Anthony Giddens LON DON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS

Mitchell Duneier CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK-GRADUATE CENTER

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

Richard P. Appelbaum UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,

SANTA BARBARA

Deborah Carr RUTGERS UNIVERSITY

affirmative action. In a current entering class at an Ivy League school, for example, out of 1,000 students there may be 100 blacks and 75 Latinos. The 1,000 students were selected from about 20,000 applicants. A significant portion of the 19,000 who were rejected may think that they didn't get in because a black or a Latino got in instead of them. But we know from the data that this is impossible: There is no way that 175 people could be keeping 19,000 people out of any school. For this reason, answer choice bis also incorrect.

As you can see, it's not enough to have a sociological imagination in the way that Mills intended it. We want you to learn how to sort through the evidence in a way that begins with imagination but insists on the kind of methods that can give us firmer and better answers to important sociological questions. How to do this in a rigorous way will be the subject of Chapter2.

THE ANSWER IS D .

....

0 BASIC CONCEPTS

The scope of sociological study is extremely wide, but in general, sociologists ask them­selves certain questions that help to focus the sociological imagination and provide them with the concepts that motivate research. These questions that orient the discipline include: How are the things that we take to be natural actually socially constructed? How is social order possible? Does the individual matter? How are the times in which we are living different from the times that came before?

Social Construction

There is a basic flaw in human reasoning that goes something like this: The things that we see before us are inevitable. They are natural and cannot be changed. What sociology teaches us is that in many ways we are freer than we think-that the things we think are natural are actually created by human beings. We might consider the question we started this chapter with as an example: The college admissions system is a social construction located in a specific place and time. Criteria for admission to American colleges have shifted according to historical and demographic trends and to changes in university leadership (Gladwell, 2005).

Another example comes from everyday experiences with sex and gender. A baby is born with a penis or a vagina. By way of that characteristic, the baby begins a process of being assigned to the category of"boy" or "girl." This is extremely important because it is almost always the first thing you want to know before you can interact with the baby. If you can't figure it out, you may ask the parents.

Is this true ofany other characteristic? You usually don't need to know the race of a baby before you start interacting. You don't need to know the economic class of a baby. Most babies today, regardless of their economic standing, are dressed in mass-produced clothes

social construction • An idea or practice that a group of people agree exists. It is maintained over time by people taking its existence for , granted.

6 CHAPTER 1 What Is Sociology?

from stores such as Baby Gap or Old Navy. Most parents in general do not try to signal the class of their baby with his or her garments. The same principle applies to race and ethnicity. There are certain parents who will dress their baby in order to affiliate with a certain race or ethnic group,

but-except on holidays-such parents are less common. Not as many people feel they need to know the race of a baby in order to interact with it.

Sex is different. If you are a parent, you do not want someone coming up to your baby boy and asking, "Is it a boy or a girl?" So what do you do to avoid this scenario? You dress your baby in blue if he is a boy, or in pink if she is a girl. Some parents do not do this at the beginning- until they start getting asked that question. Then they start dressing their baby in a certain way so that people will stop asking. Of course, even if you do dress your baby in the traditional blue or pink, there may still be people who come up and ask, "Is it a boy or a girl?" But it is not something that will happen often, because most people are pretty good at reading social cues-such as a blue or pink cap.

Now, the fact that many people need to know the sex of a baby suggests that we interact differently depending on whether we think someone is a boy or a girl. If a baby is a boy, a person might walk up and say something in a traditional masculine style, such as "Hey, Bud! How you doin'?" If it's a girl, the person might say something that is more appropriate for a little girl or more in keeping with the norms of traditional femininity. Eventually, we get to the point where these interactions start to mold the kind of person the baby becomes. Children come to see themselves as being.either a boy or a girl. They start to move their bodies like a little boy or a little girl. They know that this is how they are seen by others and they know that when - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -they go out onto the street, they occupy the role of boy or girl. This happens through a process of interaction.

Even though it is not simply a natural occurrence that a person starts to behave as a boy or a girl, many of us are raised to

believe that the differences between men and women are purely biological. Soci­ologists disagree. Does this mean that sociologists want to eliminate the role of biology? No. The goal of sociology is not to try to teach you that the biological realm is a residual category with a minor role in explaining human behavior. One purpose of sociology is to disentangle what is biological from what is socially constructed. It is in part to try to figure out how social phenomena relate to bio­logical phenomena. Most sociologists admit that there is a place for the biologi­cal. However, there are many fascinating studies that show that the things that the average human being thinks are biological, and thus natural, are actually socially constructed.

The more you start to think about dis­entangling what is natural from what is socially constructed, the more rigorously you will begin to think as a sociologist.

People interact differently with babies based on the babies' gender. How do sociologists analyze these interactions?

Basic Concepts 7

Social Order A professor looks out onto a lecture hall and sees a roomful of silent students taking notes and exhibiting self-control and discipline. There must be somebody in the room who wishes that she were doing yoga instead, or who would like to turn around to a friend in the back and say something to him. But the fact of the matter is that almost everyone appears to be doing the same thing: sitting quietly, listening, taking notes (or at least pretending to). How can we explain this orderly behavior? How can we explain the existence of social order in a lecture hall or in a society? We certainly need social order to get through the day, but how can we understand it?

Sociologists have offered up many different explanations to try to answer such questions. One explanation is that it is rational for individuals to act this way. Students know it is in their self-interest to sit quietly and pay, or pretend to pay, attention. Perhaps a student hopes to apply to graduate school and wants to get a letter ofrecommendation from the professor. This goal motivates ~~r to respond to the classroom environment: The professor's willing­ness to write a letter is an incentive for good behavior. The recommendation acts as an incentive, stimulating the response of the student who wants it. The student tries to make a good impression, all the while keeping in mind that if she turns around and talks to her friend week after week instead oflistening, the professor might write an unflattering letter or refuse to write one at all. This explanation based on self-interest and incentives is what economists would use to explain most things. While some sociologists adopt such theories, most find such explanations to be based on an all-too-narrow conception of human nature. They appeal to a different set of theories. ·

Thus, another explanation for social order is the existence of norms. It is a norm of social life that when students come into a classroom they sit and take notes and pay attention. They learn and internalize norms as young people through a process called socialization. Once they have internalized a norm, they tend to follow through with the expectations of the norm in most of their interactions. Norms are important to sociologists because they explain some of the ways in which we are inside society and, simultaneously, society is inside us.

