Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Further reading 70
Web links 71
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 19
Theories and
theorizing
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 20
H
2
3
4
‘That’s all very well in theory’ 5H
6
How often have you heard someone say ‘That’s all very well in theory’ or ‘Well, 7
I know how it ought to work in theory’? The implication of these statements is that 8
9
‘theory’, no matter how logical or clear-cut, can never grasp the realities of a situ-
0
ation and so is a poor guide to action. Theory is seen as abstract and irrelevant, per- H
haps as produced by those who live in ‘ivory towers’ and do not understand what the 2
‘real world’ is like. Sometimes, theory is seen as an evaluative, ideological position 3
that contrasts with a sombre reliance on ‘the facts’. These ideas are particularly 4
strong in discussions of the social world. People can be castigated for theorizing, 5
6
rather than getting on with more important things, much as Nero was criticized for,
7
allegedly, fiddling while Rome burned. This view often goes hand in hand with the 8
assertion that sociological theory is, in any case, mere jargon: commonplace ideas 9
dressed up in scientific mumbo-jumbo language. Theory consists of spinning out 0
long but essentially meaningless words. The jargon serves as a smokescreen for H
ignorance or platitudes. The implication is clear: sociological theorizing is not the 2
3
kind of thing that any self-respecting person need be concerned with.
4
5
6
7
8
Such views misunderstand the nature of theory. Theory is—or should be—an attempt to 9
0
describe and explain the real world. In a very important sense, it is impossible to know any-
H
thing about the real world without drawing on some kind of theoretical ideas. Sociological 2
theories are attempts to highlight the varying social situations that are of interest by draw- 3
ing out their general features. They abstract from the particular and unique features of events 4
and situations in order to isolate those things that they have in common and that can, 5
therefore, guide us in understanding events and situations that we have not yet encountered. 6
7
It is undoubtedly true that sociologists can be as susceptible to prejudice and jargon
8
as anybody else. Perhaps they have sometimes adopted cumbersome terminology in a 9
misguided attempt to justify their claims to a scientific status in the face of exactly these 0
kinds of objections. However, any scientific activity must employ technical terms in its H
theories, and these terms will not always be comprehensible to the person in the street. 2
Many sociological terms come from everyday language, and they have to be given precise 3
4
technical meanings if they are not to be misunderstood.
5
6
Theory can be dibcult and demanding. You will not necessarily understand all that we say in 7
this chapter the first time that you read it. However, you should not worry about this. It is not your 8
fault. The problem lies with the complexity of the theories and—it has to be said—with the failure of
9
certain theorists to present their ideas clearly. You will find it best to skim through the chapter as a
0
whole, not worrying too much about the detail. You can spend more time on the parts that you find
easiest to handle. Treat the whole chapter as a reference source, as something to come back to as 1
and when you read the ‘Understanding’ sections of the book. Theory is best handled in context. 2
3
4H
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 21
Theory lies at the heart of sociology. Theory enables us to understand and explain the
nature of the social world. Many sociological theories are concerned with specific social
phenomena or with explaining particular social processes. They concern such things as
crime, health, education, or politics, or they concern deviance, socialization, or stratification.
You will encounter many such theories in the various chapters of this book. These
theories are, however, connected into larger theoretical frameworks that try to grasp the
most general features of social life as a whole. It is these theories that we will look at in this
chapter. We will outline the key ideas of the main theorists, and we will show how their
ideas are related to the issues that we raise in the other chapters of the book.
There is no single theory to which all sociologists subscribe. There are, instead, a number
of different theories, each of which has its advocates and its detractors. These theories are
sometimes presented as mutually opposed to each other and as defining rival positions
from which sociologists must choose. It is sometimes assumed that adherents of one
theory have nothing to learn from considering any others. Some textbooks, for example,
present their readers with three (or perhaps four, five, or more) different theoretical posi-
tions on each topic and imply that all are equally valid. It is as if you enter the sociological
supermarket and see, laid out on the shelves in front of you, ‘Marxism’, ‘functionalism’,
‘feminism’, ‘interactionism’, and so on. You walk down the aisles, picking up those theories
that appeal to you or that have the best packaging. Having made your choice, you return
home to use your new theories.
Theoretical choice is not like this. The choice between theories is not made on the basis
of individual preference (‘I just don’t like functionalism’) or political standpoint (‘I’m work-
ing class, so I’m a Marxist’). Preferences and politics do, of course, enter into sociology, but
they do not determine the merits of particular theories. The choices that we must make
among theoretical positions are shaped, above all, by empirical considerations. When judg-
ing a theory, what really matters is its capacity to explain what is happening in the real
world. Theories must always be tested through empirical research. As we show in this and
the next chapter, the ‘facts’ are not quite as straightforward as this statement suggests.
However, the point still remains. Theories are attempts to describe and explain the social
world. Their merits and limitations depend, ultimately, on their ability to cope with what we
know about that world.
We will show that the leading theorists of the sociological tradition have attempted, in
their different ways, to understand the modern world. They have each, however, concen-
trated on particular aspects of that world. None has given a full and complete picture. The
least satisfactory theorists are, in fact, those who have tried to move, prematurely, towards
that comprehensive picture. The most powerful theories are those that have emphasized a
particular aspect of the social world and have concentrated their attention on understand-
ing that aspect. In doing so, they neglect or put to one side the very processes that other
theories take as their particular concern.
If it is possible to produce a comprehensive understanding of the social world, this is
likely to result from the slow synthesis of these partial viewpoints. In so far as the social
world is constantly changing, it is undoubtedly true that any such synthesis would not last
long before it, too, was in need of reformulation. Theoretical change and the development
of new theories are constant features of scientific activity. Even in such a well-developed
field as physics, there are numerous partial theories that have not yet been synthesized into
a larger and more comprehensive theory.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 22
For the present, then, different theories must be seen, in principle, as complementary to
one another. We must emphasize that we are not proposing that all theories are of equal
value, or that they can simply be hashed together in some unwieldy mixture. Some theories
are bad theories that have received no support from empirical research. Even the useful
theories have their particular strengths and, of course, their particular weaknesses. Each
theory must be assessed against the facts that are relevant to its particular concerns, not
against those that are more relevant to some other theory. By the end of this chapter
you should have some appreciation of how the various sociological theories do, indeed,
complement one another. You should begin to see how, collectively, they provide a picture
of the social world that is far better than any of them can provide alone.
In this chapter we place great emphasis on the historical development of sociolo-
gical theory. Theories constructed over 100 years ago are, of course, likely to have been
superseded, in many respects, by more recent theories. Many of them, however, still have a
great deal of relevance for us today, and most contemporary theories have developed out of
the ideas of the nineteenth-century theorists. It is possible to gain a better understanding
of them if these lines of development are traced.
We begin with an overview of the earliest attempts to establish a science of sociology,
and we go on to show how these attempts were the basis of the classical statements of
sociology produced around the turn of the twentieth century. The section on ‘Academic
sociology established’ looks at the three main theoretical traditions of the twentieth
century: structural-functionalist theories, interaction theories, and conflict theories. We con-
clude the chapter with a sketch of the feminist, post-modernist, and globalization theorists
whose arguments have moved sociological debates on to a broader set of issues. We con-
sider these arguments at greater length in the various chapters of Part Two. In this chapter
and throughout the book you will find that we consider both classic and contemporary
theorists, treating them as participants in the same great intellectual enterprise that is
sociology.
For as long as people have lived in societies, they The origins of a scientific perspective on social
have tried to understand them and to construct life can be traced to the European Enlightenment
theories about them. So far as we know, people have of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The
always lived in societies, and so social theory has a Enlightenment marked a sea change in the whole
long history. For much of this history, however, these cultural outlook of European intellectuals. In one
attempts at understanding have looked very different field after another, rational and critical methods were
from what we currently mean by the word sociology. adopted and religious viewpoints were replaced by
Early attempts at social understanding had a greater scientific ones. It was in this period that the very idea
similarity to myths or to poetry than they did to of science first emerged.
science, and many of these attempts were religious or The greatest of the early achievements of the
highly speculative in character. The creation of a dis- Enlightenment were the philosophy of Descartes
tinctively scientific approach to social understanding and the physics of Newton. Writing in the middle
is, in fact, a very recent thing. Only since the seven- decades of the sixteenth century, Descartes set out a
teenth century, and then mainly in Europe, has there view of intellectual enquiry as the attempt to achieve
been anything that could truly be called a science of absolutely certain knowledge of the world, using
society. only the rational and critical faculties of the mind.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 23
From this point of view, science was the attempt with a very general account of the nature of the
to construct theories that could be assessed against distinctive social element in human life, Comte tried
the evidence of the human senses. Observation and to analyse this into its constituent elements. These
direct experience of the world provided the raw were, he said, aspects of the structure of social sys-
materials for scientific work. The rational and critical tems. Both writers identified long-term processes of
faculties of the scientist guided the way that these social change that they described as processes of
were accounted for. In Newton’s physics, this method social development. Spencer, writing later in the
led to the construction of elegant mathematical nineteenth century, carried all these themes forward.
theories that saw the behaviour of physical objects He saw society as a social organism that developed
in relation to their mass, volume, and density, and to over time through a process of social evolution.
the forces of gravity and magnetism.
During the eighteenth century, the scope of sci- Hegel: society as spirit
entific knowledge in physics was enlarged, and the The stimulus behind Georg Hegel’s ideas was the
same scientific method led to advances in chemistry, philosophy of Immanuel Kant, the next great land-
biology, and many other specialist fields. Progress in mark in philosophical thought after Descartes. Kant’s
the construction of a scientific sociology was much central argument was that scientific knowledge was
slower. At first, social life was understood in almost an active and creative production of the human
exclusively individual terms. Those who explored mind. All observations, Kant argued, depended upon
social life tried to explain it as resulting from the the particular ways in which experiences were
behaviour of rational, calculating individuals who interpreted in relation to current cultural concerns.
sought only to increase their own happiness and According to Hegel, the interpretation of experience
satisfaction. They were aware that individuals lived reflects the ‘spirit’ of the culture. This term, taken
in societies, but they saw societies only as collections from Montesquieu (1748), referred to the general
of individuals. They had not grasped what most principles and underlying ideas that lay behind the
people now take for granted: that individuals cannot particular customs and practices of a society. The
be understood in isolation from the social relations spirit of a culture shapes the subjective ideas and
into which they are born and without which their meanings on which individuals act, and so Hegel saw
lives have no meaning. individuals as the mere embodiments of the cultural
In Britain and France, and later in Germany, a more spirit. There was, then, a one-to-one relationship
properly social perspective was gradually developed. between cultural spirit, social institutions, and social
British theorists were particularly concerned with actions. Hegel saw actions and institutions as simply
economic activities and economic relations and the means through which cultural ideas and values
have often been described as taking a materialist were formed into a social reality.
view of social life. For them, the central features of
social life were the struggle over economic resources
frontiers
and the inequalities and social divisions to which
this gave rise. French and German writers, on the Hegel’s ideas are complex and his works are dibcult to read. At
other hand, highlighted the part played by moral this stage, you should not try to track down his books. If you ever
values and ideas, and they have been described as do feel able to tackle him, you should start with his Philosophy
idealist theorists. These theorists saw societies as of Right (Hegel 1821). Do not expect an easy ride!
possessing a cultural spirit that formed the foundation
of their customs and practices.
Hegel saw history as involving a gradual shift
from local to more global social institutions. In the
earliest stages, family and kinship defined the basic
Social development and evolution social pattern. People’s lives were contained within
The first systematic theories of social life were those localized communities that were tied tightly together
of Hegel and Comte. Hegel built on the work of his through bonds of kinship and family obligations.
German predecessors to construct a comprehensive The family spirit prevailed. These communal forms
idealist theory of society and history. Similar con- of social life were followed in Europe and in certain
cerns are apparent in the work of Comte, though he of the great civilizations of the world, by societies in
was a more self-consciously scientific writer who which the division of labour and market relations
owed a great deal to the economic analyses of the tied local communities into larger societies. Hegel
earlier materialists. Where Hegel remained satisfied saw these societies as marked by deep divisions into
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 24
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 25
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 26
The main elements of a society, according to more abstract spiritual forces such as ‘Nature’. Finally,
Comte, are its division of labour, its language, and its the positive stage is one in which these abstractions
religion. It is through their division of labour that give way to scientific observation and the construc-
people organize production and satisfy their mater- tion of empirical laws.
ial needs. Through their language they communicate Comte saw the theological stage as having lasted
with each other and pass on the knowledge and values in Europe until the fourteenth century. This period
that they have learned. Through their religion, they involved a vast range of human societies from the
can achieve a sense of common purpose and of simplest tribal societies to more complex kingdoms.
working towards a common goal. These elements The metaphysical stage lasted from the fourteenth
are all cemented together into the overall social century until about 1800, and Comte saw its devel-
structure. opment as having been closely linked with the rise
The connections between the parts of a social sys- of Protestantism. Societies in the metaphysical stage
tem are studied by identifying their functions. We were militaristic and feudal societies that depended
will come back to this idea later in this chapter. In on a vast agricultural base. The positive stage began
general terms, however, Comte used the term func- early in the nineteenth century and corresponds to
tion to refer to the contribution that particular insti- what Comte called industrial society. This term,
tutions or practices make to the rest of the society, now so taken for granted, was first used by Saint-
the part that they play in reproducing or maintain- Simon and was taken up by Comte to describe the
ing it in existence by contributing to its solidarity type of society that was gradually maturing in the
or coherence. Comte saw a coherent society as a Europe of his day. The term industrial was initially
‘healthy’ society. Those systems that show a high contrasted with earlier ‘militaristic’ types of society,
level of solidarity, consensus, or coherence work and was intended to suggest that social life had
more smoothly and are more likely to persist than become organized around the peaceful pursuit of
those with only a low level of coherence. Coherent economic welfare rather than the preparation for
societies are in a healthy state of balance or equi- war. More specifically, an industrial society is one
librium, with all their parts working well together. organized around the achievement of material well-
In some situations, however, societies, like other being through an expanding division of labour and
organisms, may be in a ‘pathological’ condition of a new technology of production. This kind of society
imminent breakdown or collapse. If their parts are is headed by the entrepreneurs, directors, and man-
not functioning correctly, they will not have the kind agers who are the technical experts of the new indus-
of coherence that they need to survive. trial technology.
