Final answer:
No, Sri is not likely to be considered disordered, as he is well-functioning in life despite his eccentric preferences for 1920s clothing and yard trinkets. Sociology views such behaviors as individuality or minor deviance, which can be socially enriching rather than indicative of a disorder. So the correct answer is option (B).
Step-by-step explanation:
Is Sri likely to be considered disordered because he dresses in clothes from the 1920s and decorates his yard with found trinkets? The correct answer is b) No, he is functioning well in various aspects of life. The definition of disorder typically involves an impairment in one or more important areas of functioning. However, Sri appears to be well-adjusted and successful in his career and maintains close relationships with friends and family.
His preferences for vintage clothing and unique yard decorations could be seen as examples of individuality or eccentricity, but they do not necessarily indicate a disorder. The field of sociology would likely find his behaviors illustrative of nonconformity or minor deviance, which can sometimes enhance social cohesion by providing a point of interest or connection for others. Indeed, Schoepflin's theory suggests that such minor forms of deviance can become a mark of distinction, contributing positively to a person's social identity.
Viewing Sri's choices through the lens of sociology raises many questions. A functionalist might examine how his behavior fits into the larger social system, while a conflict theorist could explore the implications his actions have on social hierarchy. A symbolic interactionist might be interested in the meanings and interactions his clothing and yard decorations foster. The key takeaway is that without evidence of impairment, what is typically defined as eccentric behavior does not constitute a disorder.