Yet another explanation for social order focuses on beliefs and values. Perhaps students place a value on the classroom, on the university, or on higher education. If this is the case, then the social order upheld in classrooms is more than a norm. The lecture hall is a symbol of a greater whole, a sacred place that is partofalarger moral universe. Students sit quietly because they believe professors in this ceremonial order deserve respect, maybe even deference.

It is important to keep in mind that we do not need to choose between these theories. Multiple factors can operate together. All these explanations address the question of social order from a sociological perspective. As such, the existence of social order is not taken

for granted. For the average person, the question of social order arises in response to disruptions

socialization • The social processes through which children develop an awareness of social norms and values and achieve a distinct sense of self. Although socialization processes are particularly significant in infancy and childhood, they continue to some degree throughout life. No individuals are immune from the reactions of others around them, which influence and modify their behavior at all phases of the life course.

8 CHAPTER 1 What Is Sociology?

or breaks in that order. The average person who sees an event such as the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, or the Columbine school shooting may ask, "How could this event have happened?" The sociologist reverses that question in order to ask, "How is it that disruptions in the social order do not happen more frequently?"

--- ------------ ---------..

Agency and Structure

A long-standing debate in the social sciences revolves around questions of free will and determinism. For example, a deterministic framework would predict that where an indi­vidual ends up in life is significantly if not entirely influenced by the position into which he is born. The sociological imagination can be quite deterministic in that it pushes us to see that, in many ways, the lives of individuals are quite determined by their social roles, gen­der, race, and class. Yet we would not want you to take away the lesson that individuals are trapped, or controlled like puppets.

Let us return to our example of college admissions. It is true that Ivy League graduates have a significantly higher average income than graduates of state-level schools. This would suggest that the place at which one attends college is a crucial determinant of one's success in later life. However, conventional studies looked only at students who had the same SAT scores and grades; they did not factor in other, personal characteristics that may have had an effect on later success in life.

In 2002, Alan Krueger and Stacy Dale published a study comparing the average yearly incomes of students who had been admitted to and attended an Ivy League college with those who had been admitted to an Ivy League school, but who chose to attend a state­level college instead. Krueger and Dale's study found that the individual does matter, despite an apparent disparity in opportunities for students who attend Ivy League versus non-Ivy League universities. Contrary to the popular conception that attending elite institutions will guarantee future success, it appears that highly motivated students, rather than institutional structures, prove more a determinant of this success (2002; Gladwell, 2005).

Sociologists tend to think in probabilities. They look at the probabilities that people will end up in certain living situations on the basis of characteristics, de-emphasizing to some extent the power of the individual. However, the sociological imagination does leave room for the person to have an impact, even as we acknowledge that she is constrained.

Think about a girl from a working-class famiJy whose parents have active sociological imaginations and a very deterministic understanding of their child's life chances. The parents did not go to college. Instead, they entered the workforce after high school, and they expect that their daughter will do the same. When the teenager tells her parents that she would like to go to college and be a lawyer, the parents might think of the probability of an individual from their class position achieving such a goal- how unlikely it is. They might tell their child to consider the odds against her and encourage her to find a different goal so that she will not be disappointed. What if she took this advice with a grain of salt and applied to college anyway? She would be no different from many of your classmates, and possibly even you. Many of you can think of people who started out just like this, with similar constraints, but who ended up in college due to their refusal to accept the odds as their fate.

Social Change

One of the questions sociologists ask is how people live in light of the social transformations of their time.

In 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville, a French aristocrat and one of the first great social theorists, visited the United States from France. He wanted to understand how the conditions of democ­racy and equality were possible. Ever since the publication of his resulting study, Democracy in

Basic Concepts 9

Tocqueville described nineteenth-century Americans as a nation of joiners. Is that sti l l true?

-~··--------

CONCEPT C HECKS

1. What is the sociological imagination, accord­ing to C. Wright Mil ls?

2. How does sociology help us to disentangle biologica l from sociological phenomena?

3. How does the concept of social structure help soc iologists better understand social phenomena?

'--·---------·-------

America (1969; orig. 1835), the United States has been viewed through the lens of sociology as a nation of joiners in which, more so than in Europe, people are involved in many groups and activi­ties. Yet sociologists constantly revisit questions about whether the way we live today is different from how we lived in earlier times, and one of the enduring questions is whether Americans are less involved than before in public­spirited activities.

Another great theorist, Max Weber (194 7; orig. 1922), looked at the way the world had been changing due to the influence of massive large-scale organizations, and how the emer­gence of an organizational society and large bureaucratic organizations

had changed and transformed social life. Karl Marx, in Capital (1977; orig. 1867), examined how industrialization had changed the structure of an entire society, transforming the relationships of indi­viduals to their work and to each other from feudalism to capitalism. Emile Durkheim, in The Division of Labor in Society (1964; orig. 1893), discussed how the historical changes wrought by industrialization and urbanization had led to the increasing specificity of the roles individuals fulfilled, and how this specialization functioned to

benefit society as a whole. These sound like abstract topics, but t hey were central to under-standing how the world was changing at particular times.

0 THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIOLOGICAL THINKING

When students start studying sociology, many are puzzled by the diversity of approaches they encounter. Indeed, sociologists often disagree about how to study human behavior and how best to interpret research results. Why should this be so? Why can't sociologists agree more consistently, as natural scientists seem to do? The answer is bound up with the very nature of the field. Sociology is about our lives and our beh avior, and studying ourselves is the most complex endeavor we can undertake. To understand this complexity, sociologists are guided by the four questions we h ave discussed and that are characteristic of sociologi­cal thinking: How are the things we take to be natural actually socially constructed? How is

10 CHAPTER 1 What Is Sociology?

social order possible? Does the individual matter? How are the times in which we live differ­ent from those that came before?

