Social Theory: Roots & Branches 0190060395, 9780190060398

Citation preview

SOCIAL THEORY

Peter Xiao. Intellectual Pursuits

SOCIAL THEORY R O O T S AND B R ANCHE S

S IX T H ED ITIO N

Peter Kivisto au g u s ta n a c o l l e g e university of helsinki

N E W Y O R K    O X F O R D OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries. Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America. © 2021 by Oxford University Press For titles covered by Section 112 of the US Higher Education Opportunity Act, please visit www.oup.com/us/he for the latest information about pricing and alternate formats. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Kivisto, Peter, 1948- author. Title: Social theory: roots & branches / Peter Kivisto, Augustana College, University of Helsinki. Description: Sixth Edition. | New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. | Revised edition of the author’s Social theory, c2013. | Summary: “This is an undergraduate reader for students taking course in social theory”—Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2019050775 (print) | LCCN 2019050776 (ebook) | ISBN 9780190060398 (paperback) | ISBN 9780190060404 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Sociology. Classification: LCC HM585 .S58 2020 (print) | LCC HM585 (ebook) | DDC 301—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019050775 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019050776 Printing number: 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Paperback printed by Marquis, Canada

CONTENTS

* =

new p r e fac e  

xvii

about the editor 

xxi

s o c i a l t h e o r y : c l a s s i c a l f o u n d at i o n s

 

PA R T 1



I

a n d c o n t e m p o r a r y d e v e l o p m e n ts p e t e r k i v i s to  

xxiii

T H E R O O T S : C L A S S I C A L S O C I A L T H E O R Y  1

Karl Marx  3 1. Alienated Labor 3 Alienation is Marx’s central focus in this early critique of capitalism. 2. The German Ideology (with Friedrich Engels) 10 In this excerpt from The German Ideology, Marx takes issue with idealistic philosophy and with the ahistorical philosophy of Feuerbach. He makes a case for a historical materialist account of human consciousness. 3. Manifesto of the Communist Party (with Friedrich Engels) 14 Although Marx seeks the overthrow of capitalism, he appreciates its historically progressive character insofar as it is a highly productive and dynamic economic system. 4. The Civil War in France* 22 In this excerpt from The Civil War in France, Marx offers his analysis of the significance of the Paris Commune of 1871.

v

vi

contents



II

Émile Durkheim  27 5. On Mechanical and Organic Solidarity 27 Durkheim describes how the division of labor in modern society serves to simultaneously promote individual autonomy while making people more dependent upon others. 6. What Is a Social Fact? 32 Durkheim defines his meaning of “social facts” and contends that they constitute the proper subject matter of sociology. 7. Anomic Suicide  3 8 In this selection, Durkheim discusses anomic suicide, one of the four types of suicide he identifies. He contends that anomie is a characteristic social pathology of modern society. 8. Individualism and the Intellectuals* 45 Writing in response to the Dreyfus Affair, Durkheim offers a defense of liberalism and a form of modern individualism predicated on the “cult of the individual.”



III

Max Weber   54 9. The Spirit of Capitalism 54 The “spirit of capitalism” refers to the distinctive mentality that Weber determined was intricately linked to the formative period of capitalist development. 10. Bureaucracy  6 5 The first important analyst of bureaucracy, Weber saw it as an essential ingredient for the expansion of capitalism; here he offers an ideal typical portrait of bureaucracy. 11. The Sociology of Charismatic Authority 71 Adapting it from the realm of religion, Weber used the term “charisma” to describe a form of political authority characterized by an intense emotional bond between the leader and followers. 12. Class, Status, Party  78 This selection presents Weber’s understanding of three discrete but interconnected realms: economics, politics, and culture.



IV

Georg Simmel   8 4 13. Fashion  8 4 Simmel, the first keen sociological analyst of consumerism, discusses the reasons that fashions come into and go out of style so quickly in modern life.

Contents

14. The Metropolis and Mental Life 90 Modern industrial society is seen most starkly in urban settings, and in this classic essay, Simmel links the themes of interdependency and rationalization specifically to metropolitan spaces. 15. The Stranger 9 8 “The Stranger” is one of Simmel’s classic essays on social types. He discusses a type of person—the Jew in European society being his key example—who is both connected to and marginalized by society.



