Handouts SOC 402

Sociological Perspectives-SOC402 VU
Lesson 01
Introduction: Sociological Perspective
(Topic 001-002)
Topic 001-002: What is Sociological Perspective?
Perspective refers to a view, outlook, approach, or imagination of reality. In simple terms, it is an
approach to understanding reality. In our context, reality could encompass the entire society, its
workings, various parts, institutions, or segments. Therefore, perspective implies an approach to
comprehending that reality. In our example, we might consider society as a whole or perhaps focus
on its individual components.
Sociological theory essentially delves into the reality and offers insights into its workings. It can be
conveyed verbally or in written form. When we mention that it is presented, it signifies an image of
reality, a vision of society. This is what theory entails – assumptions about society. When these
assumptions or propositions are logically organized, they form a "theory." Perspective implies an
orientation for examining different aspects of the social world, which can eventually be translated
into scientific theory.
There are various ways to understand society, including its operations, interpretations, and
explanations. Explanation involves illustrating how one aspect leads to another, showcasing the
interconnectedness of different societal segments. The goal of theory is to establish general principles
governing the functioning of societies. When sociologists engage in sociology, they approach their
subject with specific assumptions, emphasize particular research methods, and seek answers to
particular questions. This is how sociologists perceive things and present them in the form of
sociological theory. The formulation of theories can differ, whether deductively or inductively
formulated. Deductive reasoning moves from general to specific, while inductive reasoning moves
from specific to general.
Therefore, sociological theory may be viewed as a collection of perspectives for understanding
human behavior. Society can be observed from numerous perspectives, aiming to develop principles
that govern societal functioning. Societies operate in a harmonious manner, maintaining a balance or
equilibrium.
Sociologists have examined society from various perspectives, with four key perspectives being:
1. Levels of analysis
Sociologists examine society based on subject matter, whether at the macro or micro level.
Macrosociology: Focuses on large-scale characteristics of social structure and roles.
Microsociology: Concentrates on person-to-person interactions.
Different sociological perspectives fall under these two broad categories. For instance, Functionalism
and conflict theory analyze the overall characteristics of social structure and the general nature of
social institutions, indicating a macro-level analysis. On the other hand, symbolic interactionism and
phenomenology scrutinize human interactions in intricate detail, representing a micro-level analysis.
Some sociological theories adopt both macro and micro approaches, such as rational choice theories,
which examine individual decisions and choices while considering structural qualities within society.
2. View of human beings
Human behavior can be perceived as predictable, with Functionalism and conflict theorists often
emphasizing that the environment determines individuals' behavior. Alternatively, individual
behavior may be viewed as entirely controlled by the individual, driven by individual creativity.
Symbolic interactionism and phenomenology explore the concepts of "Me" and "I," where "Me"
reflects external influences and societal expectations, while "I" represents individuality and personal
perspectives.
3. Motivation for human social action
Personal interests reside within the individual, while social values operate at the societal level, serving
as standards of desirability set by society. Functionalists believe that people's motives and behavior
are shaped by internalized social values, while conflict theorists prioritize interests as the primary
1
driving force behind behavior. Symbolic interactionism incorporates social values into the concept
of "Me," reflecting societal expectations, while phenomenology emphasizes values over interests,
highlighting the importance of trust in shaping behavior.
4. Scientific Approach
Sociological perspectives vary in their methods of argument and research, advocating either
deductive or inductive reasoning. The deductive approach, akin to natural sciences, involves outlining
concepts/variables, formulating hypotheses, and theories. In contrast, the inductive approach entails
understanding reality, developing hypotheses, and constructing theories. Functionalism, conflict
theory, and rational choice theory align with the deductive approach, while symbolic interactionism
and phenomenology lean towards the inductive approach. Deductive approaches utilize quantitative
data, while inductive approaches focus on qualitative data.
Comparison of sociological perspectives
Perspectives differ in their objectives of describing, explaining, or predicting social realities, each
contributing to human understanding of societies. Several questions may arise, such as:
 Is understanding and explanation an end in itself, satisfying curiosity?
 Can this understanding be a means to other ends, such as controlling and managing
undesirable aspects of life?
Scientific deductive explanation is a powerful tool with tight statistical correlations and predictions,
borrowing from natural sciences. It moves from explaining something to possible outcomes, which
could be desirable or undesirable. Making judgments allows for decisions on how to manage
situations. Description is valuable for understanding, explaining reality, and predicting and managing
it for societal well-being. Due to the complexity of human behavior, social sciences have limitations
in making universal predictions. Environments and individuals vary, so social scientists cannot
propose predictions applicable to all individuals and societies.
2
Lesson 02
Major Sociological Perspectives
(Topic 003-010)
Topic 003-004: Functionalism
Functionalism is derived from the word "function," which refers to the functioning of society. It
focuses on how a society survives and how social systems within the society exist. The main idea is
to understand the requirements for the survival of a society and its social systems. Functionalists
analyze the functioning and survival of society and identify the forces instrumental for its survival.
They believe that different societies function through different structures, and every structure
contributes to the society's survival. The perspective was initially labeled as "structural
functionalism," but later proponents abandoned the term "structural."
The goals of functionalism include understanding how individuals' actions are organized through
their roles in social institutions. Individuals learn these roles through socialization, with different
institutions contributing to this process. Family is a crucial institution in this socialization process.
Functionalism focuses on the overall functioning of the social system, making it a macro-sociological
perspective. While the analysis is at a macro level, it can also be applied to micro and meso levels.
Functionalists examine how individual actions are regulated by society through socialization
processes within the cultural framework of the society. This regulation helps maintain equilibrium in
society, which is a central idea of functionalism. The perspective follows a deductive approach for
theorization, similar to natural science.
Main Focus of Functionalism
The main emphasis of functionalism includes:
1. The interrelatedness and interdependence of the system's parts.
2. The existence of a "normal" state of affairs or equilibrium in society.
3. The reorganization of all parts of the system to restore normalcy.
Actions are individual and voluntary but regulated by social values and norms. While individual
actions may be revolutionary, they must align with society's norms. Functionalism aims to achieve
agreement and consensus on values and behavior patterns across society. It emphasizes the unity of
society, contrasting with the conflict perspective that stresses divisions within society.
Topic 005-006: Conflict Perspective
The conflict perspective is a major alternative to functionalism in understanding and analyzing the
structure of societies. It has gained popularity in contemporary sociology, despite variations among
its proponents. Conflict theorists view society as an arena where groups struggle for power,
highlighting the necessity of conflict in social life. Unlike functionalists who see society as
integrated parts of social systems working together for equilibrium, conflict theorists focus on power
struggles and social order maintenance through force rather than consent.
Key assumptions of the conflict
Key assumptions of the conflict perspective include;
1. People have basic interests they seek to acquire.
2. Power is central to social relationships and is unequally distributed.
3. Values and ideas are used as weapons by different groups to advance their interests.
Conflict theorists argue that powerful individuals benefit from social order at the expense of others.
The perspective raises questions about how conflict is controlled and the basis of social order,
suggesting that powerful individuals may use force to maintain control. While some social scientists
aim for objective analysis, others believe in providing subjective value judgments to resolve conflicts.
Topic 007-08: Social Exchange/Rational Choice
The social exchange/rational choice perspective focus on how people interact to realize their
interests through action. Individuals act based on their interests, and their actions are guided by
rational strategies. This perspective explores how interests translate into action, who benefits from
interactions, and the rationality of strategies employed.
3
Key assumptions of this perspective

Key assumptions of this perspective include:
• People act rationally based on their interests.
• Rewarding interactions are repeated.
• Rewards influence rational choices.
• Continuous interactions condition individuals and lead to patterns of social exchange.
This perspective allows sociologists to predict behavior patterns on various scales, emphasizing the
rationality behind actors' choices. Prominent figures in this perspective include Homans and Blau,
who explain actions based on what works effectively for actors seeking to realize their interests.
Rational choice theory builds on the foundation of social exchange theory, focusing on
identifying rational courses of action and comparing them with actual behavior. Rationality in this
context refers to efficiency, and the perspective aims to understand how individuals' actions
collectively influence the social system. It employs a methodological individualism approach,
observing individual actions within a system to explain its operation. Social systems are analyzed by
observing the actions and interactions of actors within the system, with inferences drawn about the
system as a whole. Exchange and rational choice theories seek to explain the system's functioning
based on aggregate patterns of action rather than individual motivations. The emphasis is on
identifying rational actions that optimize outcomes within a social system.
Topic 009-010: Interactionism
Interactionism
It is a prominent perspective in sociology that focuses on interpersonal relations and individual
experiences. Symbolic interactionism, founded by G. H. Mead and further developed by H.
Blumer, emphasizes how people develop their identities and understanding of society through
interactions. This perspective is linked to pragmatist philosophy, highlighting the practical ways
in which social order and knowledge are achieved.
Phenomenology
Phenomenology is another sociological perspective within interactionism, focuses on the close
observation of human experiences and the formation of basic categories of understanding.
Alfred Schutz led this perspective, influencing ethnomethodology, which studies the methods people
use to construct their everyday understanding of social life.
Interactionism emphasizes face-to-face interactions; meanings assigned to actions, and lived
experiences over abstract concepts of society. It focuses on how human agents experience and
support regularized patterns of social interaction, highlighting the importance of communication and
symbolic meanings in creating social order. Interactionism is characterized by its emphasis on human
interactions, meanings, and lived experiences rather than abstract social structures.
4
Lesson 03
Functionalist Perspective
(Topic 011-013)
Topic 011: Intellectual Roots-I
Functionalism held a dominant position among contemporary sociological theories, with other
perspectives emerging as a challenge to it. Due to its dominance, some sociologists, like Kingsley
Davis, claimed that sociological analysis and functional analysis are one and the same. Davis
argued that sociology involves examining the role (or function) that an institution or type of behavior
plays in society and the way it is related to other social features, and explaining it in essentially
“social” terms. The most important intellectual ancestors of modern functionalism are the
sociologists Comte, Spencer, Pareto, and Durkheim. Among the anthropologists, Radcliffe-
Brown and Malinowski are also notable. Comte, Spencer, and Pareto emphasized the
interdependence of parts of the social system, which is reflected in the division of labor. When there
is a division of labor, each part performs a specific function, contributing to the functioning of the
whole system. Durkheim emphasized integration or solidarity, which influenced Radcliffe-Brown’s
and Malinowski’s analysis of the function of social institutions.