Theories and Theoretical Approaches

AUGUSTE COMTE

The French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798-1857) invented the word sociology to describe the subject he wished to establish. Comte believed that the scientific method could be applied to the study of human behavior and society, and that this new field could produce knowledge of society based on scientific evidence. Comte believed that sociology should model itself after physics, and he initially called the subject social physics, a term that many of his contemporaries used. In addition to the scientific study of social life, Comte felt that sociology should contribute to the welfare of humanity by using science to predict and con­trol human behavior. His ideas about social planning were predicated on an understanding that society and the social order are not natural or preordained by a divine power but, rather, are constructed by individuals. Later in his career, Comte drew up ambitious plans for the reconstruction of French society in particular, and for human societies in general, based on scientific knowledge. The question of whether sociologists should seek to serve humanity with their work is one that sociologists still ask.

EMILE DURKHEIM

Although Emile Durkheim (1858 - 1917) drew on aspects of Comte's work, he thought that many of his predecessor's ideas were too speculative and vague and that Comte had not successfully carried out his program-to establish sociology on a scientific basis. To have a scientific basis, according to Durkheim, sociologists must develop methodological principles to guide their research. Sociol­ogy must study social facts-aspects of social life that shape our actions as individuals, such as the state of the ecpnomy or the influ­ence ofreligion. Durkheim's famous first principle of sociology was "Study social facts as things!" By this he meant that social life can be analyzed as rigorously as objects or events in nature.

Like a biologist studying the human body, Durkheim saw soci­ety as a set of independent parts, each of which could be studied separately. Each of a body's specialized parts (such as the bra in, heart, lungs, and liver) contributes to sustaining the life of the organism. These specialized parts work in harmony with one another; if they do not, the life of the organism is under threat. So it is, according to Durkheim, with society. For a society to have a continuing existence over time, its special-

Emile Durkheim (1858-1917).

ized i nstitutions (such as the political system, the religion, the family, and the educational system) must function as an integrated whole. Durkheim referred to this social cohesion as organic solidarity. He argued th at the con­tinuation of a society depends on cooperation, which presumes a general consensus among its members over basic values and customs.

toclalfacu • According to Emile Du rkheim, the aspects of social life that shape our actions as individuals. Durkheim believed that social facts could be studied scientifically.

~ IOlidarity • According to Emile Durkheim, the socia l cohesion that results from the various parts of a society functioning as an integrated whole.

The Development of Sociological Thinking 11

Another theme pursued by Durkheim, and by many others since, is that societies exert social constraint over their members' actions. Durkheim argued that society is far more than the sum of individual acts; when we analyze social structures, we study characteris­tics that have a "firmness" or "solidity" comparable to those of structures in the physical world. Think of a person standing in a room with several doors. The structure of the room constrains the range of the person's possible activities. The position of the walls and doors, for example, defines routes of exit and entry. Social structure, according to Durkheim, con­strains our activities in a parallel way, limiting what we can do as individuals. It is "exter­nal" to us, just as the walls of the room are.

Durkheim's analysis of social change was based on the development of the division oflabor; he saw it as gradually replacing religion as the basis of social cohesion and

providing organic solidarity to modern soci­et ies. He argued that as the division of labor

socialcowrtraint • The conditioning influence on our behavior of the groups and sotieties of which we are members. Social constraint was regarded by Emile Durkheim as one of the distinctive properties of social facts.

diviaionoflabor • The specialization of work tasks by means of which different occupations are combined within a production system. All societies have at least some rudimentary form of division of labor, especially between the tasks allocated to men and those performed by women. With the development of industrialism, the division of labor became vastly more complex than in any prior type of production system. In the modern world, the division of labor is international in scope.

anomie • The concept f irst brought into wide usage in sociology by Durkheim referring to a situation in which social norms lose their hold over individual behavior.

expands, people become more dependent on one another because each person needs goods and services that those in other occupations supply. Another of Durkheim's famous studies (1966; orig. 1897) analyzed suicide. Although suicide seems to be a personal act, the outcome of extreme personal unhappiness, Durkheim showed that social factors influence suicidal behavior- such as anomie, a feeling of aim­lessness or despair provoked by modern social life. Suicide rates show regular patterns from year to year, he argued, and these patterns must be explained sociologically. According to Durkheim, processes of change in the mod­ern world are so rapid and intense that they give rise to major social difficulties, which he linked to anomie. Traditional moral controls and standards, formerly supplied by religion,

Karl Marx (1818-1883).

largely break down under modern social development, and this leaves many individuals feeling that their lives lack meaning. Durkheim later focused on the role ofreligion in social life. In his study of religious beliefs, practices, and rituals, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1965; orig. 1912), he explored the impor­tance ofreligion in maintaining moral order in society.

KARL MARX

The ideas of Karl Marx (1818-1883), German economic, political, and social theorist, contrast sharply with those of Comte and Durkheim; however, Marx also sought to explain social changes arising from the Industrial Revolution. When he was a young man, his political activi­ties brought him into conflict with the German authorities; after a brief stay in France, he settled in exile in Britain. Much of his writ­ing concentrates on economic issues, but because he was always con­cerned with connecting economic problems to social institutions, his work is rich in sociological insights.

12 CHAPTER 1 What Is Sociology?

• Marx's viewpoint was founded on what he called the materialist conception of history. According to this view, it is not the ideas or values human beings hold that are the main sources of social change, as Durkheim claimed. Rather, social change is prompted primarily by economic influences. The conflicts between classes-rich versus poor-provide the motivation for historical development. In Marx's words, "All human history thus far is the history of class struggles."

Though he wrote about various phases of history, Marx concentrated on change in modern times. For him, the most important changes related to the development of capi­talism. Those who own capital-factories, machines, and large sums of money-form a ruling class. The mass of the population makes up a class of wage workers, a working class, who do not own the means of their livelihood but must find en1Ployment provided by the owners of capital. Capitalism is thus a class system in which conflict is inevitable because it is in the interests of the ruling class to exploit the working class and in the interests of the workers to seek to overcome that exploitation.