V

Other Foundational Voices  102 16. On Marriage, Harriet Martineau 102 Martineau surveys the institution of marriage cross-culturally and notes that everywhere women are treated unequally, seen most starkly are their limited occupational opportunities. 17. On Individualism, Alexis de Tocqueville 107 Making use of the recently coined term “individualism,” Tocqueville locates this phenomenon in relation to democratic societies, depicting America as the lead society in this regard. 18. Of Our Spiritual Strivings, W. E. B. DuBois* 112 In this selection from The Souls of Black Folk, DuBois describes the existential reality of African Americans at the dawn of the twentieth century: formally free, but oppressed while striving for genuine equality. 19. The Dependence of Women, Charlotte Perkins Gilman 116 In this early feminist critique of patriarchal society, Gilman assesses some of the negative implications of consigning women to the realm of household labor and child rearing. 20. Conspicuous Consumption, Thorstein Veblen 120 Veblen’s skills as an acerbic social critic are on display in his discussion of “conspicuous consumption,” which he depicts as a characteristic means by which the leisure class makes status claims. 21. Social and Individual Aspects of Mind, Charles Horton Cooley 124 Cooley takes issue with the Cartesian claim “I think; hence, I am,” countering it by advancing the idea that self and society are intricately intertwined. 22. What Pragmatism Means, William James  128 James offers a straightforward definition of pragmatism and then suggests how such an orientation shifts the thrust and focus of philosophy.

vii

viii

contents

23. Democracy and Human Nature, John Dewey* 134 Dewey argues for the need of a humanistic culture that socializes citizens to a moral commitment to democracy as a way of life. 24. The Fusion of the ‘I’ and the ‘Me’ in Social Activities, George Herbert Mead 138 According to Mead, the “I” and “me” are two aspects of the self that must work together to make acting in social life possible.

PA R T 2



VI

THE BRANCHES: CONTEMPORARY S O C I A L T H E O RY  143

Functionalism, Structural-Functionalism, Systems Theory   145 25. The Unanticipated Consequences of Social Action, Robert K. Merton  145 From a structural-functionalist perspective, Merton points to the sociological significance of the unanticipated consequences of social action and offers an analysis of some factors contributing to such actions. 26. The Structure of the Societal Community, Talcott Parsons*  153 In this excerpt from The Evolution of Societies, Parsons describes the features of one of the subsystems of society—the societal community—concerned with social integration and inclusion. 27. The Functions of Social Conflict, Lewis Coser  159 Revealing his debt to both Simmel and Parsons, Coser offers a functionalist account of conflict wherein he emphasizes its ability to reinforce group solidarity and to serve as a safety valve for the release of tensions. 28. Functional Differentiation, Niklas Luhmann 163 According to Luhmann, the inability to speak about the unity of the social system means that our capacity to resolve social problems on the basis of shared value commitments is severely limited.



VII

Symbolic Interaction, Phenomenology, and Ethnomethodology  169 29. Society as Symbolic Interaction, Herbert Blumer 169 Blumer offers an outline of what he termed “symbolic interactionism,” which seeks to contrast how his approach of beginning with the interpretive work of actors in the process of constructing their social lives differs from competing theories such as behaviorism and functionalism.

Contents

30. Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive, C. Wright Mills* 176 Building on Dewey, Mead, and Burke, Mills contends that motives are words employed as justifications for words or actions for which the individual has been called to account. 31. Performances, Erving Goffman 184 Goffman uses the metaphor of social life as theater to outline a dramaturgical social theory. In this excerpt, he is concerned with the ways in which actors both relate to their roles and convey a sense of authenticity to others, focusing on the significance of “fronts” in achieving convincing performances. 32. The Stranger: An Essay in Social Psychology, Alfred Schutz* 190 Schutz offers a phenomenological account of the stranger as a sociological type, a person who enters a new setting without the taken-for-granted world view of local inhabitants—acting in a context characterized by physical proximity but social distance. 33. Studies of the Routine Grounds of Everyday Activities, Harold Garfinkel  199 Garfinkel, who coined the term “ethnomethodology,” provides an outline of a theoretical approach intended to bring into focus the ways that social order is constructed in the most common routines of everyday life. 34. Interactional Ritual Theory, Randall Collins 203 Collins develops the basis for a general sociological theory based on the premise that the starting point for sociological analysis is the situation and not the individual. The idea of interaction ritual chains is intended to take theory beyond the dichotomies of agency/structure and microlevel/macrolevel.



VIII

Exchange Theory and Rational Choice Theory  210 35. Social Behavior as Exchange, George C. Homans 210 One of the key figures associated with the development of exchange theory, Homans outlines an exchange paradigm that in its most elementary form seeks to explain social behavior in terms of costs and rewards. 36. Formulation of Exchange Theory, Peter Blau 220 Blau presents an exchange theoretical account that, in contrast to the earlier version of Homans, attempts to focus on social structure and appreciates the differences between the micro-level and the macro-level. 37. Human Capital and Social Capital, James S. Coleman 227 Coleman was a major spokesperson for rational choice theory, an approach wherein actors and resources constitute two central elementary concepts. Here he discusses two important types of resources: human capital and social capital.

ix

x

contents

38. Fairness and Norms, Jon Elster* 235 Making use of game theory, Elster identifies and explores three fairness behaviors: the rejection of unfair division, conditional cooperation, and reciprocity.



IX

Gender Theory  241 39. Doing Gender, Candace West and Don H. Zimmerman 241 Distinguishing between sex and gender, West and Zimmerman borrow insights from both Goffman and Garfinkel to make the claim that gender is the product of social interaction. 40. Categories Are Not Enough, Dorothy E. Smith*  249 Smith offers reflections on feminist theorizing, raising concerns that categories are being treated as givens rather than political categories in need of interrogation. 41. Subversive Bodily Acts, Judith Butler* 252 Butler’s anti-essentialist feminist theory seeks to question the generally taken-for-granted nature of gender categories and calls for a view that appreciates their inherent fluidity and variability. 42. Toward an Afrocentric Feminist Epistemology, Patricia Hill Collins 260 Collins endeavors to link an Afrocentric perspective to feminist theory, contending that a black feminist epistemology begins with an appreciation of the concrete experiences of daily life. 43. Femininity and Masculinity, Raewyn Connell 270 In developing the concept of “hegemonic masculinity,” Connell stresses the structured character of gendered power relations, noting that the situation is always further complicated by the fact that there are multiple types of both masculinity and femininity. 44. Queer-ing Sociology, Sociologizing Queer Theory, Steven Seidman  2 78 A key proponent of queer theory, Seidman makes use of Foucault’s work on sexuality in his attempt to bring queer theory and sociology into mutually rewarding contact.



X

Critical Theory   290 45. Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin 290 In a passage from one of Benjamin’s most widely read essays, the author seeks to explain the impact on art of the shift from traditional to modern societies, stressing that in the latter art loses its “aura” and its link to ritual.

Contents

46. Freudian Theory and the Pattern of Fascist Propaganda, Theodor W. Adorno* 295 A central figure associated with the development of the idea of the authoritarian personality, Adorno herein uses Freudian ideas to explore the fascist leader type and the role of propaganda in drawing in those predisposed to anti-democratic views. 47. One-Dimensional Man, Herbert Marcuse 302 In a work that influenced the New Left during the 1960s, Marcuse argues that freedom is eroding in the advanced industrial nations as a consequence of the fact that technology and bureaucracy have produced an overly administered society. 48. Three Normative Models of Democracy, Jürgen Habermas  308 Identifying central problems in the two historically rooted models of democracy—liberalism and republicanism—Habermas offers an alternative, which he refers to as deliberative politics.



XI

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationalism  316 49. The Theoretical Status of the Concept of Race, Michael Omi and Howard Winant 316 In critiquing positions that either treat race as mere ideology or that essentialize race, Omi and Winant lay out the contours of a critical theory of race that views it as an unstable, historically contingent, and highly variable construct that comes to constitute “racial projects.” 50. Between Camps: Race and Culture in Postmodernity, Paul Gilroy  32 6 Gilroy contends that nationalism and racial formations operate in terms of “camps,” a word he chooses to “emphasize their hierarchal and regimented qualities,” offering as an antidote a cosmopolitan humanism based on interculturalism. 51. Ethnicity without Groups, Rogers Brubaker 337 In this provocative essay, Brubaker takes aim at the essentializing and homogenizing tendency that treats ethnicity as a thing, countering with what he sees as a corrective that stresses ethnicity’s “relational, processual, and dynamic” character. 52. Nationalism and the Cultures of Democracy, Craig Calhoun  349 Calhoun is critical of postnationalists who argue that nationalism either is being or should be overcome, contending that such a position fails to appreciate the role nationalism plays in facilitating social integration and solidarity, which are prerequisites for democratic practice.

xi

xii

contents



XII

State, Economy, and Civil Society   359 53. War Making and State Making as Organized Crime, Charles Tilly  3 5 9 As the title suggests, Tilly draws a parallel between the way that nation states and organized crime syndicates function, both creating protection rackets to enhance their own positions. 54. The Politicization of Life, Giorgio Agamben 366 Modern politics, Agamben contends, is increasingly defined in terms of bare life, directed to bodies subject to various technologies of power in contrast to political beings defined as citizens. 55. How Will Capitalism End? Wolfgang Streeck* 370 Streeck sees capitalism as rapidly unraveling, linked to the erosion of democracy and the ecological crisis but does not see a viable alternative to capitalism on the horizon. The result, he contends, is an “age of entropy” characterized by individualistic responses to this situation. 56. The Socialist Compass, Erik Olin Wright*  380 Described as a pragmatic Marxist, Wright sought out models of what he considered to be real world utopias, progressive alternatives to capitalism that can be used in the future to shape the implementation of policies and political programs that advance social justice. 57. A Network Theory of Power, Manuel Castells* 387 Castells argues that the contemporary information age is the product of the network society. In this article, he seeks to articulate, as the title indicates, a network theory of power, specifying four distinct manifestations of power and indicating the respective roles of programmers and switchers. 58. Real Civil Societies: Dilemmas of Institutionalization, Jeffrey C. Alexander  399 Alexander distinguishes three different versions of civil society theory, with the third representing his own position. Central to his version, the civil sphere is the social space wherein solidarity and justice are promoted.



XIII

Modernity  413 59. Shame and Repugnance, Norbert Elias 413 According to Elias, the civilizing process has profoundly transformed people psychologically and behaviorally; in this selection he suggests how the ideas of shame and repugnance have been an integral part of this process.

Contents

60. Spectacular Time, Guy Debord 419 In developing his idea that the contemporary stage of capitalist development can be defined as a “society of the spectacle,” in this selection Debord defines spectacular time in terms of being both consumable and pseudo-cyclical. 61. The Reflexivity of Modernity, Anthony Giddens  423 Giddens has disagreed with postmodernists that we have entered a new stage of development beyond the modern. Rather, he thinks we have entered “late modernity.” In exploring the “consequences of modernity,” Giddens distinguishes traditional and modern societies insofar as reflexivity assumes a new and more significant role in the latter. 62. Redistribution, Bruno Latour 427 Latour calls for a reconsideration of the relationship between humans and nature and the question of God and, in so doing, challenges not only the claims of modernity but also postmodernity before suggesting a “nonmodern constitution.” 63. On Living in a Liquid Modern World, Zygmunt Bauman 437 Using the term “liquid” to describe contemporary social life, Bauman views the present as characterized by rapid change that prevents the establishment of patterns of thought and action, thus preventing people from relying on solid frames of reference. 64. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Jean-François Lyotard 445 Lyotard’s classic statement on postmodernity links this cultural shift to the economic shift resulting in postindustrial societies, going on to argue that postmodern culture undermines totalizing accounts of social change. 65. Multiple Modernities, S. N. Eisenstadt*  454 Eisenstadt disputes the idea that a single, Western model of modernity characterizes modernity around the globe. Rather, while agreeing that modernity first took form in Western terms that inflect developments elsewhere, Eisenstadt argues those developments amount to novel iterations of modernity. 66. Modernity as a Project of Emancipation and the Possibility of Politics, Peter Wagner* 457 In this selection, Wagner focuses on the politics of the modern, with an explication of what emancipation might mean, shifting from a philosophical to a sociological answer. Central to his thesis is the claim that critique must fuse with a project of political reconstruction.

xiii

xiv

contents



XIV

French Critical Theory: Structuralisms and Poststructuralisms  462 67. Structures and Habitus, Pierre Bourdieu* 462 Building on both Marxism and structuralism, Bourdieu seeks to correct both traditions by taking more seriously the role of actors. Here he discusses three terms that are of central importance to his own theoretical work: structure, habitus, and practice. 68. Advertising, Jean Baudrillard 470 As a radical proponent of postmodernism, Baudrillard offers a vision of a world saturated by the media and entertainment industries. The result, he contends, is a dissolving of the differences between the real and images, signs, and simulations. 69. The Subject and Societal Movements, Alain Touraine 476 Building on his idea of action sociology, Touraine develops his understanding of the subject conceived in collective terms. Collective actors shape his understanding of social movements. The linking of the subject and social movements serves as the basis for discussing the democratic prospect. 70. Panopticism, Michel Foucault  486 In this passage from Discipline and Punish, Foucault discusses the Panopticon as a prime example of the uniting of knowledge and power into a new system of surveillance and control. 71. The Spirit of Capitalism, Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello* 492 Boltanski and Chiapello seek to describe the new spirit of capitalism that, in their view, took off in the 1970s. In this excerpt, the authors offer their definition of capitalism, followed by a discussion of why capitalism needs an ideological justification or, in other words, a spirit.



XV

World Systems and Globalization  502 72. Mapping the Global Condition, Roland Robertson* 502 Robertson thinks that a theory of globalization must go beyond worldsystems and modernization theories. He outlines the contours of contemporary globalization, tracing its historical development in terms of five historical periods beginning in the fifteenth century. 73. The Three Instances of Hegemony in the History of the Capitalist World-Economy, Immanuel Wallerstein 513 Wallerstein approaches capitalism as a global system, emphasizing the longue durée characterized by long-term cycles of development. In this essay, he uses the concept of “hegemony” to link the system’s core exploiting nations and those on the periphery and semi-periphery.

Contents

74. The Cosmopolitan Condition: Why Methodological Nationalism Fails, Ulrich Beck 519 Taking aim at methodological nationalism, Beck seeks to link a cosmopolitan alternative to both modernity and globalization. 75. Disjunction and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy, Arjun Appadurai  525 Appadurai addresses the cultural aspects of globalization as shaped by contemporary transportation networks and communication technologies. He develops a framework involving five dimensions of global cultural flows: ethoscapes, mediascapes, technoscapes, financescapes and ideoscapes.

