas1-31
Fecha de publicación2016-01-31
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaTheory in Action (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1937-0229 • E-ISSN: 1937-0237
EditorialTheory in Action (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.3798/tia.1937-0237.16001
OpenAlexW2566315942
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas11

INTRODUCTIONConflict theory is one of the major paradigms used by sociologists to make sense of the social world. All sociology that takes as its object of study the processes by which social groups compete with each other for scarce resources such as power, wealth, and status, or the inequalities that result from these competitions, falls within the conflict paradigm (Collins 1990).Conflict sociology constitutes a substantial portion of all contemporary sociological research. An examination of the six 2013 issues of American Sociological Review, the American Sociological Association's flagship journal, reveals that approximately 75% of the articles published in this journal fall within the conflict paradigm (31 out of 42, by my count), and many other sociology journals continue to document the dynamics and consequences of social inequality. Marx's writings on the relations of production in capitalism, and his thesis that historical change is a product of the conflict between economic classes gave conflict theory its initial form. However, sociologists have since extended the basic structure of Marx's theory to many other groups in competition in addition to those defined by the relations of production. For example, Weber's classic treatment of status stratification and structures of domination extended Marx's basic model of group competition over resources to include dimensions of social esteem and power. Contemporary conflict sociology continues this tradition by studying the dynamics of a variety of group inequalities such as race, gender, sexual orientation categories, as well as inter-organizational competition (Collins 1975).There is much at stake in social inequalities. Conflict theory impels us to recognize that every dimension of social structure can be conceptualized in terms of winners and losers, and social conflict often causes disastrous and tragic consequences for the losers in the social struggle. People are tortured, mutilated, and incinerated as a consequence of social conflict; they are also shunned, humiliated, exploited, and otherwise systematically shortchanged by the social structures they take part in. Social conflict induces the worst behavior of human beings toward each other. This harm is a necessary consequence of the maintenance of stratified social structure, as social interest groups seek to protect and extend their own privileges while minimizing those of their competitors, and the potential for great harm is exacerbated in industrial societies with access to weapons of mass destruction.This is the essential insight of conflict sociology: social conflict and inequality are fundamental to social structure. Yet at the same time, efforts to combat social inequalities by conflict sociologists and policy makers have largely been limited to ex post facto attempts at writing equality into social structure; the liberal welfare state is the archetypal example. This produces a paradox, in which social conflict and inequality are understood to be a necessary consequence of social structure, and yet efforts are made to write equality into social structure, both in the form of actual resource transfers, and in the kinds of policy recommendations offered by conflict sociologists. The irony of this position is brought into high relief when attempts to alter social structure to reduce inequalities are met with stiff resistance by those who benefit from those inequalities: Attempts at ex post facto resource distribution - managing social conflicts and their resultant inequalities after the inequality has already manifested - ultimately reproduce the conditions that create the inequality in the first place by reproducing the conflict of interest between those who benefit from social structure and those who are disproportionately shortchanged by it. Ex post facto resource redistribution can potentially mitigate some of the inequalities that arise from social conflict, but it fails to address fundamental questions concerning how and why inequalities are built into social structure

Conflict resolution · Conflict theories · Economics · Epistemology · Inequality · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Social conflict · Social inequality · Social science · Sociology · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Law · Mathematics · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology