Sociological Theory

Rayan Habib

1414-BH-PSY-20

Course Outline:

1. Introduction

a. Meaning and Types

b. Development of sociological theory

c. Functions of sociological theory

d. Theory and Theorizing

2. Contemporary Sociological Theory

a. Talcott Parsons

b. George Simmel

c. Robert K Merton

d. Ralph Daherendorf

e. C.W.Mill

f. GH Mead

g. CH Cooley

3. Modern Sociological Theory

a. Pierre Bourdieu

b. Anthony Giddnes

c. Jurgen Habermas

d. Michel Foucault

e. George Ritzer

• Section 1 : Introduction
• Chapter 1 : Meaning and Types

- A sociological theory is a set of ideas that provides an explanation for human society. Theories
are selective in terms of their priorities and perspectives and the data they de ne as signi cant.
As a result they provide a particular and partial view of reality. Sociological theories can be
grouped together according to a variety of criteria. The most important of these is the
distinction between Structural and Social action theories.

• Structural functionalism : The structural-functional approach is a framework for building

theory that sees society as a complex system whose parts work together to promote solidarity
and stability.

• This approach points to social structure, any relatively stable pattern of social behavior. Social
structure gives our lives shape—in families, the workplace, the classroom, and the community.
This approach also looks for a structure’s social functions, the consequences of any social
pattern for the operation of society as a whole.

- Contributors : August Comte , Emile Durkheim and Herbert Spencer

- Robert K. Merton (1910–2003) expanded our understanding of the concept of social function
by pointing out that any social structure probably has many functions, some more obvious than
others. He distinguished between manifest functions, the recognised and intended
consequences of any social pattern, and latent functions, the unrecognised and unintended
consequences of any social pattern.

- But Merton also recognised that not all the e ects of social structure are good. Thus a social
dysfunction is any social pattern that may disrupt the operation of society

- social functions the consequences of a social pattern for the operation of society as a whole

- manifest functions the recognised and intended consequences of any social pattern
- latent functions the unrecognised and unintended consequences of any social pattern
- social dysfunction any social pattern that may disrupt the operation of society
- In structural functionalism , social change is regarded as an adaptive response to some tension
within the social system. When some part of an integrated social system changes, a tension
between this and other parts of the system is created, which will be resolved by the adaptive
change of the other parts.

- Structural Functionalism that is also referred to as Functionalism, lays its emphasis on the
large-scale social structures, social institutions, their interrelationships, and implications on
society.

- In Structural Functionalism, the terms structure and function are not necessarily
complementary. One can study the structure of society without examining its functions,
similarly, functions of di erent social processes can be studied without being concerned with
its structural form.

- The basic principles of Structural Functionalism can be comprehended in three simple terms:

1. maintenance of social stability,

2. collective functioning,

3. and social evolution.

ff
ff
fi
fi
 - The social structure of society consists of various components such as social institutions,
social norms, and values, that are interconnected and dependent on each other. Each
component of the structure has a speci ed role and altogether these social patterns contribute
to the balanced and stable functioning of society.

- Furthermore, social structure adapts to the changing needs of society, if any part of the
structure acts dysfunctional then society as a whole might collapse.

• Con ict theory :

- The social-con ict approach is a framework for building theory that sees society as an arena
of inequality that generates con ict and change.

- It shows how inequality creates con ict and causes change.

- Con ict theory is a general term coving a number of sociological approaches, which oppose
functionalism, and which share the idea that the basic feature of all societies was the struggle
between di erent groups for access to limited resources.

- Con ict theories assume that all societies have structural power divisions and resource
inequalities that lead to groups having con icting interests

- Con ict theory has various other roots, such as Marxian and Weberian theory and Simmel’s
work on social con ict.

I. Con ict theories emphasize looking at the history and events in a society in terms of structural
power divisions, such as social class.

II. Although few modern sociologists call themselves con ict theorists, scholars as notable as
Karl Marx (1818–1883), Max Weber (1864–1920), Talcott Parsons (1902–1979), and Ralf
Dahrendorf (1929–2009) have formulated theories as to what causes con ict, its normalcy,
and the impact it has on societies.

III. A structural con ict approach, such as Marxism, believes that society is in con ict between
the classes. They believe that the Bourgeoisie oppress the Proletariat through various social
institutions without their full knowledge.

IV. Some sociologists, such as Crouch (2001), categorize con ict theories across two axes:
momentus vs. mundane and exceptional vs. endemic. This categorisation re ects when and
the extent to which theorists believe that con ict is pathological in a society.

V. Sociologists have used con ict theory to frame and enhance discussions as far-ranging as
historical events to individualistic vs. collectivistic cultures and gender discrimination in the
workplace.

- Marx’s version of con ict theory focused on the con ict between two primary classes within
capitalist society: the ruling capitalist class (or bourgeoisie) who own the means of production,
and the working class (or proletariat), whose alienated labor the bourgeoisie exploit to produce
pro t.

- If the power of the ruling class is challenged, by, say strikes and protests, the ruling class can
use the law to criminalise those posing the threat, and media reporting will be manipulated to
give the impression that the ruling class’s interests are those of the whole nation.

- For Marxists, the appearance of consensus is an illusion; it conceals the reality of one class
imposing its will on the rest of society.

- Coercion – the use of the army, police and other government agencies to force other classes to
accept ruling class ideology.

fi
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
ff
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fi
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
 - In contrast to functionalist theories of con ict, Marxist theories of con ict see con ict as
endemic and momentus (Marx, 2000). Endemic con ict theories see con ict as an inherent
aspect of social relations, and likely to occur at many points over the course of a relationship.

- Con ict is endemic to social relations, according to Marxism, because of the belief that society
is based upon class relations and that those from di erent class groups have opposing
interests.

- This con ict is implicit to every interaction, and con ict does not only exist when it overtly
manifests itself in actions.

- Indeed, according to Marxists, weaker parties in the class con ict may be powerless or too
fearful to express con ict openly.

- While a functionalist may view con ict between a supervisor and their employees as a
symptom of something being wrong in the organization, a Marxist sociologist may view this
con ict as a re ection of the reality of the relationship between the supervisor and his workers.

- An absence of con ict would deny the inherent and fundamental divides underlying every
structural divide in a Marxist society (Crouch, 2001).Although both functionalism and Marxism
disagree as to whether or not con ict is inherent to social interactions, both approaches agree
that con ict is likely to bring about disorder and potentially radical social change.

- In the case of Marxism, a momentous class con ict will lead to a catastrophic dissolution of
class relations.

- Indeed, in a way some sociologists have called ironic (Couch, 2001), the ongoing social order
according to Marxism resembles that of the functionalist social order. All institutions tend to
attempt to maintain the current social order.

- The structural-functional and social-con ict approaches share a macro-level orientation, a

broad focus on social structures that shape society as a whole.

• Symbolic Interactionism :

- The symbolic-interaction approach, then, is a framework for build- ing theory that sees
society as the product of the everyday interactions of individuals.

- Symbolic interactionism theory assumes that people respond to elements of their environments
according to the subjective meanings they attach to those elements, such as meanings being
created and modi ed through social interaction involving symbolic communication with other
people.

- Sociology also uses a micro- level orientation, a close-up focus on social interaction in
speci c situations.

- Symbolic interactionism is a social theoretical framework associated with George Herbert

Mead (1863–1931) and Max Weber (1864-1920).

- Max Weber’s claim that people’s beliefs and values shape society is the basis of the social-
interaction approach.

- Social-exchange analysis states that social life is guided by what each person stands to gain or
lose from the interaction.

fl
fl
fi
fl
fl
fl
fi
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
fl
ff
fl
fl
fl
fl
 - It is a perspective that sees society as the product of shared symbols, such as language. The
social world is therefore constructed by the meanings that individuals attach to events and
social interactions, and these symbols are transmitted across the generations through
language.

- A central concept of symbolic interactionists is the Self, which allows us to calculate the e ects
of our actions.

- Symbolic interactionism theory has been criticized because it ignores the emotional side of the
Self as a basis for social interaction.

- In simple terms, people in society understand their social worlds through communication — the
exchange of meaning through language and symbols.

