You are on page 1of 54

SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 18

Pioneers of social theory 22 Academic sociology established 43


Social development and evolution 23 Structural-functionalist theories 45
Hegel: society as spirit 23 The action frame of reference 46
Comte and Saint-Simon 24 Social structure 47
A positive science of society 25 Functional analysis 49
Spencer and social evolution 27 The evolution of modern society 51
Systems theory 51
Karl Marx 28
Marx’s model of society 28 Interaction theories 52
Historical materialism 30 Symbolic interactionism 52
A theory of knowledge 30 Phenomenological approaches to interaction 55
Rational choice theory 56
Summary points 31
Conflict theories 58
Authority, resources, and conflict 58
The classic period of sociology 32
Critical theory 59
Émile Durkheim 33
Summary points 61
The nature of social facts 33
Studying social facts 34
Social differentiation and social solidarity 36 Sociology moves on 63
Suicide and social solidarity 37
Feminist theories 63
Max Weber 39
Post-modernism and theory 65
Concepts, values, and science 39
Understanding social actions 41 Summary points 67
Traditionalism and rationality 42

Summary points 42 Key concepts 68

Revision and exercises 69


Theories of structure 69
Theories of interaction 69
Theories of conflict 70

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

20 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Theories and theorizing 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

22 2: Theories and theorizing

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.

Pioneers of social theory

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

Pioneers of social theory 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

24 2: Theories and theorizing

unequal social classes and as driven by the commer- THEORY


cial spirit of property-owners and merchants.
In his own time, Hegel identified the beginnings
of a new stage of social development. The nation Auguste
state was becoming the key social institution. In Comte
contemporary societies, he held, the state embodied
the spirit of the people as a whole and not just the
. . . inventor of the
spirit of a particular class or kinship group. This was word ‘sociology’.
what he called the world spirit, a universal and all-
embracing cultural spirit that marked the end point
of historical development.
Hegel’s work, while pioneering, was not yet socio-
logy. He saw history as the automatic and inevitable
expression of an abstract spirit into the world. Spirit
itself was seen as the active, moving force in social
life. Yet spirit was an unsatisfactory idea and was not
Isidore Auguste Marie François Xavier Comte (1798–1857)
analysed in a scientific way. Hegel personified spirit,
was born in Montpellier. After an unspectacular education,
seeing it as some kind of active and creative force.
during which his political interests led him into conflict
Furthermore, when Hegel looked to what it is that
with the authorities, he settled in Paris. He was a dogmatic
drives the human spirit itself, he discovered God. The
and self-important individual, whose arrogance made it
holy spirit lies behind the human spirit, and social
dibcult for him to establish secure relationships. His
development is seen as the progressive realization of
intellectual relationship to Saint-Simon was stormy, and
God’s will.
ended a year before the death of Saint-Simon in 1825.
Hegel’s work drew together many of the insights
His personal life was equally unstable. Comte’s early life
of the French idealists and put them into a com-
was marked by periods of depression and paranoia,
prehensive general framework. Its religious character,
and his marriage broke down because of his extreme
however, meant that he had few direct followers.
jealousy.
Some aspects of his thought were taken ahead, in a
Comte decided on the plan for his life work while still
very different direction, by Marx, as we will shortly
working for Saint-Simon. He planned a Course in Positive
show. Idealism had its greatest impact on the
Philosophy, which he delivered in public lectures and
development of sociology in France. The key writer
published in serial form between 1830 and 1842. The
here was Auguste Comte, who was the first to set out
Course eventually ran to six volumes, covering the whole of
a comprehensive, if flawed, account of a theoretical
what he took to be established knowledge in mathematics,
science of society.
astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, and sociology.
Comte and Saint-Simon The part on sociology (which he originally called ‘social
physics’) was its centrepiece and took up three of the six
It is thanks to Comte that the science of society
volumes.
is called ‘sociology’, as it was he who invented the
Having completed this task, Comte went on to write
word in 1839 to describe the system of ideas that
what he considered to be even more important, the
he had developed. Comte, however, was carrying
System of Positive Politics. This, too, was a multi-volume
forward and enlarging some of the ideas that he
work and was completed in 1854, just 3 years before his
had learned from his teacher and first employer,
death. The System set out a summary of his position and
Saint-Simon. Comte’s intellectual and personal
his programme for the social reconstruction of European
relationship to Saint-Simon was very close, but a
society. This reconstruction involved the establishment of a
disagreement between the two men led Comte to
‘Religion of Humanity’, a religion that abandoned dogma
deny the importance of Saint-Simon and to exag-
and faith and was itself constructed on a scientific basis.
gerate the originality of his own work. Despite this,
Sociology was to be the core of this religion, with
it is undoubtedly Comte’s efforts at systematizing
sociologists replacing priests as the expert teachers
and unifying the science of society that made
and policy-makers.
possible its later professionalization as an academic
Comte’s works are dibcult to get hold of in English
discipline.
editions, but you might like to scan some of the extracts
Saint-Simon was a radical, but eccentric aristocrat
reprinted in K. Thompson (1976).
who popularized the idea of what he called posit-
ive science. The term positive means definite and

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 25

Pioneers of social theory 25

unquestionable, and Saint-Simon used it to describe


BRIEFING
the precise or exact sciences based on observation
and mathematics that he saw emerging in one intel-
For Comte, the positivist approach in science simply
lectual field after another. This led him to advocate
involves an emphasis on rational, critical thought and
the building of a positive ‘science of man’, a psycho-
the use of evidence. In many contemporary discussions,
logical and social science of the human mind. Once
however, it is presented as a much narrower and more
this science had been achieved, he held, we would
restricted idea. ‘Positivist’ is often used almost as a term
be well on the way to possessing a complete know-
of abuse, and is applied to those who use mathematics
ledge of everything that exists. At this point, the
or social surveys. This kind of distortion is not helpful.
various positive sciences could be unified into a
You will find it much easier to handle sociological
single ‘positive philosophy’.
debates if you avoid trying to label people as positivists
The work of Saint-Simon was confused and unsys-
and non-positivists. If you must use the word, try to use it
tematic, and he recognized that he needed a collabor-
as Comte intended. Bear in mind, however, that Comte
ator. Comte, who had been convinced by the work
tied positive science to positive politics and his religion
of Montesquieu and Condorcet that there was a
of humanity.
pressing need for a social science, took on this task
and worked closely with Saint-Simon from 1817 to
1824. It was this period of intellectual apprenticeship
that gave Comte the confidence to begin to construct While many of the details of Comte’s sociology
the outlines of the positive philosophy and its posit- are no longer accepted by sociologists, his main prin-
ive science of society. ciples have largely been accepted and they now form
a part of the mainstream of the subject. His key
A positive science of society insight was that societies had to be understood as
Comte’s importance in the history of sociology is complex systems. They are organic wholes with a unity
due to the particular method that he proposed and similar to that of biological organisms. The human
his general view of the subject matter of sociology. body, for example, is a biological system of parts that
The method that Comte proposed for sociology was are connected together into a living whole. Similarly,
that of positive science. He held that sociology could a society may be seen as a cohesive and integrated
advance human understanding only if it emulated whole. The parts of a society are not simply indi-
the other positive sciences in its approach. Comte viduals, but social institutions. A society consists of
was not saying that sociology had slavishly to follow family and kinship institutions, political institutions,
the natural sciences. On the contrary, he was very economic institutions, religious institutions, and so on.
concerned to emphasize that each of the major dis- These do not exist in isolation but are interdepend-
ciplines had its own distinctive subject matter, which ent parts of the whole social system. Change in any
had to be studied in its own right and could not be one institution is likely to have consequences for the
reduced to the subject matter of any other science. other institutions to which it is connected.
His point was simply that there was only one way of Comte identified two broad branches of sociology,
being scientific, whatever the subject matter of the corresponding to two ways in which social systems
science. could be studied:
Comte’s positivism presented science as the study • social statics: the study of the coexistence of
of observable phenomena. The scientist must make institutions in a system, their structures and their
direct observations of those things that are of inter- functions;
est, examining their similarities and differences, and
• social dynamics: the study of change in institutions
investigating the order in which they occurred. These
and systems over time, their development and
observations had then to be explained by theoretical
progress.
laws, or logical connections. These laws stated causal
relationships between observed events, so allowing The study of social statics is similar to the study
the scientist to predict the occurrence of events. If, of organization or anatomy in biology. It looks at
for example, we have a law stating that intellectual the structure of a social system, at the way in which
unrest is a cause of political instability, then the the institutions that make up the system are actu-
observation of intellectual unrest would lead us to ally connected to each other. Comte argues that the
predict a period of political instability. The task of the aim of social statics is to produce laws of coexistence,
scientist is to produce theories that are able to arrive principles concerning the interdependence of social
at just these kinds of laws. institutions.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 26

