SA531: Theoretical Perspective in Sociology

M.A SOCIOLOGY Objectives

The objectives of the course are to help students to a) learn major and diverse perspectives in sociology, b) learn to comprehend society, social institutions, social processes and human social agents in alternative ways, and c) learn to utilize such perspectives to carry out research on social institutions, social processes and human social agents.

I. Sociological Thinking
A. The sociological imagination and the promise of sociology B. Reductionism and non-reductionism: Sociological versus biological, (and physiological, genetic, chemical, etc.), psychological, 'natural' and supernatural explanations of social institution and social change C. Significance of perspective and theory D. Sociology of knowledge: Basic principles and protocol E. History of early sociology: Political, economic, religious and intellectual contexts F. Classical sociology: a. Comte's method of social inquiry and the idea of human progress b. Marx: Overall doctrine and dynamics of social change c. Spencer and growth, structure and differentiation d. Durkheim: General approach, individual and society, and religion e. Weber: Types of authority, and Protestantism and the rise of capitalism f. Cooley, the 'looking-glass self' and the nature and history of human groups

II. Structural-Functional Perspective

A. Historical context B. Key arguments

Whole, part and systemic interrelationships Consensus, stability, order versus conflict, instability and change Functional prerequisites or imperatives Functional unity, universality and indispensability and Merton's reformulation Manifest and latent function and dysfunction Protocol of functional and dysfunction

C. Variants: Societal (Durkheim), Individualistic (Malinowski), Structural(RadcliffeBrown), Social systematic (Parsons) D. Critique E. Application to: a) Stratification, b) Deviance, c) Religion

III. Marxist Perspective

A. Context B. Key arguments Historical specificity of social institutions and capitalism as a specific historical category Key features of economy, polity and society under capitalism Dialectics Idealism, materialism and dialectical historical materialism Mode of production and infrastructure and superstructure Commodification of social life and alienation Class and class struggle Nature of state Social change and revolution

C. Variants: a) Structural Marxism, b) Conflict functionalism, c)Lenin, d) Luxemburg, e) Gramsci D. Critique E. Application: a) Consciousness, b) Religion, c) Family and marriage

IV. World-System Perspective

A. Context B. Key arguments: Evolution of capitalism and the rise of the modern world-system Key features of the modern world system

Priority of world-system over regional and local systems and simultaneous constitution of world and regional and local systems World division of labor and global movement of commodity, labor, finance and culture Globalization and liberalization Development and underdevelopment Economic cycles and political, economic and military crises within world system Crisis of world system, hegemonic shift and demise of capitalism

C. Variants: a) Wallerstein-Frank debate of the origin of 'modern world-system', b) World- system and dependency debate, c) Wallerstein and monthly Review debate D. Application: a) Growth of NGOs and INGOs and INGOs, b) International migration c) Global mass media E. Critique

V. Critical Theory and Jurgen Habermas

A. Context B. Key arguments Emancipation Nature of society and human beings Social change Critique of science and sociology Critique of classical Marxist perspective C. Early critical theory and Habermas The public sphere Critique of science Legitimation crisis Distorted and undistorted communication System and lifeworld Evolution

VI. Actor-Dominant Perspective

Context

The idea of interpretation Symbolic interaction -George Herbert Mead's early synthesis -Mead's central theories and methods -Symbolic interaction and the Chicago School -Herbert Blumer and his perspective -Erving Goffman and the 'presentaion of self in everyday life

Phenomenology -Alfred Schutz and phenomenological sociology -Theories of Alfred Schutz -Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann's the Local Construction of Reality

Ethnomethodology -Defining ethnomethodology -Diversification of ethnomethodology -Harold Garfinkel and ethnomethodology -Examples of ethnomethodology -Ethnomethodological criticism of 'traditional sociology'

Critique of actor-dominant perspective

VII. Structuration Perspective

A. Historical contex B. Classical formulations Marx: History, structure and the objective versus class consciousness, class struggle and political will and the subjective Weber: iron cage of rationality and disenchantment of world versus types of human social action Gramsci: Hegemony and political will Durkheim: Externality of social facts, social constraints and the elevation of the coolecticve and undermining of agency Parsons: System versus action frame of reference Bourdieu: Habitus versus field