- Instead of addressing how institutions objectively de ne and a ect individuals, symbolic

interactionism pays attention to these individuals’ subjective viewpoints and how they make
sense of the world from their own perspective (Carter and Fuller, 2015).

- The objective structure of a society is less important in the symbolic interactionist view than
how subjective, repeated, and meaningful interactions between individuals create society.
Thus, society is thought to be socially constructed through human interpretation.

- According to Blumer (1969), social interaction thus has four main principles:

1. Individuals act in reference to the subjective meaning objects have for them. For example,
an individual that sees the “object” of family as being relatively unimportant will make
decisions that deemphasize the role of family in their lives;

2. Interactions happen in a social and cultural context where objects, people, and situations
must be de ned and characterized according to individuals’ subjective meanings;

3. For individuals, meanings originate from interactions with other individuals and with society;

4. These meanings that an individual has are created and recreated through a process of
interpretation that happens whenever that individual interacts with others.

- Although symbolic interactionism traces its origins to Max Weber's assertion that individuals
act according to their interpretation of the meaning of their world, the American philosopher
George Herbert Mead introduced this perspective to American sociology in the 1920s.

- In particular, Mead concentrated on the language and other forms of talk that happens between
individuals. The “self” — a part of someone's personality involving self-awareness and self-
image — originates in social experience.

- Charles Horton Cooley (1902) used the term looking-glass self to convey the idea that a
person's knowledge of their self-concept is largely determined by the reaction of others around
them. Other people thus act as a 'looking-glass' (mirror) so that we can judge ourselves by
looking 'in' it.

- An individual can respond to others’ opinions about himself, and internalize the opinions and
feelings that others have about him.

• Development of Sociological Theory

1. Political Revolutions : The long series of political revolutions that were ushered in by the
French Revolution in 1789 and carried over through the nineteenth century was the most
immediate factor in the rise of sociological theorizing. 



fi
fi
ff
ff
 The negative e ects of such changes a ected writers who due to being particularly disturbed
by the resulting chaos and disorder, especially in France were united in a desire to restore
order to society. 



Some of the more extreme thinkers of this period literally wanted a return to the peaceful and
relatively orderly days of the Middle Ages. The more sophisticated thinkers recognised that
social change had made such a return impossible. 



This interest in the issue of social order was one of the major concerns of classical
sociological theorists, especially Comte, Durkheim, and Parsons.

2. Industrial Revolution and Rise of Capitalism : The Industrial Revolution was not a single
event but many interrelated developments that culminated in the transformation of the
Western world from a largely agricultural to an overwhelmingly industrial system. 



Large numbers of people left farms and agricultural work for the industrial occupations o ered
in the burgeoning factories. 



The factories themselves were transformed by a long series of technological improvements. 



Large economic bureaucracies arose to provide the many services needed by industry and
the emerging capitalist economic system. In this economy, the ideal was a free marketplace
where the many products of an industrial system could be exchanged. 



Within this system, a few pro ted greatly while the majority worked long hours for low wages.
A reaction against the industrial system and against capitalism in general followed and led to
the labor movement as well as to various radical movements aimed at overthrowing the
capitalist system. 



Four major gures in the early history of sociological theory—Karl Marx, Max Weber, Emile
Durkheim, and Georg Simmel—were preoccupied, as were many lesser thinkers, with these
changes and the problems they created for society as a whole. They spent their lives studying
these problems

3. Rise of Socialism : One set of changes aimed at coping with the excesses of the industrial
system and capitalism can be combined under the heading “socialism”. 



Although some sociologists favoured socialism as a solution to industrial problems, most were
personally and intellectually opposed to it. 



On one side, Karl Marx was an active supporter of the overthrow of the capitalist system and
its replacement by a socialist system. 





Although Marx did not develop a theory of socialism per se, he spent a great deal of time
criticising various aspects of capitalist society. In addition, he engaged in a variety of political
activities that he hoped would help bring about the rise of socialist societies. 



Most of the early theorists, such as Weber and Durkheim, were opposed to socialism (at least
as it was envisioned by Marx) 



They recognised the problems within capitalist society, they sought social reform within
capitalism rather than the social revolution argued for by Marx. They feared socialism more
than they did capitalism. This fear played a far greater role in shaping sociological theory than
did Marx’s support of the socialist alternative to capitalism.

4. Feminism : Wherever women are subordinated—and they have been subordinated almost
always and everywhere—they seem to have recognised and protested that situation in some
form. 



fi
ff
fi
ff
ff
 1630s, high points of feminist activity and writ- ing occurred in the liberationist moments of
modern Western history: a rst urry of productivity in the 1780s and 1790s with the debates
surrounding the American and French revolutions; a far more organized, focused e ort in the
1850s as part of the mobilization against slavery and for political rights for the middle class;
and the massive mobilization for women’s su rage and for industrial and civic reform
legislation in the early twentieth century, especially the Progressive Era in the United States. 



All of this had an impact on the development of sociology, in particular on the work of a
number of women in or associated with the eld 



Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Jane Addams, Florence Kelley, Anna Julia Cooper, Ida Wells-
Barnett, Marianne Weber, and Beatrice Potter Webb, to name a few. 



Feminist concerns ltered into sociology only on the margins, in the work of marginal male
theorists or of the increasingly marginalised female theorists. The men who assumed centrality
in the profession—from Spencer, through Weber and Durkheim—made basically conservative
responses to the feminist arguments going on around them, making issues of gender an
inconsequential topic to which they responded conventionally rather than critically in what
they identi ed and publicly promoted as sociology.

5. Urbanisation : Partly as a result of the Industrial Revolution, large numbers of people in the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries were uprooted from their rural homes and moved to urban
settings. 



This massive migration was caused, in large part, by the jobs created by the industrial system
in the urban areas. But it presented many di culties for those people who had to adjust to
urban life. 



In addition, the expansion of the cities produced a seemingly endless list of urban problems—
overcrowding, pollution, noise, tra c, and so forth. 



The nature of urban life and its problems attracted the attention of many early sociologists,
especially Max Weber and Georg Simmel. 



In fact, the rst major school of American sociology, the Chicago school, was in large part
de ned by its concern for the city and its interest in using Chicago as a laboratory in which to
study urbanisation and its problems.

6. Religious change : Social changes brought on by political revolutions, the Industrial

Revolution, and urbanisation had a profound e ect on religiosity. Many early sociologists
came from religious backgrounds and were actively, and in some cases professionally,
involved in religion (Hinkle and Hinkle, 1954). 



They brought to sociology the same objectives they espoused in their religious lives. They
wished to improve people’s lives (Vidich and Lyman, 1985). For some (such as Comte),
sociology was transformed into a religion. 



For others, their sociological theories bore an unmistakable religious imprint. Durkheim wrote
one of his major works on religion. 



Morality played a key role not only in Durkheim’s sociology but also in the work of Talcott
Parsons. 



A large portion of Weber’s work also was devoted to the religions of the world. Marx, too, had
an interest in religiosity, but his orientation was far more critical.

fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
ffi
ffi
fi
ff
ff
ff
 7. Growth of Science : As sociological theory was being developed, there was an increasing
emphasis on science, not only in colleges and universities but in society as a whole. 



The techno- logical products of science were permeating every sector of life, and science was
acquiring enormous prestige. Those associated with the most successful sciences (physics,
biology, and chemistry) were accorded honoured places in society. 



Sociologists (especially Comte, Durkheim, Spencer, Mead, and Schutz) from the beginning
were preoccupied with science, and many wanted to model sociology after the successful
physical and biological sciences. 



However, a debate soon developed between those who wholeheartedly accepted the
scienti c model and those (such as Weber) who thought that distinctive characteristics of
social life made a wholesale adoption of a scienti c model di cult and unwise (Lepenies,
1988). 



The issue of the relation- ship between sociology and science is debated to this day, although
even a glance at the major journals in the eld, at least in the United States, indicates the
predominance of those who favor sociology as a science.

• Rise of Sociological Theory

1. Enlightenment : 



The Enlightenment was a period of remarkable intellectual development and change in

philosophical thought.



