Classical Sociological Theories

Lectures at the Department of Sociology

University of Pune, Summer 2010
by
Gernot Saalmann, PhD
!isiting Professor from
"reiburg, #ermany
$ith %rasmus &un'us(
Contents
Part 1) Developing *asic +nsights an' Concepts
Introduction
Comte and Spencer
Marx the Critique of Bourgeois Capitalism
A History of Class-Struggles?
ur!heim" #he Science of Sociology and Its Method
#he i$ision of %a&or in Society
'eorg Simmel" (elational Sociology
Max )e&er" Interpreti$e Sociology
)e&er on (eligion
)e&er*s +olitical Sociology
,
-
.
/
,0
,.
,/
0-
01
-,
Part 2) Classical ,uthors of the "ollo$ing #enerations
#alcott +arsons* Systems #heory
+ierre Bourdieu*s #heory of +ractice
(eferences
Biographical Information
-.
-/
2.
23
P,-T 1
Developing *asic +nsights an' Concepts
+ntro'uction
Sociology is the science of society4 of social relations and of social institutions5
Science consists in the reflection on things done systematically4 ta!ing nothing for
granted and trying not to e$aluate5
,
#his !ind of attitude distinguishes Aristotle4
father of science in 6urope4 from Indian authors li!e Manu or 7autilya they
systematically ma!e normati$e statements5 8ne of the difficulties of science is4 to
question 9hat seems to &e self e$ident in one*s o9n thought or culture5 Scientists
ha$e to &rea! 9ith the tacit !no9ledge of e$eryday life to reach another !ind of
!no9ledge5
:If there is a sociological mode of reasoning4 it consists in a patient4
methodological4 and unremitting effort to relate the actions and ideas of men and
9omen in mutual interaction to the structures and institutions of a complex4
amorphous4 and changing social reality5 #he tas! appears more promising &ut it is
also more challenging 9hen those engaged in it are located 9ith the society 9hose
faces they see! to understand4 interpret and explain5: ;Beteille 0<<2" .1=
)hy a science of society?
)ith a certain si>e and complexity of social arrangements and institutions4 a
tendency to9ards differentiation sets in5 All the aspects of life that ha$e &een
closely interrelated so far differentiate themsel$es into se$eral spheres 9ith their
o9n specific principles and dynamic5 ?e$ertheless4 they form a someho9
consistent and functioning 9hole5 Sociology tries to descri&e and explain ho9 this
9or!s and changes 9ith history5 #he need for sociology as a ne9 science is felt
9hen social arrangements change se$eral times 9ithin relati$ely short time
;6urope in the ,1
th
century= or 9hen one encounters different societies ;I&n
Chaldun4 9ho tra$elled in ?orth Africa@ ,2
th
century=5 #he people in 6urope
experienced the changes neither as fate nor destiny any longer4 &ut as history they
themsel$es 9ere ma!ing4 so that they had to ta!e the responsi&ility5 #herefore
they needed relia&le !no9ledge of culture4 history and society5 Aor this reason4
the ne9 sciences dealing 9ith these aspects arose nearly at the same time as the
,3
th
century5
1
:#he 9ord *science* itself is used as a general name for4 on the one hand4 the procedures of science
ad$entures of thought and stratagems of inquiry that go into the ad$ancement of learning and on the
other hand4 the su&stantial &ody of !no9ledge that is the outcome of this complex endea$or4 though this
latter is no mere pile of information5 Science is organized !no9ledge B555C: ;Meda9ar ,/32" -=
1
)hat is a theory?
A theory consists of a &ody of clearly defined concepts and hypotheses4 9hich are
systematically related to one another4 and an argumentation that proceeds step &y
step5 6$ery&ody should &e a&le to follo9 and put single points or the 9hole under
scrutini>ing re$ie9 or restudy5
)hat ma!es a classic?
Classics are not only old texts or their authors they comprise strong and
thought pro$o!ing statements pertaining to e$erlasting questions5 #hey are
inspiring to read4 although the original ans9ers gi$en &y the classical author
might seem inappropriate no9adays5 Classical authors introduced ne9 concepts
or perspecti$es and 9ere the first to point out ne9 fields for further research5
2
Comte an' Spencer
)ith Christian Scholasticism and (enaissance Humanism rationality and
philosophical discussion had &ecome firmly esta&lished as leading principles of
thought5
After the (eformation and se$eral religious 9ars all o$er 6urope philosophers
sought to find out 9hat holds a society together5 #hey argued that there exists a
:natural la9: 9hich e$ery rational human &eing could comprehend and that this
forms the &asis of some :social contract: ;#homas Ho&&es4 Dohn %oc!e4
Immanuel 7ant4 Dean-Dacques (ousseau=5 Eet4 these contracts can explain
political order at &est4 not society4 &ecause they already presuppose socially
conditioned and social-minded indi$iduals5 #o compensate this4 the philosophers
sho9ed a great interest in moral theory as 9ell5
In the meantime the concept of history and e$en the idea of a steadily progressing
history had &een de$eloped5 #he philosophies of history de$ised &y se$eral
thin!ers again 9ere highly a&stract and could not really descri&e the actual
conditions of social life5 #herefore4 the idea too! hold4 that the humanities or
social sciences should &e modelled as empirical sciences li!e the already
esta&lished natural sciences5
0
August Comte ;,1/3 ,3.1= 9as one of the maFor figures in this trend5 He held
that an evolutionary process can &e detected in human history from a theological
stage o$er a metaphysical one to a positi$e stage4 each of them connected 9ith
typical ways to reason" fictitious4 a&stract4 and scientific ;for the first time ,3004
cf5 Comte ,/1/" 12=5 Comte coined the 9ord :sociology: for a ne9 science of
:social physics: 9hose tas! it is to unco$er social laws5 His &elief in the po9er of
science led him e$entually to design a ne9 religion of humanity &ased on positi$e
!no9ledge ;)ernic! 0<<,=5
-
#his had to do 9ith Comte*s experience of unfulfilled
lo$e that led him to recogni>e the importance of sensi&ility and emotion &esides
reason and rationality ;%epenies ,/3.=5
#9o decades later Her&ert Spencer ;,30< ,/<-= outlined an equally am&itious
!ind of total !no9ledge in 9hich sociology played an important part5 Spencer also
9as an e$olutionist trying to sho9 that the &asic mechanisms that Charles ar9in
;,3</ 30= had outlined ,3./ are $alid in human societies too5 He interpreted
2
Since then4 there has &een a &ig discussion going on concerning the proper !ind of 9riting on society"
some cele&rate a &rilliant literary style4 9hereas others stic! to scientific4 conceptual precision5
3
#he founders of the ne9ly independent state of Bra>il ha$e &een the only ones to adopt some of these
ideas4 cf5 the 9ords" :order and progress: on the flag ;%epenies 0<,<=5
3
the :struggle for sur$i$al: to mean that al9ays the strongest 9ill sur$i$e4 there&y
founding 9hat is misleadingly called :Social ar9inism:5
Aor Spencer society is an organism4 a system of interrelated parts4 that each play
a specific role for the existence of the 9hole5 Spencer gi$es se$eral reasons 9hy
societies are to &e seen as organisms"
%i!e organisms societies grow and this :increase in si>e: &rings a&out an
:increase in structure: as its :parts multiply and differentiate: ;Spencer ,/GG"
2-1=5 :#hat progressi$e differentiation of structures is accompanied &y
progressi$e differentiation of functions5: ;2-3= #his leads to a :mutual
dependence: of the organs5 A :division of labor: characteri>es organisms and
societies ;22<=5 Another characteristic of &oth is that the 9hole is maintained
e$en if parts die5 #herefore a :continuity of life: is to &e seen 9hich exceeds that of
its constituents5 #he :life of the 9hole is quite unli!e the li$es of the units: ;22.=5
#he only difference &et9een organisms and societies is that in the former ones the
units stand in close contact4 9hereas in societies they are free from each other4 not
in direct contact5 Here emotions and language play a crucial role4 9hich connect
the indi$iduals o$er large distances ;223=5 In &iological organisms consciousness
is concentrated4 9hereas in social organisms it is diffused ;22/=5 Here Spencer
touched on the important fact that human &eings depend on communication4
&ecause interaction is mediated &y sym&ols5
Spencer sums up the reasons 9hy he thought society could &e regarded as an
organism" :It undergoes continuous gro9th5 As it gro9s4 its parts &ecome unli!e"
it exhi&its increase of structure5 #he unli!e parts simultaneously assume acti$ities
of unli!e !inds5 #hese acti$ities are not simply different4 &ut their differences are
so related as to ma!e one another possi&le5 #he reciprocal aid thus gi$en causes
mutual dependence of the parts5 And the mutually-dependent parts4 li$ing &y and
for one another4 form an aggregate constituted on the same general principle as is
an indi$idual organism5: ;2.<=
#he idea to see society as an organism as outlined a&o$e4 9as extremely
influential during the 9hole ,/
th
century and as is to &e seen later4 forms the &asis
of Hmile ur!heim*s Sociology as 9ell &ut4 not for 7arl Marx5
4
&ar. / the Criti0ue of *ourgeois Capitalism
7arl Marx 9as &orn in ,3,3 in #rier ;'ermany= into a family of De9ish
&ac!ground5 But4 they 9ere emancipated4 Marx 9as &apti>ed and in his later life
9as $ery critical to9ards religion5 He studied philosophy4 history and la9 to
&ecome a la9yer4 yet after recei$ing his doctorate ;,32,= he &egan 9or!ing as a
Fournalist for a radical democratic ne9spaper5 Because of that4 he 9as &anished to
+aris in ,32-5 #here he met other exiled 'erman intellectuals &ut also Arench
socialists and leaders of the 9or!ing class5 In +aris Marx also came to !no9
Ariedrich 6ngels ;,30< /.=4 son of a manufacturer5 #hey &ecame close friends
and &egan to 9or! together5 Besides their famous :Communist Manifesto: ;,323=
they 9rote many polemical texts critici>ing 'erman philosophy5
Since ,32/ Marx li$ed 9ith his family in %ondon and he again &egan 9or!ing as a
Fournalist to earn money5 #hat is one reason 9hy many of his planned 9or!s
ne$er could &e finished in the 9ay he had announced it5 8nly after the ,3G<s and
due to the generosity of 6ngels4 Marx had enough time to spend hours reading at
the British %i&rary and 9riting his maFor 9or! :Capital: ;- Iols5=5 )hen Marx
died in ,33- the third $olume 9as not finished yet5 Since he 9or!ed closely 9ith
6ngels4 he too! up the tas! and finished it5
2

uring his studies in Berlin Marx came under the influence of Hegel and his
follo9ers5 He 9as especially inspired &y %ud9ig Aeuer&ach ;,3<2 10=5 Against
the a&stract philosophy of mind of 'erman Idealism4 Aeuer&ach de$eloped an
anthropology that tried to ta!e the 9hole human &eing under consideration4
stating that humans ha$e feelings and emotions too4 not only rationality5
Aeuer&ach also 9rote critically on religion claiming that it is only a proFection of
the limited human po9ers onto almighty gods5 #herefore4 he could say" :#he
secret of theology is anthropology5: ;cf5 7amen!a ,/1<" -/f=
Marx ne$ertheless maintained the position that Aeuer&ach*s argument did not
suffice5 #he human &eing is a product of society4 so that religion is a product of
society as 9ell5 Marx put the practice of man4 i5e5 9hat one does to earn a li$ing4
into the center of attention more so than Aeuer&ach did ;cf5 M6(" ,1,=5 Economy
is the main focus for Marx and against Idealism he set Materialism4 claiming the
tas! to &e finding :natural laws: 9hich 9or! 9ith necessity5 Aamous is the ,,
th
#hesis on Aeuer&ach" :+hilosophers in the past ha$e only interpreted the 9orld in
$arious 9ays@ the important point4 ho9e$er4 is to change it5: ;M6(" ,2.@ M)"
,1-=
4
Aor a highly reada&le account of Marx*s life see Manuel ,//.5
5
In his 9ritings Marx often made shorter remar!s on different types of economy to
ma!e clear 9hat is typical for modern capitalism5 #he 9ay in 9hich production is
organi>ed has implications for social relations and the 9hole 9ay of life5
#he follo9ing ta&le sho9s the four types of social relations of economic
production that Marx mentions in his :Capital: ;,3G14 ,33.4 ,3/2="
Peasant
Families
Feudalism Associations of
Free Human
Beings
Society of
Commodity
Production
Production joint dependent cooperative private
Relations personal personal social social
Labor:
- Division of
- Concet of
natural
concrete
natural
concrete
communal
general
social
general
!ime "irrelevant" relevant relevant relevant
Distribution of products of products of products and
commodities
of commodities
Commodities nearly non-
existent
minor role ubiquitous
but transparent
ubiquitous
but mystified


+ractice loses its natural character and &ecomes regulated and rationally
organi>ed 9ith industrial production5 )hen calculating costs and prices the
general abstract form of labor is important4 not its concrete form anymore5 %a&or
changes into a commodity and time as its measure plays a crucial role ;M)" 012=4
e$en if in Aeudalism the amount of time needed to 9or! for the landlord and his
rent 9as important5 #he products of human la&or &ecome commodities that
appear in large num&ers on the market5 #herefore4 their origins in social
production processes is capa&le of &eing mystified ;:fetishism of commodities:
M6(" -,/f=5 8n the mar!et the exchange value of commodities is of crucial
importance not their use value ;M6(" -<0f=5
.

Stated again4 the characteristics of industrial capitalism are"
;,= An all em&racing market4 ;0= production of commodities4 ;-= private
property4 ;2= expropriation of ;.= formally free labor5
5
An interesting o&ser$ation is made here &y 7enneth #uc!er4 concerning the contradiction &et9een the
rational organization of production and the irrational play of forces on the mar!et ;0<<0" /G=5
6
Ho9 did the change to industrial capitalism come a&out?
In Marx*s 9ords :9or! is material exchange &et9een man and nature: ;cf5 M)"
2/-=5 epending on the definition of the &asic needs and the natural conditions4
more or less 9or! is needed for su&sistence5 Any leisure time may &e used for
extra 9or!4 either out of one*s o9n free 9ill to produce surplus for the mar!et or
&y force from lord4 emperor or state5 +easants4 craftsmen or artisans o9n their
means of production4 9here land 9as a common property or &elonged to the
emperor 9ho controlled and ruled o$er its use5 It 9as only 9ith the creation of
private property of land that arose in the ,1
th
century that an :original
accumulation of capital: too! place5 6xpropriating the people of their land and
their means of production created a large num&er of free la&orers that 9ere
dri$en to sell their la&or force on the market5 )hereas in earlier times people
9ere the o9ners of the products of their o9n 9or!4 they no9 created the private
property of the capitalist5 #he la&or process is organi>ed ;division of labor= and
mechani>ed in such a 9ay4 that it produces a large quantity of surplus value as
soon as the la&orers recei$e their minimum 9age4 9hich only guarantees physical
reproduction ;of themsel$es4 their la&or force and dependent children@ M6("
0<G@ M)" 03<=5
#here is an intense dynamic &uilt into modern capitalism to rein$est profit in the
o9n factory or try to &uy other ones5 #he reason according to Marx is that only
this 9ay the profit rate can &e !ept at a high le$el5 ue to technological change
the producti$ity of la&or increases so that less la&or 9ould &e needed and
therefore the profit rate 9ould go do9n ;M6(" 0/,=5 Marx claimed that the
exploita&le surplus $alue is created &y human la&or only5 #he unpaid surplus of
9or! creates surplus $alue5
)hy is the 9hole system so despica&le?
#o explain this4 one has to remem&er the philosophy of Hegel ;,11< ,3-,=5 #he
&asic idea in his phenomenology is that mind manifests itself in o&Fects4 9hich
ena&les the mind to reach deeper consciousness of self5 #his idea can also &e
found in religion ;'ods create to pro$e their a&ilities e$en to themsel$es=4
Indian Sam!hya-+hilosophy or ?eo-+latonism ;+lotin= and Hegel !ne9 the
9orld history of philosophy quite 9ell5 In his early 9ritings Marx too! up and
de$eloped this idea of externalization into the concept of alienation ;M6(" 1,f=4
9hich has four different dimensions ;M)" 3.="
,= In industrial production4 9hich is highly di$ided humans are alienated from
their products and from the pleasure of 9or!4 9hich is :not the satisfaction of a
need4 B&utC merely a means to satisfy needs external to it: ;8llman ,/1," ,-1=5
0= Man is alienated from the act of production &ecause sJhe can*t recogni>e
her-Jhimself in the products that appear as commodities on the mar!et5
7
-= SJhe is alienated from her/his human nature ;that is characteri>ed &y
conscious $ital acti$ity= &ecause sJhe :&ecomes a mere appendage of the
machine: ;Manifesto" ,/@ M)" 0.,= and &ecause sJhe is reduced to a commodity5
2= :An immediate consequence of man*s alienation from the product of his 9or!4
his $ital acti$ity and his species &eing4 is the alienation of man from man5: ;M)"
/,= SJhe is alienated from her/his family and fellow workers and a radical
decline of personal relations is to &e seen5
As Bertell 8llman has sho9n :alienated relations &et9een man and his acti$ity4
products4 fello9s4 and species operate in the fields of economics4 social relations4
politics4 and religion: ;8llman ,/1," 003=5
In Marx* later 9ritings his leading argument is that la&orers are exploited &ecause
they are not paid according to their share in the production of goods4 and of
coarse the underlying &asic inustice! that a fe9 people o9n the means of
production ;mostly &y force or historical chance=4 9hereas the maFority is
depri$ed of this5
?e$ertheless4 the ans9er to the follo9ing question" :&y 9hat right does one
capitalist lay claim to Bla&or and its productsC?: ;8llman ,/1," 02G=4 is gi$en as
early as ,323" :#o &e a capitalist4 is to ha$e not only a purely personal4 &ut a
social4 status5: B555C :Capital is therefore4 not a personal4 it is a social
po9er5: ;Manifesto" 02@ M)" 0.1=5
8
, 1istory of Class Struggles2
At $arious points throughout his 9ritings4 Marx referred to historical references5
Aor example4 he 9as a9are that other forms of capital existed e$en &efore the
&rea!through and de$elopment of industrial capitalism5
#he 9ord :capital: is deri$ed from the livestock of animals and is counted
according to its heads ;lat5 caput=5 Corresponding 9ith this the first maFor form of
capital is the stock of goods of the merchants 9ho in$est their money in hope for
higher returns5 Marx assigns the &eginning of t9o important changes to trade"
turning products into commodities and turning use $alue into exchange $alue5
Contemporary 9ith trade capital de$eloped in form of money4 9hich 9as lent to
other people to yield interest5 Both forms together made possi&le the gro9th of
capital independent from property of land4 9hich in turn is one of the maFor
conditions to o$ercome feudalism5 Industrial capital is in$ested in means of
production to gain profit5 #hroughout economic history rational &oo!!eeping
&ecomes more and more important5
But Marx did not only loo! &ac! into history4 he also tried to sho9 different
possi&ilities for further de$elopments5 By comparing the features of $arious
economic regimes he thought of logical alternati$es5
Independent peasants or craftsmen produce pri$ate property &ased on their own
la&or4 9hereas feudal pri$ate property is &ased on the exploitation of un"free
la&or5 Contrary to this4 capitalist pri$ate property is &ased on the exploitation of
formally free la&or5 #he next step 9ould &e the exploitation of other capitalists
and the concentration of capital5 Against this4 Marx hints at the possi&ility of
indi$idual property &ased on cooperation of own la&or and common property of
means of production5
#9o other trends in history4 9hich Marx clearly had foreseen are the constant
need to esta&lish and enlarge a 9orld mar!et ;Manifesto" ,.f@ M)" 023f=4 and the
increasing importance of capital o9ners4 9ho 9ould reach a dominant position in
economy5 Concerning the first trend it is interesting to note that Marx 9hile
fiercely attac!ing imperialism4 9as still stuc! 9ith 6uro-centrism5 He 9as sure
that 6urope 9as at the height of historical de$elopment and de$ised 8riental
constructions in descri&ing other cultures" :Indian society has no history at all4 at
least no !no9n history5 )hat 9e call its history is &ut the history of the successi$e
intruders 9ho founded their empires on the passi$e &asis of that unresisting and
unchanging society5: ;M6(" G./= Marx here uses the same ideas and arguments
that the British used to legitimi>e their dominance o$er India5 :Aor Marx4 the
political unity of India and its modern means of transport are the result of British
actions5 Marx recogni>es that British Imperialism destroyed Indian culture4
9
separating India *from all its ancient traditions4 and from the 9hole of its past
history*5 Indian agriculture is also disrupted &y 6uropean in$aders5 But in
*&lo9ing up BtheC economical &asis of the 8riental mode of production4* 6uropean
imperialism *produced the greatest4 and4 to spea! the truth4 the only social
re$olution e$er heard of in Asia*5: ;#uc!er 0<<0" ,<.4 quoting M6(" G.1=
G
In the de$elopment of shareholder economy Marx sa9 one of t9o contradictory
9ays of mo$ing in the direction of associate production5 Although shares
esta&lish the Foint property of means of production they &ring a&out the total
alienation of the capitalist from the production process ;and today this can &e
studied exemplary in the &eha$ior of hedge funds=5 Cooperatives also are founded
on Foint property of means of production4 &ut 9ithout the contradiction of capital
and la&or ;at least in theory=5
#he central mechanism in history Marx detected in the dialectic of forces of
production and relations of production ;M6(" 02.=5 Because the de$eloping
forces of production ;technology4 organi>ation of production K di$ision of la&or=
are only used for creation of capital and not for the reduction of 9or!ing time
;:Areedom &egins 9here the necessity of 9or! ends:=4 there is an increasing
mismatch 9ith the relations of production5 #he social organi>ation of production
in most of human history has &een such4 that fe9 almost do no 9or! &ut get
much4 9hereas many 9or! hard and too much and get merely nothing ;:#hose
9ho 9or! do not gain and those 9ho gain4 do not 9or!: Manifesto" 0.=5 )hen the
forces of production ma!e a reorgani>ation of the economy possi&le4 the old class
of expropriators is depri$ed of its po9er and a ne9 ruling class ta!es its place5
Marx thought that the o$er9helmingly large +roletariat 9ould ta!e o$er po9er
and restructure economy and society5 In the :Communist Manifesto: ;together
9ith 6ngels= he had spo!en of all history &eing a history of class struggles ;,2@
M6(" 21-=5 In industrial capitalism there are t9o classes4 those 9ho own means
of production and those 9ho do not5 ;In other economic formations classes are
defined according to the command of means of production4 to ta!e up the insight
that pri$ate property of land only is a recently de$eloped idea@ M6(" ,3Gf5=
But4 history too! another course than 9hat Marx had en$isaged and the
:sal$ation: of humanity had not ta!en place5 )hat happened instead?
#he different socialist mo$ements4 la&or unions andJor social democratic parties
9ere quite successful in impro$ing the 9or!ing conditions5 +eople had to 9or!
less and did earn more money5 Contrary to 9hat Marx thought this 9as made
possi&le &y the increased producti$ity of la&or and mass production that led to a
decrease of prices and !ept the profit high 9hen the in$estment into machinery is
calculated against the enormous quantity of commodities produced &y it per hour5
Henry Aord 9as one of the !ey figures to argue for &etter payment for la&orers so
that they also could afford to &uy the commodities5 Aollo9ing the ideas of Dohn M5
6
Aor more on the discussion of the :Asiatic Mode of +roduction: see 8*%eary ,/3/5
10
7eynes ;,33- ,/2G= the national states sta&ili>ed their economy in times of
crisis &y creating demand of goods and ser$ices5
#here ha$e &een se$eral other ideas4 9hich at times &ecame more important than
class" race! ethnicity! nation! and sex and gender5 All these name other forms or
dimensions of oppression &esides the economic sphere5 Connected 9ith this4 a
general critique of the idea of modernity too! hold4 9hich included specific
conceptions of progress4 science4 the state4 and a far-reaching 6uro-centrism5 #he
need 9as seen e$en &y Marxists to reach a deeper understanding of po9er
relations ;#uc!er 0<<0" ,,<= and many reali>ed that Marx 9as 9rong to reduce
ci$il society to economy ;,,,@ cf5 M6(" 2=5 +olitical li&eralism is not identical 9ith
economic li&eralism4 although they interact 9ith one another5
Eet4 the &asic inFustice remains that the means of production are in the hands of a
fe9 9ho ha$e the po9er to decide on the distri&ution in their fa$or5 )hat is still
needed today4 are other forms of distri&ution and participation that not only
consist in political emancipation4 &ut :true human emancipation: ;#uc!er 0<<0"
,<,=5
)hat ma!es Marx a sociological classic 9hile 9riting so much on economy?
Aor Marx it is not the single indi$idual that is the starting point for theory4 &ut
indi$iduals li$ing and acting together5 #hey ma!e up the social 9orld5 #herefore
in economy it is not the sole entrepreneur and his decisions4 9hich are focused
on4 &ut the 9hole social conditions of economic decisions and institutions5
?e$ertheless4 Marx ga$e only a fe9 hints on 9hat is important to understand the
social 9orld5
11
Dur3heim) The Science of Sociology an' +ts &etho'
As mentioned &efore4 in times of &ig changes the need to understand social life
and ho9 it is organi>ed is ele$ated5 #his is the case 9ith Hmile ur!heim*s
lifetime also5 After the defeat of Arance &y the 'erman army led &y +russia in
,31,4 and the confusion due to the Commune in +aris4 the Arench ci$il society 9as
deeply trou&led5 %i!e many others ur!heim 9anted to contri&ute to the tas! to
get the society settled again5 Eet4 during the course of his acti$ity he unfolded his
original ideas that 9ere $ery much influenced &y others into a manifold and
fascinating $ersion of sociology5
ur!heim 9as &orn son of a (a&&i near the eastern &order of Arance in the year
,3.3 ;as 9ere 'eorg Simmel and Sigmund Areud=5 )hile still in school he mo$ed
a9ay from all religion5 He succeeded to get admitted to the elite Hcole ?ormale
SupLrieur in +aris5 #here he studied philosophy to &ecome a teacher5 After three
years teaching at school ur!heim tra$eled to 'ermany on a grant to get
acquainted 9ith the latest de$elopments in philosophy and psychology5 Bac! in
Arance he started his academic career in Bordeaux4 9here he deli$ered the first
e$er uni$ersity sociology lecture in the 9orld ;,333=5 #ogether 9ith a group of co-
9or!ers that included his nephe9 Marcel Mauss ;,310 ,/.<= he founded the
first Arench Fournal of sociology :%*AnnLe Sociologique: in ,3/35 Since ,/<0
ur!heim 9as professor at the Sor&onne ;+aris=5 eeply hurt &y the death of his
son AndrL in the Airst )orld )ar ,/,. ur!heim*s state of health declined and he
died in ,/,1 after suffering a stro!e5
In ,3/. ur!heim set out to argue that sociology is :a distinct and autonomous
science: ;ur!heim ,/.<" ,2.=4 &ecause it has its o9n o&Fect of study5 :A science
BMC can Fustify its existence only 9hen it has for its su&Fect matter an order of
facts 9hich the other sciences do not study5: ;,2.f= #herefore4 ur!heim sho9ed
9hat !ind of o&Fects sociology has and 9hich the appropriate method to deal 9ith
them is4 there&y !eeping distance from philosophy and psychology5 As soon4 as
the sociologist has to do 9ith things4 :he 9ill no longer thin! of explaining them
&y utilitarian calculations or &y syllogistic reasoning: ;,22=5 #his 9ould &e
su&Fecti$e or a&stract argumentation4 &ut not scientific explanation5 Social facts
ha$e to &e explained in such a 9ay4 needing to sho9 9hat has caused them ;,2,=5
ur!heim no longer thought that the social sciences should rely on natural la9s
as such4 &ut on the la9 of causality only5 Aor e$erything there must &e a reason
9hy it is and the 9ay it is5 Still4 ur!heim did not see clear enough that in the
human sphere these are subective reasons or motives most of the time ;except
for social institutions=5 In order to a$oid reduction to &iology or psychology4 :a
social fact can &e explained &y another social fact: only ;,2.=5 #o reach such
12
explanations :methodological experiments: need to &e conducted4 9hich in the
case of sociology are comparisons5 #herefore4 ur!heim and the %*AnnLe-group
used ethnographic material from all o$er the 9orld5 #his ena&led them to stand
out against amateur sociological Fournalists4 intellectuals andJor philosophers4
9hich ur!heim critiqued" :If sociological phenomena are only systems of
o&Fecti$i>ed ideas4 to explain them is to rethin! them in their logical order4 and
this explanation is in itself its o9n proof@ at the $ery most4 it 9ill require
confirmation &y a fe9 examples5: ;,22= Indeed4 the precondition for doing
sociology is :to discard the concepts BoneC is accustomed to apply: BMC :in order
to face the facts themsel$es: ;,2G4 ,22=5
1

)hat is a social fact?
In analogy to the experience of the physical 9orld4 9hich seems to &e independent
from man and capa&le to resist him4 ur!heim argues that social facts ha$e the
same characteristics5 :A social fact is e$ery 9ay of acting BMC 9hich is general
throughout a gi$en society4 9hile at the same time existing in its o9n right
independent of its indi$idual manifestations5: ;,-= Social facts are :crystalli>ed
*9ays of acting*: BMC :capa&le of exercising on the indi$idual an external
constraint: ;,04 ,-=5 #he prototype of a social fact is a moral norm4 &ut there are
:differences in the degree of consolidation: ;,0=5 A :moral maxim: BMC :is much
more rigid than a simple professional custom or a fashion: ;,0=5
In his famous study on suicide ;,3/1= ur!heim tried to sho9 the po9er of social
facts o$er human &eings5 Accordingly4 he did not loo! for psychological reasons
9hy particular indi$iduals commit suicide4 &ut rather for causal explanations in
$arious suicide rates5 In doing so4 he produced one of the first sociological studies
using quantitati$e statistical data5 #he interesting fact that has to &e explained is4
9hy suicide rates $ary :from country to country 9hile remaining sta&le 9ithin
countries and groups and changing uniformly o$er time: ;#uc!er 0<<0" ,0G=5
ur!heim examines t9o aspects of social integration and the effect of their
forms5 He distinguishes the attachment of people to the ideas and goals of society
from the intensity of regulation by society5 If either aspect is ta!en to an extreme4
the pro&a&ility of suicide increases5 In line 9ith that4 ur!heim claims there are
four different types of suicide"

egoistic ,ttachment altruistic
lo$ high
anomic -egulation fatalistic
7
Aor more on ur!heim*s refutation of contemporary !inds of social science see Areitas 0<,<5
13
If the attachment of people to the ideas and $alues of society is lo94 they 9ill &e
desperate in times of crisis ;egoistic=5 If their attachment is $ery high4 they 9ill
gi$e their life for others or society as a 9hole ;altruistic=5 In cases 9hen rules and
norms are a&sent from social life4 people may &e lost or feel insecure ;anomic=5 In
a society that regulates too much4 there 9ill &e no freedom or indi$idual sense of
life4 9hich could lead some to commit suicide ;fatalistic=5
:#oo much or too little social integration are ur!heim*s explanations for
understanding suicide5: ;#uc!er 0<<0" ,03=
In his time4 it 9as quite an inno$ati$e thought to loo! for social causes of suicide
instead of indi$idual ones5 But4 that should not ma!e one forget the indi$idual
dimension5 Here it is not so much the suicide4 &ut the attempted suicide that is
rele$ant5 Any such attempt is a cry for help5 #herefore4 one important aspect is
that suicide is a form of communication5
#a!ing up this insight4 Ste$e #aylor as 9ell tried to o$ercome the conflict &et9een
psychological and sociological explanations of suicide5 He com&ined the
distinction of :inner-directed: and :other-directed: suicidal action 9ith the
degree of certainty of death suicide as a !ind of ordeal or purposi$e act ;#aylor
,/30" ,/0=5 #aylor*s categories still relate to ur!heim*s types"
Attemted suicide
"gamble #it$ deat$%
Suicide
"calculated deat$%
inner-directed
&uest for Self ' egoistic Submission ' fatalistic
ot$er-directed
Aeal to ot$ers ' anomic Sacrifice ' altruistic


#he appeal to others and the sacrifice of life clearly &ear the character of
communicati$e acts5
14
The Division of Labor in Society
ur!heim sa9 Arance and the other moderni>ing states in a moral crisis4 9hich
sho9ed itself in high degrees of egoism and social conflict5 According to this he
held that part of sociology that deals 9ith morality to &e more important than
social morphology ;demography4 composition of groups=5 ur!heim did ta!e
inspirations from others &ut thus arri$ed at quite distinct conclusions5 His &asic
ideas are all spelled out $ery early and then ela&orated during the next t9enty
years5 Many of them are to &e found in his &oo! :#he i$ision of %a&or in
Society4: pu&lished in ,3/-5 By this time there 9ere t9o competing $ie9s on the
di$ision of la&or" 6conomists since Adam Smith ;,10- /<= claimed it to &e the
highly desira&le &asis of indi$idual and social 9ealth5 Marx pointed to its negati$e
effect of alienation ;from 9or! and its products4 from the 9or!er*s sel$es4 the
fello9 9or!ers and human nature=5
ur!heim no9 argued that it has a moral function4 9hereas the descriptions gi$en
&y the other authors refer to its a&normal forms only the anomic di$ision of
la&or 9hen the contact of the parts is not sufficiently regulated and the forced
di$ision 9here indi$iduals are not in harmony 9ith their function4 since it has
&een imposed on them5 It is quite clear that solidarity cannot &e prescri&ed
simply4 &ut it also cannot &e &ased on contractual regulations exclusi$ely5 Against
the contract theories ur!heim argued that interest &ased action ta!es place on
the &ac!ground of society and its moral and legal standards5 :Aor example4 the
economic exchanges constituting a mar!et can only function in the context of
shared respect for indi$idual rights4 the sanctity of contracts4 and principles of
Fustice5: ;#uc!er 0<<0" ,--=
ur!heim de$elops a tight chain of arguments to sho9 that 9ith and &ecause of
the di$ision of la&or social solidarity changes its form5 #o understand his
argument one has to loo! at the theories of t9o 'erman sociologists first5
Aerdinand #Nnnies ;,3.. ,/-G= in ,331 pu&lished his seminal 9or! on
:Community and Society:5 He descri&ed the t9o forms at once as types and in
their historical succession5 #he main difference &et9een them lies in a changed
relationship of 9ill and reason5 )hereas life in an organically gro9n community
is determined &y some !ind of essential 9ill and common understanding4 in the
larger society ar&itrariness and reasoning play a !ey role4 and so it forms a
mechanical aggregate only5 Al&ert SchOffle ;,3-, ,/<-= 9as one of the many
9riters in the ,/
th
century 9ho explained society 9ith the model of an organism
;li!e Spencer=5 Arom him ur!heim too! the idea of the collective consciousness4
the synthesis of indi$idual consciousnesses5 #he argument is that 9ays of
thin!ing4 feeling and acting of a plurality are different from 9hat single
indi$iduals 9ould ha$e thought4 felt or done5 Iery important here is the fact that
15
in Arench :conscience: does not mean consciousness only4 &ut also conscience4
and ur!heim put the accent $aria&ly on the cognitive or moral aspect5
6quipped 9ith these ideas ur!heim argued for the moral function of the di$ision
of la&or stic!ing to his o9n later de$eloped rules of methodology5 #herefore4 the
idea of indi$iduals introducing the di$ision of la&or has to &e refuted and social
causes ha$e to &e gi$en5 ur!heim here names material and moral density and a
gro9th in the $olume of society5 An increasing num&er of people li$ing closer
together and ha$ing more contact 9ith one another ma!es the di$ision of la&or
possi&le and necessary5 #he di$ision in turn causes a gro9ing interdependence
that changes the social structure5 )hereas in former times societies 9ere made up
of the addition of similar segments4 no9 they are organized out of different
parts5 Corresponding 9ith this4 another form of solidarity de$eloped4 9hich no
longer is a mechanical solidarity simply &ased on the li!eness of the social
elements4 &ut an organic solidarity that is &ased on indi$idual difference5 )ith
this idea ur!heim re$ersed the order of the concepts he too! from #Nnnies5
Again4 it should &e noted that :solidarity: in Arench has a dou&le meaning that
ur!heim rests on" it denotes a mere connection as 9ell as cohesion in the sense
of &elonging together5
?e$ertheless4 ur!heim clearly reali>ed that this moral aspect of social
interrelations is not self e$ident for many people4 &ut has to &e strengthened in
t9o 9ays" encouraging self reflection could ma!e people a9are of it4 and
solidarity can &e organi>ed and experienced in corporate groups &ased on
professions ;cf5 Saalmann 0<<0=5
It 9as important for ur!heim to point out that organic solidarity is fully
compati&le 9ith a high respect for the indi$idual and herJhis human rights4 9hich
according to him are to &e guaranteed &y the state5 :#rue indi$idual li&erty does
not consist in suppression of all regulation4 &ut is the product of regulation4 for
this equality is not in nature5 #his 9or! of achie$ing Fustice is the tas! 9hich is
imposed upon higher societies@ only on this condition can they maintain
themsel$es5: ;ur!heim ,/G2" PPIII=
%oo!ing &ac! at the 9hole argument ma!es clear that for ur!heim the remedy
against egoism lies in :reflexi$e indi$idualism:5
Eet4 ur!heim not only states that there are different forms of social structure
and solidarity4 he tries to pro$e it and ta!es la9 as an indicator5 8nly if there is
some !ind of solidarity in a gi$en society4 9ill the &rea!ing of rules &e sanctioned
&y society5 ur!heim argues that there are as many types of la9 as there are
forms of solidarity5 In smaller societies 9ith mechanical solidarity the collecti$e
conscience is $ery strong and therefore creates strong sentiments that
mechanically determine a passionate reaction 9hen offended5 #his is the reason
9hy one finds repressive la9 here 9ith the idea of punishment underlying5 In
&igger societies 9ith organic solidarity4 collecti$e conscience loses its intensity
16
and the indi$iduals &ecome more important5 #herefore the &asic idea of co"
operative or restitutive la9 is compensation5 Accordingly the share of penal la9
in the 9hole &ody of Furidical rules steadily declines5
Considering the argument of the &oo!4 one might say that ur!heim at least
sho9s the possibility of a ne9 form of solidarity &ased on the insight of each
indi$idual into herJhis interdependence 9ith others5 But4 the extent of such
reflexi$ity and the num&er of corporate groups remain far &ehind 9hat ur!heim
had hoped for5 Instead4 another 9ay to guarantee some !ind of social cohesion
&ecame far more prominent" the disciplinary measures of the state as analy>ed &y
Michel Aoucault ;,/0G 32=5 :Aor Aoucault4 the rise of restituti$e la9 increases
the sur$eillance of the pu&lic in 6urope4 as la9s &egin regulating more and more
aspects of indi$idual &eha$ior5: ;#uc!er 0<<0" ,22= In the same 9ay education for
a long time 9as far more used to discipline than to &ring up self-reflecti$e human
&eings 9ho 9ould de$elop the idea of solidarity on their o9n5
ur!heim surely had a strong &elief in science4 &ut at the same time he !ne9 ho9
difficult it is to de$elop a scientific attitude4 and later in his career he sa9 that the
categories of !no9ledge are not o&Fecti$e &ut social constructions5 ?e$ertheless4
they ha$e a $alue &ecause they contain the !no9ledge accumulated &y the
collecti$ity5 :#he intellectual po9er of society is infinitely greater than that of the
indi$idual4 simply &ecause it results from the co-operation4 the colla&oration of a
multitude of minds and e$en of generations5: ;ur!heim ,/,-a" ,10= #ogether
9ith Marcel Mauss he had 9ritten on :primiti$e classification: and in his maFor
9or! on the elementary forms of religious life ;,/,0= he further de$eloped these
thoughts4 arguing that the categories of human thought and systems of
classification ;and therefore the &eginnings of science= are &asically de$eloped
9ith the religious 9orld$ie95 :#oday 9e are &eginning to reali>e that la94 morals4
and e$en scientific thought itself 9ere &orn of religion4 9ere for a long time
confounded 9ith it4 and ha$e remained penetrated 9ith its spirit5: ;,/,0" -,=
ur!heim*s maFor ideas on religion can &e found as early as ,331 in a &oo!