26 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Pioneers of social theory 27

interdependencies in general terms and as they are


Spencer and social evolution
found in actual societies.
The materialist tradition in Britain had its major His most distinctive contribution to sociology, how-
impact on the growth of economic theory (usually ever, was his emphasis on the principle of evolution
termed political economy), where a long line of the- in his social dynamics. Evolutionary ideas achieved a
orists attempted to uncover the way in which the great popularity in Victorian Britain following the
production of goods is shaped by the forces of supply publication of Darwin’s Origin of the Species in 1859.
and demand. In the work of Herbert Spencer this was The debate over Darwin’s work made widely known
combined with ideas drawn from the work of Comte the idea that biological species evolve through a con-
to form a broader sociological theory. Spencer was stant struggle for existence in which only the fittest
seen by many people as the direct heir to Comte, can survive. Those species that are best adapted to
although this was certainly not how he saw himself. the biological conditions under which they live are
Although he gave far less attention to religious and more likely to survive than those that are only weakly
intellectual factors than did Comte, there is, never- adapted or not adapted at all. In fact, the phrase ‘sur-
theless, a great similarity in their views. It is also vival of the fittest’ had been introduced by Spencer
true to say, however, that Spencer remained very close some years before Darwin published his work, and
to the British tradition in giving a great emphasis both Darwin and Spencer acknowledged that the idea
to individual action. Spencer took forward Comte’s of a struggle for existence came from Malthus’s (1798)
idea that societies were organic systems, but he also work on population.
emphasized that they must be seen in terms of indi- Spencer’s great contribution to the debate over
viduals and their actions. evolution, however, was his advocacy of the principle
Spencer adopted Comte’s distinction between social of social evolution. This consisted of two processes:
statics and social dynamics as the two main branches
of his sociology. His social statics stressed the idea • structural differentiation;
of society as an organism. Each part in a society • functional adaptation.
is specialized around a particular function and so
Structural differentiation was a process through which
makes its own distinctive contribution to the whole.
simple societies developed into more complex ones.
A society is an integrated and regulated system of
This idea was modelled on the biological process
interdependent parts. Much of Spencer’s work in
through which, as Spencer saw it, advanced organ-
sociology consisted of the attempt to describe these
isms had more differentiated and specialized parts
than less advanced ones. In all spheres of existence,
he held, there is an evolution from the simple to
THEORY the complex. In the social world, structural differ-
entiation involves the proliferation of specialized
Herbert Spencer social institutions.
Spencer saw simple societies as organized around
Herbert Spencer (1820–1903) was born in Derby and was
family and kinship relations, and as achieving their
privately educated in mathematics and physics. He started
material needs through hunting and gathering. Few
work in the new railway industry, and became a successful
aspects of social life are specialized, and everything
railway engineer. His intellectual interests in geology and
is, ultimately, organized through kinship. Gradually,
biology, and his interest in political issues, led him to
however, separate governmental and economic insti-
publish a number of articles, and in 1848 he decided to
tutions are formed and systems of communication
move into journalism. His first book was Social Statics. This
are established. Many activities previously organized
and a series of papers on population and evolution were
through the family come to be organized through
followed by a major work that was to take the whole of the
these specialized institutions. As a result, the family
rest of his life to complete. Like Comte, he aimed at an
loses some of its functions, which have been ‘differ-
encyclopaedic summary of human knowledge; a ‘synthetic
entiated’ into the specialized institutions. Over time,
philosophy’. He published this work in his Principles of
the specialized institutions are themselves subject to
Biology, Principles of Psychology, Principles of Sociology,
structural differentiation. Governmental institutions,
and Principles of Ethics.
for example, become differentiated into separate
Spencer’s sociological works are dibcult to get hold of
political and military institutions.
and it is probably better to approach him through the
The reason why structural differentiation occurs,
extracts reprinted in Andreski (1976).
Spencer held, is that it allows societies to cope with
the problems and dibculties that they face in their

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 28

28 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Pioneers of social theory 29

THEORY

Karl Marx Engels wrote an important study of poverty, The Condition of


the Working Class in England in 1844 (Engels 1845), and he
collaborated with Marx on a number of works, including The
. . . highlighted the Communist Manifesto (Marx and Engels 1848).
importance of class
Marx found it dibcult to complete books. A number of his
conflict in social
change. most important studies were published long after his death,
thanks to the editorial work of Engels and others. The most
important of his early works, where he set out a theory of
‘alienation’, was the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts
(Marx 1844), published only in 1932. After The Communist
Manifesto, he went on to produce a series of massive drafts for
Capital, a critical study of economic theory and the economic
Karl Marx (1818–83) was born in Trier, Germany. He studied basis of society. Only volume i (Marx 1867) was published in
law at Bonn and Berlin. His radical political views led him into his lifetime.
a journalistic career, but this was cut short by the suppression The details of Marx’s work are discussed in various parts of
of the various journals for which he wrote. He fled tJzo Paris this book. You will find them in the following chapters:
in 1843, to Brussels in 1845, and, finally, to London in 1848.
alienation and the nature of work  Chapter 15
It was in London that he spent the rest of his life. His massive
poverty  Chapter 16
tomb can still be seen in Highgate cemetery.
class relations and class polarization  Chapter 17
Marx began to work on a series of philosophical and
labour organization, ruling class, politics, and the state
economic books while in Paris, and he spent the rest of his life
 Chapters 18, 19
studying, engaging in radical politics, and writing articles for religion and ideology  Chapter 11
newspapers and periodicals. He was able to use his time in this
way only because of the financial support from his friend and Useful discussions of Marx’s ideas can be found in
collaborator Friedrich Engels. Giddens (1971) and Craib (1997). There is more detail in
Engels (1820–95) was the son of a wealthy cotton McLellan (1971), which contains some extracts from Marx’s
manufacturer. Like Marx, he was involved in radical politics and own work. A good biography is McLellan’s Karl Marx: His Life
intellectual work, but he was sent to Manchester by his father to and Thought (McLellan 1973). If you want to try to understand
manage the English branch of the family firm. This gave him the Marx’s economic theory, you should try Mandel’s (1967)
financial independence to support both himself and Marx. The Formation of the Economic Thought of Karl Marx.

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

30 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Pioneers of social theory 31

theorists who adopted the standpoint of this sub-


BRIEFING
ordinate class, the oppressed and exploited class,
were able to achieve a deeper and more adequate
Modes of production understanding of their society than those who were
Marx recognized six main modes of production, each tied to the standpoint of the ruling class. It was for
defined by a particular type of property ownership and this reason that he did not hesitate to present his
labour: core ideas in a political manifesto for the communist
movement (Marx and Engels 1848).
• primitive communism—relatively egalitarian, By contrast, he saw the ideas of almost all other
communal property; social theorists as adopting the standpoint of the
• ancient—slave-owning systems; ruling, capitalist class. Classical economics and the
• Asiatic—despotic and bureaucratic control; sociologies of Comte and Spencer were, for Marx,
uncritical expressions of the capitalist or bourgeois
• feudalism—serfdom, combined with urban commercial
world-view. Their ideas could serve the labour
centres;
movement only if they were subjected to rigorous
• capitalism—wage labour and private property; criticism. Hence, he subtitled his major work on
• advanced communism—re-establishes communal economics (1867) ‘A Critique of Political Economy’.
property. Unless bourgeois thought was subjected to criticism
from the standpoint of the proletariat, it would
In each of these modes of production, the productive remain simply an intellectual defence of the existing
forces are developed to a different level. Before the stage social order.
of advanced communism they are also marked by Marx’s work provides a powerful challenge to the
growing levels of exploitation and alienation. ideas of Comte. Where Comte emphasized that
Do not worry about the details of this scheme. We modern societies were industrial societies ruled by
will introduce some of these, where relevant, in other benign industrialists, Marx saw them as capitalist soci-
chapters. You might like to compare Marx’s scheme with eties ruled by an oppressive capitalist class. Marx also
the stages of development identified by Hegel, Comte, differed from Comte in his stress on the importance
and Spencer. of conflict and struggle in human history and in
his emphasis on the economic basis of social life.
Marx’s claim to have produced a complete and com-
prehensive social theory cannot be upheld, but it is
about the physical world, as Descartes and Kant undoubtedly true that he highlighted many factors
had argued, but he held that this was not possible that had been minimized or ignored by Comte and
for the social sciences. The social world could not be Spencer.
known objectively, but only ever from particular
standpoints. These standpoints were those provided
Marx saw all social knowledge as relative to the class
by the class backgrounds of the observers. Members
standpoint of the observer. What social divisions, other than
of a dominant class do, quite literally, see the social class, could he have seen as providing distinctive standpoints
world differently from those who stand below them on the social world? Do you agree with his rejection of the
in the class hierarchy. possibility of ‘objectivity’? Come back and consider this
All social knowledge, then, is relative or ideolo- question again when you have read our discussions of
gical. It is historically determined by the class posi- Max Weber and of feminist theories.
tion of the knower. There is no standpoint outside the
class structure, and so there can be no impartial or
completely objective knowledge of the social world.
For Marx, commitment is unavoidable. Social know-
ledge—and therefore social science—reflects a political
Summary points
commitment to one side or another in the struggle This section has traced the early stages of scientific
of classes. sociology from the Enlightenment thinkers through
Marx accepted the logical conclusion that his own to the pioneering statements of Comte, Spencer, and
theories were relative. They were relative, not to Marx. Although you are not expected to understand
the standpoint of his own class, but to that of his or recall everything that we have written about them,
adopted class. This was the proletariat, the subordin- you should try to make sure that you have some
ate class of the capitalist system. He believed that familiarity with their key ideas.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 32