A number of long-standing ideas and beliefs—many of which related to social life—were over-
thrown and replaced during the Enlightenment. The most prominent thinkers associated with
the Enlightenment were the French philosophers Charles Montesquieu 1689–1755) and Jean
Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) 



The in uence of the Enlightenment on sociological theory, however, was more indirect and
negative than it was direct and positive. As Irving Zeitlin puts it, “Early sociology developed as
a reaction to the Enlightenment” Enlightenment were in uenced, above all, by two intellectual
currents—seventeenth-century philosophy and science. 



Seventeenth-century philosophy was associated with the work of thinkers such as René
Descartes, Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke. The emphasis was on producing grand,
general, and very abstract systems of ideas that made rational sense. The later thinkers
associated with the Enlightenment did not reject the idea that systems of ideas should be
general and should make rational sense, but they did make greater e orts to derive their ideas
from the real world and to test them there. In other words, they wanted to combine empirical
research with reason (Seidman, 1983:36–37). The model for this was science, especially
Newtonian physics. 



Overall, the Enlightenment was characterized by the belief that people could comprehend and
control the universe by means of reason and empirical research. The view was that because
the physical world was dominated by natural laws, it was likely that the social world was too.
Thus it was up to the philosopher, using reason and research, to discover these social laws.
Once they understood how the social world worked, the Enlightenment thinkers had a
practical goal—the creation of a “better,” more rational world. 



With an emphasis on reason, the Enlightenment philosophers were inclined to reject beliefs in
traditional authority. 



The mission of the practical and change-oriented philosophers of the Enlightenment was to
overcome these irrational systems. The theorists who were most directly and positively
fl
fi
fi
fi
fl
ffi
ff
 in uenced by Enlightenment thinking were Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl Marx, although the
latter formed his early theoretical ideas in Germany.

2. Conservative Reaction : The ideology of the counter-Enlightenment represented a virtual

inversion of Enlightenment liberalism. In place of modernist premises, we can detect in the
Enlightenment critics a strong anti-modernist sentiment” 



The most extreme form of opposition to Enlightenment ideas was French Catholic
counterrevolutionary philosophy, as represented by the ideas of Louis de Bonald (1754–1840)
and Joseph de Maistre (1753–1821) (Reedy, 1994; Bradley, 2005a, 2005b). These men were
reacting against not only the Enlightenment but also the French Revolution, which they saw
partly as a product of the kind of thinking characteristic of the Enlightenment 



Zeitlin (1996) outlined ten major propositions that he sees as emerging from the conservative
reaction and providing the basis for the development of classical French sociological theory. 



Whereas Enlightenment thinkers tended to emphasize the individual, the conservative reaction
led to a major sociological interest in, and emphasis on, society and other large-scale
phenomena. Society was viewed as something more than simply an aggregate of individuals.
Society was seen as having an existence of its own with its own laws of development and
deep roots in the past.

Zeitlin’s Ten Points 


3. Society was the most important unit of analysis; it was seen as more important than the
individual. It was society that produced the individual, primarily through the process of
socialisation. 


4. The individual was not even seen as the most basic element within society. A society
consisted of such component parts as roles, positions, relationships, structures, and
institutions. Individuals were seen as doing little more than lling these units within society. 


5. The parts of society were seen as interrelated and interdependent. Indeed, these
interrelationships were a major basis of society. This view led to a conservative political
orientation. That is, because the parts were held to be interrelated, it followed that tampering
with one part could well lead to the undermining of other parts and, ultimately, of the system
as a whole. This meant that changes in the social system should be made with extreme care. 


6. Change was seen as a threat not only to society and its components but also to the
individuals in society. The various components of society were seen as satisfying people’s
needs. When institutions were disrupted, people were likely to su er, and their su ering was
likely to lead to social disorder. 


7. The general tendency was to see the various large-scale components of society as useful for
both society and the individuals in it. As a result, there was little desire to look for the negative
e ects of existing social structures and social institutions. 


8. Small units, such as the family, the neighbourhood, and religious and occupational groups,
also were seen as essential to individuals and society. They provided the intimate, face-to-
face environments that people needed in order to survive in modern societies. 


9. There was a tendency to see various modern social changes, such as industrialization,
urbanisation, and bureaucratisation, as having disorganising e ects. These changes were
viewed with fear and anxiety, and there was an emphasis on developing ways of dealing with
their disruptive e ects. 


10. While most of these feared changes were leading to a more rational society, the conservative
reaction led to an emphasis on the importance of nonrational factors (ritual, ceremony, and
ff
fl
ff
fi
ff
ff
ff
 worship, for example) in social life. 


11. Finally, the conservatives supported the existence of a hierarchical system in society. It was
seen as important to society that there be a di erential system of status and reward. 


• Theory and Theorising

- The primary function of a theory is to attempt to explain or account for a particular
phenomenon in terms of some other phenomenon which is viewed as explanatory. It is this
explanatory function which distinguishes a theory from related but non explanatory concepts.

- Description : delineation or listing of a particular phenomenon’s characteristics without

accounting for its existence or change.

- Typology : represents a set of characteristics assumed to refer to a particular phenomenon.

- Models : while sometimes viewed as typologies are based on less empirical observation and
de ne interrelationships between characteristics as well.

- Prediction : involves the ability to predict where an individual will stand with respect to variable
Y by knowing his or her position to variable X. This prediction being based on previous
empirical correlations which have been observed between these two variables. Prediction in no
way provides theory or explanation.

• De nitions of Theory

- H.M Blalock : “It has been noted that theories do not consist entirely of conceptual schemes or
typologies but must contain law-like propositions that interrelate the concepts or variables two
or more at a time”

- J.Gibbs : A theory is a set of logically interrelated statements in the form of empirical assertions
about properties of in nite classes of events or things.

- J.Hage : There is a general agreement that a theory is a set of propositions or theoretical

statements.

- P.D Reynolds : The use of the term theory will refer to abstract statements that are considered
part of scienti c knowledge in either the set of laws , the axiomatic or the casual process
forms.

- A.L Stinch-combe : Theory ought to create the capacity to invent explanations.

- D. Willer : A theory is an integrated set of relationships with a certain level of validity.

- Conclusion : a set of abstracted and logical propositions which attempts to explain

relationships between phenomenon. - Only tackles the abstract side of theory but not the
structural side.

• Structural Elements :

- Paradigm : Foundation of any theory , based on conceptualisation of the phenomena being

explained and the underlying explanatory relationships which account for the manner in which
these phenomena operate.

- When a paradigm is highly developed , beyond the simplistic , general hypothesis level , it may
become a model of assumed relationships which represents the foundation of the theory’s
formal structure. E.G Sigmund Freud’s personality theory , symbolic interactionism , structural
functionalism , and con ict orientation.

fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
ff
 - Any paradigm implies certain concepts - a label or name given to a class of phenomena. These
concepts need to be carefully de ned and their relationship to the underlying paradigm
demonstrated.

- The logical relationships between these concepts need to be stated and theoretically linked.

- Axioms (propositions that are assumed to be true in and of themselves).

- Propositions ( statements of relationships that may be derived from axioms)

- or hypothesis ( statements of relationships between concepts in their operationalised form ,

that is their empirical indexes).

- These relationships may be positive , negative or independent of each other.

- The structure of a theory depends upon the kinds of relationship statements it contains and
their relationship to one another.

- Hence a theory can be either axiomatic (set of de nitive propositions) , propositional

(propositions derived from an axiom) or axiomatic-inductive-deductive.

- On an informal level a set of linked hypothesis may be viewed as semi-complete theories as

long as they contain basic axioms and propositions.

- Concepts/Statements of relationships need to be empirically de ned or operationalised in the

form of variables (personality tests , social class scales , demographic measures of a social
system , the organisational structure of institutions , rate of social mobility , and socio-
economic measures of social change).

- Research instrument de nes the empirical indexes within each variable of the research. (E.g
scores on speci c items of a questionnaire).

- A major di erence between scienti c and non-scienti c theories , then , is the extent to which
they are empirically testable rather than ideological or closed systems of thought.

- Next stage of an empirical methodology is to test the hypothesised relationships between the
variables and indexes. ( opinion survey , participant observation , interview data or a small
group experiment in a laboratory. Methodology dictated , is a ected by the kind of variables
derived from the theory’s structure rather than any developments prior. Sampling error occurs
due to the ,imitations provided by the type of sample collected and Measurement error occurs
during data analysis.

