By definition, individualistic means that something is explained in terms of the individual, rather than in terms of social groups. This way of looking at things is particularly prominent in Western societies, with former British Conservative Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, proclaiming, "there is no such thing as society".
By employing this theory, it is seen to be the position of the individual to bring about change, for example, in a cultural role there is an influence on people to listen to a particular type of music or dress in a certain way.
The individualistic theory explains that the individual has the ability to make important decisions that can affect his or her own life. However, it fails to accept the fact that the options presented to the individual are restricted by the social structure in which the individual lives.
Sociologist Goffman summed up the individualistic viewpoint by eloquently stating that:
“Each individual is responsible for the demeanour image of himself”.
Contradictory to this argument, the modern tendency to promote individuality, social class, gender and ethnicity remain powerful predicators of, for example, how well students perform in school. Therefore, individualistic explanations of the social world are shown to be by no means conclusive.
Naturalistic explanations are based entirely on natural or biological needs. Natural science provides explanations of how real-world events happen, giving both cause and effect to answer any given question. Such views directly link biological science with the development of social identities.
However, naturalistic conceptions fall into the trap of biological determinism; attempting to explain all aspects of human behaviour in terms of inherited biological characteristics that people have as human beings.
A good example of this would be the need to eat. The need for food is a basic instinct, but the types of food that people choose to eat varies greatly between cultures, social classes and historical periods. Sociological views note a difference between fundamental and biological needs and “media induced consumption”, reflecting that much human action is not so much need as desire.
Unfortunately these explanations are limited to a more scientific range of issues and cannot offer suitable solutions to questions regarding the social or behavioural world. Biologically based theories are also limiting because human lives do not operate in the same way in every society. The way in which people go about their lives is structured around a social, political and economic framework, of which their control is restricted.
The limitations of these single reality based common sense ideas are many. Sociological explanations eliminate such problems by taking into account the idea that the world consists of multiple realities.
The sociological perspective relies on in-depth procedures and is created by a combination of common sense, statistical inquiry and social theory. Therefore sociological explanations of society are based on knowledge rather than assumption, relying on tested methods and theories.
Sociology tries to look deeper than the surface, searching for explanations that are not immediately obvious. Sociological perspective is almost like an investigation, looking at social conditions in relation to both history and biography. Sociology does not attempt to produce a set of cast iron laws and rules, but instead acts as a guideline to follow when looking at current society.
Sociological theories eliminate some of the problems these common sense explanations present by focusing on social conditions rather than on the genetic, biological or psychological factors which affect people. They can offer a much better understanding of social identity: the way in which each individual locates themselves within the society they live.
Sociologist JS Mills said of the sociological perspective:
“The sociological imagination enables us to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society”.
So, in conclusion, despite the fact that common sense explanations give us some understanding of why changes occur in our society, this way of looking at things is rather limited. A sociological perspective offers a much more firmly grounded alternative through research and tested theories. This method is preferable due to the fact that it is based on hard evidence rather than what is seen to be “common knowledge”.