32 2: Theories and theorizing

• 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 classic period of sociology

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

The classic period of sociology 33

later development of sociology, it is Durkheim and


THEORY
Weber who must be seen as the key figures.

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

34 2: Theories and theorizing

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

The classic period of sociology 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

Religious observance Social solidarity

low
increase

Source: J. Scott (1995: fig. 6.2).

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

36 2: Theories and theorizing

of the function of religion in a society. Durkheim


argued that religion helps to meet a society’s need for Social differentiation and social solidarity
social solidarity. High levels of religious observance Durkheim applied his scientific method in his
tie people together and so increase the level of social great book on the development of modern society
solidarity; low levels of religious observance, on the (Durkheim 1893). This book, the first that he wrote,
other hand, reduce the level of social solidarity. This was an attempt to examine social differentiation,
is matched by the effects of social solidarity on reli- the specialization of activities into a complex struc-
gion. If the level of social solidarity is too low, then ture of occupations. Durkheim labelled this the
individualistic impulses may threaten the survival division of labour, using this term to refer not only
of the society. Stability can be maintained only if to the differentiation of economic activities, but also
religious observance increases and a higher level of to the specialization of political, administrative, legal,
social solidarity is re-established. If, on the other hand, scientific, and other tasks. The division of labour was
the level of social solidarity becomes too high, indi- a principal topic of investigation for economists, but
vidual creativity may be stifled, and a reduction in the Durkheim wanted to show that their understanding
level of religious observance may be required. Reli- of it was limited. The division of labour, which had
gion and social solidarity are, then, interdependent. achieved an unprecedented scale in modern society,
There is much in this view of functional analysis was not simply an economic matter. It was central to
that remains unclear. In particular, it does not the very cohesion and integration of modern societies.
show what mechanisms actually ensure that increases Durkheim’s book is divided into two parts: the first
or reductions in religious observance take place. is concerned with the causal explanation of the divi-
Durkheim minimizes this problem by equating need sion of labour and the second with its functional
with ‘goal’ or ‘purpose’. That is, he assumes that analysis. Durkheim’s discussion of the causes of the
people consciously and deliberately act to meet social division of labour is the shorter part of the book and
needs. Most later writers have rejected this view and can be dealt with briefly. He argued that the division
have tried to show that the meeting of needs is often of labour can occur only when communal societies
an unintended and unrecognized consequence of give way to more organized societies. Communal
social action. societies are divided into ‘segments’ (families, clans,
local villages) and have little or no division of labour.
Each segment is self-subcient. As segments break
frontiers down, however, individuals are brought into greater
and more intimate contact with those in other parts
Rules of the sociological method
of their society. This expansion in the scale of social
Durkheim (1895) set out a number of rules or principles. We have
interaction depends on increasing population dens-
considered only the most important of these. A simplified and
ity and on the emergence of cities and commercial
slightly shortened version of his list is:
centres. These all bring about an increase in what
– consider social facts as things; Durkheim called dynamic density. This refers to an
– cause and function must be investigated separately; increase in the number of social relationships and
– a particular effect always follows from the same cause; therefore in the amount of communication and inter-
action between the members of a society.
– a full explanation of a social fact involves looking at its
A growing population density leads to more
development through all the stages of its history;
and more people carrying out the same activities.
– social facts must be classified according to their degree of This results in growing competition and an ever-
organization; increasing struggle to survive. The only way that this
– a social fact is normal for a given type of society when it is found competition can be reduced is by people becoming
in the average example of the type; more specialized in their activities. Self-subcient
– a social fact is normal when it is related to the general households may, for example, become specialized in
conditions of collective life in a type of society. farming, milling, brewing, weaving, and other tasks.
They begin to form a division of labour. The division
Reread the discussion of Durkheim’s philosophy and identify
the paragraphs in which we discuss each of these rules. of labour, Durkheim argues, develops in direct pro-
In the title of his book, Rules of the Sociological Method, portion to the dynamic density. As the dynamic dens-
Durkheim uses the word method in the sense of a philosophy of ity of a society increases, so the division of labour
science or ‘methodology’ of science. He is not talking about the becomes more marked. Hence, growth in the scale of
specific research methods that we discuss in Chapter 3. societies over time produces ever more complex and
differentiated societies.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 37

The classic period of sociology 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

38 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Type Degree of solidarity Social situation Psychological state Examples

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

The classic period of sociology 39

type to be of little contemporary significance and he


limited his discussion of it to a footnote.
Max Weber
Durkheim recognized that egoism and anomie Max Weber worked as an economic historian and a
were often found together, as, for example, when lawyer, but he also worked along with other social
a divorce occurred. This both isolated people and scientists in Germany to develop a distinctively soci-
left their lives in an unregulated state. He was, ological perspective on these issues. His approach
however, careful to distinguish between the social to sociology, however, was very different from that
processes involved in egoism and anomie, on the of Durkheim. Weber argued that sociology had to
one hand, and the states of mind that each produced, start out not from structures but from people’s actions.
on the other hand. One of the most notable fea- This contrast between a sociology of structure and
tures of Durkheim’s theory of suicide, and one that a sociology of action, two complementary perspect-
is often overlooked by commentators, is that he ives on social life, was to mark the whole of the
shows the consequences of social conditions for an subsequent development of sociology.
individual’s psychological state. He demonstrated We will begin by discussing Weber’s general
not only that the behaviour of the individual was approach to social science, and we will then look at
social but also that the individual’s internal world his application of this approach in his investigations
of feelings and mental states was socially produced. into the development of European societies.
Thus, Durkheim argued that the social isolation
characteristic of egoistic suicide results in apathy or Concepts, values, and science
depression. Anomic suicide is associated with a much Durkheim said that the sociologist must consider
more restless condition of irritation, disappoint- social facts as things, disregarding all preconceptions.
ment, or frustration. When lack of regulation leads Weber set out a more complex position, arguing
desires and ambitions to get out of control, people that observation was impossible without concepts
become upset and frustrated by their inability to of some kind. In his principal essay on this subject
achieve them. Altruistic suicide is generally accom- (Max Weber 1904), he set out to show that this was
panied by an energy and passion quite opposite to perfectly compatible with the production of object-
the apathy of egoism. Durkheim did not discuss the ive scientific knowledge.
psychological state characteristic of fatalistic suicide Taking his lead from Kant, Weber argued that there
but it would seem to involve a mood of acceptance can be no knowledge of things as they actually exist,
and resignation. independently of thought. To have knowledge is to
Since Durkheim, the study of suicide has moved give meaning to the world and to interpret it in some
on and later sociologists have pointed to problems way. The world does not simply present itself to our
with the methods that he used. The main problem senses already interpreted. It must be interpreted in
was that the suicide rates on which he based his the light of what is significant to the observer. An
study were calculated from obcial statistics. These area of land, for example, may be of interest as a place
depended on coroners’ decisions on the classification for physical exercise, an environment for flora and
of deaths as suicides and it has been shown that their fauna, a beautiful landscape, the site of a historical
practices vary (Douglas 1967; J. M. Atkinson 1978). ruin, and so on. The particular interest that we bring
For a death to be suicide, it must be intentional, and to our observation leads us to focus on different
the assessment of intention is dibcult, particularly aspects of the world and to use different concepts to
if no suicide note is left. This leaves a lot of room interpret it. All observers, scientists included, carve
for interpretation and considerable scope for others, out particular aspects of reality to give them meaning
such as friends and relatives of the dead person, to and significance.
influence coroners’ decisions. The existence of social The concepts that are used to give this meaning to
variations in suicide rates cannot, however, be the world, Weber argued, derive from cultural values.
denied, and Durkheim’s fundamental point, that the It is our values that tell us which aspects of reality are
apparently most individual of acts requires sociolo- significant and which are insignificant. All concepts
gical explanation, stands. are ‘value relevant’. They are relative to particular cul-
tural values. Those who hold on to feminist values,
for example, are likely to focus on the relationships
between men and women and to develop such con-
We discuss general problems with the use of obcial cepts as patriarchy to describe the domination of
statistics in Chapter 3, pp. XXX–XX. women by men. Those who hold on to communist
values, on the other hand, are likely to focus on the