- Once the data is gathered it has to be analyzed in reference to the theory’s major hypothesis.
Such analysis often consists of the application statistical techniques to indicate levels of
association and statistical signi cance. These tests are entirely dependent upon the quality of
the sample and the data concerned.

- Upon completion of the data analysis the theorist must proceed to interpret data results in
relevance to the structure of the theory (i.e the basic axioms , propositions and hypothesis).
Since emprical methodologies , tests and data analysis provide only indirect tests of a theory’s
basic structure. Henceforth an investigator must be very cautious in deriving conclusions from
indirect tests in order to avoid over-estimation in terms of theoretical signi cance.

- Finally the theorist seeks to evaluate the theory in terms of two criteria : 1. The e ciency ,
scope and logic of its theoretical structure and 2. Level of testability , prediction and accuracy
when submitted for empirical examination.

- Summary : formal theory is an abstract , logical proposition which attempts to explain

relationships between phenomena. Secondly the structure of a formal theory consists of eight
major elements.

ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
ffi
 1. A paradigm

2. Set of concepts

3. Statements (axioms , propositions and hypotheses) concerning the logical relationships

between these concepts are operationalised

4. Methodology used to test the hypothesised relationships

5. Data Analysis

6. Interpretation of results

7. Evaluation of the theory’s logical and empirical structure in view of the data analysis and
interpretation.

• Major types of theories

1. Informal-Formal : Formal theories are structured by assumptions underlying the scienti c

method or it may be informal and relatively unstructured , typi ed by assumptions based on
every-day life. Mathematical theory and theory in the physical sciences tend to conform to the
former type while single hypotheses , ideology or research hunches fall into the latter
category.

2. Descriptive-Explanatory : Descriptive theories lack an underlying explanatory paradigm or

focus on the explanatory function in a viable structure. While descriptive theory may be
implicitly explanatory , it fails to represent an explanation when its basic paradigm is either
absent or invisible.

3. Ideological-Scienti c : The context of a theory may be pre-dominantly ideological or guided

by the scienti c method , with its emphasis on the formulation of assumptions which are
empirically testable. While this distinction is a matter of degree rather than form , the scienti c
method contains ideological elements also-it is important to de ne a theorist’s major aims in
order to appreciate the values behind the work. Thus no theory is completely objective ; no
matter how objective it appears to be , it always possesses certain ideological implications.

4. Intitutive-Objective : Theories also di er in the extent to which they argue that knowledge is
intuitive and subjective as opposed to external and objective. Thus phenomenologists and
mystics would argue the former , while scientists hold more to the latter in sociology the
distinction is exempli ed by the ethnomethodologists on the one hand and structure
functionalists on the other.

5. Inductive-Deductive : Theories may be on of two major types they may attempt to move form
the speci c to genera; or vice cress. The former are inductive and the latter deductive in
structure. In sociology , as we shall see , most theories are deductive , using the genera; (e.g
the social system) as the independent variable in their explanation system. Psychological and
socio-psychological theories on the other hand , then to be inductive in the form.

6. Microscopic-Macroscopic : Theories also di er in their level of analysis : they may focus on

the speci c and individual level , the microscopic or the general and societal the macroscopic.
In sociology they tend to be predominantly of the latter kind , while psychological
explanations focus more on the other level. Each Lebel has its own advantages and problems.
However , the macroscopic tends to become too general to explain individual phenomena
adequately , while the macroscopic su ers from the opposite problem.

7. Structure-Functional : They also di er in focus some concentrate on explaining the structure

of phenomena while others are more concerned with the manner in which these phenomena
are evolving and changing. In sociology for example , structure-functional theory is concerned
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
ff
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
 with the structure of a particular society in terms of its underlying functions , while other
con ict theories focus on the dynamics of a society.

8. Naturalistic-Social : Finally , theories vary in the kinds of phenomena they use as explanatory
factors , some use biological and naturalistic variables while others concentrate on social
phenomena. Thus a social scientist may attempt to explain social behaviour in terms of
humanity’s biological instincts ( a naturalistic approach ) or in terms of characteristics of the
social system , such as its division of labour , level of industrialisation ( a systemic
orientation ). These are two very di erent kinds of explanation with varying implications.

• Process of theory construction

- Delineation : underlying causal relationships. The explanatory framework is basic to the theory’s
explanatory structure. The paradigm should be made as explicit as possible , especially the
causal relationships within it which are assumed to be explanatory.

- De nition of Concepts : within the paradigm as clearly as possible. Meanings of concepts are
often assumed rather than de ned , leading to ambiguity and possible confusion.

- Logical relationships : between these concepts implied by the theory’s paradigm then require
de nition in the form of axioms or propositions. Further propositions may be logically deduced
if the method of axiomatic deduction is followed.

- Operationalise : the concepts in the form of variables and the logical relationships between
these variables are then deduced from the above axioms and proportions in the form of
hypotheses.

- Methodology : implied by these variables is then developed in order to test the hypotheses
through empirical indexes. This methodology is then applied as rigorously as possible to test
the hypotheses empirically.

- Data analysis : according to techniques statistical or otherwise derived from the theoretical
system just developed.

- Interpretation : of signi cance of the results in reference to the theory he or she has developed.
The theory may be interpreted on the basis of those results or in reference to them depending
on the approach to theory construction accepted.

- Evaluation : of the theory on the theoretical and/or empirical grounds depending , once again
on the particular approach to theorising accepted.

- The theory and methodology are not separate entities ; one implies the other and they should
be evaluated together.

• Social Context of theorising

- Societal conditions : Theories tend to develop most markedly in reaction to society’s changing
development and needs.

- Intellectual Conditions :

- Biographical Conditions :

fi
fi
fl
fi
fi
ff
 • Section 2 : Contemporary sociological theory
• Talcott Parsons
- British contemporary sociological theorist

- Most dominant American sociologist + theorist

- Problem of Social Order : How is social order possible ? For Parson’s social life is
characterised by mutual advantage and peaceful cooperation rather than mutual
hostility and destruction.

- Parson’s reached this primary conclusion by considering the works of the 17th century
philosopher Thomas Hobbes , who claimed to have discovered the basis of social
order.

- According to Hobbes , humanity is driven by both passion and reason. Passion is a

primary driving force while reason is a tool employed to enable those passions into
ful lment. If passions were allowed free reign , the only outcome would be war.
Hobbes then leads this notion towards the obverse concept of self preservation.

- The desire for Self preservation leads people to agree to restrain their passions , give
up their liberty and enter into a social contract with their fellows. They submit to the
authority of a ruler or governing body in return for protection against aggression. , force
and fraud. War against all is prevented due to this security provided by the sovereign
power.

- In Hobbes’s perspective humans are rational , self-interested and calculating beings.

They form an ordered society with their fellows through fear of the consequences of if
they do not. Hobbes’s view is antithetical to that of Durkheim , who on the other hand
believes that the ful lment of moral commitments and obeying of social rules is part of
the human condition.

- Parson’s shared Durkheim’s views and argued Hobbes’s picture as inadequate in

explaining the cause for social order. Parson’s believed that only a commitment to
common values provides a basis for order in a society.

- Parson’s illustrated this point by examining social relationships , more speci cally in
the market place. In a business transaction the parties concerned form a contract. In
order for the conduct of business to be orderly it is essential that contracts be bound
by a system of regulatory , normative rules. In parson’s view , fear of the consequences
is insu cient to motivate people to obey the rules. A moral commitment is essential
and is derived from shared values of that which is right . From these values and
agreements , rules emerge. The rules de ne a contract on the basis of validity and
invalidity. For parson’s the world of business is akin to other parts of society and is by
necessity a moral world.

• Value Consensus

- Fundamental integrating principle in society.

fi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
 - If members of a society are committed to the same values , then they will share a
common identity , which provides a basis for unity and cooperation.

- From shared values, common goals are derived.

- Values elucidate a general conception of what is desirable and worthwhile.

- Goals provide direction in speci c situations. E.g in western society , members of a

particular workforce will share the goal of e cient production in their factory - a goal
which stems from the general view of economic productivity and provides an incentive
for cooperation.

- Roles provide the means by which values and goals are translated into action. A social
institution consists of a combination of roles , which combined , further the goals of the
organisation.