C. Formulation of Anthony Giddens

Agent and agency Agency and power Structure and structuration Duality of structure Forms of institution Time, body, encounters Structuration theory and forms of research

VIII. Micro-Macro Perspectives

A. Historical contex B. Key problems The polar position: Macro-micro extremism Relative priority of macro versus micro and macro-micro integration George Ritzer Jeffrey Alexander Norbert Wiley James Coleman Peter Blau Randall Collins Richard Munch and Neil Smelser

The Sociological Imagination and the Promise of Sociology

No texto a seguir de autoria de Wright Mills e desenvolve rapidamente a idia sobre imaginao sociolgica e o objeto de estudo da sociologia. Com o breve texto entitulado The Sociological Imagination and the Promise of Sociology o autor trabalha o que deve ser estudado como objeto sociolgico e como isso deve ser feito, justificando os porques. Esse texto faz parte do livro Human Societies organizado por Anthony Giddens e publicado em 1992. Apesar de no ser to atual, o texto traz claras questes que ainda no parecem ter sido vencidas por alguns pesquisadores sociais.

C. Wright Mills The Sociological Imagination and the Promise of Sociology

The sociological imagination enables its possessor to understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and the external career of variety of individuals. It enables [the sociologist] to take into account how individuals, in the welter of daily experience, often become falsely conscious of their social positions. Within that welter, the framework of modern society is sought, and within that framework the psychologies of variety of men and women are formulated. By such means the personal uneasiness of transformed into involvement with public issues. The first fruit of this imagination and the first lesson of the social science that embodies it is the idea that the individual can understand his own experience and gauge his own fate only by locating himself within his period, that he can know his own chances in life only by becoming aware of those of all individuals in his circumstances. In many ways it is a terrible lesson; in many ways a magnificent one. We do not know the limits of mans capacities for supreme effort or willing degradation, for agony or glee, for pleasurable brutality or the sweetness of reason. But in out time we have come to know that the limits of human nature are frighteningly broad. We have come to know that every individual lives, from one generation to the next, in some society; that he lives out a biography, and that he lives it out within some historical sequence. By the fact of his living he contributes, however minutely, to the shaping of this society and to the course of its history, even as he is made by society and by its historical push and shove. The sociological imagination enables us to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society. That is its task and its promise No social study that does not come back to the problems of biography , of history and of their intersections within a society has completed its intellectual journey. Whatever the specific problems of the classic social analysts, however limited or however broad the features of social reality they have examined, those who have been imaginatively aware of the promise of their work have consistently asked three sorts of questions: 1 What is the structure of this particular society as a whole? What are its essential components, and how are they related to one another? How does it differ from other varieties of social order? Within it, what is the meaning of any particular feature for its continuance and for its changes? 2 Where does this society stand in human history? What are the mechanics by which it is changing? What is its place within and its meaning for the development of humanity as a whole? How does any particular feature we are examining affect, and how is it affected by, the historical period in which it moves? And this period what are its essential features? How does it differ from other periods? What are its characteristic ways of history-making? 3 What varieties of men and women now prevail in this society and in this period? And what varieties are coming to prevail? In what ways are they selected and formed, liberated and

repressed, made sensitive and blunted? What kinds of human nature are revealed in the conduct and character we observe in this society in this period? And what is the meaning for human nature of each and every feature of the society we are examining? Whether the point of interest is a great power state or minor literary mood, a family, a prison, a creed these are the kinds of questions the best social analysts have asked. They are the intellectual pivots of classic studies of man in society and they are the questions inevitably raised by any mind possessing the sociological imagination. For that imagination is the capacity to shift from one perspective to another from the political to the psychological; from examination of a single family to comparative assessment of the national budgets of the world; from the theological school to the military establishment; from considerations of an oil industry to studies of contemporary poetry. It is the capacity to range from the most impersonal and remote transformations to the most intimate features of the human self and to see the relations between the two. Back of its use there is always the urge to know the social and historical meaning of the individual in the society and in the period in which he has his quality and his being Perhaps the most fruitful distinction with which the sociological imagination works is between the personal troubles of milieu and the public issues of social structure. This distinction is an essential tool of the sociological imagination and a feature of all classic work in social science In these terms, consider unemployment. When, in a city of 100,000, only one man is unemployed, that is his personal trouble, and for its relief we properly look to the character of the man, his skills and his immediate opportunities. But when, in a nation of 50 million employees, 15 million men are unemployed, that is a issue, and we may not hope to find its solution within the range of opportunities open to any one individual. The very structure of opportunities has collapsed. Both the correct statement of the problem and the range of possible solutions require us to consider the economic and political institutions of the society, and not merely the personal situation and character of a scatter of individuals. Consider war. The personal problem of war, when it occurs, may be how to survive it or how to die in it with honour; how to make money out of it; how to climb into the higher safety of the military apparatus; or how to contribute to the wars termination. In short, according to ones values, to find a set of milieux and within it to survive the war or make ones death in it meaningful. But the structural issues of war have to do with its causes; with what types of men it throws up into command; with its effects upon economic and political, family and religious institutions, with the unorganized irresponsibility of a world of nation states. Consider marriage. Inside a marriage a man and a woman may experience personal troubles, but when the divorce rate during the first four years of marriage is 250 out of every 1,000 attempts, this is an indication of a structural issue having to do with the institutions of marriage and the family and other institutions that bear upon them. Or consider the metropolis the horrible, beautiful, ugly, magnificent sprawl of the great city. For many upper-class people, the personal solution to the problem of the city is to have an apartment with private garage under it in the heart of the city, and forty miles out, a house by

Henry Hill, garden by Garret Ecko, on a hundred acres of private land. In these two controlled environments with a small staff at each end and a private helicopter connection most people could solve many of the problems of personal milieux caused by the facts of the city. But all this, however splendid, does not solve the public issues that the structural fact of the city poses. What should be done with this wonderful monstrosity? Break it all into scattered units, combining residence and work? Refurbish it as it stands? Or, after evacuation, dynamite it and build new cities according to new plans in new places? What should those plans be? And who is to decide and to accomplish whatever choice is made? These are structure issues; to confront them and to solve them requires us to consider political and economic issues that affect innumerable milieux. Is so far as an economy is so arranged that slumps occur, the problem of unemployment becomes incapable of personal solutions. In so far as war is inherent in the nation-state system and in the uneven industrialization of the world, the ordinary individual in his restricted milieu will be powerless with or without psychiatric aid to solve the troubles this system or lack of system imposes upon him. In so far as the family as an institution turns women into darling little slaves and men into their chief provides and unweaned dependants, the problem of a satisfactory marriage remains incapable of purely private solution. In so far as the overdeveloped megalopolis and the overdeveloped automobile are built-in features of the overdeveloped society, the issues of urban living will not be solved by personal ingenuity and private wealth. What we experience in various and specific milieux, I have noted, is often caused by structural changes. Accordingly, to understand the changes of many personal milieux we are required to look beyond them. And the number and variety of such structural changes increase as the institutions within which we live become more embracing and more intricately connected with one another. To be aware of the idea of social structure and to use it with sensibility is to be capable of tracing such linkages among a great variety of milieux. To be able to do that is to possess the sociological imagination.

REDUCTIONISM & NON-REDUCTIONISM

I.

Reductionism = the view that (1) the facts of personal identity simply consist in the holding of certain more particular facts about brains, bodies, and series of interrelated physical and mental events, and (2) these facts can be described in an impersonal way. On the reductionist view, persons are like nations.

A.

We are reductionists about nations.

B.

Persons are like nations (in all relevant respects).

C.

Thus, we should be reductionists about persons.

II.

Non-Reductionism = the denial of both of reductionisms claims.

A.

Denial of Clause (1)

1.

Separately Existing Entities View: whats involved in personal identity is some further fact(s), and this fact(s) involves persons as separately existing entities. E.G., the Cartesian Ego View: persons are essentially purely mental substances (independent of physical substances).

2.

The Further Fact View: whats involved in personal identity is some further fact(s), but this fact(s) does not involve persons as separately existing entities.

B.

Denial of Clause (2) The facts of personhood necessarily involve reference to a subject, or owner, of those experiences.

III.

Kinds of Reductionism

A.

Physical Reductionism: the facts about personal identity simply consist in facts about bodies and/or brain, i.e., physical relations.

1.

The Body Majority View

2.

The Brain View/Physical Criterion: X at t1 is the same person as Y at t2 if enough of Xs brain has survived as Ys brain (and is enough of a brain to be that of a living person), and theres been no branching.