The study of social dynamics is concerned with the As it developed, however, industrial society created
flow of energy and information around a social sys- great inequalities of income. The resentment that the
tem and, therefore, with the ways in which societies poor felt towards the wealthy was responsible for a
change their structures in certain ways. Structural pathological state of unrest and social crisis. The only
change is what Comte calls development or progress. long-term solution to this, Comte argued, was for a
The aim of social dynamics is to produce laws of suc- renewed moral regulation of society through the
cession that specify the various stages of development establishment of a new, rational system of religion
through which a particular social system is expected and education. This would establish the moral con-
to move. sensus that would encourage people to accept the
Comte saw the emergence of positive science itself inevitable inequalities of industrialism.
as something that could be explained by the most Comte’s political aspirations were unfulfilled, and
important law of succession that sociologists possess. his religion of humanity inspired only small and
This was what he called the law of the three stages. eccentric groups of thinkers. His view of the need for
According to this law, the religious ideas produced a critical and empirical science of society, however,
by the human mind pass through three successive was massively influential and secured the claims
stages, and particular types of social institutions of his sociology to a central place in intellectual dis-
correspond to each of them. These three stages are cussions. His particular view of the development of
the theological, the metaphysical, and the positive. modern industrial society rested on a rather inade-
In the theological stage, people think in exclusively quate historical understanding of pre-modern societ-
supernatural terms, seeing human affairs as resulting ies, but he accurately identified many of its most
from the actions of gods and other supernatural important characteristics. His concept of the indus-
beings. In the metaphysical stage, theological ideas trial society has continued to inform debates about
are abandoned and people begin to think in terms of the future development of modern societies.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 27
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 28
material environment (physical conditions, climate, began to receive any proper recognition as a part of
natural resources) and from other societies. This pro- the same sociological enterprise as the works of Comte
cess of coping with the environment is what Spencer and Spencer.
called functional adaptation. Structural differentiation The inspiration for Marx’s work was the growth
allows societies to become better adapted, and so a of the European labour movement and of socialist
changing environment is associated with an increas- ideas. He tried to tie his philosophical and scientific
ing level of structural differentiation. interests to the needs of this labour movement. Marx
The nineteenth century, according to Spencer, was was trained in the tradition of Hegel’s philosophy,
a period in which industrial societies were beginning studying at Berlin just a few years after Hegel’s death,
to evolve. These societies were well adapted to the but he was also influenced by the British materialist
conditions under which people then lived. They were tradition. He saw the work of writers such as Ferguson
highly differentiated social systems with only a very and Millar as providing the basis for an understand-
loose degree of overall regulation. Individuals had a ing of the power and significance of the labour
great degree of autonomy in an industrial society, and movement, but only if combined with the historical
further evolution depended on the maintenance perspective of Hegel.
of their intellectual, economic, and political free-
doms. Spencer tried to explore what he saw as the Marx’s model of society
balance between individual freedom and collective The central idea in Marx’s early work was alienation.
welfare in industrial societies. Adam Smith had This described the way in which the economic
argued that the economic market operated as a relations under which people work can change their
‘hidden hand’ to ensure that the greatest level of labour from a creative act into a distorted and de-
economic happiness resulted from individually selfish humanized activity. As a result, people do not enjoy
behaviour. Spencer extended this argument and held their work or find satisfaction in it. They treat it as a
that all the structurally differentiated institutions of mere means to ensuring their survival (by providing
contemporary societies could be seen as working, themselves with a wage) and therefore their ability
generally in unintended ways, to produce the greatest to turn up the next week to work once more. In this
collective advantages. There was a natural harmony way, work and its products become separate or ‘alien’
or coherence that resulted only from the rational, things that dominate and oppress people.
self-interested actions of free individuals. Spencer Marx accounted for alienation in terms of property
was, therefore, opposed to state intervention of any relations and the division of labour. The economy,
kind, whether in the sphere of education, health, or he held, was central to the understanding of human
the economy. Individuals had to be left to struggle life. He argued that the existence of private property
for existence with each other. The fittest would sur- divides people into social classes. These are categor-
vive, and this was, he argued, in the best interest of ies of people with a specific position in the divi-
society as a whole. sion of labour, a particular standard of living, and a
distinct way of life. The basic class division was that
between property-owners and propertyless workers.
The existence of classes and of social inequality was
Karl Marx first highlighted by the British materialists, and Marx
We have looked at two writers who were engaged in a saw his own contribution as showing how and why
common intellectual exercise. Despite the differences these classes were inevitably drawn into conflict with
in their views, Comte and Spencer both produced pion- each other. This he did in his later work for Capital.
eering versions of a science of sociology. Karl Marx Classes, he argued, were involved in relations of
too aspired to build a science of society, but he was exploitation. The property-owning class benefits at
very much on the margins of the intellectual world the expense of the propertyless, and this leads the
and he did not describe himself as a sociologist. To classes to struggle over the distribution of economic
the extent that he took any account of the work of resources.
the sociologists, he was critical of it. This failure of Marx saw societies as social systems that could be
Marx to identify himself as a sociologist reflects the divided into two quite distinct parts: the base and
fact that the word was still very new and, for many the superstructure. The economy and class relations
people, it still described only the specific doctrines of comprised what he called the material base or
Comte and Spencer. As we will see in ‘The Classic substructure of society. The base always involves a
Period of Sociology’, pp. XX–XX, it was only in the particular mode of production. By this term, Marx
next generation of social theorists that Marx’s ideas referred to the technical and human resources of
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 29
THEORY
production and the specific property relations and poetry, or engage in sociology. The economic system
division of labour under which they are used. This acquires a compulsive power that shapes all other
economic base is the foundation upon which a social activities because of the priority that has to be
superstructure of political, legal, and customary so- given to meeting basic economic needs.
cial institutions is built. It is also the basis of various
forms of consciousness and knowledge. The ideas that
people form, Marx said, are shaped by the mater- frontiers
ial conditions under which they live. They must be Young Marx and old Marx
regarded as what he called ideologies.
There is some controversy about the relationship between the
There has been much controversy as to how
works of the older, mature Marx of the 1860s and those of the
Marx’s division of the social system into a base and
youthful Marx of the 1840s. For some commentators, the early
a superstructure is to be interpreted. In its most gen-
works on alienation were immature exercises that he later
eral sense, it is simply a claim that only those soci- abandoned. For others, however, exploitation and alienation
eties that are able to ensure their material survival, are closely related ideas. A close reading of Marx’s texts shows
through an ebciently organized system of produc- that there is a great deal of continuity and that the so-called
tion, will be able to sustain any other social activities. Grundrisse (Marx 1858) is a key link between the two phases
People must eat and have adequate clothing and of his work.
shelter before they can stand for parliament, write
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 30
Some of Marx’s followers, along with his critics, Marx often suggests that the evolutionary line in
have claimed, however, that he was setting out a western Europe led from the primitive communism
form of economic determinism that allowed no of the Germanic and Celtic tribes, through the slave-
autonomy at all for politics and culture. According owning systems of ancient Greece and Rome, and on
to this view, political institutions and cultural ideas to the feudal states of the medieval period. Feudal
simply reflect economic divisions and struggles. societies centred on the division between landowners
While Marx did sometimes seem to suggest that the and unfree labourers, who must work for the land-
economy should be seen in this way, he was too lord as well as for themselves. Eastern Europe and the
sophisticated to accept such a deterministic position. Near East followed a similar progression, but passed
Indeed, the claims for his work made by some of his through an ‘Asiatic’ stage instead of a feudal one. It
followers led him to make the famous remark ‘I am is to feudalism that Marx traced the emergence of
not a Marxist’. the capitalist societies to which he gave his greatest
Comte and Spencer saw social systems, in their attention.
normal states, as characterized by harmony and co- The form of society that was emerging in western
hesion. Marx’s view, on the other hand, recognized Europe at the time that Marx was writing was not
conflict and division as normal features of all simply an industrial society (as Comte had argued)
societies. There are divisions not only within the but a specifically capitalist society. Beginning in the
economic base (between classes), but also between towns and commercial centres of the feudal world,
base and superstructure. While a superstructure norm- a class of private property-owners had become the
ally reinforces and supports the economic base, it most important economic force. Since at least the
can frequently come into contradiction with it. By sixteenth century, these capitalists had built plants,
this, Marx meant that the form taken by the super- workshops, and factories in which they employed
structure obstructs the further development of the large numbers of workers. Capitalist entrepreneurs
mode of production. If production is to expand any generated profits for themselves through a system
further, the superstructure must be transformed to re- of market exchange and the employment of wage
establish a closer correspondence with the economic labour. Marx held that these capitalists eventually
base. became the ruling classes of their societies. They
displaced the old feudal landowners, often through
Historical materialism violent revolutions such as that in France from 1789
Social systems develop over time as a result of the to 1799. They were responsible for the alienation,
contradictions that develop within their economies. exploitation, and oppression of the workers who
Marx’s materialism, then, was a specifically histor- actually produced the goods that provided them with
ical materialism, the name by which Marxism is their profits.
often known. Historical materialism is a theory of As capitalist societies developed, Marx argued,
the transition from one mode of production to exploitation grew and their superstructures no longer
another. encouraged economic growth. If production was to
Marx distinguished a number of modes of produc- continue to expand, property relations and the whole
tion that he used to chart the sequences of historical superstructure had to be swept away in a revolu-
development that resulted from increases in the tion. This time, however, it would be a revolution
level and scale of production. The simplest, least- of the workers, who would displace the capitalist
developed forms of society were those in which the ruling class. Workers, Marx held, would become
mode of production could be described as primitive conscious of their alienation and of the need to
communism. In this type of society, property is owned change the conditions that produced it. They would
by the community as a whole, and the community join together in radical political parties and, in
itself is organized around bonds of kinship. due course, would overthrow the capitalist system.
Marx argued that, as technology develops and A workers’ revolution, Marx rather optimistically
production expands, so the property relations must thought, would abolish alienation, exploitation, and
change. If they do not, societies will not be able to oppression, and it would establish a new and more
continue to expand their powers of production. Out advanced form of communist production.
of the simple form of primitive communism, then,
systems with private property and more complex A theory of knowledge
divisions of labour evolve. In these societies, there Marx derived a distinct philosophical position from
are distinct political institutions and, in many cases, his social theory. He accepted that the natural sci-
centralized states. ences might produce absolute and certain knowledge
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 31
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 32
• The idea of a science of society was a product of the • Spencer saw social development as a process of
European Enlightenment of the seventeenth and structural differentiation, shaped by functional
eighteenth centuries. adaptation.
• Only gradually was an understanding of the dis- While Marx also saw societies as systems that
tinctively social features of human life separated could be studied in terms of their structures and
from an understanding of individuals. development over time, he placed more emphasis
• Social thought is diverse, each theoretical frame- on the part played by conflict and struggle in social
work emphasizing particular aspects of social life. development.
We looked at the way in which early social thought
• Marx saw economic activity as fundamental to
tended to follow distinct materialist and idealist
social life. Work, property, and the division of
traditions.
labour form the economic base of society, its mode
The pioneering statements of a specifically soci- of production.
ological approach are found in the works of Comte • Work and property ownership are the basis of class
and Spencer. An alternative approach, that of Marx, divisions that result in the alienation and exploita-
broadened out this emerging form of social thought. tion of labour.
Comte established the idea of sociology as a positive
• Social development has followed a sequence of
science that explained empirical observations through
modes of production from primitive communism
causal laws.
through feudalism to contemporary capitalist
• Both Comte and Spencer used a distinction societies.
between social statics and social dynamics. Social • Political and legal institutions, together with cul-
statics is concerned with the structure and func- tural values and ideologies form the superstructure
tioning of social systems. Social dynamics is con- of society and are shaped by the economic base.
cerned with their development over time. • Revolutionary change, resulting from class conflict,
• The contrast between contemporary industrial soci- will transform the base and the superstructure of
eties and earlier militaristic societies was important capitalist society and will introduce a new system
for both Comte and Spencer. of communist production.
The period from the 1880s to the 1920s was one simply as a theoretical framework but as the basis for
in which sociology began to be established as a the political programme of the labour movement.
scientific discipline in the universities of Europe and The country in which Marxism had the greatest
North America. Increasing numbers of professors impact was Russia, where the revolution of 1917 led
began to call themselves sociologists or to take soci- to the dominance of the Communist Party and the
ological ideas seriously. Both Spencer and Marx had enshrinement of Marxism as the obcial ideology of
their heirs and followers. In Britain, Spencer’s ideas the Soviet Union. The political content of Marxism
were developed in a more flexible way by Leonard limited its influence in academic sociology. While
Hobhouse, the first person to hold a sociology pro- there was some attempt to grapple with his ideas—
fessorship in a British university. In the United States, especially in Germany—Marxism was a neglected
William Sumner developed versions of Spencer’s tradition of thought until the 1960s.
ideas that had a considerable influence, and Lester Sociology thrived most strongly in France and
Ward developed a sociology that owed rather more to Germany, where a number of important theorists
Comte. began to construct more disciplined and focused
Marx’s ideas were taken up in the leading Com- theoretical frameworks that could be used in detailed
munist parties of Europe and, even before his death, empirical investigations. In France, there was the
they began to be codified into ‘Marxism’. Those who work of Le Play, Tarde, and, above all, Durkheim.
regarded themselves as Marxists shared his identi- In Germany, the leading theorists were Tönnies,
fication with the proletariat. Marxism was seen not Simmel, and Weber. In terms of their impact on the
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 33
Émile
Durkheim
Émile Durkheim
Émile Durkheim saw one of his principal academic
. . . saw sociology as
tasks as the construction of a philosophical basis for the study of social
a science of sociology. He wanted to show that soci- facts.
ology could be a rigorous scientific discipline that was
worthy of a place in the university system. An under-
standing of Durkheim’s thought, then, must begin
with this philosophy of science and his attempt to
produce a distinctive view of the nature of sociology.