Auguste Comte, the founder of sociology, derived his interest in “statics” (order) and “dynamics”
(progress) in society from his investigation of the foundations of social stability. Order refers to
equilibrium, while dynamics is associated with change and progress in society. Herbert Spencer was
also a forerunner of functionalism. Spencer’s concept of differentiation emphasized the mutual
dependence of unlike parts of the system, highlighting the necessity of differentiation for the system’s
interrelatedness and integrity. Another sociologist, Vilfredo Pareto, patterned his system of
sociology on a physiochemical system characterized by the interdependence of parts and adjustive
changes, rather than a biological organism. For Pareto, the “molecules” of the social system were
individuals with interests, drives, and sentiments. He provided a precise description of a social system
in terms of interrelations and mutual dependencies among parts. Parsons borrowed Pareto’s idea of
dynamic or “moving” equilibrium that produces harmony for the system, illustrating how systems
adapt to change while maintaining equilibrium.
Topic 012: Intellectual Roots-II
Emile Durkheim is an important sociological precursor of modern functionalism. Comte’s influence
on Durkheim and, in turn, Durkheim’s impact on Radcliffe-Brown and Malinowski were crucial
to its development. Durkheim was a significant role model for Parsons, and both Parsons and Merton
demonstrated their indebtedness to Durkheim. The influence of Durkheim can also be seen in
symbolic interactionist and phenomenological perspectives. Some of Durkheim’s most important
functionalist ideas stem from his lifelong interest in the concept of integration, which refers to the
incorporation of individuals into the social order. Integration or social solidarity is essential for
maintaining social equilibrium. In his work "The Division of Labor in Society,"
Durkheim examined the function of the division of labor and viewed social evolution as a
progression from the mechanical solidarity of tribal societies to the organic solidarity characteristic
of industrial societies. According to him, primitive societies exhibit mechanical solidarity, while
industrial societies demonstrate organic solidarity due to the division of labor. Two concepts that
need to be discussed are collective conscience and individualism. Collective conscience is prevalent
in primitive societies, while individualism is emphasized in industrial societies.
Laws, morals, customs, and fashions are social facts, which can be considered institutions, all serving
a functional purpose. These institutions are created by members of society to ensure its functioning,
and they fulfill their roles. While there may be aspects or situations that individuals dislike, they serve
functions in society, such as crime. Crime disrupts social order but unites members of society to
collectively combat it, fostering cohesiveness. Another example is punishment, which generates
collective intensity of sentiments as people unite to punish crimes and take action. Durkheim
referred to sociology as the science of institutions and their functioning. Social integration,
5
anomie, and suicide all play functional roles in society, contributing to its operation. Durkheim
developed the theory of suicide, categorizing it into four types. He posited that excessive integration
leads to altruistic suicide, while low integration results in egoistic suicide. Durkheim viewed
religion as a potent integrative force in both traditional and modern societies, facilitating the
transmission of values across generations through socialization. Values aid in the integration of
society.
Topic 013: Intellectual Roots-III
Radcliffe-Brown and Malinowski, the two anthropologists, adopted Durkheim’s approach to the
analysis of societies. Malinowski was the first to use the term "functional" for this type of analysis.
There is a link between Malinowski’s work and modern functionalism in sociology. The link is that
Talcott Parsons studied under Malinowski at the London School of Economics. Malinowski’s and
Radcliffe-Brown’s levels of analysis differed. Malinowski was concerned with psychological needs
and functions, which he believed all societies developed ways to fulfill. On the other hand,
Radcliffe-Brown was focused on sociological functions – the functions of institutions in the social
system.
Let’s take the example of magic rites to understand the difference between these two
anthropologists. For Malinowski, magic was used more in open-sea fishing than in inland fishing
because of the individual’s feelings of danger and insecurity on the open sea. So, magic rites played
a function, and the function was to overcome the dangers that people face when fishing on the open
sea. Magic both developed and functioned to reduce these feelings.
Radcliffe-Brown treated magic in terms of social functions. Societies define what is dangerous and
threatening. On the sea, perhaps there is no society, as people are fishing, so they might be looking
at it from a psychological perspective. Therefore, he is looking at it from a different angle. Societies
define what is dangerous and how to overcome that danger. Individuals are taught by society to
have appropriate responses to these situations.
Magical rites exist to maintain an orderly society; their function is social, not individual. When
Parsons developed his functionalist framework, he borrowed more heavily from Radcliffe–Brown.
Radcliffe–Brown emphasized social needs and social explanations more than from Malinowski.
Although modern functionalism has roots in the works of Comte, Spencer, and Pareto and is also
indebted to Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown, it owes its greatest debt to Durkheim.
6
Lesson 04
Functionalism (Talcott Parson-I)
(Topic 014-017)
Topic 014-015: Talcott Parsons System Levels
The concept of a system is fundamental in Parsonian theory. Parsons emphasized the importance of
the system in his general theory of action, outlining four key systems: the social system, cultural
system, personality system, and behavioral organism.
1. Social System:
At the macro level, society is viewed as a system, while at the micro level, even a family can be
considered a system. Individuals are seen as part of the social system, interacting within a culturally
structured environment. The social system is governed by shared values and customs, promoting
social solidarity and integration. Key concepts include actors, interaction, environment, optimization
of gratification, and culture.
2. Cultural System:
Culture is a patterned system of symbols that guides actors' behavior and integrates the personality
and social systems. It shapes values and norms, which are transmitted through socialization. Cultural
values are internalized by individuals, influencing their actions and interactions.
3. Personality System:
The personality system focuses on individual needs, motives, and attitudes. Need dispositions, shaped
by social influences, drive individuals to seek gratification. Actors are impelled by drives and cultural
norms, leading to acceptance, rejection, or seeking new objects to satisfy needs. The personality
system is integrated with the social system, emphasizing the role of culture in shaping individual
behavior.
4. Behavioral Organism:
The behavioral organism represents the biological aspect of human beings and serves as a source of
energy for the other systems. It is influenced by genetic constitution and shaped by conditioning and
learning processes. Individuals internalize societal values and demonstrate them through their
behavior, highlighting the interconnectedness of the four systems.
Overall, the four systems are interrelated and functionally interdependent, emphasizing the
importance of understanding their dynamic interactions in social life.
Topic 016-17: Parsons’ theory of action
Parsons' (1937) early theory of social action was based on an intensive critical analysis of the works
of Alfred Marshall, Vilfredo Pareto, Émile Durkheim, and Max Weber. His major argument was that
these theorists converged, despite different starting points, in pointing to the essential elements of a
voluntaristic theory of social action. Parsons regarded his contribution as identifying these crucial
elements and integrating them into a more general and systematic perspective. In pursuing this goal,
he made extensive use of the means-ends framework. His analysis was complex, but the basic ideas
are consistent with our common sense and everyday experience.
Key Elements of Social Action
In simple terms, his argument is that all social action has the following key elements:
 Motivated actor.
 Social action is goal-directed (or has an end).
 Social action takes place in a situation that provides means individuals can use to achieve
their goal, along with conditions the actor cannot change such as biological traits and external
constraints that shape their goals and means.
 Social action is normatively regulated with respect to the choice of both ends and means.
Values, norms, and ideas play a significant role in guiding actors' decisions on goals and means.
Action occurs within a specific context that includes means (facilities, tools, or resources) and
conditions (obstacles that arise in the pursuit of the goal). These elements are governed by normative
standards of the social system. Actors must adhere to the rules of the game, which define their
7
objectives and behavior. Normative expectations motivate actors to pursue their goals by
internalizing these norms. While actors may appear rational and free in their actions, the influence of
norms and situational constraints cannot be overlooked. Despite the appearance of voluntary
individual actions, questions arise about the rationality and freedom of human behavior within an
unregulated system. How is order maintained in a competitive environment? Voluntarism is
understood as the subjective decision-making process of individual actors, influenced by various
constraints, both normative and situational.
For example, everyone is an actor. For instance, as a motivated student (actor), you have a goal to
obtain a degree with a good CGPA, and you are motivated to achieve your goal. All goals are defined
by the cultural system, which provides mechanisms to achieve these goals.
8
Lesson 05
Functionalism (Talcott Parson-II)
(Topic 018-019)
Topic 018-019: The pattern variables
Parsons' voluntaristic theory of social action is a key starting point, aiming to explain variations in
individuals' subjective orientations that regulate their goal-directed behavior normatively. In his book
"Toward a General Theory of Action," categories were created to differentiate between various
types of subjective orientations. In his theory of action, Parsons described actors as purposeful, with
all actions directed towards goals and regulated by norms. Actors meet normative expectations to
achieve their goals, which are structured and patterned. Subjective normative orientations can be
situation-specific, based on motivational and value orientations. Motivational orientation involves
balancing immediate needs with long-term goals, while value orientation governs choices and
priorities.
Relationships involve mutual orientations and can be classified based on pattern variables. Parsons'
pattern variables are dichotomous, with no rank ordering. In traditional societies, relationships are
personal and stable, while in modern societies, they are impersonal and instrumental. Both types of
relationships are necessary in modern society, such as sex-role differentiation in families. Parsons
proposed a set of five dichotomous value-orientations that shape social behavior, which he called
pattern variables. These variables provide a multidimensional way of analyzing societies and social
structures. By examining different combinations of normative orientations, we can understand social
processes more effectively.
Parsons proposed five dichotomous choices for social situations:
1. Affectivity vs. Affective Neutrality
2. Self-orientation vs. Collectivity Orientation
3. Universalism vs. Particularism
4. Ascription vs. Achievement
5. Specificity vs. Diffuseness
Affectivity vs. Affective Neutrality:
This dilemma involves seeking emotional gratification in relationships. Affective orientation involves
emotional involvement and gratification, seen in relationships like lovers or family members.
Affective neutrality, on the other hand, avoids emotional involvement, as seen in professional
relationships like doctor-patient or social worker-client.
Self-orientation vs. Collectivity Orientation:
This dilemma involves prioritizing personal interests (self-orientation) or the needs of others or the
collective (collectivity orientation). Market transactions typically reflect self-orientation, while
family, friendships, or church relations often prioritize collectivity.
Universalism vs. Particularism:
This variable concerns the scope of normative standards in social relationships. Universalistic norms
apply to all based on impersonal categories, like equality under the law. Particularistic norms are
based on specific relationships or characteristics, like family ties or shared ethnicity.
Ascription vs. Achievement:
Ascription evaluates others based on who they are, while achievement focuses on accomplishments.
Ascriptive characteristics include family background, gender, or race, while achievement is based on
merit and performance.
Specificity vs. Diffuseness:
This variable deals with the scope of obligations in relationships. Specificity involves narrow, defined
obligations like contracts, while diffuseness involves a wide range of exchanged gratifications. In
specific relationships, the burden of proof is on the demanding party, while in diffuse relationships,
it's on the party being demanded from.
These choices determine emotional involvement, priority of interests, scope of normative standards,
9
evaluation of others, and scope of obligations in social relationships.

The pattern variables can be related to Tönnies' Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft types of social
relations, serving as basic dimensions of his typology.
10
Lesson 06
Functionalism (Talcott Parson-III)
(Topic 020-021)
Topic 020-021: The AGIL framework
The AGIL framework, used in most of Parsons' subsequent writings (e.g., Parsons, pp. 30–79 in
Parsons et al., eds., 1961), was highly influential at the time and continues to be regarded as the most
distinctive feature of his structural/functional theory. However, the specific meaning of each
functional requirement denoted in the AGIL model may vary for different types of social systems.
These requirements are further elaborated below and also related to Parsons' earlier voluntaristic
theory of social action.
Parsons and his colleagues gradually expanded the strategy of functional analysis to other types of
social systems, including dyadic relations, small groups, families, and complex organizations. This
modified form is more systematic in identifying functional requirements of all types of social systems
and more abstract in analyzing the dynamic interrelations between the component parts (or
subsystems) of the system in question. This revised version is referred to as the AGIL model; the
acronym refers to generic requirements faced by all types of social systems. These expanded
requirements are as follows:
A—Adaptation to the environment: transforming the material environment to meet needs and cope
with environmental conditions that cannot be changed.
G—Goal attainment: deciding on collective goals (not individual goals) and mobilizing resources to
achieve them.
I—Integration: coordinating the actions of the various "parts" of the system, including individual
members and other subsystems.
L—Latent pattern maintenance: maintaining and reinforcing commitments to underlying cultural
values and motivation to conform.
For survival, a system must perform the listed four functions:
Adaptation to the environment
All social systems must cope with their physical and social environment. For small groups, the
environment would include the larger institutional setting, and for total societies, it would include
other societies plus the physical or geographical setting.
Two dimensions of this requirement may be distinguished.
First, there must be "an accommodation of the system to inflexible 'reality demands' " imposed by
the environment (or, to use Parsons' earlier terminology, to the "conditions" of action).
Second, there may be some type of "active transformation of the situation external to the system."
(Parsons et al., 1953:183) This involves utilizing resources available in the environment as the
"means" for accomplishing some goal. However, any particular set of means (or resources) may be
used for a variety of goals; thus the procurement of means and the accomplishment of goals are
analytically distinct. (In everyday life, deciding on strategies to try to earn money is not the same as
deciding how to spend it.)
Goal Attainment
This requirement grows out of Parsons' contention that action is goal-directed. In this context, the
concern is not limited to personal goals but also includes the collective goals individuals share as
members of the system. Actual goal achievement represents a kind of intrinsically gratifying
culmination of action following the preparatory adaptive activity (such as procuring resources). In
the means/ends framework, goal achievement is the end, while the earlier adaptive activity is the
means for achievement (Parsons et al., 1953:184, see also p. 88). At both the individual and the social
system levels, there are numerous, sometimes conflicting goals that might be desired. Thus, the goal
attainment functional requirement will involve making decisions regarding the priority of different
goals. For social systems, this is essentially a political process.
Integration
11
To function effectively, social systems must have some solidarity among the individuals involved,
and their activities must be coordinated in some fashion for maintaining social order and achieving
other desired outcomes, both individual and collective. The integrative problem refers to the need for
appropriate socio-emotional attachments and willingness to cooperate in coordinating their
interdependent and mutually supportive lines of action. Socio-emotional bonds must not be wholly
contingent on personal benefits received; otherwise, social solidarity and willingness to cooperate
would be much more precarious, since they would be based on individuals' personal self-interests,
which often lead to conflict.
Latent Pattern Maintenance
The concept of latency suggests a suspension of interaction. Members of any social system are subject
to fatigue and satiation as well as the demands of other social systems (or subsystems) in which they
may be involved. Therefore, all social systems must provide periods when members are temporarily
relieved of the obligations of their roles in the system. During this period of latency, however, their
commitment to the system must be maintained and sometimes reinforced. In some cases, special
mechanisms may be developed to help restore motivational energy and to renew or reinforce
commitment to shared cultural values and norms. For large-scale systems, such as total societies, this
may take the form of collective rituals such as holiday celebrations like Thanksgiving or July 4
celebrations. For smaller systems, other types of rituals may be followed, such as birthday
celebrations, for example.
12
Lesson 07
Functionalism (Talcott Parson-IV)
(Topic 028-029)
Topic 028-029: Theory of Evolutionary Change
Parsons's (1966) general orientation to the study of social change was shaped by biology. To deal
with this process, Parsons developed what he called "a paradigm of evolutionary change." At an
early stage, Parsons was criticized for not paying attention to the study of change, and he was
conscious of this critique. In the early 1960s, Parsons developed his ideas about change in Societies:
Evolutionary and Comparative Perspective. He looked at change from an evolutionary perspective
and introduced the Paradigm of evolutionary change. The roots of Parsons' evolutionary thinking
can be traced back to August Comte, Herbert Spencer, Durkheim, and Marx, who believed
that societies are evolving inevitably through conflict towards a communist utopia. Parsons' idea
was a revival of interest in the evolutionary development of human society. Parsons' three stages in
the evolution of society are as follows:
1. Primitive stage: kinship relations and religious orientation were prominent.
2. Intermediate stage: written language, documents, and history.
3. Modern stage: formal relationships and procedures. Laws institutionalized.
Characteristically, he differentiated among these stages primarily based on cultural dimensions. The
crucial development in the transition from primitive to intermediate is the development of language,
primarily written language. The key development in the shift from intermediate to modern is "the
institutionalized codes of normative order," or law. The focus is on the concept of differentiation.
Any society is composed of a series of subsystems that differ both in their structure and functioning.
Differentiation in structure and functions is continually increasing, which is the key to the
evolution of social systems.
Parsons argued that the process of differentiation leads to a new set of problems of integration for
society. As subsystems proliferate, the society is confronted with new problems in coordinating the
operations of these units. A society undergoing evolution must move from a system of ascription to
one of achievement. A wider array of skills and abilities is needed to handle the more diffuse
subsystems. The generalized abilities of people must be freed from their ascriptive bonds so that
they can be utilized by society. Most generally, this means that groups formerly excluded from
contributing to the system must be freed for inclusion as full members of society.
Change from primitive to modern societies implies a shift from a situation with fused roles to a
situation in which roles are allocated based on specialized skills. Economic production becomes more
efficient in specialized factories than in self-sufficient households. Six evolutionary "universals"
identified are Social stratification, Cultural legitimation, Bureaucratic organization, Money economy
and markets, generalized universalistic norms, and Democratic associations. The evolutionary
sequence starts from greater differentiation, incorporating both structures and processes, and the
structures are the six universals identified.
The first component of that paradigm is the process of differentiation. Parsons assumed that any
society is composed of a series of subsystems that differ in both their structure and their functional
significance for the larger society. As society evolves, new subsystems are differentiated. This is not
enough; however, they must also be more adaptive than earlier subsystems. Thus, the essential aspect
of Parsons' evolutionary paradigm was the idea of adaptive upgrading. Parsons described this process:
If differentiation is to yield a balanced, more evolved system, each newly differentiated substructure
must have increased adaptive capacity for performing its primary function compared to the
performance of that function in the previous, more diffuse structure. We may call this process the
adaptive upgrading aspect of the evolutionary change cycle. Inclusion, a sort of desegregation
process, where there is no exclusion based on gender, race, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion,
or national origin. The main focus is on talent and skills. Value generalization, societies go for civil
religion, where patriotism is treated as a religion. Values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
13
are the ultimate goals of social life and progress. Value generalization provides a general pattern for
the society with a variety of differences.
For Parsons, all societies do not follow an inevitable and uniform course of development, yet there is
an evolutionary trend toward an increase in adaptive capacity. All societies may not progress
gradually and evenly. Evolution and progress are synonymous, and democracy is considered a
logical and stable social development. Parsons' theory of change is functional, and the evolving
social order is not dysfunctional. Evolution leads to change within, but not a change of, the
system. Parsons never attempted to explain either sudden or total change. Revolution has no place in
the theory of social change presented by Parsons.
14
Lesson 08
Functionalism (Robert K. Merton-I)
(Topic 030-031)
Topic 030-031: Merton’s Structural- Functionalism
Merton criticized the three basic postulates of functional analysis developed by anthropologists like
Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown.
1. The first postulate is the functional unity of society, which suggests that all social and
cultural beliefs and practices are functional for society and individuals. Merton argued that this may
be true for small societies but not for larger, complex societies.
2. The second postulate is universal functionalism, claiming that all social structures have
positive functions, which Merton disagreed with, citing examples of dysfunctional structures like
rabid nationalism.
3. The third postulate is indispensability, stating that all aspects of society are necessary for its
functioning, which Merton challenged by proposing alternative structures and functions.
Robert Merton, a prominent sociologist, advocated for middle-range theory as opposed to grand
theorizing. He emphasized the importance of empirical testing in functional analysis and developed
the concept of dysfunction to address negative consequences of social structures. Merton's functional
analysis focuses on standardized social elements like roles, institutions, and norms, examining their
functions and dysfunctions.
