An attempt to understand what it actually means to examine a social issue or evaluate it from a sociological perspective has been made by various thinkers. These perspectives guide sociological thinking about different social problems because they approach the same social problem but in different ways. Certain things that are known as facts or principles to individuals are now called into question, where each element of the same fact is evaluated against what it amounts to sociologically thinking about. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get an original essay By studying what it means to think sociologically, we realize and re-evaluate certain things in life that otherwise would not have occurred as unusual or, in some cases contradictory. Dominant ideas about the social organization of society are often what is put forward by the majority and makes people believe that it is in fact the truth. This strong influence has come to be known as the dominant discourse. Thus, it shapes what we are able to think and know at any given time. In this sense, sociology establishes discourse as a productive force in that it shapes our thoughts, ideas, beliefs, values ​​and identities, as well as our communication with others, as well as our behavior. The prevalence of a dominant discourse is widely recognized in various social practices, norms, but the main thing is to look at things from a more impartial point of view, that is, from a perspective where one can better understand the situation without being hampered by their own prejudices. .One understanding that is detrimental to sociological thinking is cultural sensitivity. Sociology understands culture by exploring individual and group communications, their customs, ideologies, social narratives and their degree of integration. In his writings, Allan Johnson, author of The Forest, the Trees, and the One Thing, explains to us the importance of looking at society through an outside perspective, because often your individual perspective is a reflection of the larger part , that is to say the society in which you are. part of. In fact, the systems we are associated with define not only who we are as individuals, but also the society of which we are a part. One way to understand society is to view it holistically. The sociologist looks at things from an individualistic point of view that goes beyond common sense understanding, it is when you go beyond common sense understanding that you see the different perspectives. Individualism consists of looking at the world in relation to oneself and therefore understanding society in its relationship. It is a way of thinking that encourages us to explain the world in terms of what happens inside individuals and nothing else. “It’s about the forest and the trees and how they relate to each other” (Johnson, 2005). Here he uses the metaphor “the forest and the trees” to understand how an individual perceives themselves and the world around them. Relationships between people and groups are characterized by the spaces between trees. It accounts for the way in which sociological practice fits into almost all aspects of life. An individualist perspective tells us that if an individual changes, then those changes can be introduced into the system. However, a sociological perspective given by Johnson goes on to explain how people participate in systems without being part of them themselves and how social life is not a problem. product of the individual and hisfeatures. Often individuals, in order to meet standards and avoid potential criticism, take the path of least resistance, in a sense certain criteria are created by society that the individual feels the need to follow in order to feel a feeling of belonging. For example, cultural norms and values ​​have evolved into rules that members of various societies have adopted to follow. Within an institution like school, there may be a sense of belonging, such that it may compel students to believe that they must wear the colors represented by their school in order to feel part of the community. institution. Sociology as a natural science uses a scientific approach. analyze society critically, using both qualitative and quantitative methods in order to find patterns and connections which, in turn, provide explanations for how a society functions and affects individuals. Sociology leads us to look at things from the point of view of individuals, which is beyond the understanding of common sense. Our opinions and our perception of the world are often limited by the position we occupy in society. Very often we feel like we take for granted the inequalities that arise from differences, whether social or physical. These differences are visible in all areas, in racial patterns and are also reflected in the social structure. Common sense understanding is seen as what “everyone knows” about the social world around us or the individuals who compose it. Much of what people believe in is influenced by the majority, which is why things are often very vague and generalized. Instead of taking common sense and accepting it, sociology examines a body of data that appears to be common sense to test the accuracy of society's common sense beliefs and ideas. For example, most common-sense beliefs have affected our gender norms and stereotypes. The idea that women are primarily the caregivers and more expressive while men are emotionally stoic and strong has now been understood differently due to sociology as we have realized that sex and gender are two distinct things, gender is something that is socially important. defined while sex is biological. Sociology has helped us understand the impact of these “common sense” conceptions on our society. In order to distinguish sociology from common sense, it is first important to understand that when we study our own society, various other phenomena that occur within our society are submerged. Especially since as individuals we are more inclined to lean towards common sense, because we have come to have what is called well-informed or developed common sense. In André Beteille's work, “Sociology and Common Sense,” he mentions some distinct differences between the sociological perspective and that of common sense. Common sense understanding is not always "common" or "sensible", because it takes the most general and uncontroversial understanding to be reality. However, sociological understanding is one that examines all aspects of a situation in order to have an informed idea of ​​what a situation is. the situation is there. Common sense tends to dwell on social norms and traditions and therefore reinforces the status quo and does not lead to any social change, while sociology tends to focus on the progressive nature. Sociology uses comparative measures and has been tested in one way or another and therefore has greater validity than common sense. However, it is importantto realize that none of them is superior to the other; sociology continues to rely on common sense knowledge to determine which popular beliefs are true and which are false. Sociology as a discipline resorts to a systematic use of comparison which makes it anti-utopian in its pretension and anti-fatalist in its orientation, and further distinguishes this generalized knowledge from localized common sense knowledge. Among the sociologists who made a clear separation between the illusions of understanding created by common sense are Max Weber, who stated that "the consequences of human actions are rarely the same as the intentions of the actors, and that sometimes both are diametrically opposed. Here, the intended meaning of said social action is often taken to refer to what an individual understands. Weber's work emphasizes the influence of religious belief in the affairs of state and society. He believes that the role of religion is extremely misinterpreted, he claims that the rise and prosperity of the capitalist economic system in Europe is attributed to certain concepts of the then dominant religious ideology, Christianity. In other words, looking at it from this perspective helps us understand how religion sowed the seeds for the eventual rise of capitalism in Europe due to the resistance or reluctance of then-emerging Protestants who also questioned many practices. Here Max Weber went beyond the common sense perspective because he had to study centuries and centuries of facts and models to arrive at this sociological understanding. A similar observation was made by Karl Marx, who examines the factors leading to capitalism and the industrial revolution. Marx believed that social change begins from a primitive stage to a more developed stage. It talks about change in society from a historical perspective. The rise of capitalism is due to conflicts in society which lead to changes in society, they modify the means and modes and therefore the social relations between people. Through Emile Durkheim's apparent use of sociological perspective to understand the reason for suicide. Durkheim discovered what drives people to commit suicide and what factors push them to make such a radical life choice. Durkheim believed that economic hardship, religion, marriage, etc. were the main reasons that pushed an individual to end their life. He based these social factors behind suicide by analyzing a larger amount of statistical data collected from a large sample of society. He believed that if suicide was the action of an individual, why weren't there societies with different suicide rates that did not stagnate over time. He focused more on social factors rather than individual facts that support the increased suicide rate, giving him a sociological perspective instead of a generalized common sense understanding of the situation. André Beteille, in his own work, examines the caste system and how inequality and conflict intersect with politics in these Indian villages. While talking about the understanding of the caste system, MN Srinivas made major contributions to the study of the caste system in India by differentiating the 'book view' from the 'field view' by mentioning how he found stratification horizontal which he highlighted as jatis, which act as the functional unit of the caste system in order to understand the aspect of social mobility between different levels. He attacks the earlier theory that the caste system was rigid and inflexible and how it.