The nature of social facts Émile Durkheim (1858–1917) was born in Épinal, France.
According to Durkheim, the subject matter of soci- He studied social and political philosophy at the École
ology is a distinctive set of social facts. These are not Normale Supérieure in Paris, reading deeply into the works
just any facts that happen to concern people’s lives of Montesquieu and Rousseau. He studied for a year in
in societies. They are quite specific phenomena that Germany. He taught educational theory at Bordeaux from
can be sharply distinguished from the facts studied 1887 to 1902, after which he moved to a professorship at
by other scientists. They are, in particular, distinct the Sorbonne in Paris. He made a close, but critical study
from the facts of individual consciousness studied by of the work of Comte, and he produced a number of
psychology and the organic facts of individual bodies exemplary sociological studies. In 1913, only 4 years
studied by biology. They are the things that define before his death, he was allowed to call himself Professor
the specific intellectual concerns of sociology. of Sociology.
Durkheim characterizes social facts as ways of Durkheim’s key works appeared regularly and became
acting, thinking, or feeling that are collective, rather the basis of a distinctive school of sociology. His major
than individual, in origin. Social facts have a reality writings were The Division of Labour in Society (1893),
sui generis. This is a Latin phrase that Durkheim uses The Rules of the Sociological Method (1895), Suicide: A
to mean ‘of its own type’ or ‘distinctive to itself’. Study in Sociology (1897), and The Elementary Forms of the
Because this was a dibcult idea for others to under- Religious Life (1912). He founded a journal that became a
stand—and it is still not completely understood by focus for his work. One of his principal followers was his
many critics of sociology—he set out his views at nephew, Marcel Mauss, who produced some important
some length. work (Durkheim and Mauss 1903; Mauss 1925).
Durkheim gives as an example of a social fact what You will find more detailed discussions of Durkheim’s
later writers would call a role. There are, he says, cer- principal ideas in various parts of this book:
tain established ways of acting, thinking, or feeling
as a brother, a husband, a citizen, and so on. They religion Chapter 11
are, in the most general sense, expected, required, or education Chapter 9
imposed ways of acting, thinking, or feeling for those anomie and the division of labour Chapter 15
who occupy these positions. They are conventional The texts by Giddens (1971) and Craib (1997) give
ways of behaving that are expected by others and useful discussions of Durkheim. More detail and a
that are established in custom and law. biographical account can be found in Lukes (1973).
Social facts are collective ways of acting, thinking, A good brief introduction is K. Thompson (1982).
or feeling. They are not unique to particular indi-
viduals, but originate outside the consciousness of
the individuals who act, think, or feel in this way.
They most often involve a sense of obligation. and these expectations become part of our own
Even when people feel that they are acting through personality.
choice or free will, they are likely to be following a Social facts, then, are external to the individual.
pattern that is more general in their society and that They do not, of course, actually exist outside indi-
they have acquired through learning and training. vidual minds, but they do originate outside the mind
We learn what is expected of us quite early in life, of any particular individual. They are not created
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 34
anew as each individual chooses what to do. They have to be discovered indirectly. By observing the
are passed from generation to generation and are actions of large numbers of people who act in similar
received by particular individuals in a more or less ways, for example, we may be able to infer the exist-
complete form. Individuals are, of course, able to ence of the role of husband. By observing a large
influence them and contribute to their development, number of conversations, we may be able to infer the
but they do so only in association with other indi- existence of particular rules of grammar.
viduals. It is in this sense that social facts are the In some cases, however, social facts may appear
collective products of a society as a whole or of to be more visible. They may, for example, be codi-
particular social groups. fied in laws, summarized in proverbs, set down in
Because they are matters of expectation, obliga- religious texts, or laid down in books of grammar.
tion, or deep commitment, social facts also have a Durkheim makes clear, however, that these laws,
‘compelling and coercive power’, which Durkheim proverbs, texts, and books are not themselves the
summarizes by the term constraint. This constraint social facts. Social facts are mental, not physical, and
may be expressed in punishment, disapproval, rejec- what we have are simply the attempts that indi-
tion, or simply the failure of an action to achieve viduals have made to bring these social facts to con-
its goal. Thus, someone who breaks the law by sciousness and to make them explicit. These explicit
killing another person is likely to face arrest, trial, formulations can, nevertheless, be useful sources of
and imprisonment or execution. On the other hand, evidence about social facts and can be employed
someone who misuses language is simply likely to alongside the direct observation of actions in any
be misunderstood. Durkheim remarks, for example, investigation into social facts.
that he is not forced to speak French, nor is he
punished if he does not, but he will be understood Studying social facts
by his compatriots only if he does in fact use the rules Durkheim’s approach to the study of social facts
and conventions of French vocabulary and grammar. owes a great deal to Comte’s positivism. It was set out
Durkheim emphasizes that social facts are very as a set of rules or principles that Durkheim thought
dibcult to observe. Indeed, they are often observable should guide the scientific sociologist. The first of
only through their effects. We cannot, for example, these directly reflected Comte’s contrast between
observe the role of husband, but only particular metaphysical thought and positive science, though
individuals acting as husbands. Similarly, we cannot Durkheim cast it in a more convincing form. The first
observe the grammar of a language, but only the rule simply says ‘consider social facts as things’.
speech of particular individuals. Social facts are, in What Durkheim meant by this was that it was
general, invisible and intangible and their properties necessary to abandon all preconceived ideas and to
study things as they really are. He held that all sci-
ences must do this if they are to be objective and of
BRIEFING any practical value. The transformation of alchemy
into chemistry and of astrology into astronomy
Social facts occurred because the practitioners of the new sci-
ences abandoned the common-sense preconceptions
Social facts ‘consist of manners of acting, thinking and that they relied on in their everyday lives. Instead,
feeling external to the individual, which are vested with they made direct observations of natural phenomena
a coercive power by virtue of which they exercise control and constructed theories that could explain them.
over him’ (Durkheim 1895: 52). Social facts are Sociology, Durkheim argued, must move in the same
characterized by direction. It must treat its objects—social facts—as
• externality ‘things’.
Our natural, everyday attitudes towards social
• constraint.
facts tend to be shaped by religious and political pre-
Some social facts are institutions. These are beliefs conceptions and by personal prejudices. We use a
and modes of behaviour that are long established in whole range of everyday concepts such as the state,
a society or social group. Others are collective the family, work, crime, and so on, and we tend to
representations: shared ways of thinking about a group assume (with little or no evidence) that these are
and its relations to the things that affect it. Examples universal features of human life. We assume, for
of collective representations are myths, legends, and example, that all families in all societies are more
religious ideas. or less the same as the families that we are familiar
with in our own social circle. Such ideas, as Marx
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 35
recognized, are ideological. They reflect our particu- Durkheim’s approach to the study of social facts
lar social position. While Marx simply accepted that makes a distinction between two complementary
all thought was ideological, Durkheim saw a funda- aspects of sociological explanation. These are causal
mental distinction between ideology and science. explanation and functional analysis. Of the two,
Those who adopt the scientific attitude, he said, must causal explanation is the more fundamental. In a
abandon all the accepted ideas of their social group causal explanation, the origins of a social fact are
and attempt to construct new concepts that directly accounted for in relation to the other social facts that
grasp the real nature of things. Preconceived ideas brought it into being. The punishment attached to a
come from outside science; scientific concepts are crime, for example, may express an intense collective
generated from within scientific practice itself. sentiment of disapproval. The collective sentiment,
Durkheim’s claim that we need to study things, then, is the cause of the punishment. If the sentiment
rather than rely on preconceptions, is, perhaps, too did not exist, the punishment would not occur.
simple. While he correctly identified the need to
avoid the prejudice and distortion that often results Showing causal relationships is not quite as
from preconceived ideas, he was mistaken in his straightforward as Durkheim implies. The fact that variations
belief that it was possible to observe things independ- in A are followed by variations in B may not indicate that B is
ently of all concepts. Marx’s philosophy, for all its caused by A. The variations could indicate that both A and B
problems, recognized that the things that exist in the are caused by some other, as yet unknown, third factor. We
world can be known only through concepts. As we look at this problem in Chapter 16, pp. XXX–X, where we
will see, Max Weber, too, recognized this and pro- consider it in relation to occupational achievement.
duced a rather better account of scientific knowledge
than did Durkheim. Functional analysis is concerned with the effects of
Nevertheless, the core of what Durkheim was a social fact, not with its causes. It involves looking at
trying to establish remains as a valuable insight. He the part that a social fact plays in relation to the needs
stressed that, if sociology is to be a science, it must of a society or social group. The term ‘need’ refers
engage in research that collects evidence through the simply to those things that must be done if a soci-
direct observation of social facts. This must be done ety is to survive. More generally, the function of
through the adoption of an attitude of mind that is something is the part that it plays in relation to the
as open as possible to the evidence of the senses. We adaptation of a society to changing circumstances.
cannot substitute prejudice and ideology for scientific The nature of functional analysis is shown in
knowledge. Figure 2.1. This model simplifies Durkheim’s account
Figure 2.1
Functional analysis
reduce
high
low
increase
This model is based on Durkheim’s account of suicide, which we discuss on pp. X–X below, and the view of social solidarity that we set out on
pp. XX–XX. You might find it useful to come back to this diagram after you have read our account of social differentiation and social solidarity.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 36
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 37
Far more attention has been given to Durkheim’s individual actions are not properly regulated by
functional analysis of the division of labour. In this shared norms. Durkheim saw anomie and egoism
part of the book, he looks at the consequences that as responsible for the economic crises, extremes of
the division of labour has for the wider society. In a social inequality, and class conflict of his day. As we
division of labour, he argues, people’s actions are show below, he also saw them as responsible for high
complementary and interdependent. The division rates of suicide. All of these problems, he held, would
of labour creates not simply exchange relationships be reduced when the division of labour was properly
in a market system, but a feeling of solidarity that established and organic solidarity instituted in its
becomes an essential factor in the integration of the normal form.
society as a whole.
Social solidarity consists of the integration of indi- Suicide and social solidarity
viduals into social groups and their regulation by Durkheim’s best-known book is his study of suicide
shared norms. As a social fact, solidarity cannot be (Durkheim 1897). His aim in this book was not only
observed directly, but only through its external indi- to provide an account of suicide but also to illustrate
cators. Durkheim argued that the most important how his methodology could be applied to even the
external indicator of social solidarity is the system of most individual of acts. The book was intended to
law. In societies with an extensive division of labour, serve as a model of sociological explanation.
he argued, the law tends to be restitutive rather than Durkheim demonstrated that the taking of one’s
repressive. Legal procedures attempt to restore things own life, apparently the most individual and per-
to the way that they were before a crime occurred. sonal of acts, was socially patterned. He showed that
Punishment for its own sake is less important. This, social forces existing outside of the individual shaped
Durkheim says, indicates a sense of solidarity that the likelihood that a person would commit suicide.
is tied to cooperation and reciprocity. Durkheim Suicide rates were therefore social facts. He demon-
calls this organic solidarity. People are tied together strated this by showing how suicide rates varied from
through relations of trust and reciprocity that cor- one group to another and from one social situation
respond to their economic interdependence, and each to another. Some of the main variations that he
sphere of activity is regulated through specific types identified were as follows:
of norms.
The organized, organic solidarity that is produced • Religion. Protestants were more likely to commit
by the division of labour is contrasted with the suicide than Catholics. The suicide rate was much
mechanical solidarity of traditional, communal higher in Protestant than Catholic countries.
societies. In these undifferentiated societies that Similar differences could also be found between
are characteristic of the pre-modern, pre-industrial Protestant and Catholic areas within the same
world, social solidarity revolves around a sense of country.
similarity and a consciousness of unity and com- • Family relationships. Those who were married were
munity. Conformity in such a society is maintained less likely to commit suicide than those who were
through the repressive force of a strong system of single, widowed, or divorced. Whether people had
shared beliefs. children or not was also very important. Indeed,
Organic solidarity is a normal or integral feature of the suicide rate for married women was lower than
modern society, but it may fail to develop in some. In that for single women only if they had children.
the early stages of the transition from pre-industrial
to industrial society, Durkheim argued, there is a par- • War and peace. The suicide rate dropped in time
ticular danger that abnormal forms of the division of of war, not only in victorious but also in defeated
labour will develop. The normal condition of organic countries. Thus, Germany defeated France in
solidarity encourages a high level of individual free- the war of 1870 but the suicide rate fell in both
dom, controlling this through the normative systems countries.
that Durkheim called moral individualism. The • Economic crisis. Suicide rates rose at times of eco-
abnormal forms of the division of labour, however, nomic crisis. It might be expected that a recession
lack this moral framework, and individual actions are that caused bankruptcies, unemployment, and
left uncontrolled. The two abnormal situations that increasing poverty would send up the suicide rate.
he describes are egoism and anomie. Suicide rates also rose, however, when economies
Egoism is that situation where individuals are not boomed. It was not worsening economic con-
properly integrated into the social groups of which ditions but sudden changes in them that caused
they are members. Anomie is the situation where suicide rates to rise.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 38
This demonstration of systematic variations in the on collective rituals and emphasizes the individual’s
suicide rate showed that suicide cannot be explained direct relationship with god. Those who are single or
solely in terms of the psychology of the individual. widowed or childless are also weakly integrated and
Even the taking of one’s own life is socially organ- therefore more prone to suicide. War, on the other
ized behaviour and therefore requires sociological hand, tends to integrate people into society and
explanation. therefore reduces the suicide rate. This form of sui-
In order to provide an explanation, Durkheim put cide was called egoistic because low integration leads
forward a sociological theory of suicide that would to the isolation of the individual, who becomes
account for these variations. Durkheim’s theory of excessively focused on the self or ego.