Examine the functions of slavery by analyzing its impact on various social units such as black
families, white families, black political organizations, and white political organizations. Consider the
net balance of slavery, recognizing that it may have been more functional for some social units while
being more dysfunctional for others. Evaluate the overall effects of slavery on different groups and
institutions. For example, consider how slavery may have functioned as a highly efficient system
within bureaucracy, despite its drawbacks such as excessive red tape. Analyze the institution of
marriage within the context of slavery and determine whether it was functional or dysfunctional for
different groups.
He distinguished between manifest and latent functions, highlighting the interdependence of social
structures and the potential for meaningful social change through functional analysis. A dysfunctional
structure may persist within a system, such as discrimination against females and minority groups in
society. While this discrimination may serve a functional purpose for certain parts of the social
system, it can have negative consequences. For example, discrimination can lead to under
productivity and increase the risk of social conflict. Not all structures are essential for the system to
function, and functionalism allows for the possibility of meaningful social change. One alternative is
to eliminate discrimination against minority groups to improve society.
15
Lesson 09
Functionalism (Robert K. Merton-II)
(Topic 035-037)
Topic 035-036: Latent functions, Social problems, and Change
In Merton's view, functional analysis extends beyond stability and social order. Institutional patterns
can persist for reasons other than their contribution to society's functional requirements. These
patterns may endure due to vested interests of influential groups, traditions, and habits. The
distinction between functional and dysfunctional aspects can be understood through manifest and
latent functions. Some actions intended to benefit the system may have unanticipated negative
consequences. Dysfunctional patterns may persist if their negative effects are not recognized,
leading to the accumulation of latent dysfunctional consequences that eventually manifest as social
problems requiring solutions and driving social change.
The concept of dysfunction is valuable in analyzing social problems and change. For instance,
widespread environmental pollution resulting from industrial activities leads to global warming,
necessitating urgent attention and regulatory measures. However, these interventions may also have
unintended consequences, such as increased costs and decreased freedom. For example, raising
minimum wages benefits labor but can lead to unemployment due to automation. Increased
investment in automation can boost productivity but also impact employment. Evaluating whether
the positive outcomes outweigh the negative ones is essential for understanding the long-term effects
of social changes.
Topic 037: Social Structure and Anomie
Merton did not aim to present a comprehensive theory of social behavior or society in his work. "
Social Theory and Social Structure" by Merton consists of a series of middle-range theories that
can stand on their own. According to Merton, social structure refers to the organized set of social
relationships in which members of a society or group are involved. The basic contention of Merton's
theory is that various forms of deviant behavior arise from a mismatch between the material and
occupational success goals (ends) and the institutional means available for achieving these goals.
There is an emphasis on equality and achievement as societal values and ideals to be pursued. While
all individuals aspire to high-level occupational and financial success, not everyone has equal access
to legitimate means to achieve these goals, leading to frustration and anomie.
Individuals may internalize culturally approved goals but lack the institutionalized means to attain
them, resulting in a discrepancy between cultural goals and means, which can lead to deviant
behavior. Anomie, as a form of deviant behavior, has been widely used to explain crime and
delinquency, with the general assumption that deviance is dysfunctional for society. However, some
forms of deviant behavior, such as innovation in creating new products or services, may actually be
functional for society and the innovative individual. Merton proposed five modes of adaptation to
address the discrepancy and anomie, suggesting that deviance can stimulate social change aimed at
improving the distribution of opportunities for success. The relationship between deviant behavior
and its impact on society's functioning remains a separate question to consider.
16
Lesson 10
Functionalism (Robert K. Merton-III)
(Topic 039-040)
Topic 039: Reference Group Theory
Reference groups are the groups individuals identify with for self-evaluation, comparison, and
normative guidance. Individuals derive their self-concepts and attitudes from these groups, striving
to follow the "generalized other." Sometimes, individuals are oriented towards standards of groups
they do not belong to, which can undermine solidarity within a group but may be functional in an
open society. For example, a lower-class individual may aspire to be like the upper class for upward
mobility.
Anticipatory socialization is the process of preparing to join a desired group, bridging the gap
between identification and membership. Merton's analysis emphasizes the consequences of behavior
patterns, particularly unintended or dysfunctional functions, requiring individuals to adapt to new
situations.
Topic 040: Theory of deviance
Merton's significant contribution lies in his analytical framework that explains the connection
between social structure and cultural factors influencing deviant behavior. While influenced by
Parsons's focus on cultural values and institutional structures in shaping social action, Merton
emphasized the variability of cultural goals and demonstrated a more flexible relationship between
goals and their realization. He argued that deviance is not solely a result of cultural values being
improperly transmitted or an individual's flawed socialization, as Parsons suggested.
Merton's work in "Social Theory and Social Structure" presents a series of middle-range theories
that can stand independently. Social structure refers to the organized set of social relationships in
which members of a society or group are involved. Merton proposed that certain social structures
exert pressure on individuals to engage in nonconforming behavior rather than conforming behavior.
This pressure leads to higher rates of deviant behavior in specific groups, not due to inherent
biological tendencies but as a response to their social circumstances. According to Merton, deviant
behavior, like conforming behavior, is a result of specific social structural conditions.
Modes of Adaptation and Deviance
Merton's typology categorizes individuals into five groups based on their relationship to cultural
goals and societal means: conformists, innovators, ritualists, retreatists, and rebels. Conformists
adhere to cultural goals and approved means, while innovators accept goals but seek alternative
means to achieve them. (e.g., racketeering-someone who commits crimes for profit (especially one
who obtains money by fraud or extortion). Ritualists reject goals but comply with behaviors, (as
seen in the current economic and political situation of Pakistan) represent pure cases of anomie, with
a disconnect between goals and means. Retreatists (e.g., drug addiction) involves rejecting both
monetary success and the means to achieve it. Rebels reject cultural goals and means, creating their
own paths.
For example, a conformist pursues academic success by meeting expectations and excelling in
coursework, while an innovator aims for success through unconventional methods like plagiarism.
The ritualist goes through the motions without ambition, the retreatist shows no interest, and the
rebel rejects societal norms entirely.
17
18
Lesson 11
Neo-Functionalism
(Topic 041-044)
Background
The structural functionalism theory faced a bombardment of criticisms from the mid-1960s to the
present day, coinciding with significant changes in American society, such as:
 The anti-war movement
 Civil rights movement
 The growing popularity of the neo-Marxist approach and Critical theory gained popularity
during this period.
Parsons' image of value consensus leading to social equilibrium was challenged. The symbolic
interactionist perspective offered an alternative to functionalism; leading to fragmentation in the
functionalist perspective (it refers to the division of society into specialized parts or institutions that
perform specific functions to maintain social order and stability. This division allows for efficiency
in meeting societal needs. Critics argue that this fragmentation can lead to social inequality and
conflict. Overall, fragmentation is viewed as essential for society's functioning, but it also has its
drawbacks). In the mid-1980s, there was a major effort to revive the theory under the heading of
"neo-functionalism." Neofunctionalism is a theoretical development that emerged in the mid-1980s
in the United States and Germany. In 1984, the American Sociological Association held a conference
on Neofunctionalism, where papers presented were reappraisals and reconsideration of the empirical
implications of Parsonian theory.
Introduction
Neo-functionalism was employed to show continuity with structural functionalism and address its
main challenges. “Neo-functionalism is a self-critical approach within functional theory that aims to
expand its intellectual scope while maintaining its core theoretical principles” (Alexander and
Colomy). Structural functionalism was considered too limited in scope, leading to the development
of a more comprehensive theory known as "neo-functionalism." This new approach aimed to
incorporate a diverse range of theoretical perspectives, with Parsons striving to create a strong
synthetic core in the theory from its beginning. Neo-functionalism was originally intended as a grand
theory of integration.
Parsons demonstrated the interconnectedness of the cultural, social, and personality systems in the
social world. However, he later shifted towards a narrower structural-functionalist perspective,
emphasizing the cultural system's influence on other systems. This led Parsons to move away from
his original synthetic approach. Neo-functionalism emerged as an attempt to revive this holistic
perspective.
Major contributors of neo-functionalism
Key contributors to neo-functionalism include Jeffrey Alexander in the United States and Richard
Münch in Germany. Alexander (1985) identified various issues linked to structural functionalism.
Neo-functionalism had to overcome challenges such as;
 Anti-individualism,
 Antagonism to change
 Conservatism/idealism
 An anti-empirical bias
Basic orientations of neo-functionalism
Neo-functionalism, as defined by Alexander, consists of six basic orientations.
1. Neofunctionalism operates with a descriptive model of society, viewing society as
composed of interacting elements that form a pattern. This pattern differentiates the system
from its environment, with parts of the system being symbiotically connected. Interaction
among the parts is not dictated by a single overarching force, leading neo-functionalism to
reject mono-causal determinism in favor of an open-ended and pluralistic approach.
19
2. Neo-functionalism emphasizes both action and order, unlike structural functionalism which
primarily focuses on macro-level sources of order in social structures and culture. It also
considers micro-level action patterns.
3. Neo-functionalism maintains a focus on integration, viewing it as a social possibility rather
than a completed state. It acknowledges the presence of deviance and social control within
social systems and emphasizes the importance of equilibrium. This approach is broader than
traditional structural-functionalism, encompassing both dynamic and partial equilibrium. It
avoids viewing social systems as static and uses equilibrium as a reference point for
functional analysis.
4. Neo-functionalism embraces the traditional emphasis on personality, cultural, and social
systems. The interplay of these systems creates tension, which serves as a catalyst for both
change and control.
5. Neo-functionalism focuses on social change through differentiation within social, cultural,
and personality systems. Change does not lead to conformity and harmony, but rather to
individuation and institutional strains.
6. Neo-functionalism emphasizes the importance of conceptualization and theorizing as
independent processes in sociological analysis.
Key objectives of neofunctionalism
In the mid-1980s, Alexander introduced the term 'neofunctionalism' as a reconstruction and revision
of Parson’s theory, known as a Neo-Parsonian stance. This movement is characterized by its synthetic
nature, aiming to integrate social system theory with Marxism to address societal crises adequately.
Neofunctionalism is more of a tendency than a fully developed theory, with the following key
objectives:
1) Creating a multidimensional form of functionalism that includes analysis at both micro and macro
levels.
2) Moving functionalism towards the left and rejecting Parsons' optimism about modernism.