re$ie95 #here he stated that religious ideas are interpretations of social
sentiments4 &ut only in symbolical form ;ur!heim ,331" -.f=5 In his 9or! on
suicide he later 9rote" :(eligion is in a 9ord the system of sym&ols &y means of
9hich society &ecomes conscious of itself@ it is the characteristic 9ay of thin!ing
of collecti$e existence5: ;ur!heim in #uc!er 0<<0" ,-1= In a similar manner
Henri Hu&ert and Marcel Mauss4 at the end of their study on sacrifice came to the
conclusion that religious representations symbolize social matters the moral
energies and collecti$e forces5 (eligion therefore performs a social function4 :&oth
for indi$iduals and for the community: ;Hu&ertJMauss ,/G2" ,<0f=5 Accordingly
ur!heim and Mauss descri&e religion as :a system of actions aimed at ma!ing
and perpetually rema!ing the soul of the collecti$ity and of the indi$idual5 BMC Its
17
principal function is dynamogenic5 It gi$es the indi$idual the strength 9hich
ena&les him to surpass himself4 to rise a&o$e his nature and to !eep it under
control5: ;ur!heim ,/,-&" ,3<=
Here ur!heim alludes to his theory of the dual nature of man4 consisting of each
a &iological and social part5 )hereas sentiments &elong to the indi$idual*s
physiological nature4 morality and intellectual functions are products of society4
9hich are acquired &y the indi$iduals during sociali>ation5 ur!heim claims that
this polarity of &iology and society4 &ody and mind is the &asis of the di$ision of
the 9orld into a profane and sacred sphere that is to &e found in e$ery religion
;ur!heim ,3//" /.@ ,/,0" -0=5 Aor example4 the soul is :the higher part of
oursel$es: ;,/,-&" ,1/= &ecause it deri$es from society5 ?e$ertheless4 ur!heim
also recogni>ed that4 :&ecause society can exist only in and &y means of indi$idual
minds4 it must enter into us and &ecome organi>ed 9ithin us: ;ur!heim in
6mir&ayer ,//G" ,02=5 #his clearly sho9s that ur!heim had de$eloped the idea
of socialization ;,3//" /G=5
#he argumentation to explain religion resem&les the one for the di$ision of la&or
someho9" in times of physical and interactional density ;i5e5 in rituals= people
experience the intensity of emotions4 feel some !ind of energy that ma!es them
recogni>e4 al&eit only in sym&olic form4 their dependence on society4 9hich
actually is the source of the energy5 #he positi$e feeling ma!es people adopt the
ideas and moral ideals of their society and the energy ena&les them to go on 9ith
their daily life in times &et9een the rituals5 #his idea4 &y the 9ay4 had first &een
put for9ard &y )illiam Dames ;,/<0= and then has &een empirically underlined
&y the 9or! of Mauss on the seasonal $ariations in the social and religious life of
the 6s!imo ;,/<2=4 as 9ell as in the &oo! of Spencer and 'illen on the Australian
a&origines ;,3//=5 But4 &ecause the definition of religion ur!heim ga$e in his
&oo!4 mentions only one of the functions of religion ;:&eliefs and practices 9hich
unite into one single moral community BMC all those 9ho adhere to them:4 ,/,0"
-<= the second function to ma!e life endura&le for man has &een notoriously
o$erloo!ed4 9hereas the integrati$e function played a fatal role in later
functionalist sociology5
18
#eorg Simmel) -elational Sociology
#he early sociologists treated so far4 all theori>ed society as a 9hole4 mostly
modeling it ali!e to an organism follo9ing the la9s of nature ;Spencer= or at least
the la9 of causality ;ur!heim=5 ur!heim asserted that the collecti$ity has a life
of its o9n4 e$en a !ind of collecti$e consciousness5 Aor this reason he has &een
accused of thin!ing a&out society as a real &eing4 9hich he $ehemently denied5
Marx descri&ed ho9 the totality of the relations of production changed 9ith the
course of history5 But4 e$en if he ac!no9ledged the di$ision of the 9hole society
into different classes4 or ur!heim said that society gro9s out of the thoughts and
actions of the indi$iduals only4 they did not analy>e this &asic le$el of social life in
much detail5 #hey de$eloped the macro"perspective in sociology4 9hereas Simmel
and )e&er 9ere the first to de$elop the micro"perspective5
'eorg Simmel 9as &orn in Berlin ,3.35 Since his father had a chocolate factory4
he 9as in the luc!y position not to ha$e to care a&out money his 9hole life5
Simmel studied philosophy and 9rote his thesis on 7ant5 ;7ant*s philosophy &y
the 9ay had an important influence on ur!heim and )e&er too5= Although
Simmel 9rote on sociological topics li!e social differentiation4 the role of money
in modern life4 or on &ig cities4 he also 9rote on moral philosophy4 7ant4 'oethe4
(em&randt4 and ?iet>sche5 His texts are essays in 9hich he loo!s at the su&Fects
under consideration from different perspecti$es4 Fust adding one to another and
only seldom systematically arguing a certain point5 At the uni$ersity he attracted
many listeners4 &ut &ecame professor ;in Strass&urg= only in ,/,24 out of anti-
Semitic reasons5 Most of the students 9ere on the &attlefields in )orld )ar I and
Simmel himself died of cancer ,/,35
#he main focus of Simmel*s Sociology 9as to descri&e the social forms that gro9
out of interaction of indi$iduals or their relations 9ith one another5 #herefore4 he
held that apart from di$ision of la&or or a di$ision into parties4 uni$ersal forms of
domination and su&ordination4 competition4 conflict4 andJor friendship4 etc
characteri>e all societies5 8ne of the &asic insights of sociology is that indi$iduals
ne$er completely merge 9ith society they are simultaneously 9ithin and
9ithout5 #his relates to the &asic preconditions of society5 Society as an o&Fecti$e
form of su&Fecti$e minds is possi&le4 &ecause of three a priori conditions"
,= )e cannot completely !no9 the indi$iduality of any other ;Simmel ,/./" -2-=5
#herefore4 one*s picture of other human &eings is distorted to a certain degree@
often it is a mere type5
0= Indi$iduals are not sociated completely they !eep some :extrasocial
nature: ;-2G=5
19
-= :Society is a structure composed of unequal elements: ;-.,=4 &ut e$ery
:indi$idual is directed to9ard a certain place 9ithin his social milieu &y his $ery
quality: ;-.-=5 :#he o&Fecti$e totality B555C offers a place to su&Fecti$ely determined
life processes4 9hich there&y4 in their $ery indi$iduality4 &ecome necessary lin!s
in the life of the 9hole5: ;-..=
In naming these three a priori conditions4 Simmel 9as a&le to explain ho9 a
:o&Fecti$e: society ;cf5 ur!heim= can &e made up &y indi$iduals 9ith su&Fecti$e
minds5 Although e$eryone may find some space to act out her indi$iduality4 social
interaction is &ased on typical 9ays of action4 generali>ed ideas and a&stract
concepts5 #his is the only 9ay to deal 9ith the fundamental human pro&lem that
one cannot !no9 the inner states of mind of fello9 &eings5 #he insight to the
crucial role of types in e$eryday life explains 9hy )e&er*s method to construct
ideal types is not entirely 9rong5 6$en if they ne$er reach indi$idual reality they
grasp social reality to a large degree5 #he same insight has &een put for9ard &y
many other sociologists ;cf5 Mauss on the person4 SchQt> on types4 'arfin!el on
routine4 +arsons on roles etc5=5 ifferent cultures and their societies $ary in
character and degree to 9hich they constrain interaction to typical forms that
ans9er to expectations and norms5 In modern society there is a hitherto un!no9n
freedom of action for its mem&ers4 9hich4 ne$ertheless4 &rings 9ith it the large
pro&lems of modern ur&an and industrial life ;Simmel descri&ed these in much
detail=5
Simmel highlighted se$eral examples of the :t9ofold position: of &eing an :obect
in relation to the social group as subect4 to 9hich BoneC ne$ertheless &elongs as a
mem&er: ;Simmel ,/<3a" ,-.=5 His t9o famous examples of the poor and the
stranger in his :Sociology: of ,/<3 also ma!e clear his relational sociology5
:Society in general may &e regarded as a reciprocity of &eings B&ound intoC a
network of rights and o&ligations: ;,/<3a" ,,3=5 Simmel loo!s at the pro&lem of
the poor from &oth these perspecti$es and re$eals quite different aspects5 If there
is a right to assistance the demands can &e addressed to indi$iduals or particular
collecti$ities5 Indi$iduals are addressed not in their specificity4 &ut as
representati$es of the totality of human &eings5 Although the relationships to
friends4 family4 municipality or state are of $arious !inds4 they all seem :to
include an element 9hich is manifested as the right to assistance in the e$ent of
impo$erishment of the indi$idual: ;,0<=5 But4 9ith :modern mo&ility: the 9hole
state is to &e addressed ;,014 ,0/=5 Although the state since the ,3
th
century had
the obligation to help the poor4 for a long time there existed no corresponding
right of the poor ;,00= and it 9as more out of pu&lic interest to uphold peace and
social sta&ility that assistance has &een gi$en ;,004 ,03=5 ?e$ertheless4 the poor
still are citi>ens4 so that they may &e outside the group4 &ut at the same time
&ound to it in :a peculiar mode of interaction BM &ecauseC the social collecti$ity
gets from the poor a reaction to 9hat it has done to them: ;,0.=5
20
Besides this public assistance there still exists private assistance from 9ell-to-do
persons5 Eet4 it is interesting to notice that :the state assists poverty4 pri$ate
assistance assists the poor: ;,-0=5 #he one is impersonal4 the other personal4
&ecause it is po$erty as such and po$erty as an indi$idual characteristic that is
paid attention to5 Indi$iduals help others out of humanitarian reasons5 )hat
remains largely implicit in Simmel*s argumentation is that o$er time the
attri&utes too! a re$ersed order4 &ecause in former times helping the poor 9as a
religious duty only and therefore mostly impersonal4 9hereas on the other side
collecti$ities had !no9ledge of the personal situation of the poor5
Moti$ations to help the poor ;from the Middle Ages until today=
Individuals
impersonal
State
impersonal
X
Collectivities
personal
Individuals
personal

Simmel then proceeds to the most important point" :the relative character of the
concept of po$erty: ;,-G=5 6$en considering &asic needs li!e food4 clothing or
shelter4 it is not possi&le to determine :a le$el that 9ould &e $alid in all
circumstances and e$ery9here and &elo9 9hich4 consequently4 po$erty exists in
an a&solute sense5 (ather4 each milieu4 each social class has typical needs
BMC: ;,-G=5
#here are t9o consequences of this" ;,= +eople can feel poor ;or not= irrespecti$e
of their o&Fecti$e status@ they can &e :indi$idually poor 9hile socially 9ealthy: ;or
the other 9ay round= ;,-G=5 ;0= +o$erty can &e defined only in terms of the social
reaction" :only 9hen society BMC reacts to9ard Bthe poorC 9ith assistance4 only
then does he play his specific role: ;,-3=5 Simmel*s some9hat em&arrassing
conclusion is" :)hat ma!es one poor is not the lac! of means5 #he poor person4
sociologically spea!ing4 is the indi$idual 9ho recei$es assistance &ecause of this
lac! of means5: ;,2<=
In a similar manner it is the social reactions that ma!e a person a stranger4 and
although &eing outside4 he &elongs to the group someho95 Being confronted &y
the group :implies a specific relationship 9hich dra9s the stranger into group life
as an element of it: ;,-.=5 :Strange: is a relative concept li!e :left: or :right:4
:under: or :a&o$e:5 8ne only is a stranger 9hen not at home5 In his :Sociology:
21
Simmel loo!ed at the stranger considering his mo&ility5 It is not the 9anderer
9ho comes today and lea$es tomorro9 9ho is rele$ant to the group4 &ut the one
9ho comes today and stays tomorro9 and e$en longer5 8nly then the group has to
react to the stranger ;cf5 Simmel ,/<3&=5
#he American sociologist onald %e$ine de$eloped a $ery insightful and useful
typology of relationships &et9een strangers and the group ta!ing the interest of
the stranger and the possi&le reactions of the group into consideration ;,/11"
03<="
A #ypology of Stranger (elationships
-esponse Stranger4s +nterest in 1ost Community
Visit Residence Membership
Ariendly 'uest SoFourner ?e9comer
Antagonistic Intruder Inner 6nemy Marginal Man
Interest and reaction to it constitute $arious !inds of relationships4 and the
stranger is treated $ery differently5
#oday4 the main conflict is &et9een claims for mem&ership and pure residence5
Migrants are seen as intruding enemies4 9ho ha$e to &e dri$en out5 #hey are the
strangers next door in the neigh&orhood of the &ig cities4 &eing near in the spatial
sense4 &ut remote in a social sense5 #hey are close and far at the same time and it
is no longer the nation states that can manage this4 &ut4 instead4 the glo&al people
themsel$es ha$e to come to terms 9ith each other and de$elop a true
cosmopolitan 9ay of life5
onald %e$ine also explains $ery 9ell 9hat ma!es Simmel still fascinating to
read" :He exposes the personal experiences of people caught up in e$eryday social
relations@ he documents intimate connections &et9een happenings ta!en from the
most unrelated moments of life@ and he shoc!s common sense &y asserting
something to &e true4 and Fust as quic!ly asserting the reality of its
opposite5: ;%e$ine ,/./" -<=
22
&a. 5eber) +nterpretive Sociology
Max )e&er 9as &orn in ,3G2 into a 9ealthy &ut patriarchal family5 After ma!ing a
scientific career )e&er had some serious &ac!sets in the form of a ner$ous
&rea!do9n and depression5 Aor years he had to stand &ac! from his duties as a
uni$ersity professor reading economics and sociology first in Arei&urg4 then
Heidel&erg and at last in Munich5 Before and after )orld )ar I )e&er &ecame
interested in politics more and more4 &ut died during the influen>a epidemic in
,/0<5 ;#he so-called Spanish flu too! more li$es than the 9ar5=
)e&er &egan his research &y 9riting on the agrarian system in (ome and &y
collecting statistical data on the situation of farm 9or!ers on the huge estates in
the eastern part of 'ermany5 #hen he too! up a topic that 9as much de&ated
around the turn of the century" the question ho9 exactly capitalism de$eloped5 #o
ans9er this4 )e&er pu&lished his famous article :+rotestant 6thic and the Spirit
of Capitalism: ;,/<.=5 )hile 9or!ing on it )e&er found a theme that preoccupied
his mind further on4 namely to detect and to descri&e processes of rationalization
in all spheres of life" religion4 economics4 politics4 music etc5
Before dealing 9ith his theories more closely one should loo! at some &asic
principles that form the &asis of his 9or!5
)e&er 9as influenced &y ?eo-7antianism4 9hich had consequences on his
epistemological and methodological $ie9s5 %i!e 7ant4 9ho claimed that
!no9ledge is su&Fecti$e and relati$e to the human cogniti$e competences
3
4 )e&er
claimed that scientific !no9ledge is al9ays based on interests4 insofar as certain
topics and concrete questions are selected for inquiry5 6$en to do science rests on
specific $alues5 8n the other hand4 science cannot ans9er to $alue questions5
Science can state the facts ;as it sees them= and name the consequences of
different actions4 &ut cannot tell 9hat to do5 Any decision rests on $alues and
interests as 9ell ;cf5 %assman ,/3/=5
Another epistemological pro&lem that is fundamental to all humanities and social
sciences is the pro&lem of other minds5 8ne cannot read the thoughts of other
people4 &ut someho9 has to !no9 9hat they thin! and 9hat moti$ates them4 to
analy>e social interaction ;cf5 Simmel=5 )ilhelm ilthey ;,3-- ,/,,= therefore
had proposed a methodological dualism" natural sciences explain and humanities
understand &y use of empathy and interpretations &ased on analogy to the o9n
experience of life5 Max )e&er sa9 that there is no such dualism and e$en in the
8
:8nly those o&Fects in the *phenomenal 9orld* ;to use 7ant*s $oca&ulary= that correspond to human
categories of space4 time and causality can possi&ly &ecome o&Fects of our experience4 and human