suicide was based on the idea that it was the degree Anomic suicide results from the lack of regulation
of social solidarity that explained variations in that Durkheim described as anomie. Durkheim be-
suicide rates. If a person is only loosely connected lieved that people would only be content if their
into a society or social group, he or she is more likely needs and passions were regulated and controlled, for
to commit suicide. If their level of solidarity is too this would keep their desires and their circumstances
strong, then this, too, could lead to a higher suicide in balance with each other. Changes in their situ-
rate. ation, such as those brought about by economic
His theory went further than this, however, for change or divorce, could upset this balance. In these
he distinguished between two aspects of social con- circumstances, the normal regulation of a person’s
nection, which he called integration and regulation. life breaks down and they find themselves in a state
Integration refers to the strength of the individual’s of anomie. This word means normlessness, lacking
attachment to social groups. Regulation refers to any regulation by shared norms.
the control of individual desires and aspirations by Altruistic suicide is the opposite of egoistic suicide.
group norms or rules of behaviour. This distinction In this case, it is not that social bonds are too
led him to identify four types of suicide, which cor- weak but, rather, that they are too strong. People
responded to low and high states of integration and set little value on themselves as individuals, or they
regulation: obediently sacrifice themselves to the requirements
of the group. Durkheim saw this form of suicide as
• egoistic suicide;
characteristic of primitive societies, though it was
• anomic suicide; also found among the military, where there is a
• altruistic suicide; strong emphasis on the importance of loyalty to
the group. He used the term altruistic to convey the
• fatalistic suicide.
idea that the individual self is totally subordinated
Egoistic suicide results from the weak integration of to others.
the individual that we have shown he described as Fatalistic suicide is the opposite of anomic suicide
‘egoism’. The higher suicide rate of Protestants is and results from an excessively high regulation that
one example of it. Protestantism is a less integrative oppresses the individual. Durkheim gives as an
religion than Catholicism, for it places less emphasis example the suicide of slaves, but he considered this
Figure 2.2
Durkheim’s typology of suicide
Egositic Low Lack of integration Apathy, depression Suicides of protestants and single people
Anomic Low Lack of regulation Irritation, frustration Suicides during economic crisis
Altruistic High Excessive integration Energy and passion Suicides in primitive societies; military suicides
Fatalistic High Excessive regulation Acceptance and resignation The suicide of slaves
There has been much discussion in the media about the motives of Palestinian suicide bombers. How do you think that Durkheim would
classify these suicides?
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 39
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 40
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 41
The final plank in Weber’s scientific method is Action is instrumentally rational when people adopt
the ideal type. The principal concepts used by social purely technical means for the attainment of their
scientists are constructions for specific scientific pur- goals. The action involves a clear goal or purpose,
poses. They are logical, ideal constructions from one- and means are chosen as the best or most ebcient
sided, value-relevant standpoints. From our particular ways of achieving it. The capitalist entrepreneur
perspective, we pull together those aspects of reality calculates the most ebcient and economic means
that are of interest to us and forge them into an ideal- for attaining the maximum profit from a particular
ized model. They can, therefore, be seen as idealiza- line of business. The party leader calculates the
tions in the sense that they do not actually exist in particular combination of policy proposals that will
reality. These are ‘ideal’ because they are analytical or maximize the party’s vote in forthcoming elections.
conceptual, not because they are desirable or perfect. Weber argues that much of the economic, political,
Ideal types are conceptual models that help us to and scientific action that involves rational choice
understand the real world. Such ideal types as cap- and decision-making approximates to this type of
italism, the nation state, and bureaucracy are not action.
themselves realities. They are analytical devices that Value-rational action, on the other hand, is action
are constructed by social scientists in order to under- that is rational in relation to some irrational or
stand the more complex reality that actually exists. arbitrarily chosen value. The religious believer who
This is also true, in many respects, for the natural prays and gives alms to the poor may be acting in a
sciences. The concept of H2O, for example, is an ideal- value-rational way. He or she is acting this way for its
ization that does not exist in reality. Actual samples own sake and as an absolute duty, and no account at
of water contain impurities and additives of all kinds, all is taken of instrumental considerations. In this
and it is only under highly artificial, laboratory con- type of action, there is no discrete or easily observable
ditions that it is possible to isolate pure H2O. In the goal, even if a believer hopes that his or her actions
social sciences, laboratory experimentation is not might lead to salvation. In the case of value-rational
usually possible and so sociologists are never likely to action, there is no suggestion that actions are tech-
observe things that correspond precisely to their nically appropriate in cause–effect terms. They are,
ideal types. Class and gender relations, for example, however, rational in the methods that they adopt for
only ever exist in combination and alongside many expressing particular values.
other factors. Traditional action is that kind of action that is
unreflective and habitual. It barely involves any
Understanding social actions degree of rationality at all. Traditional action is car-
The most important ideal types for sociology are, ried out as a matter of routine, with little or no con-
according to Weber, types of social action. The more scious deliberation. People simply act in the way that
complex ideal types are nothing more than intricate they always have done in that situation in the past.
patterns of action, so a typology of action can pro- Many everyday actions have this traditional, habitual
vide the building blocks for sociological investiga- character. Finally, affectual action is that which dir-
tions. Weber’s emphasis on action marks another ectly expresses an emotion, taking no account of its
area where he differs from Durkheim. Social struc- connection to any specific goals or values. Angry
tures are not seen as external to or independent of outbursts of violence, for example, would be seen as
individuals. All social structures must be seen as affectual in nature.
complex, interweaving patterns of action. They have Because these four types of action are ideal types,
a reality as social facts only when individuals define they do not exist in reality. All concrete patterns of
them as things with a separate existence. Sociologists action are likely to be interpretable in terms of more
can describe political activity in terms of the concept than one type. For example, the actions of a manager
of the state only if particular forms of administration in a large business enterprise faced with the need to
and decision-making have already been reified— set a wage level for its employees may involve aspects
defined as things—by the people involved in them. of all four types of action. The manager may instru-
Weber identified four ideal types of action as the mentally calculate the financial consequences of dif-
fundamental building blocks for sociology: ferent rates of pay, but may also rule out extremely
low pay and certain forms of coercion as contrary to
• instrumentally rational action;
his or her values. The manager may also respond
• value-rational action;
unreflectively to the wage negotiations, seeing them
• traditional action; in the way that he or she has done in the past, and
• affectual action. making knee-jerk reactions to trade-union proposals.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 42
Finally, a breakdown of negotiations may involve people’s actions were oriented to absolute religious
angry recriminations as one side or the other walks and political values, while in modern societies they
away from the bargaining table and storms out into engage in a rational calculation of the likely effects
the street. of different courses of action. Political authority in
In order to decide how closely a particular course modern society, for example, is based on formal,
of action corresponds to these and other ideal types, legal procedures, rather than ultimate religious values
it is necessary to use a technique that Weber sees as such as the divine right of kings.
central to sociology. This is the technique of under- In medieval societies, furthermore, a great deal
standing (Verstehen in German). The aim of a social of everyday action was not rational at all. It was
science, says Weber, is to use ideal types as a way of traditional in character. Indeed, tradition itself was
understanding the meanings that people give to their treated as an absolute value in many situations. In
actions. These meanings include their intentions modern societies, on the other hand, more and more
and motives, their expectations about the behaviour areas of social life have been opened up to rational,
of others, and their perceptions of the situations in reflective considerations. Thus, economic actions
which they find themselves. Sociologists must infer have come to be based on market calculations and
these meanings from their observations of people’s contractual relations, rather than on fixed ways of
actions, thereby aiming at an interpretative under- living rooted in traditional styles of life.
standing of them. This involves empathizing with Much everyday action in modern societies, of
those that they study, though it does not mean course, remains traditional in character. It continues
sympathizing with them. unreflectively and in routine ways with little direct
We may not approve of serial murder, for example, concern for immediate ends or ultimate values.
but we can hope to explain it only if we get close Traditional forms of action may even acquire a new
enough to serial murderers to begin to see the world importance in modern societies. This is clear from
as they see it. We must exercise empathy by trying to Weber’s consideration of contemporary economic
identify with them up to the point at which we can actions. He holds that religious values motivated the
comprehend why they acted as they did. We do not, actions of those who became the first generations
however, sympathize with them or condone their of calculating capitalist entrepreneurs, but later gen-
actions. To go beyond empathy to sympathy is to erations of individuals were more likely to continue
make the same mistake as those who go beyond with their business activities simply because they
factual judgements to value judgements. had become a matter of routine. As they become
mere cogs in huge bureaucratic machines, their work
Traditionalism and rationality becomes a ‘dull compulsion’ about which they have
Weber’s philosophy of science led him to reject no real choice. Ultimately they may remain free, but
deterministic systems of explanation. The causal in practice they are constrained.
explanations that sociologists produce must always
be rooted in an interpretative understanding of
You will understand more about Weber’s views on rational
the subjective meanings that individuals give to
economic action when you have read our discussion of The
their actions. Any study of social development Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism in Chapter 11,
must recognize the part played by individual action, pp. XXX–X. You may like to read that discussion now.
and Weber stressed that individuals have free will.
Individuals have the power to act freely and not
simply as the occupants of class positions or social
roles. The future is open and undetermined, it cannot
be predicted. The explanations of modern industrial Summary points
capitalism and the predictions of its future given
In this section we have looked at the two leading
by Marx and Durkheim would be unacceptable to
figures of the classical period of sociology, Durkheim
Weber.
and Weber. Durkheim was the principal French soci-
The transition from feudal, pre-industrial societies
ologist and founder of an approach that emphasized
to modern industrial capitalism is seen by Weber
social structures as the fundamental social facts.
in terms of a shift in the typical meanings that
He set this out in an account of the basic principles of
individuals give to their actions. Europe, he argued,
sociology.
had undergone a process of rationalization. This
involves a shift from value-rational actions to instru- • Social facts are ways of acting, thinking, or feeling
mentally rational actions. In medieval societies, that are both external and constraining. They are
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 43
collective products, and individuals experience Weber, as one of a number of important German
them as coercive or obligatory. sociologists, tried to build a sociology of social action
• Social facts are to be studied as things, through that was sensitive to the meanings and motives that
observation rather than on the basis of prejudice shaped people’s behaviour.
and preconception. Although they cannot always • Social reality can only ever be studied through the
be observed directly, social facts can be observed use of concepts that reflect cultural values. Know-
indirectly through their effects on individual ledge of social reality is objective only if it results
actions. from the rational and critical use of these concepts
• Even such an individual act as taking one’s own in a scientifically disciplined way.
life is socially patterned and can be explained • While all concepts are value relevant, Weber
sociologically. emphasizes the need to distinguish clearly factual
• Durkheim recognized two aspects of sociological judgements from value judgements.
explanation: causal explanation and functional • Sociological concepts are ideal types and do not
analysis. In causal explanation, social facts are correspond to things that actually exist in reality.
accounted for in terms of the other social facts that They grasp particular aspects of reality.
brought them into being. In functional analysis, • Ideal types of social action are the basic building
social facts are examined in relation to the part that blocks of sociological analysis. Weber identifies
they play in relation to the survival or adaptation instrumentally rational action, value-rational
of other social facts. action, traditional action, and affectual action.
Durkheim applied this sociological approach in • Actions are structured through a process of under-
a number of substantive studies of the division of standing that involves empathizing with those
labour, suicide, education, and religion. We discuss who are studied.
a number of these studies in other chapters. These Weber rejected all forms of structural determinism,
were seen as aspects of a general account of social emphasizing the open-ended character of social life.
development. He did, however, undertake a number of studies of
• Social development is a process of social differ- social development, including the important study
entiation in which the forms of solidarity change. of religion that we look at in Chapter 11.
• Social solidarity comprises the integration of indi- • Western societies had experienced a process
viduals into social groups and their regulation by of rationalization. This was a growth in the
shared norms. Durkheim contrasted the mech- significance of rational motivations and a shift
anical solidarity of traditional societies with the from value-rational to instrumentally rational
organic solidarity of modern societies. considerations.
• One of the central problems of contemporary soci- • In modern, capitalist societies, market calculation
ety was the pathological state of individualism and contractual relations have achieved a central
that Durkheim described as involving egoism and significance.
anomie. Egoism and anomie are associated with • Although capitalist economic actions originated in
particular psychological conditions and rates of religiously motivated actions, they had come to be
suicide. a mere matter of routine and dull compulsion.