xv

PREFACE

new to the sixth edition

T

his edition of Social Theory: Roots and Branches contains 19 new selections, including 10 substitutions for entries by a particular author in the previous edition and 9 readings by theorists who are new to this collection. These include the following:   1. Karl Marx, passage from The Civil War in France   2. Émile Durkheim, “Individualism and the Intellectuals”   3. W.E.B. DuBois, “Of Our Spiritual Strivings”   4. John Dewey, “Democracy and Human Nature”   5. Talcott Parsons, “The Structure of the Societal Community”   6. C. Wright Mills, “Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive”   7. Alfred Schutz, “The Stranger: An Essay in Social Psychology”   8. Jon Elster, “Fairness and Norms”   9. Dorothy E. Smith, “Categories Are Not Enough” 10. Judith Butler, “Subversive Bodily Acts” 11. Theodor W. Adorno, “Freudian Theory and the Pattern of Fascist Propaganda” 12. Wolfgang Streeck, “How Will Capitalism End?” 13. Erik Olin Wright, “The Socialist Compass” 14. Manuel Castells, “A Network Theory of Power” 15. S. N. Eisenstadt, “Multiple Modernities” 16. Peter Wagner, “Modernity as a Project of Emancipation and the Possibility of Politics” 17. Pierre Bourdieu, “Structures and Habitus” 18. Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello, “The Spirit of Capitalism” 19. Roland Robinson, “Mapping the Global Condition”

xvii

xviii

preface

acknowledgements

I have been teaching social theory for four decades and during that time have been able to introducing students to the many creative and challenging innovations, while also helping to ground them in a long tradition. First and foremost, I would like to thank all of the students who have passed through my classes at my home institution during this time. I would like to single out for thanks five exceptional students: Emma Anderson, Sonia Carlson, Logan Green, Chad McPherson, and Dan Pittman. In addition, I would like to thank a number of former professors who in rather different ways and with different results shaped my ability to think like a theorist. They include, from my undergraduate days, Max Heirich and Stephen Berkowitz and, from my graduate school days, David Apter, Norman ­Birnbaum, Niklas Luhmann, Stanford M. Lyman, Benjamin Nelson, Arthur Vidich, and R.  Stephen Warner. Sherith Pankratz has been involved in several of my book projects for more than two decades, and as I knew would be the case, it has been a real pleasure to have worked with her on this new edition. Sherith is a pro who knows what works. Thus, I always value her judgment and her generous advice. Grace Li and I didn’t know each other prior to commencing work on this project. She has proven to be masterful at keeping me on task while providing plenty of assistance along the way. To the reviewers who provided detailed comments and suggestions, I extend my appreciation for their careful reading and insights: Cynthia D. Anderson, Ohio University Gretchen Arnold, St. Louis University Barbara A. Arrigi, Northern Kentucky University Emma Bailey, Western New Mexico University Elaina Behounek, Mercer University Robert Brenneman, Saint Michael’s College David K. Brown, Illinois State University Paula S. Brush, Radford University Sarah Daynes, University of North Carolina Greensboro Keith Doubt, Wittenberg University Nicholas P. Dempsey, Eckerd College Patricia Gagne, University of Louisville Peter R. Grahame, Pennsylvania State University-Schuylkill Gabe Ignatow, University of North Texas Lutz Kaelber, University of Vermont Thomas J. Keil, Arizona State University Hans-Herbert Koegler, University of North Florid Miriam Konrad, Georgia State University Kirk Lawrence, St. Joseph’s College Matthew T. Loveland, Le Moyne College

Preface

Bradley Nash, Jr., Appalachian State University Keumjae Park, William Paterson University Chavella T. Pittman, Dominican University Nicholas P. Simon, Eastern Connecticut State University Nancy Sonleitner, University of Tennessee-Martin Tiffany Taylor, Kent State University Adia Harvey Wingfield, Washington University

xix

ABOUT THE EDITOR

P

eter Kivisto is the Richard A. Swanson Professor of Social Thought and Chair of Sociology at Augustana College, and he is also a Visiting Professor at the University of H ­ elsinki’s Center for Research on Ethnic Relations and Nationalism. He is the author or editor of 35 books, including The Cambridge Handbook of Social Theory, The Trump Phenomenon: How the Politics of Populism Won in 2016, The Anthem Companion to Robert Park, and Solidarity, ­Justice, and Incorporation: Thinking through The Civil Sphere.