!no9ledge can only extend to these o&Fects5 )e ha$e no possi&le 9ay of !no9ing the o&Fects of the
noumenal 9orld ;to use 7ant*s $oca&ulary again=4 the things-in-themsel$es that lie outside our mental
categories BMC: ;?anda 0<<." ,.-=5
23
humanities one has to explain and to understand5 'i$ing the motive for an action
is to explain it first and then it can &e understood5 Actors ha$e their intentions
and su&Fecti$e understandings of 9orld and life5 Eet4 one cannot feel their
emotions4 does not share their $alues and has another tradition as 9ell5 #o a$oid
explanations from &eing su&Fecti$e4 )e&er fa$ored the construction of ideal"
types of rational moti$es and actions5 #he other three forms of action
emotional4 value"rational4 and traditional are mere de$iations from the
rational course of action ;)e&er ,/13" -f=5 Here a limitation of )e&er*s sociology
is to &e seen4 insofar as he did not de$elop a real model of acting man4 so that
there is the danger to o$er-rationali>e human action5 In his historical-
comparati$e 9ritings ne$ertheless4 )e&er made numerous remar!s on emotions4
$alues and tradition5 But4 for ur!heim4 for example4 emotions and sentiments
had a far greater importance in the explanation of social facts5
)e&er used ideal-types throughout his 9ritings &ecause they simplify reality
someho9 and there&y ma!e analysis possi&le5 :An ideal-type is formed &y the
one-sided accentuation of one or more points of $ie9 and &y the synthesis of a
great many diffuse4 discrete4 more or less present and occasionally a&sent
concrete indi$idual phenomena4 9hich are arranged according to those one-
sidedly emphasi>ed $ie9points into a unified analytical construct5 In its
conceptual purity4 this mental construct cannot &e found any9here in
reality5: ;)e&er in #uc!er 0<<0" ,G0=
Aor example4 )e&er used the construction of ideal-types to descri&e the
:distri&ution of po9er 9ithin a community: ;)e&er ,/3,a" ,3,=5 After defining
power as :the chance of a man or of a num&er of men to reali>e their o9n 9ill in a
communal action e$en against the resistance of others: ;,3<= he goes on to sho9
that this chance to impose one*s 9ill on others can rest on three different
conditions5 Class4 status and party &elong to the economic4 social and political
order respecti$ely5 8$erarching them all is the legal order ;,3<=5 All three open up
the chances for communal action" class is a possible base for it4 status groups are
communities4 and parties try to influence communal action5 #heir $arious forms
of po9er economic4 social4 and political are &ased on the distri&ution of quite
different :things:" money4 goods and s!ills4 honor or influence5
#he follo9ing ta&le ma!es the construction of the ideal-types clear"
Order Distribution of
Class economic Money4 goods4 s!ills
+ossi&le &ase for
communal action
Status social Honor ;style of life=
Communities
Party political Influence
Influence on
communal action
24
#9o points are of special interest in )e&er*s terminology"
;,= He places a stronger accent than Marx on the fact that :a class does not in
itself constitute a community: ;,32=5 It is only 9hen the similarity of the
conditions is clearly recogni>a&le that the possi&ility for community action is
reali>ed :in the form of rational association: ;,32=5 And4 )e&er sa9 that income is
more important than property or o9nership of means of production in modern
societies ;,/,." -<,=5
;0= Although )e&er 9as right to stress that only class depends on the :mar!et-
situation: ;,3,f=4 all three !inds of distri&ution ha$e to &e ac!no9ledged &y
others4 implying some !ind of social exchange5 'oods and s!ills ha$e to &e $alued
and paid for4 honor relies on :social estimation: of a life-style ;,31=4 and political
po9er has to &e legitimi>ed to &e accepta&le ;cf5 three forms of legitimacy of
po9er ,/,." 0/2=5 It is this fact that led +ierre Bourdieu to conceptuali>e a general
:sym&olic economy:4 9ith the economy proper &eing only one part of it ;cf5 +art
0=5
If a status group is closed4 so that not only con$entions and lifestyle guarantee the
distinctions4 &ut also rituals4 then )e&er spea!s here of :caste: ;,33@ ,/,GJ,1"
2<.f=5 Social intercourse &et9een the groups is minimi>ed li!e it may &e &et9een
ethnic communities5 But4 :a *status* segregation gro9n into a *caste* differs in its
structure from a mere *ethnic* segregation" the caste structure transforms the
hori>ontal and unconnected coexistences of ethnically segregated groups into a
$ertical social system of super- and su&ordination5: ;,3/=
In other texts )e&er dre9 distinctions that pertain to the difference &et9een
class4 status and party5 He distinguished :means of production: from :means of
administration: ;,/,." 0/.4 0/1f@ ,/3,&" 00-f=4 as 9ell as production and
consumption ;,/,." -<,@ ,/3,a" ,/-=5
Class" means of production
Status" means of consumption
+arty" means of administration
It may e$en &e argued that in undifferentiated societies priests monopoli>ed the
:means of sal$ation: and exerted po9er &y use of their :$irtuosity: ;,/,." 030f=5
Again4 it should &e regarded ho9 )e&er tried to 9iden the scope of Marx*s
analysis &y sho9ing that trends to9ards monopolization exist in all spheres of
life4 not Fust in economy5 Accordingly he stressed that it is not technological
change alone 9hich transforms relations of production and society4 &ecause an
important factor al9ays is the strength of the status groups and their po9er to
9ithstand economic change4 &y defending their monopoles ;,/3,a" ,/2=5
Monopoles may &e economically irrational 9hen economy as a 9hole is
concerned4 &ut the case loo!s different if one considers the interests of single
25
groups" #he exclusion of competitors is highly rational and contri&utes to a more
easy 9ay of maximi>ation of goods4 money4 and status5 #ypically neo-li&erals tal!
of the full competition on free mar!ets4 Fust to co$er the fact that they manage to
get highly su&sidi>ed or ha$e ad$antages o$er competitors5
26
5eber on -eligion
In his 9ritings on religion Max )e&er put for9ard a thesis concerning the
de$elopment of industrial capitalism in 6urope and later tried to pro$e it 9ith
large-scale comparisons using other religions and cultures5
)hat )e&er did not claim is"
#hat there are no elements of rationality in religions other than +rotestant
Christianity5 Ruite the contrary4 )e&er sho9ed that processes of rationalization
are to &e found everywhere5
#hat other cultures are not capa&le to de$elop a capitalist economy4 9hich
9ould &e quite an unscientific statement5 ?e$ertheless4 9ith the dominance of
6uropean capitalism it is no more necessary or possi&le to de$elop a capitalism of
its o9n5 Still4 there are important variations and attempts to restrain it5
#o ma!e clear 9hat )e&er intended4 it is useful to contrast his 9or! 9ith that of
Marx5 Marx set out to disco$er the economic la9s of capitalism and on their &asis
descri&ed its crisis and future &rea!do9n5 In this 9ay he lined out an
evolutionary se#uence of stages5 )e&er on the other hand 9as much more
interested in the history of capitalism4 delineating through 9orld9ide comparison
trends of rationali>ation in different forms5 oing this4 )e&er noticed that
$arious elements or preconditions of capitalism are found else9here" rational
thought4 elements of scientific method4 ingenious technology4 trade and mar!ets4
the transformation of products into commodities4 merchant capitalism and
monetary capitalism ;e5g5 credit and cheque in Italy4 ,2
th
century4 paper-money in
China4 ,,
th
century=5 ?e$ertheless4 there 9ere se$eral features that characteri>ed
modern occidental capitalism" highly rational la9 and administration4 rational
&oo!-!eeping4 exploitation of formally free la&or4 separation of &usiness from
household acti$ities and4 most important4 a work ethic5 Indeed4 to $alue money
and 9or! as such is a quite unusual idea4 9hich had &een considered un9orthy in
all cultures at all times5 )e&er 9anted to find out exactly this" ho9 it had &een
possi&le that such a mindset de$eloped4 9hy many people turned a9ay from the
splendid lifestyle of (enaissance merchants and Baroque no&ility4 despised
enFoyment of 9ealth and pleasure and li$ed li!e mon!s in some 9ay5 )e&er
claimed that religious ideas and interests played a certain role here" :#he religious
determination of life conduct is also one note this only one4 of the
determinants of the economic ethic5: ;,/,." 0G3= )e&er had no mono-causal
story to tell and that is 9hy he refused historical materialism ;0G/f=5 His thesis is
that it is not only material causes or interests that influence the course of
;economic= history4 &ut different attitudes and ideal interests too5 In line 9ith
this4 religions also influence differing :economic mentalities:5 #herefore4 the
27
argument goes li!e this" the religious ethic of +rotestantism led to the formation
of a certain economic ethic and a corresponding attitude4 9hich )e&er called
:spirit of capitalism: ;0/0f=5 #he (eformation proclaimed &y Martin %uther and
others 9as a mo$ement of purification of the church4 religious life and the
9hole style of life5 #he churches should not &e decorated 9ith paintings and
sculptures4 the cult of saints and the Iirgin Mary a&olished4 clothing and food had
to &e modest5 6$ery&ody 9as requested to study the Bi&le and tal! to 'od 9ithout
the mediation of priests5 ?e$ertheless4 the &elie$ers had to lead a moral life and
9or! hard in this 9orld and moreo$er not put their hope into some other-9orldly
sphere5 All in all4 this austere lifestyle resem&led that of mon!s and for this reason
)e&er called it :inner"worldly asceticism: ;0/,=5
#here are se$eral religious ideas4 9hich had consequences for the economic ethic"
a person*s position in the 9orld and her occupation 9ere understood as her
:calling:
economic success 9as ta!en as permission to &e confident of sal$ation
&oth ideas required systematic self"control and a highly rational organization
the ascetic life led to the accumulation of wealth
the high moral standards resulted in a devotion to law also5
In sum4 the +rotestants 9ere the ideal citi>ens of the state" hard 9or!ing4 faithful
to the la9s4 and rational indi$iduals5 #he effect for capitalism can &e stated li!e
this" 9hereas 9arriors4 merchants or moneylenders took any chance to get or
ma!e money4 no9 chances 9ere created permanently &y rein$estment and
inno$ation5 Aollo9ing this logic soon the entrepreneurs &egan ta!ing influence on
politics and made possi&le the industrial re$olution ;cf5 pri$ate property of land
,/3,&" 0,3=5 :In general4 a legal le$eling and destruction of firmly esta&lished
local structures ruled &y nota&les has usually made for a 9ider range of capitalist
acti$ity5: ;0-<= #he consequence &eing4 that :more and more the material fate of
the masses depends upon the steady and correct functioning of the increasingly
&ureaucratic organi>ations of pri$ate capitalism5 #he idea of eliminating these
organi>ations &ecomes more and more utopian5: ;00/=
Studying the world religions Max )e&er detected mainly t9o lines of
de$elopment that could result in rationali>ation"
;,= the sublimation of magic or orgiastic cults into more ascetic or contemplati$e
forms4 and ;0= the ustifications for the conditions of life4 especially fortune4
misfortune and suffering5
Although )e&er presented it fairly late in his text4 it ma!es sense to consider the
different meanings of :rationalism: at the outset"
,= $ormation of increasingly precise and abstract concepts for theoretical mastery
of reality5 0= Methodological attainment of ends &y increasingly precise
calculation of adequate means5 -= Systematic arrangement ;,/,." 0/-=5
28
:All !inds of practical ethics that are systematically and unam&iguously oriented
to fixed goals of sal$ation are *rational*4 partly in the same sense as formal method
is rational4 and partly in the sense that they distinguish &et9een *$alid* norms and
9hat is empirically gi$en5: ;0/2=
As the text on :#he Social +sychology of )orld (eligions: is the introduction to
:#he 6conomic 6thic of the )orld (eligions:4 )e&er 9anted to ma!e his thesis of
the reciprocal effect of social-economic conditions and religious interests on each
other clear at the &eginning ;0G34 01<=5 Instead of Historical Materialism4 he too!
Ariedrich ?iet>sche*s claim as a starting point4 that ethical religions ha$e &een the
product of resentment of the lo9er4 9or!ing classes of the higher ones and their
lifestyle5 He argued that there 9ere far more $ariations in religious ethic to
consider and that o$erall suffering changed its meaning ;01,4 012=5 Indi$idual
suffering 9as first seen as a sign of guilt and therefore included in a :theodicy of
fortune: ;01,=4 9hereas only in magical &eliefs suffering had a positi$e religious
$alue ;010=5 %ater the idea of sal$ation came up together 9ith a :theodicy of
suffering: ;01-=5 :In the great maFority of cases4 a prophetically announced
religion of redemption has had its permanent locus among the less-fa$ored social
strata5: ;012= ?o9 :sin: changed from &eing :a mere magical offense: into moral
failure4 although among the less-fa$ored magic retained its significance ;contra
?iet>sche=5 But4 :as the religious and ethical reflections upon the 9orld 9ere
increasingly rationalized and primiti$e4 and magical notions 9ere eliminated the
theodicy of suffering encountered increasing difficulties5: ;01.= )e&er held that
there 9ere only three :rationally satisfactory ans9ers: Bto explainC :the
incongruity &et9een destiny and merit" the Indian doctrine of karma4 Soroastrian
dualism4 and the predestination decree of the deus abscondidus5: ;01.=
/
Accordingly4 :the t9o highest conceptions of sublimated religious doctrines of
sal$ation are *re&irth* and *redemption*5: ;01/= Eet4 the sacred $alues of most
religions ha$e &een not so much other -9orldly $alues4 &ut goods of this 9orld
and the :emotional $alue: of certain states reached during religious practices
;011f@ cf5 again Dames ,/<0 and ur!heim ,/,0=5
An important fact for sociology of religion is that in most religions the :$irtuosos:
had a special status compared 9ith the ordinary persons5 ?o94 it has &een
especially the increasingly &ureaucratically organi>ed ;Catholic= church4 9hich
fought against such $irtuosos and therefore in a certain sense democrati>ed
religion ;,/,." 033@ ,/,GJ,1" 2<-=5 #his can &e seen as one precondition for
di$erse +rotestant sects that ha$e a large mem&ership4 9hich did not turn a9ay
from the 9orld in contemplation4 &ut :to9ards an active ascetic *9or! in this
9orld*: ;0/<=5 :In inner-9orldly asceticism4 the grace and the chosen state of the
religiously qualified man prove themsel$es in everyday life5: ;0/,= Although
9
It is indeed a peculiar feature of Hindu metaphysics that it :rationali>es inFustices and misfortunes as
the natural consequence of the 9or!ings of la9s of nature BMC: ;?anda 0<<," ..=5
29
some !ind of proof is common to all soteriological religions ;cf5 Saalmann 0<,,=4
+rotestantism stands out here in $arious respects5
+rotestant ethic meant a rupture 9ith former community &ased status systems4
since no9 the religious community &ecame more rele$ant5 In stri!ing contrast to
all other concepts of honor4 no9 work 9as the source of prestige in connection
9ith a rigid morality4 9hich requires inner"worldly asceticism5 At the same time
;&ut framed and limited &y these arrangements= an inno$ati$e idea of the
individual%s responsibility for her spiritual 9elfare and sal$ation has &een put
for9ard5
Such a combination of these and other traits is not to &e found else9here5
Although it is 9ell !no9n that many Brahmins 9ere interested in accumulating
9ealth4 9hich can &e furthered &y a moral and renouncing lifestyle4 they regarded
9or! to &e dishonora&le5 #he merchants4 9hom they encouraged to 9or!