B.

Psychological Reductionism: the facts about personal identity simply consist in facts about psychological relations. Psychological connections include: memory, beliefs/desires/goals, intentions fulfilled in action, and general character resemblance. Psychological Connectedness = the holding of direct psychological connections (a matter of degree). Psychological Continuity = the holding of overlapping chains of strong psychological connectedness. The two relations together are known as Relation R. The Psychological Criterion of Personal Identity: X at t2 is the same person as Y at t1 iff (a) X is psychologically continuous with Y, (b) this continuity has the right kind of cause, and (c) theres been no branching.

1.

The Narrow Version: continuity involves the normal cause. a. involves continuity of brain; b. cannot involve radical/unwanted changes caused by external forces.

2.

The Wide Version: continuity involves any cause.

ii.STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONAL PERSPECTIVE IN SOCIOLOGY

(CONFLICT THEORY ALTERNATIVE)

Structural Functionalism is a broad perspective in sociology and anthropology which interprets society as structure with interrelated parts. Functionalism addresses the society as a whole in terms of function of its constituent elements such as norms, customs, traditions, institutions etc. Social structures are tressed and placed at the center of analysis and social functions are deduced from these structures. Functionalism is the oldest and dominant conceptual perspective in society. Functionalism has its roots in the organicism (Comte) of early 19th century. rganicism of Comte (and later that of Spencer and Durkheim) influenced the frunctional anthropologists Malinowski and Redcliffe Brown. Durkheim's timeless analysis and Weber's emphasis on social taxonomies (ideal types) began to shape modern /contemporary structural perspective. 2A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT Legacy of the early functionalist's work 1. Social world was viewed in systemic terms. The system had needs and requisites to be met to assure survival 2. Systems have normal and pathological states. Systems need system equilibrium and homeostasis. 3. As a system, the world is composed of mutually interrelated parts. Study of the parts focused on how they fulfilled the requisites of the systemic wholes and how they are maintained equilibrium. 4. Causal analysis became vague - lapsing into tautologies and illegitimate teleologies and illegitimate teleologies. 2B. KEY ARGUMENTS 2B1. Whole part and Systemic interrelationship Systems Theory is a framework of investigating any group of objects that work together to produce some result. This could be a single organism, any organization or society.

A system is composed of regularly interacting and interrelating group of activities. It is a dynamic equilibrium model. There are often properties of the whole which cannot be found in the properties of the elements. In some cases behavior of the whole cannot be explained in terms of behavior of the parts. e.g. properties of these letters which when considered together can give rise to earning which does not exist in letters by themselves. Pattern of integration and interrelation of elements/parts determines behavior of the system. e.g. integration of 'n' and 'o' may create 'on' or 'no'. All phenomena can be viewed as a web of relationships among elements/system. A system can act as an element. e.g. 'an individual' acts as a system as integration of its organs and it can act as an elements of a group or society. 2B 2.Consensus, Stability, order versus conflict, instability and change (Consensus and Conflict Perspective) Consensus Perspective Consensus perspective sees equilibrium in the society only when there is absence of conflict. Widespread/general agreement among members of the particular society brings stability and order. This perspective focuses on maintenance and continuation of social order in society. Interpretive Sociology and structural functionalism) Structuralists proposed structural reading of Marxism in the following way (macro perspective of society): society consists of a hierarchy of structures distinct from one another. Conflict is naturally prevalent within social structures. People are the product of structural conflict. Conflict emerges by itself because of incompatible relationships - therefore change will come. Just like internal organs of a normal biological organism, society maintains its stability, order and progress only when social organs, structure and institutions coordinate and cooperate with each other (are in equilibrium) - NOT conflict with each other. Society cannot operate for any length of time on the basis of force. Society is held together by the consensus of its members.