xxi

PETER KIVISTO

SOCIAL THEORY: CLASSICAL FOUNDATIONS AND CONTEMPORARY DEVELOPMENTS

N

ear the end of the past century, a century that had witnessed the institutionalization and dramatic growth of sociology in the academy, Alan Sica, the director of the Graduate Program in Social Thought at Pennsylvania State University and a well-known scholar of classical social theory, convened a panel of prominent scholars to probe the question, “What is social theory?” The result of the gathering was a book whose title posed that very question (Sica 1998). A little more than a decade later, two other prominent social theorists, Hans Joas and Wolfgang Knöbl, would begin Social Theory: Twenty Introductory Lectures (2009) with a chapter titled “What Is Theory?” Thus, it is that a question inevitably raised by undergraduate sociology majors entering a required course in social theory is also a question that scholars who have made theory their vocation continue to ask. Those who have asked this question repeatedly over the course of their careers are well aware of the fact that one of the reasons it remains germane is that sociologists are far from arriving at a consensus in articulating a reply. At a very general level, most would concur with various depictions of social theory. Thus, few would object to those who characterize theories, variously, as tools of analysis, or lenses into aspects of social reality. All would concur that theories offer something more than description or broad generalizations based on composites of cases. But it is here that theorists of various persuasions begin to part company. Some advance theories that are interpretive, while others construct theories to explain. Some theorists prefer to focus on structure, while others concentrate on the agency of social actors. Indeed, some theorists begin with the individual while others think it quite all right to dispense altogether with individuals. Some theorists think the proper

object of investigation ought to be social structures, while others are equally convinced that culture should be the main focus. In another theoretical divide, one side is intent on keeping social theory closely linked to social philosophy, while the other side urges the construction of formal mathematical models patterned after the natural sciences. Finally, for some theorists the purpose of theory extends no further than to understand some patch of reality, a view that was articulated by Erving Goffman (1982) in his presidential address to the American Sociological Association, where he contended that the reason one studies the social world is simply “because it is there.” Others— indeed, if Goffman is right, a majority of the profession—think that theories ought to have some practical or applied import, or, to use Marxist terminology, theory ought to be related to praxis (or, in other words, concrete social practices). It is thus not surprising that Donald Levine would speak in the plural of Visions of the Sociological Tradition (1995) rather than of a singular, shared vision. Given such widely divergent assessments of the nature and functions of theory, it’s reasonable to ask what counts as theory and what doesn’t. It is also reasonable to ask whether the fragmented and contested discipline of sociology will ever move beyond being what George Ritzer (1975) has called a “multiple paradigm science.” There are those who dream of the time that sociology will “mature” sufficiently to develop a commonly shared paradigm that serves to shape inquiry. To lay my cards on the table, I am not convinced that we are moving or someday will move toward consensus, nor do I think it is necessary to do so. Indeed, part of the vitality of the discipline derives from the fact that it is engaged in attempting to make sense of what is invariably “contested knowledge” (Seidman 2017;

xxiii

xxiv

social theory

Callinicos 2007). Sociology is a big-tent discipline. It relies on a wide range of research methodologies as well as a broad spectrum of theoretical approaches. This fact, of course, poses challenges to anybody seeking to introduce students to social theory, for being as comprehensive as possible can make it difficult for students to be able to see the forest for the trees. Moreover, the need to be selective means that some theorists are being privileged over others. It is this issue that I want to address by explaining the structure and rationale for this particular collection of articles. Social theory encompasses a body of writing dating from the early nineteenth century that has informed and continues to inform the discipline of sociology. This anthology has a simple objective, which is to assist students in social theory classes to acquire an appreciation of its range and scope. A casual perusal of the 75 entries in this collection will reveal the remarkable variety of work that falls under the rubric “social theory.” Looking a bit further, readers will find ample indications that social theory is indeed a contested terrain abounding in intellectual debates and controversies. As with the previous five editions of this book, I used Peter Xiao’s painting titled “Intellectual Pursuits” for the cover or in the front matter because I think it manages to humorously convey the sense of urgency and importance that thinkers attach to ideas. While it is not often that intellectual disputes lead scholars to throw books at one another, it is true that social theorists are capable of being quite feisty! They take ideas seriously and, as such, do not enter lightly into debates with those who have a different sense of the nature and purpose of theory. Although the selection process necessarily excluded many significant theorists, I have tried to identify and include representatives of those theoretical approaches that have had the greatest impact on sociology. The history of sociology has been an ongoing process of defining disciplinary boundaries while remaining open to interdisciplinary dialogues. The readings I have selected reflect an attempt to show how sociology has developed as a distinctive enterprise while also revealing the ways in which voices from outside the discipline have continued to enrich it. While in the end I am responsible for the choices appearing within these two covers, this is far from a solo

venture. On the contrary, anthologies that attempt to provide readers with a broad, ecumenical overview of a field are not possible without a sustained conversation with numerous other people, including prominent scholars, professors who teach relevant courses, reviewers employed by the publisher, editors, and students. I have relied on dozens of such individuals and have benefited in many ways from the sage advice I have received for each previous edition as well as for this one. While some of these people are mentioned by name in the acknowledgments, the point here is simply that creating a theory reader is very much a cooperative enterprise. classical roots and the emergence of a canon