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 40

40 2: Theories and theorizing

relationships between workers and property-owners


THEORY
and to develop such concepts as exploitation to de-
scribe these relationships. Values differ considerably
Max Weber from one social group to another, and they change
over time. There are no universally valid values,
. . . saw sociology as and so there can be no universally valid scientific
the study of social concepts. There are a large number of possible value
action. standpoints, and reality can only ever be known from
particular value-relevant points of view.
This does not mean, however, that all knowledge
is simply arbitrary or merely subjective. Scientific
knowledge can be objective, despite being value
relevant. This is possible if sociologists adopt strict
and disciplined methods of investigation. They must
be critical in their use of concepts and evidence,
Max Weber (1864–1920) was born in Erfurt, Germany, but and they must follow strict logical principles in their
spent most of his early life in Berlin. He studied law at the reasoning. It must be possible for any other sociolo-
University of Heidelberg—his father was a lawyer—and did gist to replicate the research and test the results. On
further academic work at Berlin and Göttingen. He was this basis, a feminist and a communist may disagree
particularly interested in Roman law and agrarian relations, over which concepts are most useful for studying
and he undertook a number of studies in economic history. the modern world, but they should each be able to
He became Professor of Economics at Freiburg in 1893, see whether the other has been honest, rational, and
and in 1896 he moved to Heidelberg. Following a dispute critical in carrying out his or her research.
with his father, he suffered a mental breakdown and gave In this way, Weber also distinguished quite clearly
up his teaching post the following year. Although he was between factual judgements and value judgements.
later able to continue with research and writing, he did not Sociologists, like all scientists, come to objective
fully return to university teaching until 1917, when he was factual judgements about what is happening in the
appointed to a professorship at Munich. Weber was actively world. They may also make subjective value judge-
involved in liberal politics, and he was a member of the ments about those things in the world of which
German delegation to the Versailles peace treaty after they approve or disapprove. These value judgements,
the First World War. however, are no part of science. That someone dis-
Much of Weber’s work appeared as essays in journals, approves of inequality has no bearing upon the
appearing in book form only later in his life or after question of how great the level of inequality might
his death. His most influential work was his study of be in any particular society. The latter is a purely
Protestantism and the rise of capitalism (Max Weber empirical matter, a matter of fact. When a scientist
1904–5), and he produced related studies of religion in makes a value judgement, he or she is making an
China (1915) and India (1916). His key works on economic ethical or political statement, not a scientific state-
and political sociology were not completed in his lifetime ment. Weber went to great lengths to show that
and were brought together for publication after his death those who allowed their value judgements to inter-
(Max Weber 1914, 1920). fere with scientific activities were abandoning the
You will find detailed discussions of Weber’s main ideas principles of science and the pursuit of objective
in the following chapters: knowledge.

religion and rationality  Chapter 11


social stratification  Chapter 17 Weber’s argument is very dibcult to follow, so do not
bureaucracy  Chapter 18 worry if you have problems with it at first. It is probably
authority and the state  Chapter 20 one of the most dibcult things that you will come across
in sociology: it is not even fully understood by some
Giddens (1971) and Craib (1997) both provide very
professional sociologists! The important point is that Weber
useful accounts of Weber’s work. The standard biography rejected the idea that we all experience the world in exactly
is that written by his wife (Marianne Weber 1926). Parkin the same way. He concluded that there can be a number of
(1982) gives a good, brief introduction. equally legitimate ways of doing sociology. Come back to
Weber’s argument after you have completed the rest of this
chapter.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 41

The classic period of sociology 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

42 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Academic sociology established 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.

Academic sociology established

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

44 2: Theories and theorizing

Figure 2.3
The development of sociology up to the 1940s

18th century Enlightenment thinkers

1790s–1850s Comte Hegel

1850s–1870s Spencer Marx

Durkheim and Hobhouse, British Weber and


1880s–1920s
French sociology and American German sociology
sociology

Structural-functional Cultural Chicago Orthodox


1920s–1940s
anthropology anthropology sociology Marxism

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

Academic sociology established 45

the new Department of Sociology at Chicago—the


THEORY
first full department in the world—was associated
with a large number of local studies that drew expli-
Social anthropology citly on European traditions of theory.
Social anthropology is the term often used to describe the Like the anthropologists, the Chicago sociologists
work of those sociologists who specialize in the study of made a major contribution to fieldwork methods,
small-scale, pre-industrial societies. but they did so from very different theoretical tradi-
Most influential among the early followers of tions. In their work, they paid little attention to
Durkheim was Arthur Radcliffe-Brown, a Cambridge- Durkheim, finding their main inspiration in German
trained anthropologist who carried out fieldwork in sociology. The main influence was not Weber but
Australia and in the Andaman Islands of the Indian his friend Georg Simmel. The Chicago sociologists
Ocean. His books (Radcliffe-Brown 1922, 1930) took up, in particular, the German writers’ emphasis
reported on religious ritual and kinship in tribal societies, on action and interaction, combining this with an
and he drew out some general conclusions in a series awareness of the part played by group conflict in
of essays (Radcliffe-Brown 1952). Radcliffe-Brown social life. Their main studies were concerned with
inspired the work of Lloyd Warner, an American who the city of Chicago itself (Park and Burgess 1925),
undertook investigations in Australian tribal societies and they began to develop theoretical ideas that
and small American towns during the 1930s and 1940s would achieve their fullest recognition only after
(Warner and Lunt 1941). Radcliffe-Brown added little the Second World War.
to Durkheim’s own ideas, but he popularized the idea Figure 2.3 shows how these various strands of
that theories had to be applied in detailed fieldwork thought relate to the wider development of soci-
studies. ological theory. From the 1940s, and for at least
Bronislaw Malinowski developed this fieldwork tradition a generation, sociological theorists continued to
in Britain. He carried out some early research on native build on these foundations. By the 1950s, when soci-
Australian kinship, but his most important work was ology had begun to break through its old national
undertaken in the Trobriand Islands of the Pacific. His main boundaries, the theoretical landscape had been
books (Malinowski 1922, 1929, 1935) emphasized the transformed. Theoretical debates crystallized into
need to study all social phenomena in terms of their a smaller number of separate positions, each of
functions in relation to other social phenomena and in which had a far more international character than
relation to the structure of the society as a whole. He before. Three principal traditions of thought domin-
further emphasized that this kind of research could most ated sociological debate: structural functionalism,
easily be undertaken by living in a society and trying to symbolic interactionism, and a number of conflict
grasp its whole way of life. theories.
Franz Boas carried forward a similar fieldwork method
in the United States, though his work owed a great deal
to Hegel as well as to Durkheim. Boas (1911) emphasized
Structural-functionalist theories
the importance of culture and the need to grasp the inner
spirit of the culture as a whole. He and his many students Post-war structural functionalism had its roots in
carried out a series of studies of native American tribes the sociology of Durkheim and the social anthropo-
and small communities in the Pacific. While Malinowski logy of the inter-war years. However, its leading
saw functional analysis in relation to material and figure came from a very different background. Talcott
environmental factors, Boas set out a more cultural Parsons, who was to dominate sociology for more
or idealist theory. than two decades, was trained in economics, spend-
ing periods of time in Britain and Germany. He
began, in the 1930s, to explore the relationship
between economics and sociology and to build a
novel philosophical basis for sociology. After this,
Rowntree, and others in localities and communities and influenced by some early work by Robert Merton
across Britain, for example, investigated poverty and (1936, 1949), Parsons began to set out his own ver-
inequality with little concern for how these could be sion of structural-functionalist theory. This theory
explained in terms of the overall structure of British exercised a great influence on the development of
society. The principal exception to this neglect of sociology and it is currently being developed as
theory was to be found in the United States, where systems theory.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 46

