When functionalists consider the preponderance of social deviance, they make a note of the positive role that inappropriate behavior plays in maintaining the health of a society. By soliciting outrage in others, a deviant can clarify and reinforce social norms while strengthening a group's sense of community togetherness (Harris, n.d.). The conflict perspective, which stemmed originally out of Karl Marx's writings on class struggles, presents society in a different light than do the functionalists. While the functionalist perspective focuses on the positive aspects of society that contribute to its stability, the conflict perspective focuses on the negative, conflicted, and ever-changing nature of a society. Unlike functionalists who defend the status quo, avoid social change, and believe people cooperate to effect social order; conflict theorists challenge the status quo, encourage social change, and believe rich and powerful people force social order on the poor and the weak (Three Major Perspectives in Sociology, 2009).

During the 1940s and 1950s American sociologists generally ignored the conflict perspective in favor of the functionalist. But during the tumultuous 1960s, American sociologists began taking a considerable interest in conflict theory. It was during this time that Marx's idea that the key conflict in society was strictly economic was expanded. Modern day conflict theorists find social conflict between any groups in which the potential for inequality exists: racial, gender, religious, political, and economic. Conflict theorists feel that unequal groups usually have conflicting values and agendas, causing them to compete against one another. This constant competition between groups forms the basis for the ever-changing nature of society (Three Major Perspectives in Sociology, 2009).

Critics of the conflict perspective often point to its overly negative view of society. The theory ultimately characterizes humanitarian efforts, altruism, democracy, civil rights, and other positive aspects of society to capitalistic designs in order to control the masses and not to the inherent interests in preserving...

The social realm is though of as a figurative battlefield upon which contending social factions struggle for control of scarce resources such as wealth and power. Functionalists tend to look for different functional components while conflict theorists look for competing interest groups, exploitation, and struggle. Class, race, and gender are the principal factors that determine who gets what and not the unconscious operation of a harmonious social system (Harris, n.d.).
Both functionalism and conflict theory tend to assume that there is a system or structure of inequality in place in society. Both assume that virtually all of society is operating within this arrangement, and that it is their job to identify it and explain it. Both of these theories in the end conclude that inequality is a normal thing. In the end, the life chances that people experience will be dictated by their social class position which in turn, will determine their education, income, type of occupation, and lifestyle (Stratification Power, Class and Privilege, n.d.). Stratification is a major part of our society and depending on which theory you buy into will determine how you go about defining your place within the system.

References

Harris, Scott R. (n.d.). Critiquing and Expanding the Sociology of Inequality: Comparing

Functionalist, Conflict, and Interactionist Perspectives. Retrieved August 5, 2009, from Web site: http://www.lsus.edu/la/journals/ideology/contents/vol2534/scottharris.pdf

Stratification Power, Class and Privilege. (n.d.). Retrieved August 5, 2009, from Web site:

http://www.public.asu.edu/~zeyno217/301/strat.html

Three Major Perspectives in Sociology. (2009). Retrieved August 5, 2009, from Cliff Notes Web

site: http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/CliffsReviewTopic/Three-Major-

Perspectives-in-Sociology.topicArticleId-26957,articleId-26837.html