In the hands of Durkheim, Weber, and their contem- in schools—a sociological perspective had been
poraries, sociology finally became, by the first decade established in the study of history, law, politics,
of the twentieth century, established as a legitimate education, religion, and many other areas of special-
science with a place in the system of university teach- ization. Figure 2.3 summarizes the origins of their
ing and research. Although there were still few pro- ideas and the main lines of development in sociology
fessors of sociology—and sociology was barely taught into the first half of the twentieth century.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 44
Figure 2.3
The development of sociology up to the 1940s
There were, of course, great differences in the from completion (but see Giddens 1976). The point
theoretical positions that were put forward by those is that sociologists need to develop a theoretical
who called themselves ‘sociologists’. Durkheim and understanding of both the structural aspects of
his followers stressed the importance of structure social life and their shaping by social actions.
in social life, seeing societies as systems of struc- Distinct theoretical traditions may continue to exist,
tured relationships. The German sociologists, such as but they must cooperate in studies of particular
Weber, tended to emphasize action as the central phenomena.
concept, showing that all social structures were, In the generation that followed Durkheim and
ultimately, to be explained as the outcome of human Weber, their leading ideas were consolidated and
actions. further developed, though there were no major
These positions must not be seen as stark altern- advances for some time. The mainstream of academic
atives to one another. In the early days of academic sociology in Europe and America owed most to the
sociology it was easy for Durkheim and Weber ideas of Durkheim. Sociology and intellectual life
each to believe that his particular theory was generally were suppressed in Germany during the
uniquely appropriate for the study of social life. 1930s and 1940s, and this limited the wider impact of
Indeed, some writers today still suggest that there is a the ideas of Weber and his contemporaries.
great gulf between structure and action perspectives In Britain and the United States, Durkheim’s
and that only one of them can be correct. As soon ideas were welded into a theoretical framework that
as one tries to do any sociological work, however, came to be described as ‘structural functionalism’, or
it becomes clear that the two approaches are simply as ‘functionalism’. Much of this theoretical
complementary. work was undertaken in the study of small-scale,
Durkheim and Weber were emphasizing differ- tribal societies of the kind that Durkheim had studied
ent aspects of a highly complex reality. Social life for his own investigations into religion (1912), and
involves both structure and action. Some sociologists many functionalists called themselves anthropo-
have tried to combine both aspects in the same logists rather than sociologists.
theory, but these attempts have not been particularly Much of the sociological research that was under-
successful. There may one day be a single, all- taken in the first thirty years or so of the twentieth
encompassing theory, but it is probably a long way century ignored theoretical issues. Work by Booth,
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 45
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 46
THEORY
Weber, he recognized that all observations were
dependent on concepts. But it was also realist in that,
like Durkheim, he saw these observations telling us
Talcott Parsons something about what the world was actually like
Talcott Parsons (1902–79) was the son of a clergyman. (Scott 1995). He argued that we must use concepts to
He studied economics at Amherst, and then undertook make observations, but we must check our observa-
postgraduate research at the London School of Economics tions against evidence.
and at Heidelberg. He taught economics from 1926 to
1931, when he switched to sociology at Harvard University.
frontiers
His early works were concerned with the relationship
between economics and sociology, as this had been seen by Philosophy and sociology
Weber, Pareto, and the British economist Alfred Marshall.
If you are interested in these philosophical issues, you
Under the influence of the biologist L.J. Henderson, Parsons
should look back at our discussion of Durkheim on social
began to take Durkheim’s work more seriously and in facts and Weber on value relevance before continuing.
1937 he produced his first book, The Structure of Social We do not intend to go very far into these issues. You may
Action. Parsons remained at Harvard throughout his prefer to look further at them when you have studied more
academic career. sociology. Once you have tackled a few substantive topics,
Parsons has a reputation for his impenetrable prose you may find it easier to struggle with some philosophy!
style and the large number of new, long words that he For those who do want to read further, some good
invented. His work is certainly dibcult. Do try to read discussions are Keat and Urry (1975) and Williams
Parsons’s work, but do not expect to understand it all at and May (1996).
a first reading.
After his first book, his most important works were the
massive Social System (1951), a book on the family
The particular concepts needed in sociology,
(Parsons and Bales 1956), one on the economy (Parsons
Parsons said, comprise an action frame of reference.
and Smelser 1956), and two shorter volumes on social
This is a set of concepts that allow sociologists to
development (Parsons 1966, 1971). Some of his more
talk about social action rather than about physical
accessible work has been reprinted in a collection of essays
events or biological behaviour. This frame of refer-
(Parsons 1954). A valuable and brief introduction to his
ence had begun to emerge in the work of the classical
work is Hamilton (1983).
sociologists. Each started from his own distinctive
You will find more detailed discussions of Parsons’s work
theoretical position, but they had gradually and
in the following chapters:
unconsciously begun to move towards a similar
socialization and social roles Chapter 4 theoretical approach to social life. This approach was
family and kinship Chapter 12 the action frame of reference.
health and illness Chapter 8 According to the action frame of reference, any
social stratification Chapter 17 action involves five basic elements:
The action frame of reference • ends: the goals that these people pursue;
In The Structure of Social Action (Parsons 1937), • means: the resources that are available to achieve
Parsons set out to synthesize the insights of these ends;
Durkheim and Weber. Durkheim, it will be recalled, • conditions: the particular circumstances in which
had stressed the need to consider social facts as things actions are carried out;
and to abandon all theoretical preconceptions. • norms: the standards in relation to which people
Weber, on the other hand, said that observation choose their ends and means.
was impossible without concepts and that all con-
cepts were value-relevant. Parsons would not go Parsons holds that sociologists must construct
along with either of these positions, though he models of action using these elements. To do this,
recognized that each writer had glimpsed a part of they must try to understand things and events as
the truth. they appear to the actors involved. The various ideal
Parsons called his synthesis of the two positions types and general concepts that are used in sociolo-
analytical realism. It was analytical in that, like gical explanations, according to Parsons, must be
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 47
Social structure
Structural functionalists see the structure of a soci- the institutions of kinship and marriage regulate
ety as a normative framework. It consists of the a range of family roles, and the institutions of
norms that define the expectations and obligations bureaucratic administration and democratic leader-
that govern people’s actions and so shape their social ship regulate political roles. Structural functional-
relations. At the heart of this normative framework ists recognize a tendency for positions, roles, and
are definitions of the various social positions that institutions to cluster together into more or less
are linked together into a complex social division of distinct subsystems. A society may, for example,
labour. There may be, for example, family positions consist of an economic system, a political system,
such as husband, wife, and child, economic and pro- an educational system, a system of social stratifica-
fessional positions such as teacher, miller, doctor, tion, and so on. At its most general, then, the struc-
and banker, and such other positions as student, ture of a social system might be described in terms
priest, politician, and so on. of the connections between such subsystems. A
Those who occupy social positions are expected simplified structural functionalist model is shown
to behave in certain ways. These expectations define in Figure 2.4.
the social roles that are attached to the positions. The key to the stability and cohesion of a social struc-
A role is a cluster of normative expectations that ture, argue structural functionalists, is socialization.
set out a script for social actors in particular social In their infancy and childhood, as well as in their
positions. It defines standards of appropriate and later life, individuals learn the norms of their
inappropriate behaviour, telling people what is society. They come to learn what is expected of
‘normal’ or expected behaviour in particular situ- them and of those with whom they are likely to come
ations. A teacher, for example, knows how he or she into contact. They learn, in short, how to be an
ought to behave in relation to pupils, parents, head acceptable member of their society. The cultural val-
teachers, governors, and others who play their parts ues and social norms that people learn are, according
in the same school and in the wider educational to many structural functionalists, widely shared in
system (Merton 1957; Gross et al. 1958). the society. That is to say, they assume the existence
Many norms are quite specific and concern just of a social consensus, an agreement over the basic
one role. Others, however, may be very general in principles that will regulate social life. All members of
their scope. These generalized norms, rooted in a society, for example, are seen as sharing a broad
widely shared cultural values, are termed social commitment to the same values, beliefs, and ideas.
institutions by structural functionalists. Institutions, Merton (1938b), however, has recognized that this
then, are established and solidified sets of norms consensus may be far from perfect. Individuals may
that cross-cut social roles and help to tie them be committed to some aspects of their culture, while
together. The institutions of property, contract, and rejecting or remaining neutral about others. He used
the market, for example, help to define a large num- this insight to develop a very important theory of
ber of economic and occupational roles. Similarly, anomie.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 48
Figure 2.5
Merton’s concept of anomie is not exactly the same as
Durkheim’s, although they are closely related. Whenever you Conformity and responses to anomie
come across the word ‘anomie’, make sure that you know how
it is being used.
Ends Means
In Chapter 4, pp. XXX–XX, you will find a full discussion of
the structural-functionalist view of socialization on which Conformity + +
Merton relies.
Innovation + −
Ritualism − +
The starting point for this theory is Merton’s dis- Retreatism − −
cussion of culture. The culture of a society, he holds, Rebellion ± ±
specifies the ends or goals that people should pursue
+ acceptance;
and the means that they are expected to follow in − rejection;
achieving them. People’s goals include such things ± rejection of dominant values and acceptance of alternative values.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 49
bureaucrats are likely to be fatalistic, resigned to their societies work, and its core ideas are quite straight-
lot. They feel that they have no control over their forward. The functionalist method sees any system as
lives. having needs or requirements. If a system is to survive
The third response to anomie is retreatism. The re- and to continue in more or less its current form, then
treatist decides to reject both the means and the ends these needs must be met in some way. The function
prescribed by the culture. This is the response of the of a structure is the contribution that it makes to
drop-out, of whom Merton sees the hobo or vagrant meeting a need, and a functional analysis consists in
as the typical example. Others have suggested that identifying the processes through which these needs
persistent deviant drug use may also be the action of are met.
a retreatist. Merton’s analysis of retreatism, however, The idea of a need is quite simple. A human body
fails to recognize that many of those who drop out of needs food if it is to survive; it will die without this
conventional society establish new conventions for food. However, it is important to recognize that there
themselves in deviant subcultures. This is the case for is nothing automatic about the meeting of needs.
many drug users and vagrants. The need for food does not, in itself, cause food to
The retreatist response, therefore, is dibcult to dis- become available. Many people across the world do,
tinguish from rebellion, where the legitimate ends in fact, starve to death. It is for this reason that
and means are rejected but are replaced by alternative Durkheim tried to separate cause from function.
ends and means that may challenge conventional How, then, can functional analysis be used in the
values. Radical political action, aimed at altering the study of societies? The first step is to identify the
distribution of resources or the political system, is, for needs of the society. A society is assumed to be a
Merton, the typical response of the rebel. This claim relatively self-contained unit that can be treated as a
can be seen as Merton’s reformulation of Durkheim’s well-bounded system. As such, it has many internal
idea that organized class conflict can be seen as a con- needs. These include the biological and psycholog-
sequence of anomie. ical needs of its members (for example, their needs
for food and company) and the need to maintain
Functional analysis its boundaries and identity. Some of these needs can
Structural functionalists have developed and clari- be met, in whole or in part, from its own internal
fied the method of functional analysis outlined by resources. The need to socialize infants, for example,
Durkheim, making it the centrepiece of their work. can be met through the educational efforts of its
Both Spencer and Durkheim, like many of their already socialized members, such as the infant’s
contemporaries, had seen parallels between societies parents.
and biological organisms. For Spencer, societies However, many needs can be met only if the
were to be seen as ‘social organisms’ that could be society draws on resources from its external envir-
studied by the same scientific methods as biological onment. This external environment comprises the
organisms. The most important part of any scientific natural world that surrounds the society, together
investigation, he held, is to uncover the functions with the other societies and social groups with
carried out by the various structures of the organism. which it has contacts. A society must adapt itself
The function of the heart in the human body, for to its external environment, and the environ-
example, is to maintain the circulation of the ment must be adapted to its needs. For example, if
blood. In sociology, Spencer suggested, we must a large society is to feed its members, then crops
investigate such things as the functions of govern- must be planted and harvested, soil must be
ment and ritual. In Durkheim’s work, functional improved and irrigated, commodities must be
analysis was drawn out more clearly and set along- imported, minerals must be mined and converted
side causal explanation at the heart of sociological into ploughs and tractors, and so on. To achieve this
explanation. kind of environmental adaptation, a society needs
The functional method has been much misunder- to restructure itself by establishing ways of handling
stood. Some critics of structural functionalism have its external relations and, perhaps, altering its own
claimed that it involves the idea that societies liter- boundaries.
ally are the same as biological organisms, or that The initial internal needs, then, lead to external
social facts can be reduced to biological facts. These needs. As a result of its restructuring, the society may
misunderstandings are, in part, the result of the face new internal needs. If, for example, a system of
misleading language used by many functionalists. food production is established, a society will then
Nevertheless, functional analysis is an important need to ensure that the pace and level of production
aspect of any sociological investigation into how are, in some degree, co-ordinated with its actual food
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 50
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 51
Parsons’s language sometimes gives the impres- however, development to even more complex
sion that needs are automatically met. Perhaps forms of social organization occurred. In Egypt
Parsons did, on occasion, believe this. He main- and Mesopotamia there were more complex forms of
tained, however, that structural functionalism was agriculture that were associated with the building
rooted in the action frame of reference, which of large systems of irrigation. Social stratification
showed that functions would be met only if people became sharper, religion came under the control
acted in ways that actually did meet these needs. of a specialized priesthood, and political control
This point has been clarified by Merton (1949), became stronger. By the third millennium bc, these
who shows that functions are generally met, if at all, societies had evolved into advanced intermediate
as the unintended consequences of human action. societies that had both a historic religion and an
One of the strongest criticisms of Parsons has been imperial political system. Similar developments occur-
that he failed to analyse action as thoroughly as red somewhat later in China, India, and the Roman
structure and function. Although he claimed to world. Following Comte, Parsons sees their religions
base his arguments on the action frame of reference, becoming more philosophical and metaphysical in
action played a minor part in his work. A structural character.
functionalist model that focuses on the structural The breakthrough to modern forms of society,
level of analysis must be complemented by an ana- Parsons said, occurred in medieval Europe in the
lysis of action. centuries following the collapse of the Roman Em-
pire and the gradual rebuilding of royal structures.