46 2: Theories and theorizing

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:

• actors: the people who actually carry out the


actions;

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

Academic sociology established 47

compatible with these basic principles of the action Figure 2.4


frame of reference. You will probably recognize how
A model of social structure
much Parsons owed to Weber here.
This action frame of reference became the basis
of the structural functionalism built by Parsons, Educational
Merton, and others from the 1940s. In undertaking system
this task, they drew heavily on the ideas of
Durkheim. They built a set of concepts that could
describe the structural features of social life, but that Political Stratification
were grounded in the action frame of reference. system system
Societies, and social groups of all kinds, were seen as
social systems that consisted of mutually dependent
parts, such as roles, institutions, and organizations.
These parts together formed the social structure.
Economic Kinship
The task of sociological analysis was to identify these system system
parts and to show the functions that they fulfil in the
system as a whole.

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

48 2: Theories and theorizing

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.

as promotion at work, pleasing a husband or wife,


learning to drive a car, writing a book, passing an Robert Merton was born in 1910 and studied under Talcott Parsons.
examination, and so on. Means are those things that He has published important papers on roles, anomie, and functional
analysis. You will find applications of his model of anomie to the
help to achieve these goals: working hard, money,
rise of new religions in Chapter 11, pp. XXX–X, and to drug use in
physical skills, power, etc. Where people are fully Chapter 7, pp. XXX–X. A useful introduction to his thought is
socialized into their culture, they will be committed Crothers (1987).
to the ends and the means that are held out to them.
They will be conformists who follow only culturally
approved goals and use only culturally approved
means. Someone may, for example, desire a pleasant Divisions of class, gender, and ethnicity set limits
and well-decorated home and will work hard to earn on the chances that they are able to enjoy. In this
the money required. The conformist would not even situation, their commitment to the prescribed
consider stealing the money from others. If, however, means may be weakened, especially if they are given
a culture emphasizes the ends much more than the less cultural emphasis than the overriding goal of
means, leaving the means only loosely regulated, success.
people’s commitment to the approved means—and Merton argues that there are four possible re-
therefore their conformity to social norms—may be sponses to this anomie, as shown in Figure 2.5. The
eroded. This is especially likely where the material first possible response is what he calls innovation.
structure of opportunities available to people makes The innovator is someone who responds to these
it dibcult for them to achieve the approved ends. cultural strains by rejecting the legitimate means
The conditions under which they must act may and employing illegitimate ones. Criminal activities
mean, for example, that they lack the resources that aimed at financial gain are typical innovative acts.
are needed for the means to which they are supposed This is particularly likely to occur, Merton argues,
to be committed. It is the rift between culturally among the poorest members of society who have
approved ends and means that Merton calls anomie. fewest opportunities. Merton recognizes this also as
In a situation of anomie, conformity is far from the response of those who are relatively successful,
automatic. but who are willing to ‘bend the rules’ and engage in
Merton suggests that his model is particularly fraud and embezzlement to increase their income.
applicable to a modern society such as the United Ritualism is the second possible response to
States, where financial success in an occupation is a anomie. Here, people decide that they have little
central social value. Contemporary culture, he says, chance of attaining any significant success and so
places great emphasis on the need to maximize reject this as a goal. They remain, however, loosely
income. It also requires that individuals should committed to the conventional means. They simply
pursue this end through occupational achievement: go through the motions in a ritualistic way, with
they should work diligently and ebciently in order little or no commitment to the approved goal. The
to be promoted to a higher salary. The distribution time-serving bureaucrat who rigidly follows rules
of resources, however, makes it dibcult for people and procedures, regardless of the consequences, is a
to compete on an equal basis in this race for finan- typical ritualist. Such a person, if challenged about
cial success. Not all people have the same opportun- the consequences of his or her actions, is likely to
ities to enter well-paid employment, for example. respond that ‘I’m only doing my job’. Ritualistic

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 49

Academic sociology established 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

50 2: Theories and theorizing

requirements and that the resources given over to Figure 2.6


this production do not prevent it from meeting any
The Parsonian social system
of its other needs. Social systems, then, are dynamic
systems, constantly altering their structures as the
ways in which they meet, or fail to meet, their needs Structures
Means Ends
change. related to
It is important to emphasize again that needs will A G
not be inevitably or automatically met, though some
functionalists have tended to assume that they will. external Economy Polity
The needs of a social system are simply the con- aspects
ditions that are necessary for its survival in its current
form. These conditions will actually be met only if,
for whatever reason, people carry out the actions that
meet them. The need does not itself cause the action internal Family and Societal
that meets it. aspects education community
A number of theorists have attempted to compile
lists of the needs or functional requirements of a L I
social system (Aberle et al. 1950; Levy 1966). The
most influential was that of Parsons himself, though A Adaptation
this was not without its critics. Parsons arrived at a G Goal attainment
classification of functional needs by looking at two I Integration
L Latency
aspects or dimensions of them:

• whether they are internal or external to the system;


• whether they involve the ends or the means of
action. The four functions shown in Figure 2.6 are adapta-
tion, goal attainment, integration, and latency.
As we have already shown, some needs are internal Adaptation is the need to accumulate and control
to the system itself, while others are external to it. resources from the environment so that they are
Parsons defines internal needs as those that concern available for future actions. Parsons said that this need
the integrity and cohesion of a social system. External is met through the economic structures of produc-
needs, on the other hand, concern the facilities and tion, distribution, and exchange. Goal attainment
resources that must be generated from its environ- is the need to mobilize existing resources in relation
ment. Whether they are internal or external, needs to individual and collective goals. This, he said, can
may be relevant to either the means or the ends of be met through the political structures of decision-
action. In the former case, they are concerned with making and executive control.
the production and accumulation of human and Integration is the need to ensure the cohesion and
physical resources for use in the future, while in the solidarity of the social system itself. Parsons intro-
latter they involve the immediate use and consump- duced the term societal community to designate the
tion of resources in current actions. structures concerned with this function. The term
According to Parsons—who followed Spencer on refers not only to localized community structures
this—the gradual differentiation of social activities of kinship and neighbourhood, but also to the
into structurally distinct roles, institutions, and sub- larger bonds of national and ethnic community and
systems is a response to attempts to meet functional of social stratification. Finally, latency (or ‘pattern
needs. He held that a model of a social system can be maintenance’) is the need to build up a store of
constructed by cross-classifying the two dimensions motivation and commitment that can be used, when
that he identified, as shown in Figure 2.5. According required, for all the various activities of the society.
to this model, any social system has four functional Institutions such as the family and education, where
needs, and its structures can be classified according people are socialized into the values and norms of
to which of the four functions they are mainly con- their society, are the main structures concerned
cerned with. This model lies at the heart of Parsons’s with this need. These structures are much less likely
work, and versions of it can be found throughout his to become differentiated than are other structures,
books. It has come to be known as the Parsonian and they remain closely tied to the structures of the
boxes. societal community.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 51

Academic sociology established 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

52 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Academic sociology establishedg 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

54 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Academic sociology established 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