This reader is divided into two sections, which I have termed “roots” and “branches.” The former comprises the period from roughly 1840 to 1920, a time when sociology emerged as a distinctive enterprise, distinguishing itself from philosophy and the other social sciences. During this time, the first explicit advocates of this new field of inquiry appeared on the scene and created what might be seen as the infrastructure needed to sustain it, particularly the carving out of a legitimate place in the university system, with all that implies. This time frame represents sociology’s classical period. The individuals associated with this era were responsible, even when they were not trying to do so, for giving sociology its initial identity. In this regard, it is important to note that left out of this collection are those philosophers who preceded the rise of sociology and social theory. These include classics in the history of philosophy, beginning with Plato and Aristotle, but in particular those that are associated with the rise of modern philosophical inquiry into the nature of social order, such as ­Niccolo Machiavelli; Charles Louis Montesquieu; the social ­ contract theorists Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau; Claude Henri de Rouvroy Saint-Simon; the Scottish moralists such as Adam Smith and Adam Ferguson; Immanuel Kant; and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. These and others constitute the central figures of the prehistory of sociology (Heilbron forthcoming; Hawthorne 1976). According

Social Theory: Classical Foundations and Contemporary Developments

to Johan Heilbron in The Rise of Social Theory (1995), it was in the predisciplinary era from approximately 1600 to 1850 that such thinkers developed analytical tools that would become central to the sociological enterprise, including such basic concepts as society, economy, state, and civil society. He sees the rise of social theory being made possible by the emergence of an intellectual space distinct from both church and state. In a related argument, Brian Singer (2004) contends that the birth of the social was made possible insofar as social theory began to be viewed as an enterprise distinct from political theory. These thinkers not only had a profound impact on the classic figures we take up in this collection but also continue to inform theorists (e.g., see contemporary theorists of civil society, who frequently begin by turning to figures such as Locke, Ferguson, Smith, Rousseau, and Hegel). In a provocative article, R.  W. Connell (1997) asked, “Why is classical theory classical?” He claimed that, contrary to the standard view that sociology arose to make sense of the emergence of modern industrial societies, in fact, the early figures associated with the formative years of the discipline were keenly interested in the worlds of the colonial Other and as such they engaged in the “imperial gaze” and granted legitimacy to the colonialism of the era. Sociology’s linkage to issues concerning imperialism was reflected in its practitioners’ preoccupation with the idea of progress, which was assessed by comparisons of “primitive” and “advanced” societies. In his pointed rejoinder to the article, Randall Collins (1997) insisted, quite accurately in my opinion, that early sociologists were far more preoccupied with changes occurring within their own societies than with what was happening elsewhere and thus the common narrative of the rise of sociology is an accurate depiction of that history. More to the point of this discussion, he observes that Connell “has no real explanation of canonicity, just a denunciation of it” (Collins 1997: 1558). He, in short, failed to answer the question posed in his article’s title. Before suggesting an answer to what makes something classical or canonical, we first turn to question of process: How does one become a classic? And, related to this question, how does a text become part of the canon? There is no simple answer to either of these questions. The reputations of early sociologists

xxv

have often waxed and waned over time. Likewise, the canon, being a social construct, is subject to challenges and to change. There is no central sociological authority that lays claim to being the final arbiter regarding who counts as a classic figure and who doesn’t and, similarly, which texts are canonical and which are not. Nevertheless, it is clear that influential and wellpositioned sociological elites play a key role in making these determinations, acting as brokers. This situation is no different than in other fields. Thus, in literature, the literary establishment—­English professors at elite universities and critics writing for national newspapers and the most influential literary journals—once excoriated James Joyce, and his masterpiece, Ulysses, was prevented from entering the United States because it was considered pornographic. Today Joyce is comfortably located in the pantheon of the twentieth century’s greatest authors of fiction. Subsequent American novelists such as Philip Roth and John Updike were highly regarded during their lifetimes, but exactly how they will be viewed in the long run is still to be determined—their precise place in the canon can only be surmised. On the other hand, today’s literary gatekeepers disparage Danielle Steel’s oeuvre (146 novels!), viewing it as nothing more than drivel for the masses. Given that this assessment is not likely to be overturned by subsequent critics, Steel will no doubt remain forever outside the canon, her only consolation being the fortune she has amassed as a result of her pandering. While the financial stakes and prestige have never been quite so high in sociology, a similar process has been and continues to be at play. The gatekeepers are not all that different from those in the literary world. Professors at elite universities, journal editors, and the editorial decision makers at publishing houses have had a say in deciding which works enter the canon and which are excluded. This is at best an imperfect process, as honest considerations of the particular merits and weaknesses of any work inevitably mingle with the intellectual predilections and cultural prejudices of the critics in question. Nowhere are the latter more evident than in matters related to the gender and racial backgrounds of specific authors. One way of determining whether someone ought to be considered a contender for the sociological