According to Marx, in the future, capitalism will be supplanted by a society with no divi­sions between rich and poor. He didn't mean that all inequalities would disappear. Rather, societies will no longer be split into a small class that monopolizes economic and political power and the large mass of people who benefit little from the wealth their work creates. The economic system that will develop in response to capitalist conflict will have communal owner­ship and will lead to a more equal society than we know at present.

materialistconceptionofhistory • The view developed by Marx according to which material, or economic, factors have a prime role in determining historical change. Marx's work had a far-reaching effect on

the twentieth-century world. Until recently, before the fall of Soviet communism, more than a third of the earth's population lived in

capitalism • An economic system based on the private ownership of wealth, which is invested and reinvested in order to produce profit.

Table 1.1 Interpreting Modern Development

DURKHEIM 1.

2.

MARX 1.

2.

WEBER 1.

2.

The main dynamic o f modern development is the division of labor as a basis for social cohesion and organic solidarity.

Durkheim believed that sociology must study social facts as things, just as science would analyze the natural world. His study of suicide led him to stress the important influence of social factors, qualities of a society external to the individual, on a person's actions. Durkheim argued that society exerts social constraint over our actions.

The main dynamic of modern development is the expansion of capitalism. Rather than being cohesive, society is divided by class differences.

Marx believed that we must study the divisions within a society that are derived from the economic inequalities of capitalism.

The main dynamic of modern development is the ratlonalizatlon of social and economic life.

Weber focused on why Western societies developed so differently from other societies. He also emphasized the importance of cultural ideas and values on social change.

The Development of Sociological Thinking 13

Max Weber (1864-1920).

societies whose governments derived inspiration from Marx's ideas. In addition, many sociologists have been influenced by Marx's ideas about class divisions.

MAX WEBER

Like Marx, the German-born Max Weber (pronounced "Vaber," 1864- 1920) cannot be labeled simply a sociologist; his interests spanned many areas. His writings covered the fields of econom­ics, law, philosophy, and comparative history as well as sociology, and much of his work also treated the development of modern capi­talism. He was influenced by Marx but was also critical of some of Marx's major views. He rejected the materialist conception of history and saw class conflict as less significant than did Marx. In Weber's view, economic factors are important, but ideas and values

. have just as much effect on social change. Some of Weber's most influential writings analyzed the distinc-

tiveness of Western society compared with other major civilizations. He studied the religions of China, India, and the Near East, thereby making major contri­butions to the sociology of religion. Comparing the leading religious systems in China and India with those of the West, Weber concluded that certain aspects of Christian beliefs had strongly influenced the rise of capitalism. He argued that the capitalist outlook of Western societies had not emerged, as Marx suppo_sed, only from economic changes. In Weber's view, cultural ideas and values shape society and affect individual actions.

One of the most persistent concerns of Weber's work was the study of bureaucracy. A bureaucracy is a large organization that is divided into jobs based on specific functions and staffed by officials ranked according to a hierarchy. Industrial firms, government orga­nizations, hospitals, and schools are examples of bureaucracies. Weber saw the advance of bureaucracy as an inevitable feature of our era. Bureaucracy enables large organizations to run efficiently, but at the same time it poses problems for effective democrat ic participation in modern societies. Bureaucracy involves the rule of experts, who make decisions without consulting those whose lives are affected by them.

Some of Weber's writings also address the character of sociology itself. He was more cautious than either Durkheim or Marx in proclaiming sociology to be a science. According to Weber, it is misleading to imagine that we can study people by using the same procedures by which we use physics or biology to investigate the physical world. Humans are think­ing, reasoning beings; we attach meaning and significance to most of what we do, and any discipline that deals with human behavior must acknowledge this.

Neglected Founders

Although Comte, Durkheim, Marx, and Weber are foundational figures in-.socio1ogy, other thinkers from the same period made important contributions. Very few women or mem­

bers of racial minorities had the opportunity to become professional sociologists during the

bureaucracy • A type of organization marked by a clear hierarchy of authority and the existence of written rules of procedure and staffed by full-time, salaried officials.

14 CHAPTE R 1 What Is Sociology?

"classical" period of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Even the foundational fig­ures in sociology frequently ignored women and racial minorities, at the same time that they were

I } ~

creating the first theories systematically to address inequality, strat­ification, subjective meaning, and exploitation. As a result, the few women and members of racial minorities that conducted sociological research of lasting importance often remain neglected by the field . These individuals and the theories they developed deserve the atten­tion of sociologists today.

HARRIET MARTINEAU

Harriet Martineau (1802-1876), born and educated in England, has been called the "first woman sociologist." As with Marx and Weber, her interests extended beyond sociology. She was the author of more than 50 books as well as numerous essays, and was an active pro­ponent of women's rights and the abolition of slavery. Martineau is now credited with introducing sociology to England through her translation of Comte's founding treatise of the field, Positive Philosophy (Rossi, 1973). Additionally, she conducted a systematic study of American society during her extensive travels throughout

Harriet Martineau (1802-1876).

the United States in the 1830s, which is the subject of her book Society in America (1962; orig. 1837). Martineau is significant to sociologists today for several reasons, but in par­ticular for her methodological insight. Fl!:.st. she argu.ecltbat when one studies ~ty. one must focus on all its aspects, including keUQlliical. religious, and social institutions. Second, she insisted that an ~lysis ~ciety must include.alljts members, a point that drew attention to the conspicuous al>sence of women's lives from the sociology oftha~ time. Third, she was the first to turn a sociological eye on previously ignored issues and

'institutions, including marriage, children, domestic and religious life, and race relations. Finally, like Comte, she argued that sociologists should do more than just observe; they should also act in ways to benefit society.