56 2: Theories and theorizing

This forced parents to bring out into the open


BRIEFING
the normally taken-for-granted assumptions about
how children ought to behave in relation to their
Ethnomethodology
parents.
Sociology is often criticized for using too many big
words and phrases. Our use of phenomenology and
Rational choice theory
ethnomethodology might have convinced you that A final approach to action and interaction focuses
these critics are right. Don’t panic! Many professional not on interpretative processes and the construction
sociologists still find it dibcult to pronounce the words, of meaning, but on rational choices and calculat-
let alone spell them. Concentrate on the ideas and do ive decision-making. This theory of action draws
not get caught up on the words themselves. To help heavily on the models of action used by econom-
you along, however, the word ‘ethnomethodology’ ists to explain producer and consumer choices in
has two elements in it: ethno, meaning ‘people’, markets, but its advocates argue that such models
and methodology, meaning ‘how things are done’. can be applied to actions in the political, religious,
So ethnomethodology simply means ‘how people familial, ethnic, and other spheres, as well as to the
do things’. economic sphere. One of the most important formu-
lations of rational choice theory was given by George
Homans (1969), but it has also been developed by
Peter Blau (1964), James Coleman (1990), and Jon
social world. Their accounts, however, are never Elster (1989).
complete but always leave something implicit or What these theories have in common is the view
taken for granted. People rely on their audiences that all actions are oriented towards goals and that
sharing a background of assumptions that allow people choose those means that are likely to be most
them to fill in the gaps for themselves and so to effective in attaining them. They choose from a range
understand what is being said. Organizational of alternative courses of action by calculating the
accounts, such as police records, medical records, chances they have of achieving their goals. In doing
and personnel files, for example, contain gaps and so, they consider the rewards and costs that are
incomplete information that can be filled in by their attached to each alternative. Some of these rewards
readers. They are descriptions of actions and inter- and costs will, of course, be monetary, but many are
actions that are seen as meaningful by those involved not. Choosing whether to earn money from employ-
and that provide a satisfactory basis for action. ment or to obtain it through theft, for example,
They are not, however, so easily readable by non- involves the obvious monetary rewards but also
participants, who are less likely to share the back- involves considering the time costs involved, the
ground knowledge and assumptions employed by amount of effort, the hardship that will be caused,
those in the organization. the social approval or disapproval that will be ex-
An important part of this taken-for-granted back- perienced, and so on. Similarly, the choice between
ground is a sense of social structure that people use voting or staying at home on an election day involves
to interpret and account for the actions of others. considering the time and effort required and the
People explain actions by showing that they are strength of commitment to the democratic process.
exactly the kinds of things that people in that situ- While some of these rewards and costs are tangible,
ation would do. They see it as a part of their role, material factors and others are less tangible symbolic
for example. These interpretative processes are not and emotional factors, all are seen as equally sub-
normally visible, and ethnomethodology assigns ject to rational calculation. people must find a way
itself the special task of uncovering them in order to of comparing very different rewards and costs and
demonstrate what is really going on in the routine deciding what course of action is, overall, most
activities of everyday life. They believe that this can rewarding or least costly to them.
be achieved through experimental interventions This kind of theory is often described as game
in social life. Taken-for-granted realities have to be theory, as the emphasis on rational and strategic
disrupted or challenged so that people are forced to calculation is comparable with that required by the
reflect on what they are doing. Only in this way can rules of games such as poker and chess. People are
the ethnomethodologist obtain any proper know- seen as acting exclusively on the basis of simple
ledge about these processes. Garfinkel suggested, for strategic principles in pursuit of a series of ‘moves’
example, that his students should react to their that will ensure they ‘win’ their various social
parents as they would if they were merely a lodger. encounters.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 57

Academic sociology established 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

58 2: Theories and theorizing

while a conflict theory would be better able to illu-


Conflict theories minate others.
The analysis of conflict has a long history, yet struc- At the heart of Dahrendorf’s theory of conflict is
tural functionalism developed as an approach that authority. In all organizations, he argues, there is
placed far more emphasis on consensus and cohe- an unequal distribution of authority that creates a
sion. This was one of the reasons why Marx—who division between the dominant and the subordinate,
saw conflict as playing a central part in social life— between those who rule and those who are ruled. In a
refused to identify himself as a sociologist. While business organization, for example, there is a division
some sociologists, like Marx, recognized the im- between managers and workers, in a state there is a
portance of conflict, they had little impact on the division between the elite and the mass of citizens,
mainstream of academic sociology. Marxism was, of and in a church there is a division between clergy and
course, a major influence on the work of Weber and laity.
other German sociologists, but this tradition itself Where consensus theorists focus on the normative
was of secondary importance until after the Second expectations attached to social positions, Dahrendorf
World War. The growing dissatisfaction with struc- looks at their interests. A person’s interests are those
tural functionalism as a complete and all-embracing things that are advantageous or disadvantageous,
theory of social life was associated not only with a given his or her position in society. Those in ruling
growing interest in theories of interaction but also positions have an interest in the structure of author-
with attempts to recover an awareness of conflict. ity as it is and so will act to maintain it. Those
Those who saw structural functionalism as paying they rule, on the other hand, have an interest in
too much attention to consensus looked to conflict altering the distribution of authority and will try
theories for an expansion of the intellectual tools to change it in order to improve their positions.
available to them. They highlighted, instead, the Individuals may not always be aware of their own
part played by divisions, power, force, and struggle. interests, as they rarely have a complete and perfect
They looked at the ways in which groups came to knowledge of the circumstances that they face. This
be organized for collective action, entered into con- lack of knowledge may often lead people to act in
flict with one another, and established relations of ways that disadvantage them. Because of these dif-
domination and control. No single theory of conflict ferences in interest and outlook, rulers and ruled
has dominated the field, but a great many views of will tend to be formed into what Dahrendorf calls
conflict have been put forward. We will look at four social classes. These are the base from which trade
of the most influential arguments—those of Ralf unions, political parties, and other associations are
Dahrendorf, John Rex, C. Wright Mills, and Jürgen recruited. These interest groups come into conflict
Habermas. with one another and are the actual driving forces in
social change.
Authority, resources, and conflict Rex focuses on social divisions that originate in
In the section on ‘Interaction theories’ we showed the distribution of economic, political, and cultural
that Weber had an important influence on some of resources, rather than the distribution of authority.
the American symbolic interactionists. His major He sees economic resources as fundamental, and he
impact, however, has been on conflict theorists. draws on a number of ideas from Marx to explore the
Weber’s discussion of social action has been a particu- conflicts that result from the unequal distribution
larly fruitful source of ideas, and the most import- of economic resources. He shows that classes are
ant writers to develop this into conflict theories formed around differences of property and market
were Ralf Dahrendorf (1957), John Rex (1961), and situation and that they struggle with each other over
C. Wright Mills (1959). Dahrendorf argues that struc- this distribution. Agricultural land, company shares,
tural functionalists presented, in effect, a consensus factories, and houses, for example, are sources of
theory. They looked at only one side of reality, ignor- power for their owners, who tend to come into
ing the existence of conflict and division. The theory conflict with those who lack these resources and seek
of consensus, then, needed to be complemented by a to alter their distribution. Similar divisions are pro-
theory of conflict. Dahrendorf wanted to use ideas duced around political and cultural resources, and
from Weber and Marx to build a theory of conflict. there is a close correspondence between the various
He did not, however, see any need to bring consensus distributions. Whole societies tend to be divided into
and conflict theories together into a new synthesis. sharply defined classes and these become organized
Each theory had something separate to offer. Con- for conflict through the kinds of interest groups
sensus theory illuminated some aspects of reality, described by Dahrendorf.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 59

Academic sociology established 59

is to uncover and explore this link between histor-


Dahrendorf, Rex, and Mills talk about the division of ical trends and individual experiences (Mills 1959:
societies into conflicting classes. However, they mean different chapter 1).
things by this. For Dahrendorf, classes are defined by authority
relations, while Rex and Mills see them as defined by economic
and other resources, but Mills gives particular attention to their This might be a useful point at which to review Marx’s
participation in political and military power. You will find a main ideas, as you will find they help you to understand the
discussion of these issues in ‘Class and status’, Chapter 17, following section on ‘Critical theory’. Look back at our whole
pp. XXX–XX, and ‘Elitist theories’, Chapter 19, pp. XXX–X. discussion of Marx on pp. XX–X.