3) Arguing for an implicit democratic aspect in functional analysis.
4) Incorporating a conflict-oriented perspective.
5) Emphasizing contingency (uncertainty) and interactional creativity.
Issues of neofunctionalist
 How should researchers characterize the relationship between conflicts or contingency and
social order?
 To what extent should Parsons' emphasis on the relationship between social action and social
order be revised for empirical research?
 A key goal of neofunctionalism was to restore the legitimacy and significance of Parsonian
theory, which it has achieved. Neofunctionalism has achieved success in this endeavor.
20
Lesson 12
Conflict Perspective
(Topic 045-047)
Topic 045: Conflict Perspective
Introduction:
Conflict theory is the major alternative to functionalism as an approach to analyzing the general
structure of societies; and it is increasingly popular and important in modem sociology. Conflict
theorists of all types share a number of important assumptions and preconceptions. Together these
create a distinctive way of looking at the world.
Functionalists, as we have seen, look at societies and social institutions as systems in which all the
parts depend on each other and work together to create equilibrium. They do not deny the existence
of conflict; but they believe society develops ways to control it, and it is these methods that they
analyze.
Conflict theorists' perceptions of society could hardly be more different. Where functionalists see
interdependence and unity in society, conflict theorists see an arena in which groups fight for
power, and the "control" of conflict simply means that one group is able, temporarily, to suppress
its rivals. Functionalists see civil law, for example, as a way of increasing social integration,
whereas conflict theorists see civil law as a way of defining and upholding a particular order that
benefits some groups at the expense of others.
Conflict theorists see society as an arena where: Groups fight for power, control of conflict means
the suppression of rivals and civil law benefits some groups at the expense of others. Conflict theory
is interested in the rivalries among different workers and management and in the position each
group is in to do well for itself. A conflict theorist might point out that the aircontrollers want more
staff and additional expensive equipment; that the pilots are continually trying to restrict entry into
the profession in order to keep salaries high; that the porters,maintenance staff, and cleaners all
belong to militant unions; and that all these groups are at odds with the airlines and terminal
management, who want to keep costs down and profits up. The focus is on the shifting balance of
power among competing groups, not on the equilibrium of interdependence and cooperation.
Assumptions:
The general "conflict" orientation incorporates three central and connected assumptions.
1. The first is that people have a number of basic "interests," things they want and attempt
to acquire and which are not defined by societies but are rather common to them all. Indeed,
Marxists generally argue that if people do not behave in accordance with these interests it can only
mean that they have been deceived about what their "true interests" are by a social system that
works in others' favor.
2. Second, and central to the whole conflict perspective, is an emphasis on power as the core
of social relationships. Conflict theorists always view power not only as scarce and unequally
divided and therefore a source of conflict but also as essentially coercive. This analysis leads, in
turn, to a concern with the distribution of those resources that give people more or less power.
3. The third distinctive aspect of conflict theory is that values and ideas are seen as weapons
used by differentgroups to advance their own ends rather than as means of defining a whole society's
identity and goals. We shall find that conflict theorists have a great deal to say about ideas as an
aspect of groups' interests, especially under the categories of "ideology" and "legitimacy."
Topic 046-047: Intellectual Roots
Power, Position, and Legitimacy: Marx and Weber
The basic elements of conflict theory were set out by two of the greatest early sociologists, Karl
Marx and Max Weber. Much of Weber's work incorporates a debate with Marx and Marxist
analysis, but in both these authors we find the same two concerns:
1. First, with the way social positions bestow more or less power on their incumbents.
2. Second, with the role of ideas in creating or undermining the legitimacy of a social
21
position.
Marx emphasized the primacy of modern technology and of patterns of property ownership in
determining:
 The nature of people's lives
 The course of social conflict
Marx's work is also distinguished by its claim to predict the future and its belief in the possibility of
a perfect, conflict- free, communist society. The divide between the two approaches thus derives
from the central differences between Marx and Weber themselves. Like Marx, Weber wanted to
identify the origins of essential characteristics of "modern" society, but he did not see modernization
as the road to perfection. On the contrary: modern rationality could be an "iron cage," creating a
narrow "disenchanted" world of bureaucratic officialdom.
Weber did not have Marx’s impact. Weber’s ideas had the most important influence on “analytic”
conflict theory. Like Marx, Weber saw people’s activities as largely self-centered. A sociologist
must recognize the importance of goals and values specific to a society. Acquisition of wealth is a
universal interest. Calvinists’ desire to save their souls: Unique goal of simply accumulating wealth
Evidence of God’s favor. Whereas enjoying the fruits of wealth would be sinful indulgence. People
maneuver values in pursuit of advantage.
Weber formulated ideal types by abstracting from different historical contexts the essential
elements of a general concept. Real-life examples need not correspond exactly to the stylized ideal
type: for example, it may be impossible to find any examples of bureaucracy which correspond in
every particular to Weber's model of it. However, an ideal type is very important in making
historical and contemporary events intelligible. He distinguished between unlegitimated
domination and legitimated domination, which has authority, and involves claims that certain
people have the right to be obeyed.
Three "ideal types”/Three main foundations of authority
Weber suggested that there are three main foundations for successful claims to authority-or three
"ideal types.
1. Charismatic authority rests on a leader's personal qualities, so that "the governed submit
because of their belief in the extraordinary quality of the specific person. The legitimacy of
charismatic rule thus rests upon the belief in magical powers, revelations and hero
worship."! Thus, Jesus' disciples followed him because of what he was, not because of some
position which he held.
2. Traditional authority is also personal, but it is enjoyed because it has been handed down
from the past. A king or a tribal chief may not personally be very capable or effective, but
he enjoys authority legitimated by custom. Weber argues that in general "patriarchalism is
by far the most important type of domination the legitimacy of which rests upon tradition.
3. Rational-legal authority is derived from formal rules. Thus, modem bureaucrats are
obeyed because and insofaras laws empower them to do certain things and because our
societies accept statutory laws as the ultimate source of authority. According to Weber, the
anchoring of legitimacy in particular sorts of rules is central to modern society's ongoing
"rationalization" of everything.
Weber agreed with Marx that economic interest often underlie people’s behavior and disagreed
with the idea that economic interests are the sole crucial determinant of social structure and people’s
chances in life. Someone’s religion, education, political status be as important a source of power
and success.
Instead Weber focused on class, status, and party. Modern “analytic” theorists subscribe to this idea.
Ideas and values have important and independent effect on history. Ideas and values may not be
simply reflections of underlying interests but they can strengthen the position of a social group and
provide legitimacy to the position and system.
22
Lesson 13
Conflict Perspective: Ralf Dahrendorf-I
(Topic 048-052)
Topic 048: Ralf Dahrendorf
Introduction
Ralf Dahrendorf (1929) has for many years been widely known and respected in both Europe
and North America. Dahrendorf discusses the relationship between social class and conflict in
capitalist societies, and he argues that social conflict is an ordinary and necessary aspect of social
life. Dahrendorf argues that social conflict arises from the unequal distribution of power and
authority within society. He contends that social classes are defined by their relationship to power
and that conflict between classes is inevitable as they compete for power and resources.
Major exponent by Dahrendorf are that society has two faces:
1. Conflict
2. Consensus
Sociological theory therefore should be divided into two parts: Conflict theory and Consensus
theory.
 Consensus theorists should examine value integration in society. It entails coordination,
integration and consensus and ever growing interest in comparatively small ‘social systems’
such as communities, enterprises and small groups.
 Conflict theorists should examine conflicts of interest and coercion that holds society
together.
Society could not exist without both conflict and consensus, both are necessary for society. We
cannot have conflict unless there is some prior consensus, no contact between any entities, no prior
integration to serve as a basis for a conflict. Conversely, conflict can lead to consensus and
integration. There is a relationship between conflict and consensus, developing a single sociological
perspective encompassing both the processes is doubtful.
Dahrendorf constructed a conflict theory of society. It was a reaction to structural functionalism,
for functionalists, the social system was held together by voluntary cooperation orgeneral consensus
or both. For conflict theorists, society was held together by “enforced constraint.”
Some positions in society are delegated power and authority over others. Power of authority not
power of ownership of means of production. The differential distribution of authority by positions
in organization is the determining factor of systematic conflicts. Authority does not reside in
individuals but in positions. Authority attached to positions is key element in his analysis. Authority
always implies super ordination, subordination. Those in positions of authority expected to control
subordinates; they dominate because of expectations that surround them, not because of
psychological characteristics. Like authority, expectations attached to positions, not people.
Authority is legitimate, sanctions can be brought against those who do not comply.
Groups on top and at the bottom are defined by common interests, dominant groups seek to maintain
the status quo while subordinates seek change. A conflict of interest within any unit isat least latent
at all times. Individuals may not be conscious of this conflict, but occupants of positions behave in
expected manner which is usually adapted.
Dahrendorf defined key features of modern societies:
 Class conflict contained and regulated
 Chances of revolution are far less
 Conflict leads to gradual evolutionary change that strengthens the system
 Main focus is on corporate organizations.
 Conflict is not just because of ownership of resources but ownership of power and
authority so conflicts inevitable.
 Marx’s class conflict applicable to early stages of capitalism
23
 Conflict of interest is always latent but may become manifest.

Topic 049-050: Power, conflict, and social explanation
Dahrendorf argues, there is inevitably a conflict of interest and an impetus for the powerless to
conflict with the powerful, the former in pursuit of power, and the latter in defense of it. Power is
a "lasting source of friction." Distribution of power is crucial determinant of social structure.
Coercive view of power, which is common to most conflict theorists, is very different from that of
functionalism. For functionalists power embodied with political institutions. These institutions
solve the functional imperatives of goal attainment. Use of coercive power is secondary.
For Daherndorf, power is necessary if large organizations are to achieve their goals. May be
defensive war. Powerful are not granted power by the community they grasp and use their power
for their own ends. Actors use power within social relationships just one’s influence to get things
done thus power has the inherent tendency to create conflict in society. Groups with or without
power have different interests, each group will pursue its interests that results in conflict. When
balance between power and opposition shifts society changes, thus conflict is the great creative
force of human history.