;,/,GJ,1" 2,2=4 $ery seldom led an ascetic life5 So it is not :economic gro9th:
9hich )e&er thought to &e :unnatural: someho94 li!e 'ail 8m$edt says ;0<<-"
,21=4 &ut to attri&ute $alue to 9or! as such4 and constantly and of one*s o9n free
9ill to produce more than is needed for su&sistence and &asic 9ell-&eing5 8nly
this attitude can change merchant capitalism ;man*s :natural inclination:
follo9ing Adam Smith= into producti$e industrial capitalism 9ith control o$er
free la&or ;,/,GJ,1" 2,-=5 #his is clearly demonstrated &y 8m$edt herself5
:Buddhism4 in discouraging ritualism4 in countering &irth-&ased ascription4 in
setting its face against all notions of purity-pollution4 ga$e positi$e
encouragement to the de$eloping society of openness4 equality and
mo&ility5: ;,21f= #his could ha$e &een supporti$e to economy4 &ut historical
circumstances soon &egan to 9or! against that" ,= the Mauryan state &ro!e do9n
9hich led to large destructions@ 0= the do9nfall of the (oman empire cut off long
distance trade ;8m$edt 0<<-" ,-/=@ -= the tra$el 9ritings of Hsuan #sang sho9
that Buddhism had a fierce competitor in Dainism ;,.<f=@ 2= Brahmanism &ecame
stronger again 9ith the caste system o&structing change ;)e&er ,/,GJ,1" 2,0=@ .=
one reason 9hy Buddhism did not ha$e the same consequences for economy can
&e seen in its doctrine" to stri$e for :li&eration from ensla$ement to
passion: ;8m$edt 0<<-" ,,.= means that Buddhists also shall not ha$e passion for
9or!5 #hat their monasteries often had positi$e effects on the economy is no
argument against this5
Instead of pointing to supposed 9ea!nesses in )e&er*s argumentation ;and
there&y forgetting that he 9anted to highlight only one important factor in the
o$erall changes= it ma!es much more sense to use his 9ritings for another !ind of
criticism" &ust because the 6uropean de$elopment has &een so exceptional it is
possi&le and necessary to #uestion the claim of 6uropean culture to universality
time and time again5
30
5eber4s Political Sociology
#he typological distinction &et9een class4 status and party has already &een
mentioned4 &ut it may &e apt to appreciate )e&er*s insights once more5
)hereas Marx had seen a deep split of society into t9o classes4 9hich stand in
conflict 9ith each other4 ur!heim had tried to sho9 the possi&ility of solidarity
and social order &ased on remainders of ritual and a quasi-religious cult of the
indi$idual5 )e&er :too! up: insights from &oth these $ie9s4 although ne$er
referring to ur!heim*s 9ritings5 Aor him the o$erarching legal order ma!es up
the frame9or! for social exchange and productive conflict5 Some !ind of order
therefore is possi&le in a plural4 democratic society 9ith conflicting $alues and
interests5
In connection 9ith his research on religions )e&er had come to distinguish three
main &ases of authority and therefore legitimacy of po9er claims5
,= 'egal authority rests on rules5
0= Charismatic authority is &ased on the :&elief in the extraordinary quality of a
specific person:5
-= (raditional authority rests on :e$eryday routine as in$iola&le norm of
conduct:5 ;,/,." 0/.f@ cf5 ta&le in Mommsen ,/12" 1G=
Iery important is the o&ser$ation that some !ind of :routini>ation: of charisma
and patrimonialism 9as nearly ine$ita&le4 9hich pa$ed the 9ay for the
de$elopment of rational administration and &ureaucracy in religion and politics
;0/1=5
Here again ideal-typical distinctions can &e made"
Any union of human &eings can &e either
rational or non-rational
;community=
9ith domination or 9ithout
;institution= ;association4 clu&=
political or hierocratic
;state= ;church=
#he de$elopment of :&ureaucratic authority: ;,/3,&" ,/G= &ased on rules and la9
had t9o consequences" Airstly4 the official is separated from :the means of
administration: ;,/,." 0/.=4 and secondly4 the &ureaucratic organi>ation &ecomes
a power of its own &esides the politicians and parties ;,/3,&" 0-0=5
31
In the section of :6conomy and Society: dealing 9ith &ureaucracy )e&er
descri&ed 9ith much detail the conditions4 historical forms and characteristics of
this type of organi>ation5 #he main points are that all is precisely fixed and exactly
regulated ;,/3,&" ,/Gf=5 #his guarantees calcula&le speed of decision4 obectivity
and rationality ;0,24 00<=5 Bureaucracy 9or!s li!e a machine ;003=5 #his is true
especially of &ureaucratic administration in a monetary &ased economy4 9hereas
other forms of salary li!e the po9er to tax or the lease of land &ear the danger for
the ruler of loss of po9er ;0<2f=5 #herefore4 it is ad$antageous to rely on :paid
professionals instead of inherited nota&les: or :collegiate &odies: ;00.4 0-G=5
Consequently4 training and the education of experts &ecome highly rele$ant
;02<=5
6$aluating the 9hole re$eals great am&i$alences5 (ational administration surely
has ad$antages and positi$e effects4 &ut there are dangers and negati$e aspects as
9ell5 8n the one hand4 &ureaucracy furthers democracy4 on the other it e$ades or
pre$ents it5 )or!ing against inherited pri$ileges and ma!ing decisions :9ithout
regard of persons:
;0,.= leads to a :le$eling of social differences: ;0024 0-<=4 as 9ell as to
democrati>ation4 9hich is furthered &y the :uni$ersal accessi&ility of office: ;00G=5
8n the other hand4 the administrati$e organi>ations are in a :po9er position:
a&o$e the politicians ;e$en the prime minister= ;0-0=5 A :tendency to9ard
secrecy: and the status of expert !no9ledge may result in pre$ention of
parliamentary control ;0--f=5
A real danger is to &e seen in the fact that :the &ureaucratic machine: ;0-<= 9or!s
for any sort of interests in domination ;0-,=4 e$en totalitarian ones5 Eet4 some
hope is seen here in that people do not follo9 rules unanimously or a&solutely5
(ules are adapted or e$en ignored5 Here the 9hole sociological discussion on
human &eha$ior as :rule follo9ing: and alternati$e models of human action is
rele$ant ;cf5 'iddens4 Bourdieu=5
Another critical aspect is the close relationship &et9een monetary &ased
&ureaucracy and capitalism ;0-<=5 #his may lead to interest coalitions4 9hich go
against the interests of the maFority of the population ;e5g5 #ransnational
Corporations4 :casino capitalism:=5
#he necessity of experts leads to the spread of institutions of higher learning that
create a pri$ileged :caste: of degree holders 9hich enFoy high social prestige and
its economic ad$antages5 6$idently they ha$e an interest to restrict the supply for
these positions and if in addition to that the expenses 9hich are necessary for
education are considered4 there is a strong possi&ility that &oth may result in a
:set&ac! of talent in fa$or of property: ;02<f=5 8nly democratic control can 9or!
against this5
#he fact that )e&er highlighted all these points ma!es his text on &ureaucracy
still useful today ;cf5 +art 04 Bourdieu= and moreo$er4 it is reasona&ly treated as a
classical text of sociology5
32
P,-T 2
,ttempts at Synthesis)
Classical ,uthors of the "ollo$ing
#enerations
33
34
Talcott Parsons4 Systems Theory
+arsons 9as &orn ,/<0 into an academic household and after college he 9ent to
6urope for further studies5 In Heidel&erg he 9rote a dissertation on Max )e&er5
Bac! in the States +arsons &ecame lecturer and later sociology professor at
Har$ard5 #here4 together 9ith many colleagues he set up the interdisciplinary
epartment of Social (elations in ,/2G5 +arsons dominated sociology in the
,/.<s4 &ut since the G<s other theories ha$e &een de$eloped in critical reaction
to9ards his ideas5 +arsons died in ,/1/5
#he question that had &een 9orrying people in 6urope since the ,1
th
century has
&een" Ho9 is a society of indi$iduals possi&le? #he ans9er gi$en &y philosophers
that sociologists ha$e refuted is a social contract5 +arsons too! up )e&er*s
solution ;cf5 last section= com&ined 9ith ur!heim*s concept of social order &ased
on moral norms5 Concerning norms there ha$e &een t9o maFor philosophical
$ie9points"
a= )tilitarians claim that norms are Fust one factor to &e considered in the
individual calculation of means to ends5
&= #hin!ers of the idealistic tradition point to the inter"subective $alidity of
norms &ased either on a&stract reasons or gi$en historical traditions5
Challenging these $ie9s ur!heim de$eloped the concept of the sociali>ation of
the indi$iduals and the internali>ation of norms during its course5 As +arsons
;stimulated &y discussions 9ith anthropologist Clyde 7luc!hohn4 ,/<. G<=
points out4 it is not ;only= norms4 &ut mainly shared values that are rele$ant to
consider here5 Aurthermore4 ur!heim had also already &een a9are that they are
not only o&ligatory4 &ut affirmed &y indi$iduals 9ho identify themsel$es 9ith
them and are moti$ated &y them to direct their actions ;cf5 )e&er" su&Fecti$e
intentions=5 In ,/-1 +arsons therefore called his position :$oluntaristic:5 +eople
appro$e of norms and $alues and :9ant: the social order to &e the 9ay it is5 A ci$il
society &ased on mutual respect of its mem&ers might &e differentiated and
constantly changing4 and yet4 &e inclusi$e and ha$e generally accepted $alues5
#hese are human rights4 indi$idualism4 la9 and Fustice4 and democracy5 )ith
them4 society gi$es po9er to indi$iduals and this 9ay ma!es possi&le the
emergence of social order from their actions5
%ater in his career +arsons set out to explain &oth social order and indi$idual
action 9ith the same theory5 He de$eloped a model that descri&ed indi$idual and
societal action4 as!ing :9hat are the &asic components of a *system of action* to
sur$i$e?: 8$er the years he de$eloped his systems theory that is highly a&stract
and $ery schematic5 Because +arsons modified it permanently it 9ould lead too
far to consider these changes in their details here5 Instead one can highlight t9o
35
crucial points" the relations &et9een the different su&-systems and the
explanation of indi$idual action gi$en &y +arsons5
Basically there are three su&-systems" the cultural4 social4 and personality system5
A fourth system the &iological organism &ecame more important in the later
9ritings of +arsons only 9ith the ne9 concept of the :&eha$ioral system:5 *alues
are attached to culture4 norms to society4 and motives to personality5 Bet9een
these three su&-systems there are relations in both ways5 Cultural $alues gi$e
legitimation to social norms4 and social institutions em&ody &asic $alues5 Society
has expectations to9ards the indi$iduals 9ho during socialization apprehended
them4 li!e they internalize cultural $alues4 so that they identify 9ith them5 #he
function of the social system is integration4 of the personality system goal
attainment4 and of the cultural system the maintenance of latent patterns5 A
fourth function of adaptation to the en$ironment is related to the
organismJ&eha$ioral system5 ;#ogether this ma!es up the A'I%-scheme5= #his
conceptual model ma!es the complexity of human action perfectly $isi&le4 9hich
indeed goes far &eyond the simplistic utilitarianJneo-li&eral and idealistic $ie9s5
All its dimensions are crystalli>ed in the concept of :roles: someho9 ;cf5
ur!heim" :crystalli>ed 9ays of action: ,3/." ,0=5 (oles are institutionali>ed
patterns of &eha$ior that are comprised of $arying shares of $alues4 norms and
moti$es5 Aor example the role of a teacher consists of norms and expectations for
his correct &eha$ior4 there are certain $alues he has to stic! to4 &ut ne$ertheless
there is some space for indi$idual moti$es ;earning money4 spreading !no9ledge4
lo$ing to 9or! 9ith people4 etc5=5
?e$ertheless4 +arsons argued that indi$iduals incorporate cultural pattern
elements into their action systems ;+arsons ,/.," ,G= and tried to sho9 ho9 their
decisions might &e analy>ed 9ith the help of pattern $aria&les ;G1=5
#he systems theory may &e dra9n out li!e this"
Culture ;Ialues=
A" %atent pattern maintenance
Identification
Internali>ation
Person ;Moti$es= Institutionali>ation
A" 'oal attainment %egitimi>ation
Sociali>ation
6xpectation
Society ;?orms=
A" Integration
36
#he addition of the fourth system 9ould change the t9o-dimensional triangle into
the three-dimensional figure of a pyramid5
+arsons constantly added ne9 aspects and dimensions of analysis to these four
systems4 so that the 9hole model &ecame e$er more a&stract and in the end too
complex5
Much more important here is to loo! 9hether +arsons succeeded in the
explanation of indi$idual human action5
Any indi$idual actor ;ego= 9ho is confronted 9ith a situation made up of natural
and material conditions and other actors ;alter=4 de$elops a cogniti$e and
e$aluati$e orientation to9ards this situation4 using her internali>ed cultural
$alues4 expressi$e sym&ols and !no9ledge5 )hile interaction &et9een ego and
alter ta!es place they &oth de$elop a co-orientation to9ards the other and in this
sense re-create elements of the social system5 #hey act out norms and roles
according to the situation and the actors in$ol$ed5
6xplaining action
Personality Internali>ation Culture
Ego 6xternali>ation ;$alues4 expressi$e
sym&ols4 !no9ledge=
8rientation
Co-8rientation SI#TA#I8?