Collective action by conflict groups establishes


Critical theory
what Rex calls a balance of power. In some situations,
a powerful group may be able to impose its ideas and Rex, Dahrendorf, and Mills made use of ideas from
values on others, establishing a dominant ideology. Marx and Weber. Marx’s recognition of conflict,
In other situations, however, the conflicting groups however, was kept alive even more strongly in
may be more equally balanced and so the institutions Marxist political parties and in the works of a number
of the society will reflect a compromise between the of Marxist theorists. Of most importance in develop-
values of the two groups. Occasionally, the members ing Marx’s ideas were the so-called critical theorists.
of a subordinate group may be able to carry through They have suggested that a renewed understanding
revolutionary actions aimed at transforming their of Marx’s ideas will allow sociologists to advance
society. beyond its conventional concerns and, indeed,
Mills drew heavily on symbolic interactionist ideas beyond Marxism itself.
to provide a social psychological basis for his argu- The idea of critique was, in many ways, a part
ments, but his core ideas focused on the class divi- of the Marxist tradition from its beginnings. This
sions of societies and the ways that these organized was certainly the way that Marx saw his own
political power and cultural processes. Hs particular work. In the Marxism of the Russian, German, and
concern was to explore the ways in which personal other European Communist parties, however, Marx’s
experiences and problems were linked to possible thought was transformed into an uncritical and
issues of structural change. Individual biographies, dogmatic system of theory. This began to change in
he said, must be related to the historical development the 1920s, when a number of independent thinkers
of social structures. started to develop a critique of established Marxism.
Social structures, according to Mills, must be Gramsci in Italy and Korsch and Lukács in Germany
explored through uncovering the processes through were the pioneers in developing a form of Marxism
which they are integrated. Social systems may be that broke with dogmatic styles of thought and also
integrated through consensus and the ‘correspond- took the political and cultural spheres more seriously
ence’ among their social institutions, but also than earlier Marxists (see Lukács 1923). Although
through processes of ‘co-ordination’ that reflect the their ideas had little impact outside Marxist circles,
society’s conflicts and tensions. In a situation of they helped to change the direction of Marxist
co-ordination, one or more institutional orders pre- thought, and their ideas were taken up by radical
dominates over others and regulates their relations writers in the 1960s and 1970s. Prominent among
with each other (Gerth and Mills 1953: chapter 12). these has been Jürgen Habermas.
The clearest examples of this are provided by total- Some of Habermas’s most important work has
itarian societies in which there is a dominance of concerned issues of scientific method, where he has
the political institutions, which are organized into tried to clarify the nature of a truly critical theory. All
single-party states. Even in the United States and knowledge, he argues, develops in relation to what
similar capitalist societies, however, Mills saw a close he calls the cognitive interests of social groups.
association between the political, economic, and These are the particular social interests that shape
military institutions, and an overlapping of power people’s needs for knowledge. There are three of
relations among them (Mills 1956). Ordinary people, these cognitive interests, each of which is associated
as a result, have become increasingly powerless and with a particular kind of knowledge:
feel that they can do little to influence the decisions
• an interest in technical control;
that shape their lives. The United States has become,
then, a ‘mass society’, divided between the powerful • an interest in practical understanding;
elite and the powerless masses. The task for sociology • an interest in emancipation.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 60

60 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Academic sociology established 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

62 2: Theories and theorizing

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

Structural-functionalist, interactionist, and conflict to understand modern societies. This transformation


theories continue to provide the theoretical core of theories and research is still under way, and it
of contemporary sociology, but they have not gone has not gone unchallenged by those who cling to
unchallenged. The rise of a strong and powerful existing styles of work. We look at the impact of these
women’s movement in the 1970s led many women arguments in the various chapters that follow, and
to challenge not only the male domination of senior particularly in Chapter 5, where we look at the cent-
positions in sociology but also the intellectual ral issue of gender divisions and gender identities. In
content of sociology itself. A number of influential this chapter we will concentrate on the philosophical
feminist theories challenged what they saw as the male questions that they have raised about the status of
bias in all the leading traditions of social theory. knowledge in sociology.
These have, they argued, ignored women and the We showed on pp. XX–X that Marx saw all social
part played by gender divisions. While feminists knowledge as related to the class position of the
found much of value in existing social theory, they observer or theorist. This view was echoed by Lukács,
suggested that nothing less than its whole-scale an early influence on critical theory. Lukács held
reconstruction was needed if this bias was to be that the standpoint of the proletariat—the working
overcome. class—was the only one that allowed its occupants to
A different challenge to the mainstream has grasp the real nature of their society as a whole. In
come from the theorists of the post-modern. They have Habermas’s formulation of critical theory, knowledge
argued that contemporary societies have undergone was related to deeper and more general cognitive
a transformation that cannot be grasped by our exist- interests. For Habermas, it was the standpoint cor-
ing intellectual tools. All existing forms of theory, responding to the emancipatory interest that allowed
including most feminist theories, are seen as too people a broader and deeper perspective on social
closely tied to the structures of modern societies. reality than knowledge built from the standpoint of
They must be replaced by new forms of theorizing technical and practical interests.
that are better fitted to the post-modern condition that One of the most significant and far-reaching
we have entered. features of contemporary sociology has been the
We will look at these theoretical approaches way in which these kinds of arguments have been
in turn. You will find that our discussions of par- taken up and extended by feminist writers. The
ticular topics in Part Two of this book draw on main thrust of feminist thought has been the claim
these theories as well as the mainstream theories. that knowledge is related to divisions of sex and
Indeed, the suggested shift from modern forms of gender. Put simply, men and women have different
regulated, centralized, and organized social life to experiences and so have different standpoints from
post-modern flexible and pluralistic forms is one of which they construct their knowledge. All social
the principal ideas that we explore. While we are knowledge is related to the gender of the observer
critical of the idea of post-modern society, you will or theorist.
find that each of the chapters in the second part of At one level there is an agreement among Marxists,
the book looks at contemporary changes in relation critical theorists, and feminists, all of whom see
to the issues raised by theorists of the post-modern aspects of social position and social action as deter-
condition. mining what people can know about their world.
Conventional, mainstream theories are seen, vari-
ously, as based on bourgeois, technical and practical,
or male standpoints. Those who occupy these
Feminist theories dominant and privileged positions in society are
Feminist writers have posed a fundamental and com- tied closely to the system from which they benefit;
prehensive challenge to all existing social theories their ideas can do little but legitimate and reinforce
and to their attempts to inform and interpret empir- existing social relations. Conventional science is
ical research. They have attempted nothing less than neither objective nor neutral. Liberating and critical
a long-overdue reformulation of the way in which theories, on the other hand, are built from prolet-
sociologists—and other social scientists—have tried arian, emancipatory, or female standpoints. Those

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 64

64 2: Theories and theorizing

who occupy subordinate or oppressed social positions


BRIEFING
are uniquely able to challenge the social order and to
produce knowledge that is critical of it.
Knowledge and standpoints
Feminists, then, suggest that mainstream theory
must be seen as malestream theory. It is rooted in There are many different feminist approaches, and
patriarchal relations that embody male power over not all accept this particularly strong version of
women and that establish the male standpoint on the argument for the feminist standpoint. There is,
knowledge. The technical character of scientific however, a broad agreement about the features that
knowledge and its emphasis on objectivity reflects are supposed to characterize malestream and feminist
a male way of seeing the world. This gendering of knowledge. These are set out below. While malestream
knowledge is denied, ignored, or unacknowledged writers place a positive value on the things listed on
by mainstream theorists, virtually all of whom the left-hand list, feminists see these in a negative
have been male. Women, it is claimed, are invisible light and stress the importance of things on the
in social theory and in social research. Studies of right-hand list.
people are, in reality, studies of men. This gendered
knowledge, feminists argue, must be challenged by Malestream Feminist
theorizing and research conducted from a female or • rationality • emotion
feminist standpoint. • facts • experiences
• objectivity • subjectivity
Gender differences are those differences of masculine • neutral • personal
and feminine identity that are linked to biological differences
of sex. We discuss these issues at length in Chapter 5,
• detachment • embodied
pp. XXX–XX, where various strands in feminist thought • public • private
are identified. • culture • nature
Knowledge is said to be gendered when its content and
its structure express specifically masculine or feminine You might have noticed an interesting ambiguity
characteristics. Look back over this chapter and see how few in these arguments. It is the distinctive standpoint of
female theorists have been mentioned: can you find any? women that has been identified, yet the theory describes
Is this simply bias on the part of two male authors, or is itself as a ‘feminist-standpoint’ theory rather than a
something deeper involved? When you have read more widely
female-standpoint or feminine-standpoint theory. Is it
into sociological theory, you might like to see if you can find
valid to equate a female standpoint with a specifically
any female theorists who could have been mentioned in our
sections on ‘Pioneers of social theory’ and ‘The classic period feminist consciousness?
of sociology’.