Norms Like other conflict theorists, Dahrendorf argues that societal norms do not define or emerge
from social consensus. He argues that norms "are established and maintained by power, and their
substance may well be explained interms of interests of the powerful." This may be seen from the
fact that norms are backed by sanctions. Vivid examples of what Dahrendorf means can be found
in China, where protestors still risk prison or labor camp, or in the pre-civil rights South, where so
called "uppity" blacks or nonconforming whites could lose their livelihoods or even their lives.
Sanctions involve the control and use of power, particularly the power of law and punishment. "In
the last analysis, established norms are nothing but ruling norms," he suggests.
Conflict theory’s explanation of social stratification
Conflict theory’s explanation of social stratification draws on Dahrendorf’s view clearly
distinguishes between two facts:
1. First, that positions and jobs are different and demand different skills.
2. Second, that different jobs are treated as "superior" or "inferior" to one another.
There are both "social differentiation of positions and social stratification based on reputation and
wealth and expressed in a rank orderof social status." Social stratification results in rank ordering
of social status, ranking of different occupations and high ranking paid more than low ranking.
Pattern of ranking gets established through norms and this Pattern is institutionalized.
Stratification, Dahrendorf argues, is caused by norms, which categorize some things as desirable
and others as not. In every group, norms defining how people should behave entail discrimination
against those who do not comply.
Every society has general norms, which define certain characteristics as good (such as being an
aristocrat or having more education than average) and which therefore entail discrimination against
those who do not or cannot conform. These norms, Dahrendorf argues, are the basis of social
stratification, and they themselves are derived from and upheld by power. Once again, therefore,
power is the central concept. This is a very different explanation from that of functionalists, who
argue that social stratification derives from society's need to attract talented people into important
positions. The two may not be as totally irreconcilable as Dahrendorf implies, however. Dahrendorf
does not explain how a group becomes powerful inthe first place, but this will surely often depend,
at least in part, on its offering skills and a type of social order that people value.
Topic 051-052: Theory of conflict groups
Dahrendorf addresses the question of when inequalities and conflicting interests will actually
produce conflicts. His central argument is that social conflicts will take place, systematically,
among groups that differ in the authority they enjoy over others. By authority, Dahrendorf (again
following Weber) means the sort of power that is attached to a social role or position that is
legitimate in the sense of being defined and delimited by social norms, and that is backed by
24
sanctions up to (and no further than) these limits. Inequalities and conflicting interests produce
conflict. Social conflict takes place among groups that differ in authority over others. It is part of
the system and authority is attached to social role/position, a means to power.
Authority is legitimized, defined, and delimited by social norms, is backed by sanctions. A person
may have the power but may not have authority. Criminal may have the power but no authority.
Authority of university to charge the fee but no power to usurp money. Institutionalized authority
systematically gives rise to social conflict between groups with authority and those without it.
Dahrendorf calls these groups as classes instead of economic groups, for Dahrendorf “the term
‘class’ signifies conflict groups that are generated by differential distribution of authority in
imperatively coordinated associations”. Class means organizations in which orders are given and
taken, People with authority give orders. Here authority is dichotomous: Either a person has it or
does not Interests are formed accordingly. Just like Marx, conflict involves only two sides, all
classes do not engage in active conflicts all the time to be mobilized.
When will people be actually mobilized?
The structural requirements for people to form active "interest groups" are "technical,"
"political," and "social."
Technically, Dahrendorf argues, a group requires a founder and a charter or ideology to become
active.
Politically, the more liberal the state, the more likely is the mobilization for active conflict; the
more totalitarian the state, theless likely the mobilization. All this means the amount of freedom for
groups to organize and engage in collective action.
Finally, three social factors are important for group formation. Group formation is more likely
first,
1. If potential members are fairly well- concentrated geographically;
2. If they can communicate easily (as modern communications technology makes it easier
for them to do); and
3. If people who stand in the same relation to authority (same social class standing). are
recruited in similar ways and come, for example, from the same type of families or
educational organizations.
25
Lesson 14
Conflict Perspective: Ralf Dahrendorf-II
(Topic 053-057)
Topic 053: Theory of conflict groups
For Dahrendorf three broad types of groups are:
1. Quasi group, or “aggregates of executives of positions with identical role interests” These
are the recruiting grounds for interest groups.
2. Interest group, it has a structure and a well-organized goal, Personnel of members with
common modes of behavior.
3. Conflict group, which emerge out of many interest groups, they actually engage in group
conflict.
Example for conflict group can be class opposition between factory workers and owners, vividly
apparent as a result of unsafe working conditions in late nineteenth-century factories and mills, gave
rise to political solutions establishing new norms (e.g., legislation regulating work- hours) and new
structures and opportunities (e.g., legalization of unions) for the airing and negotiation of
grievances. Dahrendorf argues that the establishment of trade unions reduces the intensity of
conflict between workers and owners. With the democratization of conflict, “Organized groups
stand in open, and therefore in controllable, conflict”. This process is exemplified in the US in the
relations between the car manufacturing companies (e.g., GM, Ford,Chrysler) and the car workers’
union, the United Auto Workers (UAW); though they frequently have tense relations, both sides
ultimately resolve their disputed issues (at least temporarily). Perhaps for this same reason, Walmart
is rethinking its negative attitude toward unionization, recognizing that conflict is more easily
controlled when it is institutionalized rather than suppressed.
Topic 056: Consequences of conflict
Conflict often triggers social change, particularly with respect to the authority structure of an
organization or the overall society. Structural change may involve changing the personnel in
positions of authority or incorporation of the interests of the subordinate class in the policies of the
dominant class .Members of the subordinate class are actually incorporated, and ultimately co-opted
into the dominant class, means they shift their priorities in maintaining the new positions and
eventually neglect the interests of subordinate class. Here the question is the change radical or
sudden,
Radicalness: refers to the extent of structural change.
Suddenness: refers to the speed of change.
Some common characteristics of change are:
 Change may be sudden and radical (revolution),
 Change may be slow but also radical, may not be consciously experienced.
 Change can be slow and non-radical like minor renegotiations with subordinates and
compensations
 Rapid but non radical change like change in party government, little change in policies.
Conditions of class formation and class conflict
Class formation and class conflict took place under the following historically specific conditions:
(a) Absence of mobility
(b) Superimposition of authority, property, and general socialstatus
(c) Superimposition of industrial and political conflict
(d) Absence of effective conflict regulation
26
Lesson 15
Conflict Perspective: C. Wright Mills-I
(Topic 058-060)
Topic 058: Introduction of C. Wright Mills
C. Wright Mills was an American Sociologist. He combined a conflict perspective with a strong
critique of functionalist perspective. Mills provided a radical and impassioned dissenting voice
during the period of functionalism’s dominance. Talcott Parsons’ focus was on stability and social
order. Mills insisted that sociology should promote a critical stance toward the existing social
structure. His focus was critical understanding of the social structure; how it affects the behavior
and actions of the people. Therefore, a particular concept associated with Mills was
“Sociological Imagination”. He was strong advocate for a developing a “sociological
Imagination.”
Imagination involves understanding society through a particular approach. The sociological
imagination helps us to understand how personal troubles are connected to larger social issues. For
example, a person is poor and unemployed, then question arises that is he responsible for
unemployment? Or is he responsible for poverty or social system is making people poor. Here
sociological imagination approach will help to understand these issues. You try to look into the
analysis of social structure and we might see the problems of large number of people emerge out of
the operation or working of the structure. Individuals’ problems rooted in the way society is
organized.
The problems may relate to:
a) Material problems such as unemployment and poverty or
b) Psychological problems such as alienation.
In his opinion social structure should be analyzed. Social structures should therefore be analyzed
critically to show:
 How they prevent people from meeting their basic needs, or
 How they prevent them in developing to their full potential as human beings?
He developed his argument by understanding the American society. The structure of American
society was governed by a “power elite.” The member of this power elite see their own class
interests as equivalent to the general welfare. They try to maintain the status- quo because it looks
after the general welfare. In this critical perspective, individual needs should have priority rather
than maintenance of the equilibrium of the social system.
Topic 059: Sociological Imagination
Sociological imagination (SI) is to see things sociologically. it’s more like developing a deep
understanding of:
 How individuals’ biography is a result of historical process
 How it occurs within larger social context.
SI enables to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society. Let’s
take an example of a person who is poor. When we look his biography then we would know how
he became poor. Is he highly intelligent or least intelligent? His biography would help us to know
where he was born. Which factors were responsible? Secondly, we would look at the history of the
society. By history of the society we mean social structure, the stratification in the society, the
institutions of the society, social classes in the society where that individual was raised, developed
his level of talent. It will help us to understand the larger historical scene for the inner life and
external career i.e. appearance of a poor person i.e. poverty.
The sociologists should take into account how individuals (having unlimited/unorganized
experiences) often falsely become conscious of their social positions. Individuals can only
understand their own experiences fully if they can locate themselves within their period of history.
Try to make distinction between personal troubles and public issues. Personal troubles are which
27
occur within individual as biographical entity and within the scope of immediate milieu. Scale of
the problem is limited to individual e.g. unemployed person or violence against wife. It is a Private
trouble. On the other hand, Public issues means matters that have to do with institutions of
historical society as a whole. We see issues in larger social structures. Scale of the problem is
larger. For example, Unemployment in the society, how many people are unemployedin the society
OR Violence against wives? The scale of the problem and the law’s lack of concern makes it a
public issue. Here the lesson is an individual can understand his own experience and gauge his own
fate by locating himself within his period. This is Imaginative understanding of individuals’ life
chances. In order to overcome the problems, we either change their self or environment or both.
Using sociological imagination researchers can also make policy recommendations.
28
Lesson 16
Conflict Perspective: C. Wright Mills-II
(Topic 061-065)
Topic 061-062: Power elite
Mills argues consistently that the growth of large structures has been accompanied by a
centralization of power and that the men who head government, corporations, the armed forces, and
the unions are very closely linked. He carries this part of his analysis the furthest in his discussion
of the "power elite."
Mills argues that America is ruled by a "power elite" made up of people who hold the dominant
positions in political, military, and economic institutions.
