SlideShare verwendet Cookies, um die Funktionalität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Webseite zu verbessern und Ihnen relevante Werbung bereitzustellen. Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter besuchen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies auf dieser Seite einverstanden. Lesen Sie bitte unsere Nutzervereinbarung und die Datenschutzrichtlinie.
SlideShare verwendet Cookies, um die Funktionalität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Webseite zu verbessern und Ihnen relevante Werbung bereitzustellen. Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter besuchen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies auf dieser Seite einverstanden. Lesen Sie bitte unsere unsere Datenschutzrichtlinie und die Nutzervereinbarung.
ASSIGNMENT:<br />Compare and contrast different social science paradigms<br />Subject: Social Research<br />Name: HAMZA SHAUKAT<br />Roll no. 20<br />WWW. HAMZA20.MAGIX.NET/WEBSITE<br />I.A.S DEPARTMENT<br />PUNJAB UNIVERSITY LAHORE PAKISTAN<br />Paradigm:<br /> A scientific paradigm, in the most basic sense of the word, is a framework containing all of the commonly accepted views about a subject, a structure of what direction research should take and how it should be performed.<br />Conflict Paradigm:<br />According to Karl Marx in all stratified societies there are two major social groups: a ruling class and a subject class. The ruling class derives its power from its ownership and control of the forces of production. The ruling class exploits and oppresses the subject class. As a result there is a basic conflict of interest between the two classes. The various institutions of society such as the legal and political system are instruments of ruling class domination and serve to further its interests. <br />The conflict paradigm causes us to see social behavior one way, the interactionist paradigm causes us to see it differently.<br /> Natural scienceNatural scientists generally believe that the succession from one paradigm to another represents progress from a false view to a true one Social scienceIn social sciences theoretical paradigms may gain or lose popularity , but they are seldom discarded altogether<br />Difference between various social science paradiigms:<br />There are many differences between macro and micro-level theories.<br />Micro-level theoriesMicro-level focuses on individuals and their interactions. For example the relationship between adult children and their parents, or the effect of negative attitudes on older people. Some criticize on micro-level theories becuase they focus on what older people do rather than on social conditionsand policies that cuase them to act the way they do.Macro-level therories Macro-level focuses more upon social structure, social processes and problems, and their interrelationships. For example the effects of industrialization on older people's status, or how gender and income affect older people's well being. This approach tends to minimize people's ability to act and overcome the limits of social structures.<br />Both micro and macro-level theories can take one of three perspectives which include: interpretive perspective, normative, and conflict. <br /> The last twenty years has been dominated by four relatively distinct traditions, which have sometimes have been in conflict, and sometimes in various kinds of alliance with one another .The four traditions have areas of overlap, but they can be broadly characterized as follows:<br />1. Ordinary living, rights, needs-based, normalization / role valorization - based<br />perspectives.<br />This tradition emphasizes the following<br /><ul><li>social integration (with its corollaries of localization and dispersal of provision),
autonomy and growth.</li></ul>2. Functional, or skills - based perspectives.<br />The functional approach is perhaps the most practical a theoretical and non-ideological of the<br />four approaches. It emphasizes two domains:<br /><ul><li>the functional activities of the person with intellectual disability,
practical ways of supporting the person in personally relevant acts.</li></ul>3. The behavioral approach.<br /><ul><li>Behavior can be understood as a function of controlling variables
Organisms adapt to their environments through processes at phylogenetic (chiefly Darwinian natural selection) and ontogenetic (especially through the selection of operant behavior by the mechanism of reinforcement) levels.</li></ul>4. Perspectives based on theories of human development.<br />Hodapp at al. (1990, pp 4-9) identify the following core assumptions of classical developmental approaches<br /><ul><li>change is non randomly directed to a specific end point,
change can be both qualitative and quantitative in nature,
development is not reducible to a simple function of the passage of time, and
development involves progressive increases in 'differentiation, articulation, and hierarchic integration' (Werner, 1957).
PositivismReduced biasness Prior to Comte’s time religious paradigms predominated in describing societyDarwinismSurvival of the fittestAutonomy and growth.Organisms adapt to their environments through processes at phylogenetic (chiefly Darwinian natural selection)EthnomethodologyEveryone is acting like a social scientistNo significant growthbehaviour is evidence of underlying schemes,
FunctionalismSocial system is made up of partsEach part contributes the functioning of wholeFocus on collective rightsFeminismSocial system is made up of partsOnly some or one part is contributed by the society(gender discrimination)Focus on individual rights