Sociological Theoretical Perspectives to the Analysis of Society and Culture
In general, sociology provides various theoretical perspectives to the analysis of society and culture.
The major perspectives are symbolic interactionism, structural functionalism, and conflict.
Symbolic interactionism focuses on the social interactions among individuals in society using
symbols. Such symbols have meanings for people in society based on their respective cultures. For
example, a piece of wood is just a piece of wood, but if two pieces of wood are intersected with
each other forming a cross, the meaning of this symbol for Christians is their belief in Jesus Christ.
For non-Christians, it remains as a piece of wood which for them means nothing but firewood
maybe.
[insert photo of crucifix made of wood; photo of firewood]
Structural functionalists view society from a more macro-level perspective as it focuses on the
interconnection between systems in society which have functions that maintain the functioning of
the whole society. One social institution affects all other institutions, thus if there is a dysfunction
in one aspect, the entire system is affected. For example if the economy is in crisis, it affects the
political institution, education and all other social institutions. Just like a car engine, if there is one
part that is not functional, it cannot function as a whole.
[insert photo of car engine showing different parts]
Similarly, the conflict perspective views society from a macro-level perspective but instead of
focusing on functions, it focuses on unequal relationships among groups or categories of people to
explain what is happening in society. For example, it views poverty as a result of exploitation of the
lower class (workers) by the powerful class (capitalists). These sociological perspectives shall be
utilized in analyzing science and technology in society.
[insert photo of workers in a factory]
Specific Views on the Relationship between Science and Technology
Specific views on the relationship between science and technology with society and culture have
emerged – Technological Somnambulism, Technological Determinism, and the Social Construction
of Technology. Although all these look at the relationship between technology and society, they
have different views of this relationship.
The first view, although we shall not utilize this in our discussion and analysis, is called
Technological Somnambulism which, as explained by Langdon Winner, a political scientist, denies
the various ways by which technology provides structure and meaning for human life. This
perspective contends that human relationship to technology consists of merely “making” and
“using” technology. In this view, technology is considered neutral in the moral and ethical sense –
neither is technology good nor bad. In other words. Technology’s impact on society depends on
how it is utilized. Generally, this view ignores how technology can shape social structure; and how
social structure shapes technology. Thus, technologies are seen to operate beyond the control of
humans and seem to be results of automatic, unavoidable processes. This is in contrast to the two
other perspectives discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.
[insert photo of a machine without people running it]
Technological Determinism generally contends that a society’s technology largely determines its
social structure and culture. The term “technological determinism” was coined by Thorstein
Veblen, an American sociologist and economist. Technology is viewed as the main determinant of a
society’s history and the driving force of its culture. This view posits that the introduction of newer
technologies leads to changes in society and culture which may lead to the loss of existing
knowledge and technologies as well. For example, the mechanization of agriculture has led to the
loss of traditional farming methods. The same is true with communication technologies. People
nowadays communicate through the internet by sending emails and no longer through handwritten
letters sent via the post office. Over the course of human history, there are a number of examples
that could be cited, such as the invention of irrigation systems, the wheel and gunpowder. For
every new discovery or invention, there is a corresponding transition or change in society. The
discovery of steam power, for example, led to the development of industrial society; while the
invention of computers ushered in the information age in contemporary societies. This shall be
discussed in more detail in the next chapters.
[insert photo of farming using a plow; and farming using tractor]
The Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) perspective arose as a contrasting view to
technological determinism introduced by Wiebe Bijker and Trevor Pinch in 1984. It emphasizes the
importance of social context in the development of new technologies viewed as a product of social
processes involving several social groups. SCOT argues that technological innovation is a complex
process wherein both technology and society negotiate the meaning of new technologies; then
make changes to technology through resistance; and lastly construct social and technological
frameworks, actions and practices. For example, the social context of science and technology in
third world countries like the Philippines is different from that of first world countries like the
United States and Japan. Thus, the development of new technologies in first world countries is
more rapid compared to those in the third world. There are differences in terms of government
support, financial support, and educational system in these countries. On the other hand, specific
situations in different societies also lead to the development of different types of technologies that
are appropriate to the given context.
[insert photo of scientists working in an electronics laboratory]