The evolution of modern society Political and scientific spheres of action were differ-
One of the main concerns of structural-functionalist entiated from the previously all-encompassing reli-
theorists was to use their ideas to build an account gious structures, and a separate sphere of economic
of the development of modern society. They tried action also appeared. Private property, the market,
to show that the need to adapt to changing func- and the division of labour expanded, forming spe-
tional needs drove societies in a definite direction. cialized elements in the economies of the European
Though no one intended it to occur, traditional societies. From the eighteenth century, industrialism
agricultural societies underwent a process of modern- and democracy transformed the ways in which the
ization that brought into being the new social institu- adaptation and goal-attainment functions were met,
tions that comprise modernity. Modern societies, and more fully modern societies were formed. Nation
then, are the results of long processes of structural states and industrial technologies were the character-
differentiation that were shaped by the need to adapt istic institutions of these modern societies, which
to changing environments and the unintended con- were characterized by the spread of bureaucracy
sequences of the responses made to this need. This and market relations. Modern social institutions
argument has been most clearly stated by Parsons, developed especially rapidly in the United States,
who placed it in the context of a larger theory of where pre-modern survivals were very much weaker,
social evolution. and it became the characteristically modern society
The baseline for studying social evolution, accord- of the twentieth century.
ing to Parsons, is provided by the ‘primitive’ hunt-
ing and gathering societies (Parsons 1966). In these Systems theory
relatively undifferentiated societies, the societal com- The structural functionalism of Parsons came under
munity is formed from a network of kinship relations heavy criticism from those who stressed interaction
that extend across the whole society and there are and conflict, and whose views we consider below.
no functionally specialized structures. Each society These critics argued, in particular, that structural func-
is integrated through its shared religious beliefs, tionalism overemphasized the importance of value
which provide an all-embracing cultural framework consensus and of socialization into these values.
for people’s actions. As these societies increase in size As the number of writers associated with structural
and become more involved in settled agriculture, so functionalism have attempted to come to terms
structures of private property and social stratification with these criticisms and have developed a form
begin to develop to organize the new systems of of structural functionalism that takes the conflict of
production. When societies achieve this level of values and social groups more seriously, but retains
complexity, they may require systems of chiefhood the structural focus of the original structural func-
or kingship to co-ordinate them. tionalism. These theorists have generally defined
Across the world, tribes and chiefdoms prevailed their position as neofunctionalism or simply systems
for thousands of years. In certain circumstances, theory. Neil Smelser and Jeffrey Alexander (1985,
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 52
1988) in the United States and Niklas Luhmann of Weber and, above all, the early Chicago sociolog-
(1982, 1984) in Germany have been the key figures ists in an attempt to construct a full-blown sociology
in this theoretical work. of action. In this section, we will look at two related
Neofunctionalism and systems theory hold that theories of interaction: the symbolic interactionism
social systems need not be perfectly integrated and of the Chicago school and the phenomenological
coherent, as Parsons tended to imply. There can theories developed from a reconsideration of Weber’s
be contradictions, strains, and tensions among the typology of action.
various parts of a social system, and these are quite
likely to generate conflict and change in the structure Symbolic interactionism
of a society. According to Luhmann, these are the Symbolic interactionism was nurtured in the De-
driving forces in a process of structural differentia- partment of Sociology at Chicago from the 1920s to
tion. Early forms of society, he argues, are organized the 1950s. However, it originated outside Chicago
around core institutions of kinship and religion and it has, since the 1950s, spread far beyond it.
but, over time, distinct spheres of action and struc- The core of the sociological work carried out at
ture split off from these core social institutions. Chicago was a series of empirical studies in the city
Specialized economic, political, legal, scientific, educa- of Chicago itself. The theoretical framework used
tional, and other social systems are, therefore, dif- to organize these studies and to explain some of
ferentiated from each other and may come to operate their results stressed the struggle of social groups for
according to different values and norms. This pro- resources and their competition over the use of the
cess, which Parsons saw as one of modernization, is, space in the city. When they wished to explain what
according to Luhmann, an integral feature of change was going on within each of these groups and how
in all social systems. It is the outcome of often individuals responded to their situations, they drew
incompatible system processes, and it creates further on the ideas that later came to be called symbolic
incompatibilities. interactionism.
The arguments of the neofunctionalists and sys- This was a theory of action that originated in the
tems theorists do not mark a fundamental change philosophical and psychological studies of William
from the earlier structural functionalism. What they James, carried out at Harvard towards the end
show, rather, is how to use structural-functionalist of the nineteenth century. William James, brother
ideas in a more flexible way and of building theor- of the novelist Henry James, was not a particularly
etical explanations that are more sensitive to the sophisticated philosopher. He had a number of
conflict and change that is such an obvious feature insightful ideas, but he expressed these in a rather
of social life. homespun and oversimple way. He did, however,
nurture the brilliant work of the eccentric Charles
Peirce. The works of James and Peirce together laid
the foundations of the philosophical position of
Interaction theories pragmatism, and it was this approach to knowledge
Structural functionalism provided the mainstream of and meaning that was transformed into symbolic
sociological thought from the 1940s until at least the interactionism.
1970s, and it remains an important part of contem- Pragmatism holds that ideas are produced and used
porary sociology. With its roots in Comte, Spencer, in practical situations. The knowledge that people
and Durkheim, it is at the heart of the sociolo- acquire is not like a photograph. It is not a mental
gical tradition. However, it was never unchallenged. copy of things that actually exist in reality. It is,
Many critics pointed out that, despite its advocacy rather, an attempt to understand the world well
of an action frame of reference, it did not really enough to make practical sense of it and to act effect-
take subcient account of action. In providing a ively. James summarized this point of view in the
comprehensive theory of social structures and their claim that truth consists simply of those ideas that
functions, it minimized the active and creative part happen to work. Knowledge is true if it helps us to
played by social action. This concern for social action get by in our practical actions. It is this practical or
has a long history, and we have shown how it was pragmatic test that gave the philosophical position
central to the work of Weber and his contemporaries its name. Peirce’s work added much subtlety to this
in Germany. However, it was a subordinate trend basic argument. In particular, he presented prag-
within sociology, and it has achieved a wider impact matism as a theory of meaning, rather than simply a
only since the 1960s. Writers critical of structural theory of truth. What Peirce argued was that the
functionalism returned to the founding statements meaning of a concept is given by the way in which
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 53
that concept is used. What we mean by a chair The world is never experienced directly, but always
is something to sit on when we wish to relax, and through the ideas that we hold about it. The meaning
many different physical objects can meet this need. of reality is, in a fundamental sense, the meaning
Similarly, one of the things that we mean by a that we choose to give to it. Thomas summarized this
mother is someone who looks after children. There point of view in the statement that ‘When men
can be no abstract definitions of these concepts that define situations as real, they are real in their con-
identify essential characteristics of what chairs or sequences’. What he meant by this is that the actions
mothers ‘really’ are. They simply mean whatever of men (and women) depend far more on how they
they are used to refer to in practical everyday define a situation than on the situation itself. People
situations. define situations and act upon those definitions. As a
These arguments were developed—and made pragmatist, however, Thomas stressed that these
much clearer—in the works of John Dewey, Charles definitions were not simply arbitrary and artificial
Cooley, William Thomas, and George Mead. It was constructions. Only those definitions that are use-
Thomas and Mead, after they joined the staff at ful in practical actions are likely to persist in use for
Chicago, who began to convert pragmatist ideas any time.
into a sociological theory of action. Mead was by This becomes clearer if we consider the example
far the more sophisticated writer of the two. He had of a bus. A bus exists as a purely physical object, an
undertaken his postgraduate studies in Germany, assemblage of metal, plastic, rubber, fabric, and so
and he found many congenial ideas in the German on. Its meaning for us, however, depends on how
philosophical and sociological tradition. Weber was, we choose to define it. In calling it a bus, we define
of course, an influence on him, but the most import- it as something that will follow a particular route,
ant of the German theorists in the shaping of Mead’s stop at particular places, and pick up people who
position was Georg Simmel. Work by Simmel was pay to take a journey. Redundant buses, however,
translated and published in the American Journal of have been defined and used as social centres, cara-
Sociology, the journal of the Chicago Department, vans, chicken coops, and works of art. Each of these
and through these translations Simmel had a major definitions—and many others—is compatible with
impact on the new theory. the particular physical object that, in other circum-
Mead argued that individuals give meaning to the stances, we define as a bus. What makes its defini-
world by defining and interpreting it in certain ways. tion as a bus appropriate is our practical success in
being able to use it to travel to our destination. What
is true of the bus is true of all social objects. It is
possible to define things in any of a number of differ-
THEORY
ent ways, and the effective definition is simply the
one that works when people come to act on their
Georg Simmel definitions.
Georg Simmel (1858–1917) was born in Berlin, Germany. These definitions cannot be unique to particular
He spent most of his academic career at the University of individuals, or they will not work. The concept of
Berlin. He studied philosophy, but he taught and wrote a bus, for example, is one that is useful only because
on both philosophy and sociology. During his lifetime it is widely shared. It is a concept shared by all those
he was probably better known than Weber among interested in its operations: passengers, drivers, con-
other sociologists. ductors, inspectors, trabc police, ministers of trans-
Simmel stressed the need to study the forms of social port, and so on. Many of these people acquire their
relationships, rather than their content. He explored such identities from the idea of the bus. It is, for example,
things as the relations of insiders to outsiders, relations of impossible to have bus drivers unless we have the
domination and subordination, relations of conflict, and the concept of a bus. It is usually possible to rely on a bus
significance of the size of groups. His ideas were developed service because there are widely shared definitions
in a book called Sociology (Simmel 1908), most of which and conventions concerning timetabling, queuing,
has been translated in Wolff (1950). Simmel was and fare-paying. A widely shared meaning, commu-
particularly concerned with uncovering the distinctive nicated to us by others, has a greater reality than does
features of contemporary urban life, and he set out these an idiosyncratic one, and it is more likely to be useful
ideas in an essay on the metropolis and a book called in practical situations.
The Philosophy of Money (Simmel 1900). The definitions that people use are constructed
from the symbols (the names and labels for objects)
that are available to them in their culture. Spoken
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 54
BRIEFING
The arguments of Mead, Goffman, and other symbolic
interactionists figure prominently in this book. You will find
Social construction substantial discussions of their core ideas in the following
chapters:
The case of a bus—discussed in the text—is typical of all
social definitions, which is why we have discussed it at self, roles, identity Chapter 4
such length. Whenever we employ words to refer to deviance and social reaction Chapter 7
objects in our social world, we are, quite literally, social construction of health Chapter 8
constructing them as meaningful social objects that organizations Chapter 18
we can take account of in our actions. Try to think
about the implications of attempting to redefine
some common social objects. What would happen Goffman’s work, undertaken between the 1950s
if you defined a table as a chair? What consequences and the 1970s, gave particular attention to face-to-
would follow if you defined newly washed curtains face interaction and small-scale social contexts. He
as paint covers? (Don’t try this one at home!) called his approach dramaturgical (Goffman 1959).
When you have considered these relatively simple By this he meant that it was a theory of action
cases, you might think about the consequences of that uses the metaphor of drama in a theatre to
defining an unmarried man as a homosexual rather examine people’s abilities to present particular im-
than a bachelor. ages of themselves in their interactions with others.
Goffman used such terms as actor, audience, and,
of course, role in his theory. Actors play their parts in
interaction, and they attempt to give their audiences
convincing performances.
and written words, together with pictures, images, In their interactions, Goffman said, people aim
and other conventional signs, convey information and to create a particular impression or image of them-
are used by people to give meaning to the situations selves in the eyes of others. Goffman calls this image
in which they find themselves. These symbols are the self. People present this image to others through
learned and communicated through interaction with using techniques of impression management that
others. This is why the theoretical position has come help them to control the performances that they
to be called symbolic interactionism. give. The image that they present will vary according
This name was coined by Herbert Blumer (1966), to the expectations of the audience. The self that is
who also did much to popularize it and to mark presented to friends at a club on a Friday night is
out its distinctiveness from mainstream structural- likely to be very different from that presented to a
functionalist sociology. According to Blumer, societies bank manager in an interview about an overdrawn
were not fixed and objective structures. What we call account. The self that is presented to parents at home
‘society’ is the fluid and flexible networks of interac- is likely to be different again. Whenever we wish
tion within which we act. To describe these overlap- others to think of us as a particular kind of person, we
ping networks of interaction as structures, Blumer try to present exactly that image to them.
held, is to reify them and to distort the part that indi- Goffman has emphasized the ability that people
viduals play in creating and altering them through have to manipulate the images that they present to
action. This led Blumer to reject all talk of structures, others. However, symbolic interactionism also shows
systems, and functional needs. There are simply that images and conceptions of self can be imposed
actions, interactions, and their consequences for on people by their audiences. The social process is an
individuals. interplay of action and reaction, an interplay in which
Others in the symbolic interactionist tradition each actor interprets and responds to all others.
have been less extreme in their opposition to main- Interaction involves a reciprocal and continuous
stream sociology. They have seen symbolic interac- negotiation over how situations are to be defined. A
tionism as concerned merely with those aspects of definition of the situation is the joint construction of
action and interaction that have not given their due the participants in interaction. Consensus exists only
attention in structural functionalism. This is, for when this definition has been established and agreed
example, the case with Erving Goffman, whose work by all involved. Though often implicit, this negotia-
owes as much to Durkheim as it does to Mead tion is necessary because any definition can be con-
(Collins 1994: 218). tested by others. What we call reality is constructed
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 55
through social interaction; it is a socially constructed rarely question it in later life. This taken-for-granted
reality. Where there is disagreement, and dissension, reality has the character of a Durkheimian social
the individual or group that is most powerful may fact. As well as being objective, however, it is also
be able to impose a definition of the situation on all subjective.
others. They have the power to ensure that their The everyday world is seen as the product of
views prevail. human subjectivity. It is a product of human action
This point of view became the cornerstone of the that is reified—made into a thing—whenever people
trends in the sociology of deviance that powerfully forget that it is a human product and begin to take it
enlarged symbolic interactionism during the 1960s for granted. The language that we use is the principal
and 1970s (Becker 1963). This work stressed the way means through which we reify social reality. An
in which the labels used to define behaviour by those example might be the very use of the terms symbolic
with the power to enforce them could influence the interactionism and phenomenological sociology as
actions of those who were labelled. The use of such names for loose and diverse collections of writers.
labels as ‘criminal’, ‘junkie’, ‘queer’, and so on defines Use of these particular labels gives the impression
behaviour as deviant by identifying it as a departure that these approaches have more unity and reality
from social norms and attributing certain characterist- than is, in fact, the case. Repetition of the words
ics to the person labelled. Through their reactions to in textbooks, essays, and examination questions
a person’s behaviour, then, an audience of labellers reinforces the taken-for-granted assumption that they
may cause her or him to take on the image that is exist as sharply defined schools of thought. When
held out. we give a name to something, we make it appear as
something that is separate from us, external to us,
Phenomenological approaches to interaction and that is solid and substantial. Berger and Luckman
While symbolic interactionism mounted an increas- show how this creates the apparent solidity of ‘the
ingly successful challenge to the excessive claims family’, while Douglas argues that suicide is a sim-
made by some structural functionalists, it, too, was ilarly reified term.
challenged in the 1960s by what claimed to be a These phenomenological approaches began to
more radical perspective on interaction. This was the rediscover some of the themes raised in classical
approach of phenomenology that originated in the German sociology and to translate them into con-
philosophy of Edmund Husserl. During the 1920s temporary concerns. They stressed, as Weber had
and 1930s, Husserl began to produce what he saw as done, that all social realities have to be studied from
the fundamental basis for knowledge. The aim of his the standpoint of the subjective meanings given
philosophy was to describe the contents of people’s to them by individual actors. As they were being
experiences of their world. Husserl’s work inspired a developed, however, yet another phenomenological
number of diverse approaches to sociology. The most approach was being developed from Schütz’s work.
influential has, perhaps, been that of Alfred Schütz, This was the ethnomethodology of Harold Garfinkel
who saw his task as that of uncovering the content and Aaron Cicourel. Ethnomethodology originated
and form of everyday interpersonal experiences of in Garfinkel’s papers of the 1950s (see the essays
the social world. Schütz took as his fundamental collected in Garfinkel 1967), and it was taken up by
question, how is Weber’s typology of action possible? others in the 1960s and 1970s.
