A “theory” is an explanation to the happenings in the world. It is not just an assumption, instead theory is based on scientific facts. There are many theories till now to explain various things such as the evolution of the modern world, globalization etc. Hence theories are considered as a creation of new knowledge.
In the initial phases of formation of theories, most of the theories are incomplete or completing with one another. Later theories became prominent. And some theories emerged as dominant and got all the attention. This set of dominant theories is called as “Paradigm”, according to Thomus Kuhn. Hence paradigm is much broader than a theory.
A paradigm is a set of beliefs and theories that a society possesses. This is the explanation for paradigm having two aspects. The first one is the “global paradigm“, which is the set of beliefs and values the the whole world believes in. And there are local versions. Some societies agree with global beliefs and some do not.
World is changing at a fast pace. Hence new theories will come into existence and some theories become redundant, and some other theories will turn into false by the new theories and will be rejected if found wrong. This is called as “paradigm shift“, according to Thomus Kuhn.
Paradigms acts as frameworks for the creation of new theories. Functionalism, structuralism and Marxism are some examples of paradigms. For example, Marxist paradigm looks at society as two classes – Capitalist class and working class. “Social conflict theory” is formed based on Marxist paradigm. While forming new theories, sociologists look at things in a perspective set by paradigms. And paradigm is the set of contemporary theories. Hence theories and paradigms are interconnected.
Can i get pdf of previous years questions with answers?
The concept of scientific paradigm and particularly the sociological paradigm, is closely connected to
sociological theories. If we assume that a scientific paradigm represents a general hypothesis of scientific knowledge,
a general knowledge which can be presented both as a practical one and as a specific matrix of scientific research,
then we can talk about a wider and more exact system of views, attitudes and theories concerning the scientific
explanation of objective reality. In its widest meaning, a scientific paradigm is ‘a set of facts and convictions which is
systematically presented, that is presented as a theory whose function is to initiate theoretical productions, and
practical research in certain fields thereafter, so that it appears in this sense as a source of some future or already
existing theoretical composition.” In accordance with that, a sociological paradigm represents a fundamental illustration
of the society (the definition of its concept, the comprehension of its structure and dynamics) which has been more or
less accepted in the association of sociologists during certain periods of this science development.
The sociological paradigm performs significant functions in a qualitative sociological analysis. According to Merton,
at least five functions of a paradigm in sociology may be specified: (a) the function of defining concepts, (b) the
function of decreasing the probability of unconscious introduction of latent assumptions and concepts, (c) the function
of cumulating theoretical interpretations, (d) the function of concept systematization, and, (e) the function of qualitative
analysis codification. The first function of the paradigm in sociology is to provide precision in designating the central
concepts of a sociological analysis and it can almost be compared to the significance and functions of mathematical
symbols in natural sciences. Moreover, the paradigm implies logical concept derivation from previously clearly defined
concepts. The cumulation of theoretical interpretations in a sociological paradigm enables new theoretical attitudes to
be derived from and supported by the previous ones, producing a coherent theoretical structure. In case the fundamental paradigm assumptions are weak, new theoretical statements cannot withstand theoretical and empirical verification.
Paradigms may nitiate the systematization of significant concepts, as well as point out the need of empirical and
theoretical investigation of certain problems. Paradigms also contribute to certain codification and unification of
procedures in partial and global researches.
In this respect, in the framework of sociology we may find the old sociological paradigm and the new sociological
paradigm, which mutually differ with regard to the theories, methods and instruments applied in learning about the
social totality. Professor Miroslav Pecujlic is of the opinion that the old (classical) sociological paradigm pervaded
classical sociological theories and so called objectivistic theories (positivism, functionalism, system theories, structuralism).
The statements and attitudes of a classical sociological paradigm are predominant in them, particularly the conceptions
of linear progress and historical determinism, mechanical comprehension of the universe, idealized image of the
society in the centre of which are order, harmony, non-conflicting and in which the conflicts, social struggles, force
and domination, social changes, discontinuity, great obsession of theory by apology and governing system preservation,
dominance of system over personality, limited picture of historical actors, are either excluded or less discussed.
A new sociological paradigm is created on completely new assumptions and knowledge, such as the openness of
history, entropic comprehension of the world (a danger of the planet destruction), the beginning of an era of great
cultural transformations, mutual permeance of social processes of continuity and discontinuity, the necessity of free
human actions development, the appearance of new agents of social changes, the beginning of social movements, the
outset of new factors of social dynamics. Alongside with that, a new sociological paradigm organically originates from
the critical and creative meditation of previous systems of thought in the science of sociology. “The first step in a large
revitalization of sociology lies, then, in the synthesis, in supplementation of mutually exclusive streams: a modern
system theory, critical theories of the society, theories of radical changes (dialectics), as well as in the apprehension
of social phenomena as the phenomena with certain meanings. Comparative investigation of objective circumstances
and subjective motives, observation of the phenomenon in the system frame, but of more profound changes as well,
critical examination of the existent and also of the desirable and possible future (alternative)–all of that provides
incomparably more powerful intellectual instruments for the understanding of the new, more complex world that is
being formed. Yet, it gives much more, in fact. A new sociological paradigm, critical interpretation and comprehension
of existing and search for more rational social life forms and a desirable and possible future, have become a decisive
factor of great cultural transformations brought into focus by history.” In this manner, sociology is actively included
into the modern civilization courses, it observes and analyses contemporary society and establishes itself as a modern
science. “A true history of sociological theory has to exceed by evidence the chronologically arranged disquisition set;
it has to deal with interrelations between the theory and other items, like the social origin and status of its exponents,
a variable social organization of sociology, changes of the ideas brought about by their expanding, and the relations of
ideas toward the surrounding social and cultural structure.”
Being that sociology is a multi-paradigmatic science (Ritzer), and we can agree with that, in a sociological
explanation we should also take into consideration the verified data of various theories and paradigms developed in its
scope. In this respect, the research of the social structure in modern society, for example, demands the application of
both social class and stratification theories, which may cover the research subject more complexly if combined in use.
Ritzer’s paradigms may in this sense be understood as complementary and not exclusive and mutually independent
paradigms. Namely, although the paradigm of social facts, paradigm of social definitions and social-behavioural
paradigm differ in their contents, their statements are respected in modern sociology.
Thank you so much…it was helpful
The study center which i had choose was Shyam Lal College Delhi but one of my friends told me that the study center has shift to another institution so, i don’t know the place where they shift. .i may have problem on submitting my assignment..Please HELP
Contact them and ask about the whereabouts of the study center (Phone no – 011 2232 4086). In case they are not responding, you can ask your doubts through asking a query here – http://igram.ignou.ac.in/ .
where is new study centre can you have any idea because mine also shyam lal college
Tysm sir …
I got an idea
Very good article… And useful for understand…