W.E.B. DU BOIS

W.E.B. Du Bois (1868- 1963) was the first African American to earn a doctorate from Harvard University. Among his many contribu­tions to sociology, perhaps most important is the concept of"double

_consciousness," a way oftalking about identity through the lens of the experiences of African Americans. Du Bois made a persuasive claim that one's sense of self and one's identity are greatly influ­enced by historical experiences and social circumstances-in the case of African Americans, the effect of slavery and, after emanci­pation, segregation and prejudice. Throughout hi,,s career, Du Bois focused on race relations in the United States; as he said in an oft­repeated quote, "the problem of the twentieth century is the prob­lem of the color line" (Du Bois, 1903). His influence on sociology today is evidenced by continued interest in the questions he raised, particularly his concern that sociology must explain "the contact of diverse races of men" (Du Bois, 1903). Du Bois was also the first social researcher to trace the problems faced by African Ameri­cans to their social and economic underpinnings, a connection that most sociologists now widely accept. Finally, he c'onnected social

W.E.B. Du Bois (1868-1963).

The Development of Sociological Thinking 15

analysis to social reform. He was one of the founding members of the National Associa­tion for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and a longtime advocate for the collective struggle of African Americans.

Understanding the Modern World: The Sociological Debate

From Marx's time to the present, many sociological debates have centered on Marx's ideas about the influence of economics on the development of modern societies. According to Marx, the impulse behind social change in the modern era resides in the pressure toward constant economic transformation produced by the spread of capitalist production. Capi­talism is a vastly more dynamic economic system than any other that preceded it. Capi­talists compete to sell their goods to consumers; to survive in a competitive market, firms have to produce their wares as cheaply and efficiently as possible. This leads to constant technological innovation, because increasing the effectiveness of the technology used in a particular production process is one way in which companies can secure an edge over their rivals.

There are also strong incentives to seek new markets in which to sell goods, acquire cheap raw materials, and make use of cheap labor power. Capitalism, therefore, according to Marx, is a restlessly expanding system pushing outward across the world. This is how Marx explains the global spread of Western industry.

Subsequent Marxist authors have refiped Marx's portrayal. However, numerous critics have set out to rebut Marx's view, offering alternative analyses of the influences shaping the modern world. Virtually everyone accepts that capitalism has played a major part. but other sociologists have argued that Marx exaggerated the effect of purely economic factors in producing change and that capitalism is less central to modern social development than he claimed. Most of these writers have also been skeptical of Marx's belief that a socialist system would eventually replace capitalism.

One of Marx's earliest and most acute critics was Max Weber. whose alternative posi­tion remains important today. ~a Weber noneconomic factor~ve played the key role in modern social development. Weber's celebrated work The ProtestantEtfiic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1977; orig.1904) proposes that religious values- especially those associated with Puritanism-were of fundamental importance in creating a capitalistic outlook. This outlook did not emerge, as Marx supposed, only from economic changes.

Weber's understanding of the nature of modern societies, and the reasons forthe spread of Western ways of life across the world, also contrasts substantially with that of Marx. According to Weber, capitalism-a distinct way of organizing economic enterprise- is one among other major factors shaping social development in the modern period. ~derJyl_ng capitalist mechanisms, and in some ways more fundamental than those mechanisms, is

~the effect of science and bu re~. Science has shaped modern technology and will pre­sumably do so in any future society, whether socialist or capitalist. Bureaucracy is the only

rationalization • A concept used by Max Weber to refer to the process by which modes of precise calculation and organization, involving abstract rules and procedures, increasingly come to dominate the social world.

16 CHAPTER 1 What Is Socio logy?

way of organizing large numbers of people effec­tively, and therefore inevitably expands with eco­nomic and political growth. The developments of science, modern technology, and bureaucracy are examples of a general social process that Weber refers to collectively as rationaliza­tion. Rationalization means the organization of

analyzing the social world. According to him, language allows us to become self-conscious beings- aware of our own individuality. The key element in this process is the symbol For example, the word tree is a symbol by which we represent the object tree. Once we have mas­tered such a concept, Mead argued, we can think of a tree even if none is visible. Symbolic thought frees us from being limited in our experience to what we actually see, hear, or feel.

Unlike animals, according to Mead, human beings live in a richly symbolic universe. This applies even to our sense of self. Each of us is a self-conscious being because we learn to look at ourselves as if from the outsi<cle- as others see us. When a child begins to use "I" to refer to that object whom others call "you" (herself), she is exhibiting the beginnings of s~~onsciousness.

~11 interactions among individuals, symbolic interactionists say, involve an exchange of symbols. When we interact with others, we constantly look for clues to what type of behavior is appropriate in the context and how to interpret what others are up to. Symbolic interaction ism directs our attention to the detail of interpersonal interaction and how that detail is used to mak.e' sense of what others say and do. For instance, suppose two people are on a first date. Each spends a good part of the evening sizing the other up and assessing how the relationship is likely to develop, if at all. Neither wishes to be seen doing this too openly, although each recognizes that it is going on. Both individuals are careful about their own behavior, being eager to present themselves in a favorable light; but, knowing this, both are looking for aspects of the other's behavior that would reveal his or her true opinions. A complex and subtle process of symbolic interpretation shapes their interaction.

Functionalism Symbolic interactionism has been criticized for concentrating too much on things that are small in scope. Symbolic interactionists have found difficulty in dealing with larger-scale structures and processes- the very things that a rival tradition of thought, functionalism, emphasizes. Functionalist thinking in sociology was originally pioneered by Comte, who saw it as closely bound up with his overall view of the field.

To stud~n..of asocial acti'lity_is to anal~ its contribution to.th!u:ontinuation of the society as aw~. The best way to understand this idea is by analogy to the human body, a comparison that Comte, Durkheim, and other functionalist authors made.~ an organ such as the heai:t,.we need tO-Show how it relateS-to-Gther parts of the body. When ~rn how the heart pumps blood, we understand its yital role in the continuation of the life of the organism. Similarly, analyzing the function of some aspect of society, such as religion, means °;bowing its part in the continued existence and health of a society. Func­tionalism emphasizes the importance of moral consens~aintaining order and stabil-

symbol • One item used to stand for or represent another-as in the case of a flag, w hich symbolizes a nation.

functiona1t.m • A theoretical perspective based on the notion that social events can best be explained in terms of the functions they perform-that is, the contributions they make to the cont inuity of a society.