That is, he asked how the types of action could be Garfinkel criticizes Parsons and other structural
justified, on philosophical grounds, as the necessary functionalists for treating people as what he calls
basis for sociological research. cultural dopes. Structural functionalists assumed
The work of Husserl and Schütz appeared rather that people were simply socialized into a cultural
idiosyncratic, and it was not until the 1960s that it consensus and so had no real freedom of action.
really began to inspire specific approaches to soci- They acted in their roles as if they were puppets,
ology. In the works of Berger and Luckman (1966) and controlled by the social system. In place of this
Douglas (1967), phenomenological ideas were used point of view, Garfinkel stresses individual auto-
in order to investigate the taken-for-granted reality nomy. He holds that the objective reality of everyday
that people construct in the face of the reactions of life is something that people struggle to achieve
others. These writers have stressed the way in which in their practical actions: it is, he says, a ‘practical
the everyday world comes to be seen as natural, accomplishment’.
inevitable, and taken for granted. People are born In accounting for their actions and for the actions
into a prestructured meaningful world, and they of others, people continually create and recreate their
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 56
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 57
BRIEFING
Action and The opposition between structural functionalist theories and interactionist theories can be
system usefully seen in terms of their central concepts of system and action. Where the concept of
action points to issues of agency and will, the concept of system points to issues of structure
and determinism. The contrast should not be taken too far, but it highlights a real difference
in focus.
Action System
• The actions of individuals are the • Social structures are the basic elements in
basic elements in social life. They are social life. They have a reality over and
the building blocks of sociology. above individuals.
• Individuals define situations and • Social reality is external to individuals and
construct social reality. constrains their actions.
• Sociologists must understand • Sociologists must look at the functional
actions in terms of their subjective connections among the structural parts of
meanings. social systems.
• Individuals improvise and create • Individuals conform to the role
their own roles on the basis of what expectations that they learn during their
they learn during their socialization. socialization.
Homans and Blau described their approach as Larger claims have been made for rational choice
‘exchange theory’ in order to emphasize that they theory (Downs 1957; G. Becker 1976, 1981), and
were dealing especially with interaction rather than it has proved to give valuable insights into many
with isolated rational actions. When people en- aspects of social life. Its fundamental limitation,
counter one another, each tries to maximize their however, is that it cannot properly take account of
profit—or minimize their loss—by gaining rewards precisely those features that are central to symbolic
and avoiding costs. Any interaction, therefore, interactionism. In order to apply a rational choice
involves an exchange of some kind: there may be an model of action, it is necessary to draw on other
exchange of goods for money, as in an economic action theories to show how people are able to con-
transaction, an exchange of love for financial sup- struct a definition of the situation and how their
port, an exchange of loyalty for political support, norms and values influence the decisions that they
and so on. In successful, ongoing interactions, each make.
participant will tend to have ensured that the overall Theories of action prospered because of the fail-
reward that they earn is greater than could be earned ure of structural functionalists to pay serious atten-
for any other interaction: if this were not the tion to action and interaction. They promised a
case, they would have abandoned the interaction in sociology that properly considered the creative ele-
favour of that other alternative. ment that human beings bring to their social rela-
Blau argues, however, that many interactions may, tions. Symbolic interactionists, phenomenologists,
in fact, involve unbalanced exchange: one person and ethnomethodologists, in their various ways,
will be gaining more than the other. People may, for aimed to uncover the processes of communication
example, undertake a course of action that is costly to and interaction that allowed people to make sense of
them if they think that, in the long term, they will their social worlds and to construct the structures
benefit in some way. On the other hand, people may that structural functionalists treated simply as social
continue with an unprofitable relationship simply facts. Many advocates of these theories, however,
because other possibilities have been shut off from claimed that the matters that concerned structural
them. A married woman, for example, may remain functionalists could safely be forgotten. In saying
with a violent husband because she has no realistic this, they overstated their case. Action and structure
possibility of finding employment or housing on are not alternative explanatory principles but com-
her own. plementary ones.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 58
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 59
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 60
THEORY
interaction in everyday settings. In their interactions,
people need to attain some kind of understanding
of one another. They must build up a degree of con-
Jürgen Habermas sensus and shared understanding if their actions
Jürgen Habermas (1929–) studied under Adorno, a leading are not to collapse into mutual incomprehension
figure in critical theory, at Frankfurt. It is here that he has and conflict. The cultural disciplines, concerned
spent most of his academic career. He produced a number with understanding texts are based on what he calls
of essays on philosophy and scientific method in the historical-hermeneutic knowledge. (You need not
1960s (Habermas 1967, 1968), and he began to engage worry about the precise meaning of all the long
with the radical student movement. His initial attempt words that Habermas uses.) This knowledge provides
to construct a sociological account of this new movement the interpretations and meanings that make practical
(Habermas 1968–69) owed as much to Weber as it did understanding possible.
to Marx. Habermas sees approaches to the social world as
Habermas set out the basis of a critical theory of having tended towards one or the other of these
modern society, along with a research programme to two types of knowledge. The positivism of Comte,
study it, in Legitimation Crisis (1973). Through the 1970s Durkheim, and structural functionalism more gener-
he worked on the more general theoretical principles ally has followed the natural-science model and has
underlying this, publishing the results in his Theory of aimed at producing empirical–analytical knowledge
Communicative Action (1981a,b). Since completing this, for a positive science of society. The interpretative
he has concentrated rather more on philosophical issues work of Weber and the interactionist theorists, on
and on engaging with his political and philosophical the other hand, has been closer to the cultural studies
critics. and has aimed at producing historical–hermeneutic
You can find more on the applications of Habermas’s knowledge.
theory in other parts of this book: Both forms of knowledge have their uses, but
Habermas sees neither of them as giving a satisfactory
state and crisis Chapter 20
base for social theory. Both the main traditions of
social movements Chapter 17
sociological thought are partial and one-sided. They
Critical theorists’ views on the mass media are discussed are limited and distorted by the underlying cognitive
in Chapter 10. interests around which they are organized. Only an
A good account of Habermas’s early work can be found emancipatory interest, he holds, can produce the
in McCarthy (1978), and a brief overview of his whole kind of knowledge that can synthesize these two
output can be found in Pusey (1987). The best accounts partial perspectives.
of the wider context of critical theory are Jay (1973) and An interest in emancipation is what is required if
Held (1980). distorted forms of knowledge and action are to be
overcome. Habermas holds that people can be liber-
ated from ideology and error only through what
he calls critical–dialectical thought. Once liberated,
they can go on to achieve the kind of autonomy
An interest in technical control, argues Habermas, is and self-determination that Marx saw as the ultimate
inherent in the whole way in which human labour is goal of human history. An interest in emancipation
organized for productive purposes. Labour involves develops along with the evolution of human society,
an attempt to use and to transform the resources pro- and Marx was the first to construct a properly critical
vided by the natural environment, and it stimulates theory appropriate to this interest.
people to acquire the kind of knowledge that will This is how Habermas locates his own work, along
help them to control the natural world. The natural with that of the earlier critical theorists. An interest
sciences and industrial technology are based on what in human emancipation, he argues, requires that all
he calls empirical–analytical knowledge of the kind knowledge is subjected to criticism. To be true to the
produced in the positive sciences. This knowledge, he interest that motivated Marx’s work, it is necessary
says, provides the kind of objective information that to go beyond it and to reconstruct it continually in
can be used to make explanations and predictions the light of changing circumstances. Societies have
that will help to ensure the technical success of our changed since Marx’s death, and a critical theory
actions. must reflect these changes. In contemporary societies
An interest in practical understanding, on the other there are new sources of division, unforeseen by
hand, is fundamental to human communication and Marx. It is no longer possible to see the working
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 61
BRIEFING
Consensus and While the opposition between consensus and conflict perspectives can be exaggerated, there
conflict are real differences that it is important to recognize. The approaches can be contrasted in terms
of their main concepts and themes.
Consensus Conflict
• Norms and values are the basic elements of • Interests are the basic elements of social
social life. There is a consensus over them. life. They are the sources of conflict.
• People conform because they are • People react to one another on the basis
committed to their societies and their rules of inducement and coercion.
• Social life depends on cohesion and • Social life involves division and
solidarity. exclusion.
• People tend to cooperate with one another. • People tend to struggle with one another.
Source: adapted from Craib (1984: 60).
• You might like to consider whether Habermas adequately combines consensus and conflict
themes in his work.
class as the sole agents of revolutionary change. A what he calls the lifeworld through which people’s
challenge to the system may come from any of its experiences are formed into human communities.
many oppressed social groups. For some time, critical These two traditions of theory, Habermas says,
theorists saw the radical student movement as the highlight different aspects of social reality. Modern
group most likely to initiate social change, but they societies, for example, are organized around the
now recognize a great variety of groups from the separation of systems of economic and political
women’s movement to environmental and antimil- relations from a communal lifeworld of interpersonal
itarist movements. interactions. The systems are concerned with the
Habermas’s critical theory, then, is critical of con- integration of actions and relations into more or less
temporary social theories for their distorted views coherent and co-ordinated wholes. They are studied
of social reality, but it is also self-critical. Critical by tracing the functional connections among the
theory must continually reassess its own foundations structures and the parts that they play in the mainten-
and the specific theories that it builds on them. ance of the system as a whole. Habermas, like Marx,
Habermas’s own major work (1981a,b) was cast in stresses that it is important to look at contradictions
exactly this spirit. It is an attempt at a comprehensive within these systems as well as at their coherence.
reconstruction of Marx’s social theory, but it makes The lifeworld is concerned with the harmonization
this reconstruction by critically reconsidering also of the meanings given to actions in the communal
the work of structural functionalists and interaction life of social groups. It is studied by examining
theorists. All of these strands are synthesized by the shared ideas and values that form the taken-
Habermas. for-granted cultural framework for interaction.
With structural functionalism and systems theory,
Habermas emphasizes the importance of systems
and structures, seeing these concepts as especially
applicable to the economic and political systems
Summary points
of modern societies. However, he builds an aware- In this section we have identified three broad ap-
ness of conflict and social division into his account proaches to sociological theory, and have argued
of these social systems. With interaction theories, on that they have to be seen as grasping different aspects
the other hand, he recognizes the importance of of a complex reality. They are, therefore, comple-
communication and meaning, which he sees as essen- mentary rather than alternative approaches. These
tial for understanding face-to-face encounters in three approaches are structural-functionalist theories,
everyday life. These face-to-face situations comprise interaction theories, and conflict theories.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 62
The main source of inspiration for structural- • Definitions are built in interaction through
functionalist theories was the work of Durkheim, processes of self-presentation, labelling, and
who laid its foundations in the classical period. You negotiation.
might like to remind yourself about his key ideas. • Phenomenological approaches focus their atten-
• The key figure in the construction of structural- tion on the taken-for-granted contents of everyday
functionalist ideas was Talcott Parsons, who saw consciousness. When reified, these ideas form
his task as that of synthesizing the ideas inherited the external, constraining realities that constitute
from the classical writers. He set out the basis for society.
this in his action frame of reference. • Ethnomethodology, originating in the work of
• The basic elements in the action frame of reference Garfinkel, takes this one step further and examines
are actors, ends, means, conditions, and norms. the processes through which people sustain a
• The structure of a society is the normative frame- taken-for-granted sense of reality in their everyday
work that defines its social positions and their encounters.
social relations in a division of labour. The norm- • Rational choice theory, using an economic model
ative expectations attached to social positions of action, sees people as making rational calcula-
define the roles to be played by their occupants. tions about the rewards and costs involved in their
• Dislocations between culturally approved ends and interactions with others.
structurally available means establish conditions The works of Weber and Marx inspired a number
of anomie. Individuals respond to anomie through of theories that put conflict at the centre of their
innovation, ritualism, retreatism, or rebellion. attention. These theorists criticized the structural-
• The function of any structure is its contribution to functionalist mainstream for its overemphasis on
meeting the needs of the system of which it is a consensus.
part. At the most general level, needs include the
internal needs of the system and its adaptation to • Dahrendorf saw conflict as originating in the dis-
its external environment. tribution of authority.