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

66 2: Theories and theorizing

describe this in terms of scientific progress or the


BRIEFING
advance of knowledge, as there is no way of compar-
ing the results produced by scientists using different
Post-structuralism and
paradigms. Each paradigm creates its own facts, and
there are no theory-neutral facts that we can use to
post-modernism
decide among them. The paradigm that survives is
Foucault’s work is often described as ‘post-structuralist’,
one that is able to attract the largest number of new
as he developed it in response to certain structuralist
recruits and the highest levels of research funding.
writers in the Marxist tradition (see Althusser 1965).
As so often in the political world, might makes
We discuss his extremely important ideas at many
right. Theoretical approaches are, therefore, different
places in this book, but particularly in Chapter 8.
from each other, but it is much more dibcult to
Foucault’s work is often linked with that of Lyotard,
say whether any one is better or more truthful than
though they differ in many ways. What they have in
another.
common is their rejection of the idea that there are
Kuhn’s ideas were enthusiastically taken up in
overarching structures in social life, and their recognition
sociology, as his argument suggested that the differ-
of fragmentation and diversity in cultural and social life.
ences between the natural sciences and the social
Lyotard saw himself as setting out a theory of the
sciences were not so great as many people assumed.
post-modern condition, and he is generally seen as a
Sociologists did not need to feel inferior about the
‘post-modernist’. This position has been most forcibly
theoretical disputes that ran through the discipline.
developed by Baudrillard (1977).
As in physics, chemistry, biology, and astronomy,
You will find that some writers use a hyphen in post-
the clash of fundamental and irreconcilable theor-
modernism, but others prefer it without. In fact, the
etical positions was a sign of a healthy pluralism
dictionary definition of ‘postmodernism’ (without a
(Friedrichs 1970).
hyphen) refers to a movement of thought in art and
Kuhn was not as radical as many of his more
architecture. This idea inspired contemporary writings,
enthusiastic supporters. His belief that a paradigm
but the term has now acquired a different meaning. It is
would collapse when a large number of problematic
used in its hyphenated form to show this difference in
observations had accumulated implied that observa-
meaning: a post-modern condition is one that goes
tions were not simply creations of the paradigm
beyond the modern condition.
itself. If facts really were nothing other than the
products of preconceived ideas, then no problematic
observations would ever be made. Many of his
followers conveniently ignored this point and saw
Kuhn as justifying the proliferation of irreconcilable societies, cultural institutions are embedded in
theoretical positions. Sociologists merely had to other social institutions that shaped people’s cultural
choose a theoretical position that appealed to them. activities. Marx’s model of the economic base and the
In the world of science, they held, anything goes. cultural and political superstructure was simply the
There can be as many alternative positions as our most extreme formulation of this. As these modern
imaginations can produce. societies have entered the post-modern condition,
These arguments were echoed and elaborated in however, the autonomy of the differentiated cultural
the works of two French writers, Foucault (1971) sphere has grown and it has become the most import-
and Lyotard (1979). Both highlighted the plurality ant aspect of social life.
and diversity of scientific knowledge, and Lyotard Some theorists of the post-modern condition have
argued that this reflected the post-modern condition seen this as resulting from changes in economic and
that contemporary societies were entering. It was political structures themselves. These changes are
simply no longer possible to use such terms as seen as leading from modern industrial capitalism
truth and objectivity. In post-modern conditions, to late capitalism (Jameson 1984), late modernity
all thought has to be seen as relative, partial, and (Giddens 1990), or even post-industrialism and post-
limited. No standpoint is fixed or absolute. capitalism (Bell 1979). These writers point to such
Lyotard’s argument concerned the nature of sci- things as the development towards more flexible and
ence and technical knowledge, but he pointed to a globalized systems of production in which market-
wider cultural phenomenon. Cultural activities of all ing, advertising, and consumerism play a more cent-
kinds are seen as having become more important in ral part. The cultural sphere becomes extended and
the second half of the twentieth century. In modern enlarged, and through the mass media it comes to

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 67

Sociology moves on 67

stress diversity and choice in all matters. We discuss


GLOBAL THEORY this further in Chapter 10, pp. XXX–X. In the post-
Most of the theories that we have considered have, modern condition, the idea of absolute and univer-
implicitly or explicitly, taken the nation state as their sal standards loses its meaning (see also Lash and
point of reference. Societies are seen as contained within Urry 1987).
the territorial boundaries of nation states, and the processes These writers have remained tied to Marxist
that sociologists study are largely contained within such or structural-functionalist theories and have, to a
societies. Thus, much sociology refers to British society, greater or lesser extent, been critical of the intel-
German society, American society, and so on. As we lectual consequences of the post-modern condition.
show in Chapter 14, in particular, this has always been an A more radical group of writers—epitomized by
unreal approach, and the growth in connections between Lyotard—have embraced the post-modern condition.
national societies has made their boundaries even more These are post-modern theorists, rather than simply
artificial than before. We live in an increasingly globalized theorists of the post-modern. They argue that it is
world, and the proper objects of sociological explanation no longer valid to search for economic and polit-
are transnational organizations and global structures ical realities beyond our cultural images of them.
themselves.
According to Baudrillard, for example, the post-
An awareness of the importance of transnational linkages
modern condition is one in which there is nothing
and the global integration of the world was, however,
for us to do except produce and consume cultural
depicted in the world-system theory of Immanuel Wallerstein
images. He argues that the cultural products of the
(1974). Writing in the 1970s, and drawing on arguments
from the sociology of development, Wallerstein set out a form mass media define reality for people, reflected in a
of Marxism that saw capitalism as developing within world growing intellectual interest in cultural studies and
systems rather than nation states and national societies. in the need to abandon the idea of building sci-
A world system is a large social system that contains many entific theories to explain the world. Sociology, for
states and cultural regions and that is integrated through Baudrillard, is no different from any other cultural
an extensive division of labour. The modern world system— activity: there is no real difference between building
rooted in a capitalist world economy—came into being in a theory, writing a poem, and composing an advert-
sixteenth century Europe and was the context within which ising jingle. Post-modern theorists enthusiastically
classical sociology arose. It is the increasing globalization of accept the complete relativity of knowledge and the
the modern world system that many see as underpinning the abandonment of the Enlightenment idea of scientific
move to late modernity or post-modernity and as having knowledge.
undermined nation-state based sociology. This argument has These ideas have had a massive impact on recent
most recently been formulated by Castells (1996), who has work, not only in sociology but also in literature,
traced the implications of the growing global network of cultural studies, and many other disciplines. There
economic and political linkages for the collective identities
are signs that some of the excessive claims made
of social movements.
by post-modernists have begun to wane, and a more
Albrow (1996) has suggested that contemporary social life
reasoned consideration of diversity and difference
has involved a transition from the modern age to the global
is beginning to take place. It is too early yet to
age. This transition, Albrow argues, occurred during the years
1945–89 and was marked by a strengthened dialogue about say what the final outcome of this will be. We hope
human rights and by the growth of the women’s, peace, and that your engagement with some of the implica-
green movements, each of which was involved in a global tions of their work while you read the rest of this
agenda. In this global age, people identify less and less with book will stimulate you to make your own con-
nations and local communities. They rely more and more tribution to this debate over the future of sociology
upon the construction of individualized identities. At the and science.
same time, they begin to become conscious of the world as a
single social space, albeit a multicultural social space
(Robertson 1992).
These theories are taken up in all the various chapters of
Summary points
this book, where we try to highlight the shift towards more In this section we have sketched out the contem-
global forms of social life. You will find a useful discussion porary criticisms of the mainstream theories that
of many of these issues in Urry’s Sociology Beyond we looked at in ‘Academic sociology established’.
Societies (2001). These criticisms are explored at greater length in
our discussions of particular topics in Parts Two
and Three.

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 68

68 2: Theories and theorizing

• 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

• action frame of reference • gendering • positivism


• adaptation • goal attainment • proletariat
• alienation • historical materialism • rationalization
• analytical realism • ideal type • roles
• anomie • idealist • ruling classes
• authority • ideologies • self
• base • industrial society • social classes
• bourgeois • integration • social differentiation
• capitalist society • interest group • social facts
• causal explanation • interests • socialization
• cognitive interests • latency • solidarity
• division of labour • materialist • structure
• dynamic density • mechanical solidarity • superstructure
• evolution • mode of production • symbolic interactionism
• function • organic solidarity • understanding
• functional analysis • phenomenology • values

··
SocC02 10/9/02 4:25 PM Page 69

Revision and exercises 69

Revision and exercises

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

70 2: Theories and theorizing

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

··

You might also like