18 CHAPTER 1 What Is Sociology?

~ in society Moral consensus exists when most people share the same values. Functionalists regard order and balance as the normal state of society-this social equilibrium is grounded in a moral consensus among the members of society. According to Durkheim, for instance, religion reaffirms people's adherence to core social val­ues, thereby helping to maintain social cohesion.

Functionalism became prominent in sociol­ogy through the writings of Talcott Parsons and

Robert K. Merton, each of whom saw functionalist analysis as pro­viding the key to the development of sociological theory and research. Merton's version offunctionalism has been particularly influential.

Merton distinguished between manifest and latent functions. Manifest functions are those known to, and intended by, the par­ticipants in a social activity. Latent functions are consequences of that activity of which participants are unaware. Merton used the example of a rain dance performed by the Hopi tribe of Arizona and New Mexico. The Hopi believe that the ceremony ~ng the rain t hey need for their crops (manife.st function). This is why theY organize and participate in it. But using Durkheim's theory of religion, Merton argued tha motes the cohesion of Hopi society (latent function). A major part of socio­logical explanation, accordmg fOMertOn, consists in uncovering the latent functions of social activities and institutions.

Merton also distinguished between functions and dysfunc­tions. To look for the dysfunctional aspects of social behavior means to focus on features of social life that challenge the existing order. For example, it is mistaken to suppose t hat religion is always

Robert K. Merton (1910-2003).

functional- that it contributes only to social cohesion. When two groups support dif­ferent religions or different versions of the same religion, the result can be major social conflicts, causing widespread social disruption. Thus wars have often been fought between religious communities-as in the struggles between Protestants and Catholics in European history.

For a long while, functionalist thought was the leading theoretical tradition in sociol­ogy, particularly in the United States. In recent years, its popularity has declined. Although this was not true of Merton, many functionalist thinkers-Talcott Parsons is an example­unduly stressed factors leading to social cohesion at the expense of those producing division and conflict. In addition, many critics claim that functional analysis attributes to societies certain qualities those societies do not have. Functionalists often wrote as though societies had "needs" and "purposes," even though these concepts make sense only when applied to individual human beings.

Marxism and Class Conflict

Functionalism and symbolic interactionism are not the only modern theoretical tradi­tions of importance in sociology. A further influential approach is'Marxism. Marxists, of course, all trace their views back to the writ-ings of Karl Marx, but today there are schools of Marxist thought that take very different theo­retical positions.

In all its variations, Marxism differs from non-Marxist traditions of sociology in that its author s see it as a combination of sociological analysis and political reform. Marxism is sup­posed to generate a program of radical political change. Moreover, Marxists lay more emphasis

manifestfunctiom • The functions of a type of social activity that are known to and intended by the individuals involved in the activity.

latent functiolUI • Functional consequences that are not intended or recognized by the members of a social system in which they occur.

Marxism • A body of thought deriving its main elements from the ideas of Karl Marx.

Modern Theoretical Approaches 19

on conflict, class divisions, power, and ideology than many non-Marxist sociologists do, especially those influenced by functionalism. The concept of power is of great impor­tance to Marxist sociologists and to sociology in general. Power implies the capability of individuals or groups to make their own interests count, even when others resist. Power sometimes involves the direct use of force but is almost always accompanied by t~ devclQID1leut Gfid~~(ideolo@es), which are used to iustify the act10ns of the power­ful. ~ower, id~og'y and conflict are always closely connected. Many conflicts are about power because of the rewards it can bring. Those who hold most power may depend on the influence of ideology to retain their dominance but are usually also able to use force if necessary.

Feminism and Feminist Theory

Feminist theory is one of the most prominent areas of contemporary sociology. This is a notable development because gender issues are scarcely central in the work of the major fig­ures who established the discipline. The•success offeminism's entry into sociology required a fundamental shift in the discipline's approach.

Many feminist theorists' experiences in the women's movement of the 1960s and '70s influenced their work as sociologists. Like Marxism, feminism links sociological theory and political reform. Many feminist sociologists have been advocates for political and social action to remedy the inequalities between women and men in both the public and the private spheres.

Feminist sociologists argue that women's experiences are central to the study of society. Sociology, like most academic disciplines, has presumed a male point of view. Concerned with women's subordination in society, feminist sociologists highlight gen­der relations and gender inequality as important determinants of social life in terms of

poWel' • The ability of individuals or the members of a group to achieve aims or further the if)terests they hold. Power is a pervasive element in all human relationships. Many conflicts in society are struggles over power, because how much power an ihdividual or group is able to achieve governs how far they are able to put their wishes into practice.

~ • Shared ideas or beliefs that serve to justify the interests of dominant groups. Ideologies are found in all societies in Which there are systematic and ingrained inequalities between groups. The concept ofideology connects closely with that of power, since ideological systems serve to legitimize the power that groups hold.

fehalnisttbeory • A sociological perspective that emphasizes the centrality of gender in analyzing the social world and particularly the uniqueness of the experience of women. There are many strands of feminist theory, but they all share the desire to .explain gender inequalities in society and to work to overcome them.

20 CHAPTER 1 What Is Sociology?

both social interaction and social institutions such as the family, the workplace, and the edu­cational system. Feminist theory emphasizes that gendered patterns and gendered inequali­ties are socially constructed. (We will cover this point in more detail in Chapter 10.)

Today, feminist sociology focuses on the intersection of gender, race, and class. A feminist approach to the study ofinequality has influenced new fields of study, such as men's studies, sexual­ity studies, and gay and lesbian studies.

Rational Choice Theory

The sociologist~that--ttll behavior could be divided into four categories: (1) ~brolior oriented toward higher.italues, such ~ics; (2) beht!!a~vaiQL~~c.e.cJJOLW<1i..ta....uat01 such as walking to school on a familiar path; -- -(3) behavior oriented toward ~ (EllJlotions), ~has falling in love: and (4)~havior oriented _g>w.ard self-interestp such as making money. Behavior in the last category is often called

"instrumental." or "rational." action. In recent years, many sociologists have adopted an approach that focuses on it. This has led numerous scholars to ask under what condi­tions human behavior can be said to constitute rational responses to opportunities and constraints.