• Parsons recognized four fundamental needs: • Rex saw conflict as originating in the distribution
adaptation, goal attainment, integration, and of resources.
latency. • Both Dahrendorf and Rex saw interest groups as
• Neofunctionalism and systems theory try to retain recruited from classes and as engaged in a struggle.
an emphasis on structure and system, but they Classes, engaged in collective action, are the agents
combine this with a sensitivity to conflict and of social change.
change. • Mills emphasized the emergence of a power elite
A diverse range of interaction theories have as the central element in contemporary class
attempted to provide the analysis of action that tends structure.
to get lost in the work of the structural functionalists. • Critical theory aimed at a reconstruction of
We considered symbolic interactionism, phenomen- Marxism so as to combine its recognition of social
ological approaches, ethnomethodology, and rational divisions and social conflict with an awareness of
choice theory. how societies had changed since the death of
Marx.
• Symbolic interactionism originated in pragmatist
philosophy, which held that the truth of theories • Habermas placed his analysis of conflict and col-
and concepts depends on their value in practical lective action in the context of a theory of the rela-
actions. tionship between economic and political systems,
• Central to symbolic interactionism is the idea of on the one hand, and a communal lifeworld, on
the definition of the situation. By acting in terms the other.
of their definition of the situation, people con- • The claims of critical theory depend on a particular
struct and make meaningful the objects of their account of the relationship between knowledge
social world. and interests in science.
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 63
Sociology moves on 63
Sociology moves on
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 64
A feminist standpoint is held to yield knowledge do not, of course, see this as a failing, though this is
that is radically different from malestream know- how subjectivity has often been seen in mainstream
ledge (Hartsock 1983; Harding 1986; Smith 1987). theory. According to feminists, their standpoint gives
The human mind, feminists argue, does not acquire women distinct advantages in the pursuit of know-
knowledge in abstraction and detachment from the ledge. They have access to whole areas of social life
world. It is only through the senses and through that are inaccessible or unavailable to men.
bodily involvement in real situations that knowledge Feminist writers have raised crucial issues about
is possible. Differences of sex and gender, it is held, the gendered character of scientific methodology
lead men and women to have quite different patterns and empirical research. They have also suggested that
of bodily involvement and experience, and so know- sociological theory itself is gendered. Their argument
ledge is necessarily embodied. Women have primary suggests that such concepts as structure, system, and
responsibility for childbirth, mothering, and domestic action may themselves be part of the malestream
labour, and they learn to behave in distinctly female world-view. This is a dibcult position to uphold, as
ways. They have quite different ways of being and feminists have developed their criticisms by drawing
acting in the world, and their lives are characterized on precisely these concepts. There are, for example,
by a much greater intensity of feeling and emotion structural feminists, interactionist feminists, and
than is typical for men. feminists who draw on Marxist ideas about conflict.
Knowledge acquired from a feminist standpoint, It seems that these most general concepts of sociolo-
then, is deeply marked by this subjectivity. Feminists gical theory are not intrinsically gendered, although
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 65
Sociology moves on 65
they have often been used in gendered ways. That feminists, on the grounds that they ignore the
is, arguments about structure, action, and conflict distinct experiences of women of colour (Hill
are not, in themselves, malestream discussions. Collins 1990).
They become part of the malestream when they are A recognition of such diversity poses a number of
discussed exclusively in terms of the world of male challenges for sociological theory. Because they are
experience and involvement. For example, theories factors that also divide men, the simple dichotomy
of class structure have tended to focus on men’s class of male and female must be abandoned. Middle-class
position and have either ignored women or derived women and middle-class men, for example, may
their class positions from those of their husbands, have more in common with each other than do
partners, and fathers. middle-class women and working-class women. More
Feminist critics of the malestream have correctly importantly, these divisions cross-cut each other and
identified, in particular, the gaps and the absences prevent the construction of any single female stand-
that have characterized substantive sociological point. There is no single category of ‘woman’: there
work. This substantive work has, for example, tended are black middle-class women, Asian working-class
to emphasize class as the overriding social division. women, white gay women, and so on.
Until feminist critics raised the problem, little or no The feminist criticism of sociological thought has
attention was given to the significance of gender opened up possibilities for other critiques of the
divisions or to the theorization of the body and the mainstream: black and antiracist perspectives, ‘queer
emotions (Shilling 1993; B. Turner 1996). theories’, post-colonial theories, and many others
However, in showing that knowledge is gendered have all been proposed. The end result of the critique
and in promoting the claims of the feminist stand- of the mainstream seems to be a proliferation of
point over malestream knowledge, feminist writers competing perspectives. This proliferation has been
tend to accept many of the characteristics and con- encouraged and welcomed by the contemporary
sequences of contemporary gender differences. They theoretical approach that we consider in the next
argue that women have a distinctive standpoint section.
because of their oppression, and they go on to
advocate the cultivation of this standpoint. A truly
critical and radical position would challenge this very
differentiation of male and female and would try to
Post-modernism and theory
overcome the oppression that it produces. Throughout the 1960s there was a growing recogni-
Feminist standpoint theorists have, of course, real- tion that conventional science did not live up to the
ized this problem, and they have made some attempts image of positive science presented in the philo-
to overcome it. Harding (1986), for example, has sophy textbooks. The focus of these discussions was
tried to explore the ways in which feminist know- not the social sciences but the natural sciences.
ledge can be enlarged into knowledge that is not The leading figure in reconstructing the image of
gendered at all. Current feminist standpoints are natural science was Thomas Kuhn, who stressed that
seen as transitional and as destined to be transformed science did not deal with given facts but created its
in the future into a broader form of knowledge that is facts. Scientists, he argued, worked within commu-
neither male nor female in character. Butler (1993) nities of theorists and researchers who shared certain
has argued for the need to reject all taken for granted basic concepts and methods. Without these shared
ideas about fixed gender divisions. Gendered iden- preconceptions, no factual knowledge was possible.
tities are constructed through interaction and are Scientists employ what Kuhn called paradigms of
inherently flexible and malleable. It is for this reason knowledge that tell them what to look for in their
that Butler advocates ‘gender bending’ actions that experiments and that help them to explain away
challenge established identities and open up new observations that did not fit their preconceived
possibilities. theories (Kuhn 1962).
The original formulations of feminist standpoint Eventually, Kuhn said, the sheer bulk of the
theories were based on the idea that the specific observations that had been ignored would become so
experiences of women were common to all women. great that support for a paradigm might begin to
A number of writers have reminded us, however, that crumble. Younger scientists might begin to use a new
women’s experiences are shaped, also, by ethnicity one that was better able to handle these observations.
and sexual orientation, as well as by such factors The history of science, then, is a sequence of theor-
as class, age, and disability. Black feminist writers, etical revolutions in which paradigms replace one
for example, have challenged mainstream white another periodically. It is impossible, said Kuhn, to
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 66
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 67
Sociology moves on 67
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 68
• Feminist writers have criticized mainstream soci- thought that suggested fundamental changes in the
ology for its malestream characteristics. They argue structure of modern societies.
that the concern for rationality and objectivity can
often mask the adoption of a male standpoint. • The modern structures of industrialism and cap-
italism, described by structural functionalists and
• A feminist standpoint is seen as offering a differ-
Marxists, have developed into more flexible and
ent and more adequate basis for knowledge. This
fragmented structures that create the post-modern
standpoint reflects the distinct position and experi-
condition.
ences of women. Knowledge is gendered.
• Black feminists and others have pointed to the • In the post-modern condition, cultural activities of
need to abandon the category of woman and to all kinds acquire a greater autonomy and signi-
recognize the diversity of female experiences. ficance in social life.
• Post-modern theorists embrace a complete relat-
We stressed, however, that the claims made by the
ivism in knowledge and reject the very ideas of
more radical post-modern theorists have themselves
rationality, objectivity, and scientific certainty.
been challenged and that there is a need to explore
When discussing post-modern theorists, we showed the implications of their work in relation to specific
that their ideas were part of a wider movement of substantive topics.
Key concepts
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 69
Look back over the summary points at the end of each section of this chapter and make sure that
you understand the points that have been highlighted:
• Make sure that you understand the use of the following terms: materialist, idealist, positivist;
standpoint, gendered knowledge.
• In what sense can it be said that sociological theory is malestream theory?
• What intellectual problems, if any, can you identify in the post-modern theorists’ defence of
relativism?
Theories of structure We looked at the origins of structural functionalism in the works of Comte and Spencer, its
enlargement by Durkheim, and its consolidation by Parsons:
• Make sure that you are familiar with the biographical details concerning: Comte, Spencer,
Durkheim, Parsons, Merton.
• What is meant by the following terms: structure, function, structural differentiation,
functional adaptation; social fact, dynamic density, social solidarity, role, socialization?
• How would you distinguish between social statics and social dynamics?
• Briefly outline the distinction between mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity.
• How did Durkheim distinguish between causal explanation and functional analysis?
• Make sure that you understand the following: egoism, egoistic suicide, anomie, anomic
suicide, altruism, altruistic suicide, fatalism, fatalistic sucide.
• How did Merton’s concept of anomie differ from that of Durkheim? What were the responses
to anomie that Merton identified?
• Define the following terms used by Parsons: adaptation, goal attainment, integration,
latency.
Towards the end of the chapter, we looked at the debate over industrialism and post-industrialism
that took place in the 1980s and 1990s:
• What did Comte and Spencer mean by industrial society. How did this differ from the way in
which the term was used by Parsons?
• How useful is it to describe contemporary societies as having entered a post-industrial or
post-modern condition?
Theories of We looked at a range of theories that emphasized the investigation of action and interaction.
interaction In particular we looked at symbolic interactionism, phenomenology, and ethnomethodology:
• Make sure that you are familiar with the biographical details concerning Weber and Simmel.
Look at the biographical box on Goffman (Chapter 4, p. XXX).
• What is meant by the following terms: value relevance, value judgements, ideal types,
understanding; definition of the situation, social construction, dramaturgical, rewards,
costs?
• What are the types of action identified by Weber? Give a one-line definition of each
of them.
• What did Garfinkel mean by the term ‘cultural dope’?
• What does it mean to describe a theory of action as phenomenological?
• Do you remember what the word ‘ethnomethodology’ means?
• What do rational choice theorists mean by treating interactions as exchange
relationships?
• Why is it appropriate to consider Weber under the headings of both ‘Interaction theories’ and
‘Conflict theories’?
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 70
Theories of conflict Conflict theories have their origins in the works of Marx and Weber, but they have been extended
by a number of later writers:
• Make sure that you are familiar with the biographical details concerning: Marx, Engels,
Weber, Habermas.
• What is meant by historical materialism? Can it be seen as a form of economic determinism?
• What is meant by the following: alienation, exploitation, social classes; ideology, mode of
production; base, superstructure; authority, interest groups?
• On what basis did Marx define the six main modes of production?
• Has the break-up of the Soviet Union and the other Communist states of east and central
Europe finally undermined the intellectual claims of Marxism?
• What did Weber mean by rationalization?
• How would you summarize the main differences between the theories of Dahrendorf and Rex?
We included Habermas as a theorist of conflict, although his theory is much broader in scope than
this label might imply:
• What did Habermas mean by: technical control, practical understanding, emancipation?
Which of these does he associate with the development of a critical theory?
• How did Habermas distinguish between system and lifeworld?
Do not worry if your answers to these questions are still a little vague. You will come across
discussions of many of these ideas later in the book. You might like to return to these questions
periodically to test how your understanding has developed.
Further reading
Useful overviews of the main trends in sociological theory can be found in:
Craib, I. (1997), Classical Social Theory (Oxford: Oxford University Press). An excellent and very
readable introduction to the ideas of Marx, Weber, Durkheim, and Simmel.
Giddens, A. (1971), Capitalism and Modern Social Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press). Gives an excellent account of Marx, Weber, and Durkheim, but also puts them into the
historical context of the development of European society.
Scott, J. (1995), Sociological Theory: Contemporary Debates (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar). Looks in
detail at Parsons and at the various strands of theory that developed in relation to his work,
including interaction theories and conflict theories.
More detailed discussions can be found in:
Berger, P. L., and Luckmann, T. (1966), The Social Construction of Reality (Harmondsworth:
Allen Lane, 1971). An important and influential statement of the phenomenological point
of view.
Dahrendorf, R. (1957), Class and Class Conflict in an Industrial Society (London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul, 1959). A readable statement of the need for a conflict perspective that goes
beyond the ideas of Marx.
Goffman, E. (1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (Harmondsworth: Penguin). Gives a
powerful extension of the symbolic interactionist position. We look at his work in more detail in
Chapter 4, pp. XXX–X and Chapter 8, pp. XXX–XX.
You should try to read at least one of the works of each of the leading classical theorists.
The best starting points might be:
Marx, K., and Engels, F. (1848), The Communist Manifesto (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1967).
Durkheim, E. (1897), Suicide: A Study in Sociology (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1952).
Weber, Max (1904–5), The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell,
2002).
··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 71
Web links 71
Web links W
There are three important sites covering the works of the leading classical sociologists
http://csf.colorado.edu/psu/mark/index.htm
For Marx, and consult his collected works at
http://eserver.org/marx
For Weber
www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Quad/5889/weber.htm
For Durkheim
www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Quad/5889/
durkheim.htm
Symbolic interactionism is covered on
http://paradigm.socio.brocku.ca/~/lward
Feminist thought can be found at
http://www.feminist.org
Baudrillard’s post-modernism is covered at
http://www.csun.edu/~hfspc002/baud/index.htm
Finally, two large sites, covering all the leading thinkers, are the so-called ‘Dead Sociologists’
Society’ pages
http://www.runet.edu/~lridener/dss/deadsoc.html
http://staff.uwsuper.edu/hps/mball/dead_soc.htm
··