- The content of roles is structured in terms of norms , which de ne the rights and
obligations applicable to each particular role. Norms can be seen as speci c
expression of values.

- Thus the norms that structure the roles of manager , accountant , engineer ,
psychologist etc , owe their content partly to the value of economic productivity.
Norms tend to ensure that role behaviour is standardised , predictable and therefore
orderly.

- At the most general level , the value system is equivalent to the sharing of common
values on the basis of normative conduct and henceforth provides the basis for social
order.

• Social Equilibrium

- The value consensus theory led Parson’s to state the central task of sociology ,
which is to - analyse “ the institutionalisation of patterns of value orientation in the
social system.

- When values are institutionalised and behaviour is structured in terms of them , the
result is a stable system. A state of social equilibrium is attained when various parts of
the social system are balanced.

- The rst way of maintaining social equilibrium is socialisation , by means of which

society’s values are transmitted from one generation to the next. These values are
internalised to form an integral part of individual personalities. E.g in western society
the family and the education system are a major part of this function.

- The second way of maintaining social equilibrium is by employing various mechanisms

of social control.

- These mechanisms of social control discourage deviance in order to maintain social

order.

fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
• Functional Pre-requisites

Parson’s saw society as a system and considered four basic functional prerequisites
which upon ful lment allow a society to survive.

Adaptation , Goal attainment, integration and pattern maintenance.

Solutions to these four societal problems must be institutionalised in the sense that they
must be organised in the form of ordered , stable social institutions which persist through
time.

Adaptation : refers to the relationship between the social system and the environment. To
ensure survival , the social system must have some form of control over the environment.
The economy must ensure the provision of food and shelter.

Goal attainment : refers to the needs for all societies to set goals towards which social
activities are directed. Procedures for establishing goals and deciding on priorities
between goals are institutionalised in the form of political systems. Governments not only
set goals but also allocate resources in order to achieve them. Even in a so-called free
enterprise system , the economy is regulated and directed by laws passed by the
government.

Integration refers to the adjustment of con ict. It is concerned with the coordination and
mutual adjustment of the parts of a social system. The law is the main , institution that
meets this need. Legal norms de ne and standardise relations between individuals and
between institutions and so reduce the potential for con ict. When con ict does arise it is
settled by the judicial system and does not therefore lead to the disintegration of the
social system.

Pattern maintenance : refers to the maintenance of the basic pattern of values

institutionalised in the society. Institutions that perform this function include the family ,
the education system and religion. In parson’s view the values of society are rooted in
religion. Religious beliefs provide the ultimate justi cation for the values of the social
system.

Parson’s maintained that any social system can be analysed in terms of the functional
prerequisites he identi ed. Thus all parts of society can be understood with reference to
the functions they perform in the adaptation , goal attainment , integration and pattern
maintenance systems.

• Social Change

Parsons argued against the criticism of functionalism in explaining the phenomena of

social change , by stating that in reality no social system is in complete , unhindered
equilibrium. The process of social change is hence described as moving social
equilibrium.

All four functional pre-requisites are interrelated. A change in one will produce a change in
others. E.g a change in adaptation causes social disturbance , due to which the other
three prerequisites change in order to restore equilibrium.

fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
fl
fl
 This reaction will lead to some degree of change , however small , in the system as a
whole.

• Social Evolution and Pattern Variables

Parsons viewed social change as a process of social evolution from simple to more
complex forms of society. He regarded changes in adaptation as a major driving force of
social evolution.

The history of human society from the simple hunting and gathering band to the more
complex nation-state represents an increase in the general adaptive capacity of society.

As society evolves into more complex forms the control over the environment increases.

As for pattern of changes , Parsons believed that albeit economic changes , cultural
changes have the longest and most signi cant impact due to being value-based.

Two cultural value variables : Variable A and Variable B. These pattern variables A and B
consist of ways in which society should answer basic questions such as : how should
rewards be allocated to individuals.

Pattern Variable A :

1. Ascription : Status is ascribed and is determined by the type of family a person is

born into.

2. Di useness : People enter relationships to satisfy a large set of needs.

3. Particularism : People act di erently with di erent people.

4. A ectivity : Grati cation is immediate. People act to gratify their desires as soon as
possible.

5. Collective Orientation : People put the interests of the social groups to which they
belong before their own interests.

Pattern Variable B :

1. Achievement : Status is achieved through personal e orts.

2. Speci city : People enter in relationships to satisfy particular needs.

3. Universalism : People act according to universal principles.

4. E ective Neutrality : Grati cation is deferred.

5. Self-orientation : People pursue their own interests rst rather than those of the
social group to which they belong.

According to Parson’s , with the exception of family , patterns A are typical of simple
societies and pattern B are typical of complex societies. Social change requires a shift
towards variables of pattern B.

Eg Hinduism vs Christianity.

• Social Di erentiation

- Social evolution involves the process of specialisation in the form of di erentiation of

specialised functions. E.g Religious institutions are separated from state , family and
ff
ff
ff
fi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
fi
ff
ff
 economy are separated in terms of functions. This produces the problem of integration
on the causal basis of a lack of common values.

- Henceforth society tends to employ general values towards which each speci c
di erentiated institution works. E.g. in the west , general and-or universal standards of
achievement are generally accepted and provide the basis for di erentiatial reward and
role allocation. Social integration and order are maintained by generalising of values.

• Robert K Merton
- Re ned and further developed the analytical aspects of the functionalist perspective.

-
- He singled out three functionalist assumptions and analysed their utility.

• Problem of functional unity

- The rst assumption that he postulated was the functional unity of society.

- This assumption states that any part of the social system is functional for the entire
system. All parts of society are seen to work together for the maintenance and
integration of society as a whole.

- Merton argued that particularly in complex , highly di erentiated societies , this

functional unity is doubtful. He provided the examples of religious pluralism to illustrate
this point.

- Merton argued that functional unity is a matter of degree. It’s extent must be
determined by investigation rather than simply beginning with the assumption that it
exists.

- The idea of functional unity implies that a change in one part of the system will
automatically result in a change in other parts.

- Merton argued that this is a matter for investigation and it should simply not be
assumed as an outset.

- Merton suggested that in highly di erentiated societies institutions may well have a
high degree of functional autonomy. Thus a change in a particular institution may have
little or no e ect on others.

• Functions , dysfunctions and non-functions

- Merton referred to the second assumption as the postulate of universal functionalism.

This assumption states that all standardised social or cultural forms have positive
functions.

- Merton argued that the assumption that every aspect of the social system performs a
positive function is not only premature , it may well be incorrect.

- He suggested that functionalist analysis should proceed from the assumption that any
part of society may be functional , dysfunctional or non functional and must be clearly
speci ed. These units may be individuals groups or societies as a whole.

- E.g poverty may be dysfunctional for the poor but may be functional for the non-poor.

ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
ff
ff
ff
fi
 - Merton suggested that the postulate of universal functionalism should be replaced by
the provisional assumption that persisting cultural forms have a net balance of
functional consequences either for the society considered as a unit or for subgroups
su ciently powerful to retain these forms intact bu means of direct coercion or indirect
persuasion.

• Problem of indispensability

- Merton’s third criticism was directed toward the postulate of indispensability. This
assumption states that certain institutions or social arrangements are indispensable to
society.

- Functionalists have often seen religion in this light. E.g Davis and Moore claim that
religion plays a unique and indispensable part in society.

- Merton questioned the assumption of indispensability , arguing that the same

functional prerequisites may be met by a range of alternative institutions. Thus there is
no justi cation for assuming that institutions such as the family , religion and social
strati cation are a necessary part of all human societies.

- To replace the idea of indispensability , Merton suggested the concept of functional

equivalents or functional alternatives. From this point of view , a political ideology such
as communism can provide a functional alternative to religion. However merton was
still left with the problem of actually identifying functional prerequisites.

- Merton argued that the postulates of the functional unity of society , universal
functionalism and indispensability are little more than articles of faith.

- They are matters for investigation and should not form prior assumptions.

- Merton claimed that his framework for functionalist analysis removed the charge that
functionalist analysis removed the charge that functionalism is ideologically based.

- He argued that the parts of society should be analysed in terms of their e ects or
consequences on society as a whole and on individuals and groups within society.


- Merton claimed that the value judgement present in the assumption that all parts pf the
system are functional was therefore removed.