Characteristics of the Power Elite
"Within the American society," he writes, "major national power now resides in:
1. The economic: major corporate owners and directors
2. The political : the highest political leaders including the president and a handful of key
cabinet members and close advisers
3. The military domains: high-ranking military officers
Within each of the big three, the typical institutional unit
 Has become enlarged
 Has become administrative
 In the power of its decision, has become centralized.
The means of power at the disposal of centralized decision-making units have increased
enormously. "Mills argues, moreover, that the three domains are interlocked, so that "the leading
men in each of the three domains of power-the warlords, the corporate chieftains, the political
directorate-tend to come together to form the power elite of America. The military capitalism of
private corporations exists in a weakened and formal democratic system containing an alreadyquite
politicized military order." Mills believed that power can be based on factors other than property.
However, the unity of the elite's institutional interests brings them together and maintains a war
economy.
Central thesis:
The central thesis of Mills is that those who occupy the top positions of the economic, military, and
political institutions form a more or less integrated and unified power elite. Their decisions
determine the basic structure and direction of the society. Many non radical sociologists agree that
economic life is increasingly intertwined with the activities of the government. However, they argue
that it is not simply military expenditures that are important, but rather the increased involvement
of government in all spheres of economic life. Those of us who live in Washington notice how,
month by month, more and more industrial, trade, and labor associations set up headquarters in the
city's growing office blocks, close to the federal government and its power.
Critics of Mills disagree with the perception of a single “power elite” pursuing its interests and
excluding others from influence. They argue that powerful interests may-and frequently do- conflict
with each other. "Business," for example, undoubtedly has power. It gets some of the measures it
wants, and some firms and industries acquire a protected, semi monopolistic position from
government regulators. For others, however, plans are delayed or demolished by decisions about
environmental quality, prices are set at levels they oppose, or costs are raised by taxes, government
paperwork, population requirements, and the like. However the large size and high level of
centralization of the dominant economic, military, and political structures mean that the
decisions and actions of their elites have wide-ranging ramifications for one another, for the overall
society, and each can facilitate or hinder others in achieving their goals.
The elites may not be consciously aware of the conflict between their goals and interests and the
overall welfare of society. Instead, they simply identify their own interests with the general welfare.
Mills, like Marx, looked at society sharply divided between the power-full and the powerless. He
29
also looked at:

 Alienation
 Social structure
 The effects of social structure on personality
 “Manipulation” of people by mass media.
At the same time, however, Mills clearly belongs to a distinctively American populist tradition,
which does not regard property as such as the main source of evil in society. To Mills, small-scale
property ownership and the class of independent entrepreneurs are the major safeguards of freedom
and security, and he regrets the declining of the old American society of independent farmers and
businessmen."
Topic 063: Centralization of power in modern society
Both the large size and the high centralization of the dominant institutions depend on:
 Modern technologies of production
 Administration
 Communication
Technological advancement is central to this change.
Mills claimed that “the means of oppression and exploitation, of violence and destruction, as well
as the means of production and reconstruction, have been progressively enlarged and increasingly
centralized.”
Mills looked at American society as modern society. Change from decentralized economic
structure as well as political structure to large size and the high centralization of the dominant
institutions in the second half of 19th century. If we look at the three domains of power – economic,
political, and military. Each of these domains becomes enlarged and centralized, the consequences
of its activities become greater, and its traffic with the others increases.
For example, the decisions of a handful of corporations bear upon military and political as well as
upon economic developments around the world. The decisions of the military establishment rest
upon and grievously affect political life as well as the every level of economic activity. The
decisions made within the political domain also determine economic activities and military
programs. There is interpenetrating and interlocking nature of the policies and activities of the
dominant institutional orders. Interpenetration and interlocking is based on social, psychological as
well as social structural factors.
The elites in these structures had similar social backgrounds (wealth, power, prestige) and
worldviews. Many of them came from long-established families that traditionally enjoyed high
status or had social acquaintances among them. They tended to have the same kind of educational
background. They intermingled with one another in various clubs and cliques. In addition, some of
them moved back and forth between the top of one institutional order and another.
Topic 064: Mass media and mass society
Mills did not consider American power structure as pluralistic. Pluralistic means numerous, largely
autonomous centers of power. These power centers must negotiate with one another in establishing
national policies. It applies to middle level of power than the top level.
Characteristics of people under middle level of power:
Beneath the middle levels of power, a vast majority of the people are:
 Fragmented
 Passive
 Inarticulate mass society
Members of mass society are unorganized, having no impact on public policy or even on middle
levels of power. We see the passive nature of mass society results largely the way the mass media
30
are able to manipulate public opinion and attitudes. Mass media manipulate the public issues in the
ways that are not conducive to public dialogue. Why it manipulates? The answer is because mass
media is managed by power elite.
The elites present their decisions and actions as being in accordance with democratic principles.
They justify the sociopolitical status-quo and their elite positions. Further media offer escapist form
of entertainment that divert people’s attention from sociopolitical issues.
Mills’ critique of the mass media and mass society may seem to be less relevant today. Because
nowadays we don’t only have one news channel or newspaper. There are so many t.v channels and
newspaper in each society. Some might be supporting certain type of policies of the government
and others might not be supporting. So we can say that mass media is now less homogeneous and
its role in criticizing the political power structure has expanded greatly.
Moreover, since the late 1960s there has been a higher level of mobilization of various segments of
the population to deal with various social problems. Some of the important social movements have
developed since Mills’ diagnosis of his times include:
 The civil rights movement
 The women’s movement
 The environmental movement
 The gay/lesbian movement
Moreover, through new electronic forms of communication, there are increased opportunities for
the public to be heard, even though they may not be organized effectively. In some case, the news
media themselves provide opportunities for public feedback. On the other hand, the mass media
today also offer multiple options for being diverted to a highly simulated world that they create,
thereby avoiding the practical world of public affairs or civic involvement.
Key point of Mills’ critique
The key point is that Mills’ critique leads us to look at how power elites are able to maintain their
position, sometimes by neutralizing or coopting their opponents, in an environment of widespread
public apathy. The mass media still play a crucial role in this process.
31
Lesson 17
Frankfurt school: Critical theory-I
(Topic 066-069)
Topic 066: Frankfurt School: The Major Critiques of Social and Intellectual Life
Critical theory/perspective is the product of a group of German neo-Marxists who were dissatisfied
with the state of Marxian approach. The term critical theory is specifically associated with the
theorists of the Frankfurt school. These theorists were revolutionaries. The Institute of Social
Research, founded in Frankfurt, Germany in 1923, was associated with this group. Critical theory
has spread beyond the confines of the Frankfurt school. Critical theory was and is largely a
European orientation, although its influence in American sociology has grown. The analyses of the
Frankfurt theorists owe a great deal to Marx, and, like him, they emphasize the importance of
conflicts of interests based on property relationships. However, they are by no means orthodox
Marxists. They are very interested in uniting psychoanalysis and Marxism, an effort toward which
orthodox Marxism (or Marxism-Leninism) is highly unsympathetic.
Critical theory aims:
“Critical theory” or perspective aims at two things;
a) Social theory must be critical of oppressive arrangements
b) It must propose emancipatory alternatives.
This theme exists in Marx’s work. It is blending theory with action or use theory to stimulate action
and vice versa.
Critical theorists wanted theory:
 To expose oppression in society
 To propose less constrictive options
Yet they were confronted with the spread of political and economic domination of the masses.
Critical theory is composed largely of criticisms of various aspects of social and intellectual life,
but its ultimate goal is to reveal more accurately the nature of society.
Topic 067: Criticism of Marxian theory
Critical theory is composed largely of criticisms of various aspects of social and intellectual life.
Their Ultimate goal was to reveal more accurately the nature of society. The most disturbing point
in Marxian theory was the idea of economic determinism. Conflicts of interests was based on
property relationships. Economic determinism is implicit in parts of Marx’s original work. The
focus of criticism of critical theorists was primarily on neo-Marxists because they interpreted
Marx’s work too mechanically. The critical theorists do not say that economic determinists were
wrong in focusing on the economic realm but that they should have been concerned with other
aspects of social life as well. Marx argued that people produce their ideas and conceptions of the
world because of social structures in which they are born, raised, and lived. People’s lives are the
process of production. First they produce for survival, then new needs come and people need new
forms of production. Here if we talk about industrial society; there is division of labor in these
societies. It increasingly deprives humans of their capacity to control their productive activities and
leads to “Alienation”. It can lead to spread of political and economic domination of the masses.
This capitalist stage will lead to a new era of human organization.
Marx believed that the capacity to use language, to think, and to analyze their conditions would
enable humans to alter their environment. People use their capacities for thought and reflect. For
Marx, the goal of social theory: logically expose those oppressive social relations and propose
alternatives actions. Action to change social conditions generates increased knowledge, use it to
mount more effective change-producing action. The interplay between action and theory
continuously taking place. Information technologies, as well as markets for services and cultural
symbols have changed. This transformation has changed the very nature of humans’ capacities to
understand and respond to their conditions. Economic determinism may not be the main factor
32
determining the nature of society. Critical theorists criticized those being concerned only with
economic determinism. They should have been concerned with other aspects of social life as well.
The critical theorists seek to rectify the imbalance by focusing its attention on the cultural realm.
Topic 068: Criticism of Positivism
One of the focuses of critical theorists was the philosophical underpinnings of scientific inquiry,
especially positivism. The criticism of positivism is related, at least in part, to the criticism of
economic determinism, because some of those who were determinists accepted part or all of the
positivistic theory of knowledge.
Positivism is depicted as accepting the idea that a single scientific method is applicable to all fields
of study. It takes the physical sciences as the standard of certainty and exactness for all disciplines.
Positivists believe that knowledge is inherently neutral. They feel that they can keep human values
out of their work. This belief, in turn, leads to the view that science is not in the position of
advocating any specific form of social action.
Propositions
Social analysis for critical theorist revolves around two propositions. The propositions are as
follows:
1. People’s ideas are product of the society in which they live. Impossible to reach objective
knowledge, free of the influence of particular era and its conceptual patterns.
2. The intellectuals should not try to be objective and to separate fact from value judgment in
their work. What they should adopt is a critical attitude to the society being examined. An
attitude that makes people aware of what they should do and has as its aim social change.
Intellectuals should maintain a critical attitude toward their own work. They should examine and
make explicit its relationship to the current state of society and socially created “knowledge.”