xxvi

social theory

pantheon is whether his or her work continues to be read today and in some fashion still informs the varied ways in which sociologists frame their patterns of inquiry. Early in the twenty-first century, there is fairly widespread consensus that four scholars have played especially significant roles in shaping what has come to be contemporary sociology: (i) Karl Marx (1818–1883), who never claimed to be a sociologist or suggested he wanted to advance sociology’s cause (he did, however, criticize the earliest proponent of sociology, Auguste Comte); (ii) Émile Durkheim (1858–1917), who was single-minded in his determination to promote sociology as a science clearly distinct from competing social sciences; (iii) Max Weber (1864–1920), who became a sociologist later in life but never gave up also considering himself to be a historian and economist; and (iv) Georg Simmel (1858–1918), who until fairly recently was not considered in the league of the preceding trio but whose reputation in recent years has finally landed him in the pantheon of founding figures. What exactly does it mean to say that this quartet is viewed as foundational to the discipline? Suffice it to say that all of them are widely read today, with all of their major works still in print in many languages. Moreover, in all cases there are virtual cottage industries devoted to exegeses, analyses, and assessments of their works. Parenthetically, the fact that we maintain such interest in individuals who were dead by 1920 and that we continue to read them indicates that sociologists disagree with Alfred North Whitehead’s (1938) claim that a science cannot progress unless it forgets its founders. We read them because whatever their shortcomings and however different our world is from theirs, they provide insights that continue to inform the discipline. In examining how the work of certain social theorists came to be viewed as classical, one can get an implicit sense of what it means to be a classic. Whereas Connell skirted the question in his earlier noted article, Jeffrey C. Alexander (1987) has convincingly addressed it head on in perhaps as clear and concise an account as is possible: Classics are earlier works of human exploration which are given privileged status vis-à-vis contemporary explorations in the same field. The concept

of privileged status means that contemporary practitioners of the discipline in question believe that they can learn as much about their field through understanding this earlier work as they can from the work of their own contemporaries. To be accorded such a privileged status, moreover, implies that, in the dayto-day work of the average practitioner, this deference is accorded without prior demonstration; it is accepted as a matter of course that, as a classic, such a work establishes fundamental criteria in the particular field. It is because of this privileged position that exegesis and reinterpretation of the classics—within or without a historical context—become conspicuous currents in various disciplines, for what is perceived to be the “true meaning” of a classical work has broad repercussions. (pp. 11–12)

In other words, we examine these theorists because they get us thinking in intellectually productive ways. Their works are not construed as ends in themselves. If sociologists were to treat any or all of these scholars as providing something akin to revealed truth, they would be approaching works such as Capital, The Division of Labor in Society, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, and The Philosophy of Money in a manner analogous to the way Christian fundamentalists view the Bible—as inerrant and complete. Fortunately, few sociologists operate with such a perspective—and those who do tend to be adherents of an orthodox Marxism that has largely faded from the scene. The appropriate reason for reading these canonical figures is that sociological theory does not arise out of nowhere, without context or history. Rather, it is always the product of responding to a tradition of thought, and in this regard theorists are no different from other writers who both look forward to what they want to produce and backward to whence they came. Much theoretical work is intended to be revisionist, by which I mean that it seeks to simultaneously build upon and correct those who came before. It sometimes wants to amend, while at other times to challenge, to embrace and refine, or to dismiss. Whatever the particular nature of the relationship with past theorists, all are motivated in part by what literary scholar Harold Bloom (1997) has called the “anxiety of influence.” When did Marx, Durkheim, Weber, and Simmel become classics? Certainly after their deaths, since

Social Theory: Classical Foundations and Contemporary Developments xxvii

death would appear to be a prerequisite. While this is not the place for intellectual history, I note simply that Durkheim and Weber were accorded classic status first. While the process of becoming part of the canon began rather quickly after their deaths, a most important point occurred with the publication of Talcott P ­ arsons’s The Structure of Social Action in 1937. Therein the young Harvard theorist, sensing an unappreciated convergence in their writing, placed them in the center of sociological theory. His book was to have a singularly important impact on their subsequent reputations. However, it was not altogether determinative in shaping the received wisdom of various theorists, for he also included two other theorists who are largely unread today: Alfred Marshall and Vilfredo Pareto. At the same time, it is worth mentioning that Parsons appeared to be ambivalent about Simmel. On the one hand, he treated him as a sufficiently compelling theorist to draft a chapter for the book. On the other hand, in the end he decided not to publish that particular chapter. Marx was never considered for inclusion into ­Parsons’s first major work. Moreover, Marx’s move into the canon was stymied by the association of his work with the events surrounding the Russian Revolution and subsequent Marxist-inspired revolutions. During the Cold War, and especially during the McCarthy era, embracing Marx’s ideas could be a risky enterprise. Nonetheless, even before the events of the 1960s—the civil rights movement, the anti-Vietnam war movement, and the counterculture—Marx’s reputation was on the rise among sociologists. As Alvin Gouldner (1973) pointed out, two of the most significant theorists of the post–World War II era, Robert Merton and C. Wright Mills “kept open an avenue of access to Marxist theory” (pp. x–xi). This meant that two of the three major theory schools of the period