• Anomie

- Merton recognised that the consensus may be far from perfect. Individual's may be committed
to some aspects of their culture while rejecting or remaining neutral about others. He used
insight to develop a very important theory of anomie.

- The culture of a society he holds speci es the ends or goals that people should pursue and the
means that they are expected to follow in achieving them. People’s goals include such things
as promotion at work, pleasing a husband or wife , learning to drive , writing a book , passing
an examination and so on. Means are those things that help to achieve these goals : working
hard , money , physical skills power , etc. Where people are fully socialised into their culture
they will be committed 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.

ffi
fi
fi
fi
ff
 - If however a culture emphasises the ends much more than the means , leaving the means only
loosely regulated , people’s commitment to the approved means and therefore their conformity
to social norms-may be eroded.

- This is especially likely where the material structure of opportunities available to people makes
it di cult for them to achieve the approved ends.

- The conditions under which they must act may mean , for example that they lack the resources
that are needed for the means to which they are supposed to be committed.

- It is the rift between culturally approved ends and means that Merton calls anime . period in a
situation of anime conformity is far from automatic period Merton suggests that as model is
particularly applicable to a modern society such as the United States of America we are
nancial success as an occupation is it central social value period contemporary culture he
says places great emphasis on the need to maximise income it also requires that individuals
should pursue this and through occupational achievement they should work diligently and
e ciently in order to be promoted salary period this distribution of resources however makes it
di cult for people toCompete on an equal basis in this race for nancial success not all people
have the same opportunities to enter well play paid employment for example divisions of class
gingernut necessity set limits the chances that they are able to enjoy.

- Merton suggests that there are four possible responses to this anime

- the rst possible response is what he calls innovation. The innovator is someone who responds
to these cultural strains by rejecting the legitimate means in appointing illegitimate ones.
Criminal activities aimed at nancial gain or typical innovative acts this is particularly likely to
occur Merton argues among the poorest members of society who have the fewest
opportunities. Merton recognises this also as a response of those who are relatively successful
but were willing to bend the rules and engage in fraud and embezzlement to increase their
income.

- Ritualism is the second possible response to anomie here people decide that they have little
chance of attaining any signi cant success and so reject this as a goal. They remain however
loosely committed to the conventional means this simply go through the motions in a ritualistic
way with little or no commitment to the approved goal the timeserving bureaucrats originally
follows rules and procedures regardless of the consequences is a typical ritual list such a
person if challenged about the consequences of his or her actions is likely to respond in a
ignorant manner. Ritualistic bureaucrats are likely to be fatalistic resigned to their life they feel
that they have no control over their lives.

- The third response to anime is retreatism.

- The retreaters decides to reject both the means in the end is prescribed by the culture this is
the response of the drop out of Homerton see is the hobo or vagrant as typical example.
Others have suggested that persistent deviant drug use may also be the action of a retreat list.
Mertons analysis of retreaters am however feels to recognise that many of those who drop out
of conventional society establish new conventions for themselves in deviant subcultures.

- The retreat this response therefore is di cult to distinguish from rebellion where do legitimate
ends and means are rejected but our place by alternative ends and means that may challenge
conventional values. Radical political action, aim that altering the distribution of resources or
the political system, is, for Merton, the typical response of the rebel. This claim can be seen as
Mertons reformulation of Durkheim‘s idea that organised class con ict can be seen as a
consequence of anomie.

• Critique of functionalism

- Teleology : Criticism against the logic of functionalist enquiry. It is argued that the type of
explanation employed is teleological. Teleological explanations state that the parts of a system
exist because of their bene cial consequences for the system as a whole. The main objection
to this type of reasoning is that it treats an e ect as a cause. Thus David and Moore’s theory of
fi
ffi
ffi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ff
fi
fl
 strati cation outlines the positive e ects or functions of social strati cation and then proceeds
to argue that these e ects explain its origin. But an e ect cannot explain a cause since causes
must always precede e ects. Therefore the e ects of strati cation cannot occur until a system
of social strati cation has already been established. It may be argued that members of society
unconsciously respond to social needs and so create the institutions necessary for the
maintenance of society. However no evidence of the existence of such unconscious
motivations exists.

- Assessing Facts : Functionalism is on stronger logical grounds when it argues that the
continued existence of an institution may be explained in terms of its e ects. Thus once an
institution has originated , it continues to exist if on balance it has bene cial e ects on the
system. But there are problems with this type of explanation as it is extremely di cult to
establish that the net e ect of any institution is bene cial to society. A knowledge of all its
would be required in order to weigh the balance of functions and dysfunctions. As the debate
on the functional merits and demerits of strati cation indicates there is little evidence that such
knowledge is forthcoming.

- The problems involved in assessing the e ects of a social institution may be illustrated in terms
of the analogy between society and a physical organism. Biologists are able to show that
certain parts of an organism make positive contributions to its maintenance since if those parts
stopped functioning life would cease. Since societies change rather than die , sociologists are
unable to apply similar criteria. In addition standards exist in biology for assessing the health of
an organism. In terms of these standards the contribution of the various parts can be judged.
There are no comparable standards for assessing the health of a society. For these reasons
there are problems with the argument that a social institution continues to exist because on
balance its e ects are bene cial to society.

- Value Consensus and Social Order : Critics argue that consensus have been strongly
criticised. First their critics argue that consensus is assumed rather than shown to exist.
Research has failed to reveal unequivocally a widespread commitment to the various sets of
values that are seen to characterise western society.

- Secondly , the stability of society may owe more to the absence rather than the presence of
value consensus. For example a lack of commitment to the value of achievement by those at
the bottom of strati cation systems may serve to stabilise society. Thus Michael mann argues
that in a society where members compete for unequal rewards cohesion results precisely
because there is no common commitment to core values. If all members of society were
strongly committed to the value of those at the base of the strati cation system might well
produce disorder.

- Thirdly, consensus in and of itself will not necessarily result in social order In fact it may
produce the opposite result. Pierre van de Berghe notes consensus on norms such as extreme
completion and individualistic laissez-faire , or suspicion and treachery is hardly conducive to
social solidarity and integration. Therefore the content of values rather than value consensus
such as can br seen as the crucial factor with respect to social order.

- Determinism : Critics have argued that in terms of functionalist theory , human behaviour is
portrayed as determined by the system. In particular the social system has needs , and the
behaviour of its members is shaped to meet these needs. Rather than creating the social world
in which they live , people are seen as creations of the system. Thus David Walsh argues that
Parsons treats human action ‘as determined by the characteristics of the system per se’. By
means of socialisation , humanity is programmed in terms of the norms and values of the social
system; it is kept on the straight and narrow by mechanisms of social control that exist to ful l
the requirements of the system; its actions are structured in terms of social roles that are
designed to meet the functional prerequisites of society. Humanity is pictured as an automation
, programmed , directed and controlled by the system.

- Walsh rejects this view of humanity. Arguing from a phenomenological perspective he claims
that humanity actively constructs its own social world rather than being shaped by a social
system that is somehow external to its being. Walsh maintains that the concept of a social
fi
ff
fi
fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
ffi
fi
 system represents a rei cation of the social world. Functionalists have converted social reality
into a natural system external to social actors. In doing so , they have translated the social
world into something that it is not. They have tended to portray the social system as the active
agent , whereas , in reality , only human beings act.

- Coercion and Con ict : Critics of functionalism have argued that it tends to ignore coercion
and con ict. For example Alvin Boulder states ‘While stressing the importance of the ends and
values that men pursue , Parsons never asks whose ends and values these are. Are they
pursuing their own ends or those imposed upon them by others ? Few functionalists give
serious consideration to the possibility that some groups in society , acting in terms of their
own particular interests , dominate others. From this point of view , social order is imposed by
the powerful and value consensus is merely a legitimation of the position of the dominant
group. In his criticism of one of Parson’s major works The social system , David Lockwood
argues that Parson’s approach is highly selective in its focus on the role of the normative order
in the stabilisation of social systems. In focusing on the contribution of norms and values to
social order , Parsons largely fails to recognise the con icts of interest that tend to produce
instability and disorder. Lockwood argues that , since all social systems involve competition for
scarce resources , con icts of interest are built into society. Con ict is not simply a minor strain
in the system which is contained by value consensus , instead it is a central and integral part of
the system itself.