in Interaction
8rientation
Social System +lter 6ature
Although it is extremely important to include the situation in 9hich action ta!es
place into the explanation of action4 and to de$elop the concept of co-orientation4
the highly rele$ant processes of internali>ation and externali>ation 9hich could
help to explain and understand the moti$es of the actors remain too unclear in
+arson*s theory5 He only pro$ided ideas4 reasoning that the significance of
internali>ed social o&Fects and culture is not confined to the content of the
superego4 as Areud assumed5 #hey permeate the 9hole personality system5
:Internali>ation of a culture pattern is not merely !no9ing it as an o&Fect of the
37
external 9orld@ it is incorporating it into the actual structure of personality as
such5 #his means that the culture pattern must &e integrated 9ith the affecti$e
system of the personality5: ;+arsons ,/.0" 0/=5
It 9ere +eter Berger and #homas %uc!mann 9ho in their &oo! :#he Social
Construction of (eality: ;,/GG= too! up the tas! of explaining internali>ation in
more detail4 com&ining elements of +arsons* theory 9ith ideas of their teacher
Alfred SchQt> ;,3// ,/./= and 'erman +hilosophical Anthropology5
#he Systems #heory 9as de$eloped in the ,/1<s and 3<s &y 'erman scholar
?i!las %uhmann ;9ho had studied 9ith +arsons=5 He too! many inspirations
from cy&ernetics and logic4 9hich contri&utes to the fact 9hy his theory again is
highly formal and a&stract 9ithout a real actor e$en5 At the same time4 DQrgen
Ha&ermas outlined his influential :#heory of Communicati$e Action: ;,/3,=
com&ining ur!heim4 )e&er4 and +arsons 9ith linguistic theory of speech acts5
By doing so4 he expounded a normative philosophy of discursive action4 instead
of a sociological theory of all aspects of human action5 8ne of the most if not
the most inspiring attempts at synthesis of the sociological tradition has &een
put for9ard &y +ierre Bourdieu5
38
Pierre *our'ieu4s Theory of Practice
In the 9ritings of +ierre Bourdieu 9e find"
,= A theory of human practice introducing a ne9 sociological paradigm the
habitus as the central element in 'enetic Structuralism5 Such a structuralism tries
to explain ho9 the structures are generated and ho9 they generate action in turn5
0= A critical theory of education5
-= A study of culture5
2= An analysis of social structure5
In the follo9ing4 the theory of practice 9ill &e treated in more detail than the
other aspects &ecause it forms the &asis of them5 But4 first some details of
Bourdieu*s life are gi$en4 9hich are rele$ant to understand his theoretical point of
$ie95
Bourdieu 9as &orn ,/-< in a rural area in Arance close to the Spanish &order5
Although his family &ac!ground 9as upper lo9er class only ;his father 9as a
postman=4 he managed to &ecome a 9ell-!no9n and distinguished academic
professor of sociology5 8ne of his teachers recogni>ed the potential in the young
&oy and sa9 to his higher education4 9hich ena&led Bourdieu to go to the highly
prestigious Hcole ?ormale SupLrieur in +aris5 After ha$ing finished his studies in
philosophy4 he 9as drafted to Algeria5 Because he 9as not in the fighting &rigades
of this late colonial 9ar4 &ut in the office instead4 he had the time and inclination
to study the Algerian society5 So4 Bourdieu &egan to do serious field9or!
;including thousands of photographies= and e$en stayed in Algier after his
military ser$ice 9as completed5 In the follo9ing t9o years he changed from a
philosopher into a sociologist4 9or!ing 9ith Algerian colleagues on the collection
of empirical data5 )hen Bourdieu 9ent &ac! to Arance in ,/G< he studied and
taught sociological classics and &egan to conduct research in Arance5 Besides
studying his home region BLarn4 Bourdieu and his co-9or!ers studied the $isitors
of museums4 the reputation and social use of photography4 and most importantly4
the social &ac!ground of students in the Arench educational system5 All these
collected materials form the &asis of his theory5
Bourdieu also founded his o9n sociological Fournal ,/1. ;Actes de la recherche au
sciences sociales4 free access on +ortail de re$ues en science"
9995persee5frJ9e&Jre$uesJhome= and particularly since the early ,//<s
immersed himself into political engagement5
In Danuary 0<<0 Bourdieu died of cancer5
39
uring his early 9or!s on Algeria Bourdieu 9as partly influenced &y Max )e&er
and concerned himself 9ith the transition of a pre-capitalist economy to a
capitalist one5 He recogni>ed ho9 the people 9ho had recently come to the cities
from the traditional areas in the mountains 9ere not interested and not really
capa&le to act accordingly to rules of a capitalist economy4 there&y forming some
!ind of :su&-proletariat: ;,/G0=5
Because of his first hand-on !no9ledge of the situation in Algeria4 Bourdieu too!
a $ery critical stand to9ards Arench intellectuals li!e Dean-+aul Sartre 9ho spo!e
out on the anti-colonial mo$ement 9ithout such !no9ledge5
In the early G<s Bourdieu tried to use the structuralist method of Claude %L$i-
Strauss ;,/<3 0<</= to interpret his findings from Algeria5 But soon he reali>ed
that this highly a&stract 9ay of analysis 9as not $ery useful for understanding the
fine details of human practice5
6$entually4 Bourdieu too! his stand in the middle &et9een o&Fecti$ist and
su&Fecti$ist positions5 )hat ma!es people &eha$e and act the 9ay they do are
neither factors that lie &eyond their control4 nor sheer 9ill or rationality5 So4 it is
neither some deterministic mechanism ;li!e the la9s of history in ialectical
Materialism or stimulus and response in Beha$iorism= or some unconsciously
operating structure ;%L$i-Strauss=4 nor the consciously acting su&Fect ;Sartre= or
the utilitarian actor of economic science ;or li&eral ideology=5
7b8ectivism Sub8ectivism
eterminism Intention
Tnconscious Conscious
Structure Choice
*our'ieu
isposition
Incorporated Ha&itus
Structured and structuring
#he indi$idual actor is acting out the ;limited= possi&ilities that are laid do9n in
his ha&itus5
In de$eloping his o9n theory4 Bourdieu 9as deeply influenced &y Marx4
ur!heim4 and )e&er ;cf5 his &oo! on the methodology of sociology4 ,//,=5 Arom
Marx he too! the concept of class &ut &lended it 9ith )e&er*s concept of status
groups and ur!heim*s analysis of the social origin of classifications5 A&o$e that4
40
)e&er 9as important ;,= &ecause he found a 9ay to reconcile Idealism and
Materialism" :?ot ideas4 &ut material and ideal interests directly go$ern men*s
conduct: ;)e&er ,/,." 03<= these interests depending on :one*s image of the
9orld:4 and ;0= &ecause )e&er sho9ed ho9 economical interests underline some
de$elopments in the religious sphere5
+riests monopoli>e the :means of sal$ation: li!e rituals for example ;,/,." 030f=5
?e$ertheless4 the most &asic idea stems from ur!heim4 namely that indi$iduals
are socialized 9ith such a degree that quite often they simply act out 9hat society
requires from them5
In Bourdieu*s highly original $ersion of this old idea the acquired habitus of
indi$idual actors plays the !ey role5 A ha&itus comprises 9ays of perception4
thought4 and action 9hich human &eings adopt 9hile gro9ing up in their families
and &y going to school5 Ho9e$er a ha&itus is not so much learned !no9ledge4 as it
is acquired competences4 incorporated 9ays4 and routines5 So4 for example the
specific 9ay to mo$e the &ody4 to gesture or to ta!e a posture &elongs to the
ha&itus5 #he difference to simple habits is that the habitus is the structured
generating principle that produces a ha&it5 Here Bourdieu ta!es up the
fundamental insight of structuralism4 9here structures at once are structured and
9or! as structuring ;cf5 +iaget ,/G3=5 #hey arrange a gi$en set4 select certain
patterns and install limitations5 Correspondingly4 the ha&itus of any indi$idual
predisposes herJhim for certain thoughts or actions5 #his does not mean
determination4 &ut some !ind of pre-selection instead5 #he ha&itus Fust causes
that a certain range of possi&ilities4 &ut not all possi&ilities come into
consideration5 Bourdieu uses formulations li!e :conditional freedom: and
:regulated impro$isation: to ma!e clear that there is no totally free 9ill and no
a&solute determination5 #he 9or!ings of the ha&itus lead to consistent
regularities and non-intentional automatisms instead5
)ith their ha&itus indi$idual actors are differently equipped for appropriate
actions in $arious fields of the differentiated society" economy4 la94 politics4 art4
science4 etc5
,<
6$ery such field has its o9n specific rules for correct or legitimate
action5 8n the other hand4 the players in the field try to influence the rules
according to the interests predisposed &y their ha&itus4 there&y continuously
struggling in each field5 6$ery&ody is after to get as much ac!no9ledgement and
prestige as possi&le4 9hich is re9arded to herJhim insofar as sJhe ta!es the game
seriously4 is really interested in it and a&ides &y its rules5 ;Bourdieu calls this the
illusio of the actors that are really in$ol$ed &y their ha&itus in a field5= Basically4 it
is people stri$ing for symbolic profit5
Bourdieu de$eloped the idea of a symbolic economy 9hen he found the !ey to
interpret the traditional culture of the 7a&yle in Algeria5 He recogni>ed that here
;li!e in most other cultures= the highest goal is honor and prestige5 Aor this
reason people act to reach this goal4 e$en if they state other norms explicitly ;li!e
,<
8ne of the earliest and most clear outlines of this concept is to &e found in Bourdieus text of ,/GG5
41
the rules of marriage %L$i-Strauss 9as so much interested in=4 and Bourdieu
found that economic transactions are clad in terms of exchange of prestigious
goods and actions5 His thesis re$ol$es around the idea that these actions ma!e up
an o9n !ind of economy or some general symbolic economy5 All aspects of the
domestic economy ;from 'ree! :house:" oikos= form the &asis of this general
economy and the modern economic sphere is only a special4 al&eit enormously
enlarged segment of it ;Bourdieu ,/11=5 Here Bourdieu ta!es up Max )e&er*s idea
that interests al9ays play a decisi$e role5 #he claim that interests are confined to
the economic sphere 9hereas other spheres of life are interest free ;esp5 culture=
is nothing &ut ;Bourgeois= ideology5 But4 Bourdieu mo$es a9ay from the narro9
Marxist definition of the influence of interests4 9hich argues that ideas and
cultural practices express and Fustify economic relations5 Instead he tries to sho9
that there are quite different interests4 9hich are pursued in all the spheres of life5
Although the &asic interest is to maximi>e symbolic capital4 there are three main
9ays to acquire it" to gain cultural! social and economic capital5 6conomic capital
consists of money4 goods4 and means of production@ social capital in a 9ell-
de$eloped social net9or! and cultural capital can ta!e on three forms5 It consists
of the incorporated !no9ledge and the competences of indi$iduals 9ith regard to
culture4 the obectified culture of all 9or!s of art and material culture li!e tools4
9hereas the institutionalized form is made up of degrees and certificates5
Bourdieu claims that the three forms of capital play a decisi$e part in any human
society4 although their importance may $ary in different cultures and social
groups5
#he social &ac!ground of the family is of extreme importance for the children
gro9ing up4 &ecause here the &asic structures of their ha&itus is implanted and it
is here 9here they get their initial stoc! of cultural4 social and economic capital5
Based on his research on the education system Bourdieu claimed that 9ith the
historical de$elopment of this system since the Middle Ages some !ind of
:original accumulation of cultural capital: &y the upper classes too! place5
Because the main goals and &asic competences that are to &e reached and
de$eloped during education do not stem from the practical sphere of life4 &ut
from the intellectual sphere4 children of the upper classes are systematically more
pri$ileged5 In their families there is enough leisure time and a great interest in so
called :higher culture:4 so that the children already ha$e a &asic acquaintance
9ith those aspects that are needed in school5 #heir ha&itus ena&les them to spea!