The rational choice approach posits that if you could have only a single variable to explain society ~!re;;! would be the best one. A person who believes in this approach might even use : to fxlf ain things that seem irrational. One popular rational choice theory sees decisions to marry as maximizing self-interest in a marriage market; this might explain why marriage has declined the most in poor African American communities with low rates of employment. The explanation-that it is not in the self-interest of women to marry men who cannot support them (Wilson, 1987)-goes against competing explanations suggesting that poor African Americans don't marry because they don't share mainstream values. The rational choice argument sees the decline as having little to do with values and much to do with self-interest under existing conditions. According to this theory, if employment rates for black men were to change, so would the number of"eligible" men and the desire of women to marry them.

Rational choice theorists find few irrational mysteries in life. One of the few some note Ls love, which they define as the irrational act of substituting another person's self-interest for one's own (Becker, 1991). But such a definition makes it difficult to distinguish between .__ basic altruism, friendship, and romantic love. Indeed, although a rational choice approach often can be useful, there are some aspects oflife that it cannot explain. Consider an angry driver who tries to teach a tailgater a lesson by tailgating the tailgater. Self-interest does not explain this action because the "teacher" is unlikely to personally reap the benefits of a lesson well learned (Katz, 1999).

Postmodern Theory Advocates ofpostmodernism claim that the classic social thinkers' idea that history has a shape- it "goes somewhere" and leads to progress-has collapsed. No longer do any "grand narratives," or metanarratives-overall conceptions of history or society-make any sense (Lyotard, 1985). In fact, there is no such thing as history. The postmodern world is not des­tined, as Marx hoped, to be a socialist one. Instead, it is dominated by the new media, which "take us out" of our past. Postmodern society is highly pluralistic and diverse. As countless films, videos, TV programs, and websites circulate images around the world, the many ideas and values we encounter have little connection with our local or personal histories. Every­thing seems constantly in flux: "[F]lexibility, diversity, differentiation, and mobility, commu­nication, decentralization and internationalization are in the ascendant. In the process our own identities, our sense of self, our own subjectivities are being transformed" (Hall, Held, and McGrew, 1988).

One important theorist of postmodernity, Jean Baudrillard (1929- 2007), believed that the electronic media created a chaotic, empty world. Despite behig influenced by Marxism m his ea:rly years, Baudrillard argued that the spread of electronic communication and the mass media reversed the Marxist theorem that economic forces shape society. Instead, he asserted, social life is influenced above all by signs and images.

rational choice approach • More broadly, the theory that an individual's behavior is purposive. Within the field of criminology, rational choice analysis argues that deviant behavior is a rational response to a specific social situation.

postmodernism • The belief that society is no longer governed by history or progress. Postmodern society is highly pluralistic and diverse, with no "grand narrative" guiding its development.

Modern Theoretical Approaches 21

In a media-dominated age, Baudrillard said, meaning is created by the flow ofimages, as in TV programs. Much of our world is now a make-believe universe in which we respond to media images rather than to real persons or places. Thus, when Diana, Princess of Wales, died in 1997, the worldwide outpouring of grief did not constitute mourning for a real per­son, because Diana existed for most people only through the media. Her death was more like an event in a soap opera.

Theoretical Thinking in Sociology

So far we have been discussing theoretical approaches-broad orientations to the subject matter of sociology. However, there is a dist inction between theoretical approaches and theories. Theories are more narrowly focused and attempt to explain particular social con­ditions or types of events. They are usually formed during the research process and suggest other problems for subsequent research. An example would be Durkheim's theory of suicide.

Some theories are lnore encompassing than others. Opinions vary about whether it is desirable or useful for sociologists to engage in very wide-ranging theoretical endeavors. Robert K. Merton (1957), for example, argued that sociologists should concentrate on what he called theories of the middle range. Rather than attempting to create grand theoretical schemes (in the manner of Marx, for instance), we should develop more modest theories.

Middle-range the~es are specific enough to be te~l research, yet suf-ficiently general to cover a range ofphenom . Consider the theory ofrelative deprivation,

'Wmctr- o st at ow peop e eva ua e their circumstances depends on whom they compare themselves to. Thus feelings of deprivation do not conform directly to the level of material poverty that individuals experience. A family living in a small home in a poor area, where everyone is in similar circumstances, is likely to feel less deprived than a family living in a similar house in a neighborhood where other homes are much larger and other people more affluent.

Indeed, the more wide-ranging and ambitious a theory is, the more difficult it is to test empirically. Yet there seems no obvious reason that theoretical thinking in sociology should be confined to the "middle range."

Assessing theories in sociology, especially theoretical approaches, is a challenging and formidable task. The fact that no theoretical approach dominates the whole of sociology might seem to be a sign of weakness in the subject. But this is not the case: The jostling of rival theoretical approaches and theories actually expresses the vitality of the sociologi­cal enterprise. In studying human beings (ourselves), theoretical variety rescues us from

microsociology • The study of human behavior in contexts of face-to-face interaction.

macrosociology • The study of large-scale groups, organizations, or social systems.

dogma. Because human behavior is so compli­cated, a single theoretical perspective could never cover all its aspects. Diversity in theoreti­cal thinking provides a rich source of ideas for research and stimulates the imaginative capaci­ties so essential to progress in sociological work.

Levels of Analysis: Microsociology and Macrosociology

An important distinction among theoret ical perspectives involves the level of analysis each takes. The study of everyday behavior during face-to-face interaction is microsociology. Macrosociology is the analysis oflarge-scale social systems, such as the political system

22 CHAPTER 1 What Is Sociology?

Microsociology focuses on face-to-face interactions (a), while macrosociology analyzes large-scale social forces (b). How might a microsociologist and a macrosociologist analyze this food court differently?

or the economic order. It also includes analysis oflong-term processes of change, such as the development of industrialism. Although micro analysis and macro analysis may seem dis­tinct from one another, in fact the two are closely connected (Giddens, 1984; Knorr-Cetina and Cicourel, 1981).