Conflict Perspective This perspective emphasizes conflict in the society. It deals with the incompatible aspects of the society. (Radical Humanism and Radical Structuralism) Change emerges from the crisis between human beings and their society. Human beings have capacity to think and act against situations that are not satisfactory to their existence. Means of conflict between two classes of people can bring change in society. 2B3. Functional Prerequisites/Imperatives Analysis of the things (functions) that a social system needs in order to survive: What needs to be avoided? These factors threaten the existence of society, so, need to be voided. o Extinction or dispersion of population o Highly apathetic population o War of "all against all" What needs to be adapted? o Society should adapt the following characteristics: society must have adequate methods of dealing with environment (ecology + social system) o society must have adequate method for sexual recruitment (couple must product something above 2 children) o must have sufficient number of people with diverse interest and skills o must have sufficient differential roles and assignment of people to those role (social stratification) o Adequate communication system o Common/shared value pattern (at individual and group level) o Share articulated set of goals o Requires some method of regulating the means to achieve these goals (normative regulation of goals) o Society must regulate affective expressions (unnecessary emotions) - but some are quite necessary, e.g. love, family loyalty) o Socialization of new member o Effective control over disruptive forms of behavior o Four Types of Functional Prerequisites (Merton)

1. The Functional Pattern Maintenance o maintaining the stability of pattern character of normative person state of institutionalization o structural category of values o motivational commitment/tension management (socialization mechanism) 2. The Function of Goal Attainment a. Goals are defined for equilibrium > a direction setting b. Concern should not be on commitment of social values BUT should be on what is necessary for system to function 3. The Function of Adaptation a. Goal attainment is more important than adaptation b. Facilities in place for achieving goal 4. The Function of integration a. Systems are differentiated and divided into independent units b. Focus on most of a system's distinctive properties/process c. Common value system 2B4. Functional Unity, Universality and Indispensability and Merton's Reformulation. Functional Unity, Universality and Indispensability The following three prevailing postulates in Functional Analysis (Malinowski & Redcliffe Brown) are debatable and are considered unnecessary to the functional orientation. Standardized social activities or cultural items are functional for entire social or cultural system All such Social and cultural items fulfill sociological functions These items are consequently indispensable 1. Postulate of Functional Unity of Society Redcliffe Brown: "We may define this as a condition in which all parts of social system work together with a sufficient

degree of harmony." (without producing persistent conflicts which can neither be resolved nor neglected) In such situation, social activities/cultural items are functional for entire social system. [Critic: If the one unqualified assumption is questionable, isn't this twin assumption doubly questionable?] 2. Postulate of Universal Functionalism All standardized social or cultural forms have vital functions. Malinowski: "The functional view of culture insists therefore upon the principle that in every type of civilization, every custom/object/idea/belief fulfills some vital function. Malinowski gives example: mechanically useless buttons on the sleeves of European suit serves the 'function' of preserving/maintaining tradition. 3. Postulate of Indispensability Malinowski: "Every part fulfills some vital function of the system and has some task to accomplish and hence it represents an indispensable part within a working whole." The above postulate is ambiguous in the sense that it is not clear whether the function is indispensable or the item is indispensable. Davis & Moore try to clarify that it is institution that is indispensable but soon they too seem confusing by stating that it is the function of the institution which it is taken typically to perform - is indispensable Critic: If it is function that is indispensable - what about the concept of functional alternative and functional equivalent/substitute? 2B5. Manifest and Latent Functions and Dysfunction (Merton) Structural Functional Approach focuses on any structure's social function. These functions are the consequences for th e operation of society as a whole.
Devi Prasad Subedi, MA Sociology, TU Nepal

5 Social functions have 3 components: 1. Manifest functions The recognized and intended consequences of

any social pattern are its manifest functions. [conscious motivation/motives] e.g. Manifest function of Education include preparing for a career by getti ng good grades, graduation and finding good job etc. 2. Latent functions Latent functions are the unrecognized and unintended consequences of any social pattern. [objective conseque nces/functions] e.g. latent functions of Education include meeting new people, participati ng in extra curricular activities taking school trips or maybe finding a spouse. o the concept of latent function extends the observer's attention BEYOND the question of whether or not the behavior attains its avowed purpose o sociological observers are less likely to examine the collateral/latent functions of the behavior 3. Dysfunction Social pattern's undesirable consequences for the operation of the society are considered dysfunction. [failure to achiev e manifest function] e.g. Dysfunction of education include not getting good gr ade, not getting a job etc. o functional analysts tend to focus on the statics of social structure and to neglect the study of structural change o concept of dysfunction implies the concep t of strain, stress and tension on the structural level of a social sy stem. So it provides the analytical approach to the study of

dynamics and change