and &eha$e according to the norms and they already ha$e certain competences
9hich other children lac!5 #herefore4 Bourdieu*s thesis is" &ecause the upper
classes ;no&ility and Bourgeois= succeeded in imposing their $alues on the
education system4 their children 9ill al9ays do &etter than the others5 #heir
failure is explained 9ith the ideology of innate a&ilities li!e intelligence5 Bourdieu
42
calls this :class racism: ;cf5 Beteille ,/1/" 0. for the ideological foundation gi$en
&y Arancis 'alton ,3G/=5
In his &oo! :istinction: from ,/1/ ;Bourdieu ,/32= Bourdieu expounds his
theory in great detail5 He uses his theory of practice and the analysis of the
education system to explain differences in taste4 9hich usually are also explained
9ith some !ind of ideology5 He critici>es 7ant*s a&stract philosophy a&out the
Fudgment of taste and tries to sho9 the social foundation of taste5 He claims that
according to their class position ;and their ha&itus= people ha$e a different !ind of
taste4 9hich is e$ident in their preferences concerning consumption5 Aor the
lower classes he finds a taste of necessity4 9hich is dictated &y the function that
o&Fects fulfill" food has to &e nutritious4 art decorati$e4 furniture functional etc5
#he middle classes ha$e a taste of pretension5 #hey stri$e to &e li!e the upper
classes4 although they lac! the means ;considering their ha&itus4 cultural and
economic capital=5 #he upper classes are characteri>ed &y their taste of
distinction5 )ith their highly refined taste and :demonstrati$e
consumption: ;Ie&len ,3//=4 they try to clearly distinguish their difference from
the other classes5
,,

Systematically analy>ing the preferences for certain goods and 9or!s of art and
relating them to the $olume of cultural and economic capital Bourdieu de$elops a
model of social space in 9hich e$ery&ody positions her-Jhimself through
consumption5 )ith their different4 class &ased ha&itus people not only culti$ate a
common lifestyle4 they also incorporate the means to classify themsel$es and
others5 Hence4 different classes ;or life-style groups= not only o&Fecti$ely form a
class in itself4 &ut the people ha$e some !ind of ha&itual consciousness of their
class for itself5
#o ma!e clear the connection &et9een prestigious consumption and class4 and the
reproduction of social structure Bourdieu ta!es up an idea from Max )e&er
again5 )e&er distinguished :status: &ased on honor :determined &y differences in
the styles of life: and education from :class: &ased on economical rele$ant factors
li!e property or income5 He recogni>ed that4 although classes dominated the
modern society ;at the &eginning of the 0<
th
century=4 the status of educated
groups 9as still $ery important5 He also named the &asic mechanism &y 9hich
they sustain their high social position" degrees open up social and economic
opportunities for their holders ;)e&er ,/,." -<<f@ ,/3,&" 02<f=5 Bourdieu claims
that this same mechanism still explains the reproduction of social structure of the
class society in Arance5 #he democrati>ation of education has &een far less
successful than expected for t9o main reasons" students from middle and lo9er
classes are still disad$antaged &ecause their ha&itus does not fit the requirements
of the system as 9ell as the ha&itus of the upper class students does@ and o$er
,,
Some of these mechanisms ha$e &een ela&orated also &y Simmel 9ith reference to fashion ;,/<2=5
43
time steadily higher degrees and certificates are needed to get the same Fo&5
Again4 the &etter students and those 9ell equipped 9ith economic capital4 9hich
can afford to study longer are ultimately the pri$ileged5
In this 9ay the upper classes succeeded in closing an open system of
stratification &ased on merit ;'upta 0<<2" ,-,= at least a little &it4 &ecause still
the entry conditions are $ery different according to class and status5
Appendix" #he ialectics of Structured and Structuring Aspects of Structures
Practice Position
Social Incorpo- Habitus Dispo-
Conditions ration sition Princiles of Distinction
Classification
Structured and Structuring
Structured Structuring Structuring Structured
44
-eferences
Berger4 +eter %5J #homas %uc!mann ;,/GG=4 #he Social Construction of (eality5 A
#reatise in the Sociology of 7no9ledge5 'arden City ;?E=5
Beteille4 AndrL ;,/1/=4 #he Idea of ?atural Inequality5 In" Beteille4 #he Idea of ?atural
Inequality and 8ther 6ssays5 elhi ,/3-4 pp5 1 -05
Beteille4 AndrL ;0<<2=4 Sociological Concepts and Institutions5 In" I5 as ;6d5=4
Hand&oo! of Indian Sociology5 elhi 0<<24 pp5 2, .35
Bourdieu4 +ierre ;,/G0=4 #he Algerian Su&proletariat5 In" )5 Sartman ;6d5=4 Man4 State
and Society in the Contemporary Maghri&5 %ondon ,/1-4 pp5 3- /05
Bourdieu4 +ierre ;,/GG=4 Intellectual Aield and Creati$e +roFect5 In" Social Science
Information 3J,/G/4 pp5 3/ ,,. 5
Bourdieu4 +ierre ;,/11=4 8utline of a #heory of +ractice ;,/10=5 Cam&ridge5
Bourdieu4 +ierre ;,/32=4 istinction5 A Social Critique of the Dudgment of #aste ;,/1/=5
Cam&ridge ;Mass5=5
Bourdieu4 +ierreJ Dean-Claude Cham&oredonJ Dean-Claude +asseron ;,//,=4 #he Craft
of Sociology5 6pistemological +reliminaries ;,/G3J10=5 BerlinJ?e9 Eor!5
Comte4 Auguste ;,300=4 +rospectus des tra$aux scientifiques nLcessaires pour
rLorganiser la sociLtL5 +lan der 9issenschaftlichen Ar&eiten4 die fQr eine (eform der
'esellschaft not9endig sind5 MQnchen ,/1-5
ur!heim4 Hmile ;,331=4 (e$ie9" 'uyau %*IrrLligion de l*a$enir4 Ltude de sociologie5
In" )5 S5 A5 +ic!ering ;6d5=4 ur!heim on (eligion5 Atlanta ,//24 pp5 02 -35
ur!heim4 Hmile ;,3//=4 Concerning the efinition of (eligious +henomena5 In"
+ic!ering ;6d5= ,//24 pp5 12 //5
ur!heim4 Hmile ;,/,0=4 #he 6lementary Aorms of the (eligious %ife5 In" )5 A5 %essaJ 65
S5 Iogt ;6ds5=4 (eader in Comparati$e (eligion5 An Anthropological Approach ;,/.3=5
;#hird 6dition= ?e9 Eor! ,/104 pp5 03 -G5
ur!heim4 Hmile ;,/,-a=4 (e$ie9" %L$y-Bruhl %es Aonctions mentales dans les
sociLtLs infLrieures and Hmile ur!heim %es Aormes LlLmentaires de la $ie
religieuse5 %e systUme totLmique en Australie5 In" +ic!ering ;6d5= ,//24 pp5 ,G/ 1-5
ur!heim4 Hmile ;,/,-&=4 (e$ie9 9ith M5 Mauss" Ara>er #otemism and 6xogamy and
ur!heim %es Aormes LlLmentaires de la $ie religieuse5 %e systUme totLmique en
Australie5 In" +ic!ering ;6d5= ,//24 pp5 ,12 3<5
ur!heim4 Hmile ;,/G2=4 #he i$ision of %a&or in Society ;,3/-=5 ?e9 Eor!5
ur!heim4 Hmile ;,/.<=4 #he (ules of Sociological Method ;,3/.=5 Chicago5
6mir&ayer4 Mustafa ;,//G=4 Tseful ur!heim5 In" Sociological (heory ,2J,//G4 pp5 ,</
-<5
de Areitas4 (enan Springer ;0<,<=4 Ma!ing Sense of ur!heim*s Methodological
+rescriptions5 In" ,hilosophy of the Social Sciences 2<J0<,<4 pp5 .-/ .,5
'upta4 ipan!ar ;0<<2=4 Social Stratification5 In" I5 as ;6d5=4 Hand&oo! of Indian
Sociology5 elhi 0<<24 pp5 ,0< 2,5
45
Hu&ert4 HenriJ Marcel Mauss ;,/G2=4 Sacrifice" Its ?ature and Aunction ;,3/3=5 %ondon5
Dames4 )illiam ;,/<0=4 #he Iarieties of (eligious 6xperience5 A Study in Human
?ature5 %ondon5
7amen!a4 6ugene ;,/1<=4 #he +hilosophy of %ud9ig Aeuer&ach5 %ondon5
%assman4 +eterJ Ir$ing IelodyJ Herminio Martins ;6ds5= ,/3/4 Max )e&er*s :Science as
a Iocation:5 %ondon5
%epenies4 )olf ;0<<0=4 ie drei 7ulturen5 So>iologie >9ischen %iteratur und
)issenschaft ;,/3.=5 Aran!furt5
%epenies4 )olf ;0<,<=4 Auguste Comte5 ie Macht der Seichen5 MQnchen5
%e$ine4 onald ?5 ;,/./=4 #he Structure of Simmel*s Social #hought5 In" )olff ;6d5=
,/./4 pp5 / -05
%e$ine4 onald ?5 ;,/11=4 Simmel at a istance" 8n the History and Systematics of the
Sociology of the Stranger5 In" (ay ;6d5= ,//,4 pp5 010 3G5
%u!es4 Ste$en ;,/1-=4 Hmile ur!heim5 His %ife and )or!5 %ondon5
Manifesto ;MarxJ6ngels ,323=5 In" M5 Co9ling ;6d5=4 #he Communist Manifesto5 ?e9
Interpretations5 6din&urgh ,//34 pp5 ,2 -15
Manuel4 Aran! 65 ;,//.=4 A (equiem for 7arl Marx5 Cam&ridge ;Mass5=5
Mauss4 Marcel ;,/<2J<.=4 6ssais sur les $ariations saisonniers des sociLtLs 6s!imos5
Htude morphologie sociale5 In" Mauss4 Sociologie et anthropologie5 +aris ,/.<4 pp5
-3/ 2115
Meda9ar4 +eter ;,/32=4 #he %imits of Science5 ?e9 Eor!5
Mommsen4 )olfgang D5 ;,/12=4 #he Age of Bureaucracy5 +erspecti$es on the +olitical
Sociology of Max )e&er5 8xford5
M6(" #he Marx-6ngels (eader@ edited &y (o&ert C5 #uc!er ;0
nd
6d5= ?e9 Eor! ,/135
M)" 7arl Marx5 Selected )ritings@ edited &y a$id Mc%ellan;0
nd
6d5= 8xford 0<<<5
?anda4 Meera ;0<<,=4 A *Bro!en* +eople efend Science5 (econstructing the e9eyan
Buddha of India*s alits5 In" ?anda 0<<14 pp5 -, 305
?anda4 Meera ;0<<.=4 Ho9 Modern Are )e? Cultural Contradictions of India*s
Modernity5 In" ?anda 0<<14 pp5 ,2. G25
?anda4 Meera ;0<<1=4 Brea!ing the Spell of harma and 8ther 6ssays5 ;Second 6d5=
'urgaon5
8*%eary4 Brendan ;,/3/=4 #he Asiatic Mode of +roduction5 8riental espotism4
Historical Materialism and Indian History5 8xford5
8llman4 Bertell ;,/1,=4 Alienation5 Marx*s Conception of Man in Capitali>ed Society5
%ondon5
8m$edt4 'ail ;0<<-=4 Buddhism in India5 Challenging Brahmanism and Caste5 ?e9
elhi5
+arsons4 #alcott ;,/.,=4 #he Social System5 %ondon5
+arsons4 #alcott ;,/.0=4 #he Superego and the #heory of Social Systems5 In" +arsons4
Social Structure and +ersonality5 ?e9 Eor! ,/G24 pp5 ,1 --5
+iaget4 Dean ;,/G3J,/1,=4 %e Structuralisme5 +aris@ Structuralism5 %ondon5
(ay4 %arry D5 ;6d5= ,//,4 Aormal Sociology5 Aldershot5
Saalmann4 'ernot ;0<<0=4 Solidarity in a Society of Strangers5 Arei&urg ;cf5
9995freido!5uni-frei&urg5deJ$olltexteJ.G15
46
Saalmann4 'ernot ;0<,,=4 #he Many #heories of Seculari>ation5 In" Saalmann4 'uest
%ectures at Tni$ersity of +une5 +une 0<,,4 pp5 ,, 0<5
Simmel4 'eorg ;,/<2=4 Aashion5 In" (ay ;6d5= ,//,4 pp5 02- G<5
Simmel4 'eorg ;,/<3a=4 #he +oor5 In" (ay ;6d5= ,//,4 pp5 ,,3 2<5
Simmel4 'eorg ;,/<3&=4 #he Stranger5 In" 75 H5 )olff ;6d5=4 #he Sociology of 'eorg
Simmel5 'lencoe ;Ill5= ,/.<4 pp5 2<0 <35
Simmel4 'eorg ;,/./=4 Ho9 Is Society +ossi&le? ;,/<3= In" )olff ;6d5= ,/./4 pp5 --1
.G5
Spencer4 Bald9inJ Arancis D5 'illen ;,3//=4 #he ?ati$e #ri&es of Central Australia5
%ondon5
Spencer4 Her&ert ;,/GG=4 +rinciples of Sociology ;Iol5 ,4 ,312-1G= ;)or!s Iol5 G=5
8sna&rQc!5
#aylor4 Ste$e ;,/30=4 ur!heim and the Study of Suicide5 ?e9 Eor!5
#Nnnies4 Aerdinand ;,/.1=4 Community and Society5 ?e9 Eor!5 ;'emeinschaft und
'esellschaft5 %eip>ig ,331=5
#uc!er4 7enneth ;0<<0=4 Classical Social #heory5 A Contemporary Approach5 Malden5
Ie&len4 #horstein ;,3//=4 #heory of the %eisure Class" An 6conomic Study of
Institutions5 ?e9 Eor! ,/-25
)e&er4 Max ;,/,.=4 #he Social +sychology of the )orld (eligions5 In" H5 H5 'erthJ C5
)right Mills ;6ds5=4 Arom Max )e&er" 6ssays in Sociology ;,/2G=5 8xford ,/3,4 pp5
0G1 -<,5
)e&er4 Max ;,/,GJ,1=4 India" #he Brahman and the Castes5 In" 'erthJMills ;6ds5= ,/3,4
pp5 -/G 2,.5
)e&er4 Max ;,/13=4 6conomy and Society5 Ber!eley5
)e&er4 Max ;,/3,a=4 Class4 Status4 +arty5 In" 'erthJMills ;6ds5= ,/3,4 pp5 ,3< /.5
)e&er4 Max ;,/3,&=4 Bureaucracy5 In" 'erthJMills ;6ds5= ,/3,4 pp5 ,/G 0225
)e&er4 Max ;,///=4 #he Spirit of Capitalism5 In" (5 S9ed&erg ;6d5=4 Max )e&er5 6ssays
in 6conomic Sociology5 +rinceton ,///4 pp5 .0 125 ;Contains a useful glossary as
9ell4 pp5 0G, 3.5=
)ernic!4 Andre9 ;0<<,=4 Auguste Comte and the (eligion of Humanity5 Cam&ridge5
)olff4 7arl H5 ;6d5= ,/./4 'eorg Simmel4 ,3.3 ,/,35 Colum&us5
Classics in the net)
Marx" Marx-6ngels Collected )or!s ;M6C)4 .< Iols5=4 9995marxists5org
ur!heim" 9995emile-dur!heim5com
Simmel" http"JJsocio5chJsim
)e&er" 9995ne5FpJasahiJmoriyu!iJa&u!umaJ9e&er-texts5html
47
*iographical +nformation)
'ernot Saalmann4 ,/G-@ +h4 Tni$ersity of Arei&urg ;'ermany= 0<<,@
%ecturer at the epartment of Sociology4 Arei&urg@
'uest %ecturer at CSSS4 Da9aharlal ?ehru Tni$ersity4 elhi 0<<3 and 0<,,5
(esearch interests" Sociological theory ;esp5 #heory of +ractice=@ Sociology of
7no9ledge and (eligion@ Anthropology and Cultural #heory ;music and film=@
'lo&ali>ation ;focus" India=5
+u&lications in 6nglish"
:#he 6ncounter4 6xchange and Hy&ridisation of Cultures:5 In" 5 SchirmerJ '5
SaalmannJ C5 7essler ;6ds5=4 Hy&ridising 6ast and )est5 #ales Beyond
)esternisation" 6mpirical Contri&utions to the e&ate on Hy&ridity5 MQnster4
Berlin 0<<G4 pp5 ,0. 2,5
:Arguments 8pposing the (adicalism of (adical Constructi$ism:5
In" Constructi$ist Aoundations ;,= -J0<<14 pp5 , G5
;Internet Dournal" 9995uni$ie5ac5atJconstructi$ismJFournal=5
:Intercultural Communication and Cosmopolitanism:5 In" A5 75 'iri ;6d5=4
Cosmopolitanism and Beyond" #o9ards a Multi$erse of #ransformations5 elhi
0<,, ;in press=5
48