Macro analysis is essential for understanding the institutional background of daily life, because people's lives are affected by the broader institutional framework. Consider a comparison of the daily cycle of activities in a medieval culture and in an industrialized urban environment. In modern societies, we are constantly in contact with strangers. This contact may be indirect and impersonal. However, no matter how many indirect or elec­tronic relations we enter into, even the most complex societies require the presence of other people. While we may choose to send an acquaintance just an e -mail message, we can also choose t o fly thousands of miles to spend the weekend w ith a friend.

Micro studies illuminate broad institutional patterns. Face-to-face interaction is the basis of all forms of social organization, no matter how large scale. In studying a busi­ness corporation, we could examine face-to-face behavior to analyze, for example, the interaction of directors in the boardroom, people working in various offices, or work­ers on the factory floor. We would not gain a picture of the whole corporation in this way because some of its business involves pr inted materials, letters, the telephone, and computers. Yet we could certainly contribute significantly to understanding how the organization works.

Later chapters will give further exam­ples of how interaction in micro contexts affect s larger social processes and how macro systems affect the more confined settings of social life.

-------·--II\_ _______ _

I

CONCE'PT CHECKS /

1. What are the differences between symbolic inter actionism and functionalist approaches to the analysis of society?

2. How do rational choice theorists explain human behavior?

3. What role does theory play in sociological research?

4 . How are macro and micro analyses of society connected?

L-----·------------------

Modern Theoretica l Approaches 23

0 HOW CAN SOCIOLOGY HELP US?

As we discussed at the beginning of t}J.e chapter, sociological thinking applies to your day-to-day life-from college admissions to falling in love. C. Wright Mills emphasized these practical applications of sociology when developing his idea of the sociological imagination.

Awareness of Cultural Differences

First, sociology allows us to see the social world from many perspectives. If we properly understand how others live, we better understand their problems. Practical policies that lack an informed awareness of the ways oflife of people they affect have little chance of suc­cess. Thus a white social worker operating in an African American community won't gain the confidence ofits members without having a sensitivity to the differences in social expe­rience that separate wHite and black in the United States.

Assessing the Effects of Policies

Second, sociological research helps in assessments of the results of policy initiatives. For example, a program of practical reform may fail to achieve its goals or may produce unin­tended negative consequences. Consider the large public-housing blocks built in city cen­ters in many countries following World War II. The goal was to provide high standards of accommodation for low-income groups from slum areas and to offer shopping amenities and other civic services close at hand. However, research later showed that many people who had moved to the large apartment blocks felt isolated and unhappy. High-rise apart­ment blocks and shopping malls in poorer areas often became dilapidated and provided breeding grounds for muggings and other violent crimes.

Self-Enlightenment

Third, and perhaps most important, sociology can provide us with self-enlightenment­increased self-understanding. The more we know about our own behavior and how our society works, the better chance we have to influence our futures. Sociology doesn't just help policy makers make informed decisions. Those in power may not always consider the interests of the less powerful or underprivileged when making policies. Self-enlightened groups can benefit from sociological research by using the information gleaned to respond to government policies or form policy initiatives of their own. Self-help groups such as Alco­holics Anonymous (AA) and social movements such as the environmental movement are examples of social groups that have directly sought practical reforms, with some success.

The Sociologist's Role

Finally, many sociologists address practical matters in their work as professionals-as industrial consultants, urban planners, social workers, and personnel managers, among other jobs. An understanding of society also serves those working in law, journalism, busi­ness, and medicine.

Those who study sociology frequently develop a social conscience. Should sociologists themselves agitate for programs of reform or social change? Some argue that sociology can preserve its intellectual independence only if sociologists remain neutral in moral and

24 CHAPTER 1 What Is Sociology?

political controversies. Yet are scholars who remain aloof more impartial in their assess­ment of sociological issues than others? No sociologically sophisticated person can be unaware of the inequalities, the lack of social justice, or the deprivations suffered by mil­lions of people worldwide. It would be strange if sociologists did not take sides on practical issues, and it would be illogical to ban them from drawing on their expertise in doing so.

We have seen that sociology is a discipline in which we often set aside our personal views to explore the influences that shape our lives and those of others. Sociology emerged as an intellectual endeavor along with the development of modern societies, and the study of such societies remains its principal concern. But sociologists are also preoccupied with the nature of social interaction and human societies in general.

Sociology has major practical implica­tions for people's lives. Learning to become a sociologist shouldn't be a dull academic endeavor! The best way to make sure of this is to approach the subject in an imaginative way and to relate sociological ideas and findings to your own life.

CONCEPT CHECKS

1. Describe three ways that sociology can help us in our lives.

2. What skills and perspectives do sociologists bring to their work?

How Can Sociology Help Us? 25

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

TERMS TO KNOW

CONCEPT CHECKS

0

Learn what sociology encompasses and how everyday topics are shaped by social and historical forces. Recognize that sociology involves not only acquiring knowledge but also developing a sociological imagination.

Sociological imag ination • Social ., structu re • Social construction • Socialization

1. What is the sociological imagination, according to C. Wright Mills?

2. How does sociology help us to - disentangle biological from

sociological phenomena?

3. How does the concept of social structure help sociologists better understand social phenomena?

\..

'

Learn how sociology originated and understand the significance of the intellectual contributions of early sociologists.

Social fact s • Organic solidarity • Social constraint • Division o f labor • Anomie • Mater ialist conception of history • Capitalism • Bureaucracy • Rationalization

1. According to Emile Durkheim, what makes sociology a social science? Why?

2. According to Karl Marx, what are the differences between the two c lasses that make up a capitalist society?

e

Be able to identify some of the leading theorists and distinguish between their theoretical approaches to social life.

Symbolic interactionism • Symbol • Functional ism • Manifest functions • Latent functions • Marxism • Power •

- - - - - - Ideologies • Feminist theory • Rational choice approach • Postmodernism • Microsociology • Macrosociology

1. What are the differences between symbolic interactionism and functionalist approaches to the analysis of society?

2. How do rational choice theorists explain human behavior?

3. What role does theory play in sociological research?

4. How are macro and micro analyses of society connected?

0

See the practical implications of sociology.

1. Describe three ways that sociology can help us in our lives.

2. What skills and perspectives do sociologists bring to their work?