- Functionalism reconsidered : Despite the widespread criticism of functionalism , it should not

be rejected out of hand. Durkheim’s work , for example , has provided insights that have helped
modern sociologists to understand contemporary societies. Johnathan H turner and
Alexandera Maryanski argue that , although functionalism has many aws , it remains useful.
Many of its basic assumptions still guide much sociological research : for example , the
assumption that society should be seen as an integral whole ; that its parts are
interdependent ; that social institutions exist and they do have e ects and that society is
structured and the social structure directs human behaviour.

• Ralph Daherendorf

• Post-Capitalism

- DaherenDorf excepted that Marx’s description of capitalism was generally accurate in the 19
century when Marx was writing, but he argued that in the 20th century it had become outdated
as a basis for explaining con ict.

- He argued that important changes are taking place in countries such as Britain and the USA.
They were on a post-capitalist societies.

- He claimed that, far from the two main classes becoming polarised, as Marx had predicted the
opposite had happened. The proportion of skilled and semiskilled workers had grown, as had
the size of the new middle-class of white-collar workers such as clerks, nurses and teachers.
Inequalities in income and world had been reduced, partly because of changes in the social
structure and partly because of measures taken by the state.

- Social mobility had become more common and crucially the link between ownership and
control and industry had been broken. Managers rather than owners, exercise day-to-day
control over the means of production.

- in the circumstances, Marxist claim that concept was based upon the ownership or non-
ownership of the world was no longer valid. This was because there was no longer a close
association between wealth and power .

- Shareholders, For example might on the wealth of a company, but in practice they do not
exercise close control over the management.

fl
fl
fl
fi
fl
fl
ff
fl
fl
 - In view of these changes, dahrendorf argued that con icts were no longer based upon the
existence of the two classes identi ed by Marx, nor were they based upon economic divisions.
Instead he saw con ict as being concerned with authority.

Authority

To dharendorf Authority is legitimate power attached to the occupation of a particular

social role within an organisation. Does for example a manager in a company or a teacher
in a classroom has the right to take certain decisions regardless of the wishes of the
workforce or pupils. A manager has the 30 to instruct workers to arrive on time and a
teacher has the 30 to instruct pupils to do homework. Organisations are associations
have positions of domination and subjection. Summer able to take decisions legitimately
an issue commands and others are not. It is the situation which he saw as the basis for
con ict in post-capitalist societies.

Quasi Groups

- He believed that the existence of dominate and subordinate positions produces a

situation in which individuals have di erent interests.

- Those occupying dominant positions have an interest in maintaining a social structure

that gives them more authority than others. Those in subordinate positions on the other
hand have an interest in changing the social structure the deprives them on for 30
authority. This con ict of interest is present in a much wider range of social
relationships and the economic con ict of interest between the ruling class on the
subject class that marks identi ed as the basis for con ict in society .

- As a consequence there are many di erent cause of groups or potential groups that
could be in con ict with each other some of these causal groups will join together and
act to pursue their common interests. Individuals may belong to a whole variety of
di erent groups and there are not necessarily con ned in all areas of social life to
subordinate or dominant groups.

- He said since domination in industry does not necessarily involve domination in this
state or a church or other associations total societies can present a picture of a pro
plurality of competing dominant and conversely subjected aggregates. Does a person
who is manager and has a position of the 30 in a company will tend to act to maintain
that it already but if for example the same person has a subordinate position in a
religious organisation they may try to change the organisation to increase their own
authority.

Critique

- Marxist do not accept turn doors view that Marx is teary is no longer applicable. British
Marxist John Wester guard believes that Britain is fundamentally divided between two
classes and he denies that inequality between rich and poor has been decreasing in
recent decades. Most importantly though some psychologists question whether his
approach can actually explain con ict.

- Ian Crabe points out that ralf admits that subordinate groups may defer to the authority
of dominant groups as well as challenging it. This members of the workforce may work
conscientiously or as they may strike, but Ralph feels to explain adequately why they
ff
fl
fl
fl
fl
fi
fi
fl
fl
ff
ff
fl
fi
fl
 will follow one course rather than the other .crêpe suggest that Ralphs only answer is
to suggest that it is a matter of individual choice, but this does not actually explain why
on some occasions there is con ict for example a strike and on others there is none.

- More generally, contradictory whether Ralph‘s order of other writers produces a rather
confuse picture of the social structure. Society is post portrayed asking to sing of so
many di erent groups all of which may be in contact with each other that it is di cult
to get a clear picture of how society works. It is not clear what the end result of the
concert will be who will win and who will lose. Nor does concept theory provide an
adequate explanation of why one group will be successful in another will not. Marxism
and new Marxism give more coherent answers to these types of questions. On the
other hand con ict theory is able to encompass concert between such groups as men
and women , Which does not t neatly into a Marxist framework for understanding
society. Con ict theory represented an important break from Marxism and help to
provide the basis for the development of some later theories in particular post
structuralist‘s and post-modernists have gone further in arguing that there are
numerous types of social division and sources of inequality, indeed post structuralism
post-modernist think more in terms of di erence than division and inequality.

• C.W.Mill

- While dahrendorf was challenging Parsons’s emphasis on societal consensus, the in uential
American sociologist C. Wright Mills was critiquing the conceptual abstraction in Parsons’s
writing, which he referred to sarcastically as “grand theory”

- Mills, by contrast, argued that because sociology is (or should be) concerned with “all the
social worlds in which men have lived, are living, and might live” (1959: 147), it must
necessarily be attentive to the empirical realities in individual lives, and their intersection with
history and social structures: “Biography, history, society ... are the coordinate points of the
proper study of man”

- THE NEW MIDDLE CLASS

- Mills was at the forefront of documenting the changing composition of the class structure that
began to emerge in the US in the 1940s. Mills (1951) documented, for example, the transition
from the “old middle class” composed of farmers, business people, and independent
professionals (e.g., family doctors) to the “new middle class,” composed of managers, salaried
professionals, sales people, and o ce workers.

- This shift was driven by the changing post-World War II American consumer economy and the
expansion of government, corporate, professional, and service and sales bureaucracies,
including the expansion of media, advertising, and public relations companies. Some scholars,
such as daniel Bell (1973) and Alain Touraine (1971) refer to these changes as producing a
post-industrial society, a term that recognizes the declining importance especially since the
1970s of industrial manufacturing and manual labor, and the growing importance of information
exchange and of service and professional workers in the economy.

- Mills is critical of the penetrating control exerted by economic markets and bureaucratic
organization (its emphasis on rationality, impersonality, hierarchy, etc.; cf. Weber; see chapter
3). He argues that the bureaucratization of work has produced a “personality market,” requiring
employees to have standardized, self-alienated personalities molded by “the market mentality”
that dominates the bureaucratic society

- Mills identi ed the emergence of the “managerial type of man” (1951: 77) – the standard- ized,
managerial-entrepreneurial personality who, essentially, bends and blends his own personality
ff
fi
fl
fl
fi
ffi
fl
ff
fl
ffi
 and interests to t with the strategic interests of the organization he serves. The control
institutionalised in bureaucratic organization extends to self-control; self-control over the
employee’s own feelings and desires, as exempli ed by “the salesgirl,” who must maintain a
“friendly” personality – “a commercial mask” – to impress customers, remembering that she
represents the organization, not herself

- Succumbing to the demands of the bureaucratic and consumer society, it is status and prestige
(e.g., 1951: 240–241), rather than political or civic commitment, Mills argues, that de ne the
character of the “politically indi erent” (1951: 327) new middle class.

- THE POWER ELITE

- Most notably, Mills underscored the impotence of the salaried middle class and of blue-collar
workers (the working class) against what he called the power elite – the decision-makers in the
upper echelons of the political, economic, and military institutions.

- Most notably, Mills underscored the impotence of the salaried middle class and of blue-collar
workers (the working class) against what he called the power elite – the decision-makers in the
upper echelons of the political, economic, and military institutions.

- contrary to dahrendorf’s inter-group con ict theory of society, Mills emphasised the unilateral
and far-reaching, consolidated power of the ruling institutional elite. discussing the expansion
of the bureaucratic, administrative authority of the state and the extending reach of economic
and technical rationality

- Mills argued that “there is an ever-increasing interlocking of economic, military, and political
structures” constituting a “triangle of power ... In each of these institutional areas, the means of
power at the disposal of decision makers have increased enormously; their central executive
powers have been enhanced ... As each of these domains become enlarged and centralised,
the consequences of its activities become greater, and its tra c with the other increases”.

- Mills argued that the power elite possess power, wealth, and celebrity, and by de nition,
present themselves, and are perceived, as being of superior moral and psychological character
to those beneath them (Mills 1956: 13).

- Arguing against the view that it is Fate or chance or some Unseen Hand that determines
history, Mills instead emphasised that “The course of events in our time depends more on a
series of human decisions than on any inevitable fate ... in our time the pivotal moment does
arise, and at that moment, small circles do decide or fail to decide. In either case, they are an
elite of power” (1956: 21, 22). And he argued that the power elite have at their disposal the
ever-expanding and concentrated power of the latest technology and the most e cient tools
for logistics planning and other organisational e ectiveness.

- SHIFTS IN THE COMPOSITION OF THE POWER ELITE

- Mills noted that the institutional composition of the power elite was not set once and for all
time; “No matter how we might de ne the elite, the extent of its members’ power is subject to
historical variation” (Mills 1956: 20). He thus recognised that the institutional domains
comprising the power structure can vary over time, though he also argued that such changes
were usually a matter of relative degree rather than challenging the power elite’s basic authority
(1956: 269).

- What is new today is the ascendancy (since the 1970s) of a media elite to prominence and
power far beyond Hollywood and media circles. This is underscored by the narrow
concentration of media owners (e.g., Rupert Murdoch) and executives who control a greatly
expanded world media industry, and whose power commands the attention and friendship of
political and economic elites.

fi
ff
fi
fl
ff
fi
ffi
ffi
fi
fi
- As highlighted by the public inquiries in the UK into the phone-hacking abuses of journalists
working for Murdoch’s tabloid newspapers, the Murdoch family and its corporation’s senior
executives were/are close friends with prime ministers (david cameron and Tony Blair) and
cabinet members, attending each other’s family birthday parties, weddings, and other social
events. Also new, and rapidly consolidating its expansive local and global power, is the
economic-technological elite composed of the owners of Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft,
Amazon, etc., and the executives and creative producers working in/for these companies.

- The defence industry continues to be a major corporate-political force (e.g., General Electric,
Halliburton, Lockheed Martin, Boeing), and military-defence industry executives, as is true of all
corporate executives, have a network of cross-cutting ties with several diverse corporations
(banks, food manufacturers, etc; domho 2006a: 27–28, 35). Unlike defence industry
executives, however, military commanders have limited political in uence. As underscored in
military and other accounts of the Iraqi war, the assessments and judgments of senior military
commanders are frequently ignored if they do not t the agenda established by political elites
(e.g., decision-makers in the White House, non-military Pentagon o cials, etc.)

- Military decision-makers today thus seem to have less autonomy than argued by Mills, and it is
likely that back in the 1950s too, they had less power than their economic and political
counterparts.

- WOMEN IN THE POWER ELITE

- One aspect of the power elite that has not changed very much since the 1950s is its gendered
character. In the 1950s, the exclusion of women from the halls of power was so taken for
granted that Mills, “an outspoken radical but a product of his times on matters of gender ... did
not even mention [women’s] absence among corporate and military leaders”

- Today, although there are more women in the upper echelons of government (e.g., Senators,
members of parliament, cabinet secretaries), and more women corporate executives, judges,
and military generals (one – appointed in 2008 in the US), they nonetheless comprise a small
minority. For example, only about 3 percent of cEos at Fortune 500 companies today are
women.

- Women also have a low representation on corporate boards though their numbers are
increasing; in the UK in 2013, among the FTSE 100 companies, 17.3 percent of directors were
women, up from 12.5 percent in 2010.

- THE PASSIVE, MASS SOCIETY

- Unlike dahrendorf, who noted the di erentiation within the upper class between owners and
executives, and thus the possibility for inter-group con ict within that stratum, Mills highlighted
what he saw as the overall unity of the ruling elite, notwithstanding di erences among them
based on family wealth (Mills 1956: 62–65). Further, he contrasted elite unity with what he saw
as the powerlessness and fragmentation of other classes and groups. Thus, contrary to Marx’s
view that revolutionary social change would inevitably emerge from class antagonism between
capitalists and workers, and contrary to dahrendorf ’s construal of inter-group con ict and
social change, Mills regarded those outside of the power elite, including the new middle class,
as incapable of e ecting social change – they stand power- less in the face of the ruling elite’s
decisive and consequential power.

- Essentially, Mills (1956: 302–303) articulated a mass society thesis, namely, the idea that the
vast majority of people, who are outside the corporate power structure, are both helpless and
uninterested in in uencing the ruling decisions determining their fate; as critical theo- rists also
argued, they are manipulated and controlled by the mass media into passivity (see chapter 5).
Mills argues that “mass education” ful lls a similar function. Education is not a prerequisite for
“political alertness,” a point highlighted by the active political interest and involvement of earlier
uneducated generations (Mills 1951: 338). “Mass education” – criticized by Mills for its narrow,
ff
fl
ff
fi
ff
fi
fl
fl
ffi
ff
fl
 unimaginative and boring content – trivializes politics and, Mills maintains, contributes to the
masses’ greater fascination with media entertainment than with politics (1951: 338–339).

- Political indi erence and passivity stand in sharp contrast to the democratic ethos and its
a rmation of citizen participation and voluntary groups and associations in shaping society
(Mills 1956: 28–29). In this context, social change, for Mills, is contingent not on political
activism but on changes in the institutional landscape (1956: 280) – shifts in the mix of
whichever institutional sectors become more prominent than others (e.g., resulting from how
changes produced by internet technology get adapted by existing institutions). Mills did not
recognize the protest-mobilizing impact of Martin Luther King, Jr, in the mid- 1950s (e.g.,
Halberstam 1993: 423–424). Nor did he anticipate the subsequent expansion in grassroots civil
rights activism that was robust in the 1960s and 1970s, and which succeeded in achieving
gains in equality for blacks, women, gays and lesbians, and physically disabled individuals
(domho 2006b). despite these omissions, Mills’s (1951) attentiveness to “managerial culture,”
and to the consequential signi cance of an interlocked network of powerful political, economic,
and military gures in shaping the history of the present, nds considerable empirical support in
contemporary times.

- DEPENDENCY THEORY: NEO-MARXIST CRITIQUES OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

- Despite the di erent analytical frameworks of dahrendorf (interest-group con ict) and Parsons
(values consensus), and of Mills (power elite), dahrendorf (multiple power groups), and Parsons
(power equilibrium), the societal context informing their respective analyses was the US, and
additionally for dahrendorf, European industrialized countries. This US/ western focus is in part
due to the fact that in the post-World War II period, with the tri- umph of democracy over
Nazism and Fascism, the US was seen as the prototypical modern society. As crystallized by
Parsons, the presumption was that all countries would eventually take on the same dimensions
of modernization as the US.

- There were challenges from within America and Western Europe to the unevenness of
modernization – the fact that in the US, for example, despite an expanding middle class, there
were still large numbers living in poverty. It was also becoming apparent that modernization
had its costs – the edgling environmental movement in the 1970s highlighted the impact of
unregulated economic growth on local communities and on the natural environment. The more
visible social movements of the 1960s and 1970s highlighted the unevenness for blacks,
women, and gays and lesbians in the realization of social equality. Additionally, the student
anti-war movement protested what it regarded as American/western imperialism, an
imperialism primarily located in America’s protracted military presence in Vietnam, and one that
loomed large over protesters’ own immediate future as a result of the US military draft (e.g.,
Gitlin 1980). In short, in the US, the modernization narrative of a progressive expansion in
economic and social prosperity had its many vocal detractors, among both the elite and those
on the margins.

• GH Mead
• CH Cooley

Section 3 : Modern Sociological Theory

a. Pierre Bourdieu

b. Anthony Giddnes

c. Jurgen Habermas

d. Michel Foucault

e. George Ritzer
ffi
ff
ff
fi
ff
fl
fi
fi
fl