Two critical attitudes can be different because:
1. Critical theorists are also product of a particular society.
2. Their own work is subject to its influences and is not uniquely objective.
Critical theorists believe in the truth and knowledge. That norm need to be followed by the
researchers. So consider this approach better than the one followed by positivists who attempt to
separate value judgments from analysis. Critical theorists focus on human activity as well as on the
ways in which such activity affects larger social structures. Human actor is distinct, can be unique.
Hence general laws of science cannot be applied without question to human action.
This critique leads to the view that:
Positivism is inherently conservative, incapable of challenging the existing system. It may be too
narrow an approach to the contributions of positivism.
Topic 069: Criticisms of Sociology
Sociology is attacked for its “scientism,” Excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and
techniques that is, for making the scientific method an end in itself.In addition, sociology is accused
of accepting the status quo. The critical school maintains that sociology does not seriously criticize
society or seek to transcend the contemporary social structure. Sociology, the critical school
contends, has surrendered its obligation to help people oppressed by contemporary society.
Members of this school are critical of sociologists’ focus on society as a whole rather than on
individuals in society; sociologists are accused of ignoring the interaction of the individual and
society. Although most sociological perspectives are not guilty of ignoring this interaction, this view
is a cornerstone of the critical school’s attacks on sociologists. Because they ignore the individual,
sociologists are seen as being unable to say anything meaningful about political changes that could
lead to a “just and humane society”. Sociology becomes “an integral part of the existing society
instead of being a means of critique and a ferment of renewal”
33
Lesson 18
Frankfurt school: Critical theory-II
(Topic 070-072)
Topic 070: Critique of Modern Society
Most of the critical school’s work is aimed at a critique of:
 Modern society
 A variety of its components
Whereas much of early Marxian theory aimed specifically at the economy, the critical school
shifted its orientation to the cultural level in light of what it considers the realities of modern
capitalist society. That is, the locus of domination in the modern world shifted from the
economy to the cultural realm. Still, the critical school retains its interest in domination, although
in the modern world it is likely to be domination by cultural rather than economic elements. The
critical school thus seeks to focus on the cultural repression of the individual in modern society.
The critical thinkers have been shaped not only by Marxian theory but also by Weberian theory, as
reflected in their focus on rationality as the dominant development in the modern world. In fact,
supporters of this approach often are labeled “Weberian Marxists”.
For critical theorists, in modern society:
 The repression/domination produced is by rationality.
 It has replaced economic exploitation.
 That is the dominant social problem.
The critical school clearly has adopted Weber’s differentiation between:
 Formal rationality
 Substantive rationality
Formal rationality is concerned unreflectively with the question of the most effective means for
achieving the given purpose. It is “technocratic thinking” the objective is to serve the forces of
domination, not to emancipate people from domination. The goal is to find the most efficient means
to achieve the ends. Ends defined as important by those in power. The approach is rational but not
reasonable one. In contrast, reason is the hope for society. Reason involves the assessment of means
in terms of the ultimate human values of justice, peace, and happiness. Despite the seeming
rationality of modern life, the critical school views the modern world as rife with irrationality. This
is the “irrationality of formal rationality”.
Substantive rationality, in which individuals might consider a range of possible values or actions,
and attempting to make them consistent. Weber termed this substantive rationality and considered
it problematic in modern society in that rationalization of social life makes it difficult for people to
pursue particular values. For example, pursuit of family or religious values may be difficult in
modern society, given economic pressures and dominance of bureaucratic organizations.
In Herbert Marcuse’s view, “this society is irrational as a whole” because:
 The rational world is destructive of individuals and their needs and abilities
 Peace is maintained through a constant threat of war
 People remain impoverished despite the existence of sufficient means
One example of formal rationality is modern technology. It can be used for repression or
emancipation. Powerful people in the society use it for their own benefits.
Topic 071: Critique of Culture
The critical theorists level significant criticisms at what they call the “culture industry” (Kellner
and Lewis, 2007), the rationalized, bureaucratized structures (for example, the television networks)
that control modern culture. The culture industry, producing what is conventionally called “mass
culture,” is defined as the “administered, nonspontaneous, reified, phony culture rather than the real
thing”.
Two things worry the critical thinkers most about this industry:
34
1. First, they are concerned about its falseness. They think of it as a prepackaged set of ideas
mass- produced and disseminated to the masses by the media.
2. Second, the critical theorists are disturbed by its peacemaking, oppressive, and astonishing
effect on people.
Topic 072: Subjectivity
Traditional Marxian concern with objective structures. The great contribution of the critical school
has been its effort to reorient Marxian theory in a subjective direction. Although this constitutes a
critique of Marx’s materialism and his dogged focus on economic structures, it also represents a
strong contribution to our understanding of the subjective elements of social life at both:
 The individual
 The cultural levels
Economic determinism was being the central point for Marx. Many of the critical thinkers see
themselves as returning to those roots, as expressed in Marx’s early works. In doing so, they are
following up on the work of the early-twentieth-century Marxian revisionists. The critical school
has shifted to a concern with the cultural “superstructure” rather than with the economic “base.”
In addition to this factor, a series of external changes in society point to such a shift. In particular,
the prosperity of the post–World War II period in America seems to have led to a disappearance of
internal economic contradictions in general and class conflict in particular. False consciousness
seems to be nearly universal: all social classes, including the working class, appear to be
beneficiaries and ardent supporters of the capitalist system. In addition, the former Soviet Union,
despite its socialist economy, was at least as oppressive as capitalist society.Because the two
societies had different economies, the critical thinkers had to look elsewhere forthe major source of
oppression. What they looked toward initially was culture.
35
Lesson 19
Critical theory: Juregen Habermas-I
(Topic 074-076)
Topic 074: Juregen Habermas Differences with Marx
Jürgen Habermas is a primary figure in Frankfurt school of critical theory. He belongs to second
generation of Frankfurt school.
Goal of Habermas
 To develop a theoretical program for the reconstruction of historical materialism.
He Started with Marx. Marx failed to distinguish between two analytically distinct components of
species-being:
1. Work (or labor, purposive- rational action)
2. Social interaction (Symbolic or communicative action)
Karl Marx ignored social interaction. Everything reduced to labor. Habermas made a distinction
between work and interaction.
 Work is purposive-rational action
 Interaction is communicative action
Purposive-rational action, Habermas distinguishes between:
 Instrumental action involves a single actor rationally calculating the best means to a given
goal.
 Strategic action involves two or more individuals coordinating purposive-rational action in
the pursuit of a goal.
Both involve the calculated pursuit of self-interest.
Communicative action
Habermas is most interested in communicative action, in which the actions of the agents involved
are coordinated not through egocentric calculations of success but through acts of reaching
understanding. In communicative action participants are not primarily oriented to their own
successes; they pursue their individual goals under the condition that they can harmonize their plans
of action on the basis of common situation definitions. Leads to communicative understanding.
Whereas the end of purposive-rational action is to achieve a goal, the objective of communicative
action is to achieve communicative understanding. It is broader than that encompassing “speech
acts or equivalent nonverbal expressions.” Marx’s focus was on work, Habermas is led to focus on
communication.
Baseline to analyze work
For Marx free and creative work was a baseline for critically analyzing work in various times. For
Habermas communicative action was the baseline.
Topic 075-076: The Legitimation Crisis in the Political Organization of Capitalism
Habermas looked at the process whereby political and economic systems are legitimated through:
 Cultural beliefs
 Ideologies
 Worldviews
However Modern capitalist societies face a legitimation crisis.
The Crisis occur due to:
 Transformation from the early forms of entrepreneurial capitalism to modern organized
capitalism.
 Tremendous expansion of scope of the government’s role in modern democratic societies.
People’s resistance to this role.
 The Government’s role expanded due to:
 The need to deal with the periodic economic crises of capitalism.
 Meeting the basic welfare needs that inevitably develop in unregulated market systems.
36
The increasing government regulation is inconsistent with a political ideology i.e. limited
government role for the sake of individual freedom. It amounts to putting restrictions for the
development of political democracy. Lower the restrictions on individual freedom, more the
development of political democracy. Practicing of this principle opened the door for the early
development of entrepreneurial capitalism. Separation (“uncoupling”) of economic activity from
political control. There should be separation (“uncoupling”) of economic activity from political
control. Reality is: With the expansion in capitalist enterprises there is expansion in political
interference (recoupling). Justified to insure economic stability and protect the general welfare.
The goal of stability was crucial for capitalist enterprises, while the general welfare goal was
important for providing some protection for individual citizens from the growing power of these
large-scale corporate enterprises. This is “recoupling” of economic activity and political regulation.
Even though justified in terms of the general welfare, a lot of theexpansion of government programs
and regulations occurred without widespread democratic discussion or clear consensus regarding
the proper role of government in insuring the general welfare in a complex society. The long-term
outcome was that government policies often seemed to benefit particular groups or “special
interests” more than the general welfare.
While critical theory is oriented toward increasing individual freedom, the question of when
restrictions are needed to prevent exploitation and promote the overall welfare of society are always
matters of political debate. The problem in modern societies is that public participation in such
discussion tends to be limited and one-sided. This lack of citizen participation makes it possible for
large-scale corporate structures to have an inordinate influence on public discourse and political
policy decisions. The restrictions and distortions in the communication process in modern society
result in part from heavy reliance on impersonal “steering mechanisms” as a source of control and
integration of large-scale complex systems. This leads us to Habermas’s (1987) important
distinction between system and lifeworld. Modern societies differ from earlier types of society in
terms of their heavy reliance on impersonal procedures of macro-level system integration.
Moreover, these mechanisms have become detached (or “uncoupled”) from the micro-level
processes whereby people’s everyday life worlds are integrated through open communication
leading to mutual understandings and thepossibility of well-informed consensus. This discrepancy
between system integration based on impersonal steering mechanisms and social integration based
on communication results in large part from the growing size and complexity of society. His
analysis of the system is consistent with Durkheim’s argument regarding the effects of the
expansion of the division of labor in increasing functional interdependence while simultaneously
decreasing moral solidarity. This process can also be related to Marx’s description of how social
ties between members of different socioeconomic classes have been replaced by purely market
transactions (or a narrow “cash nexus”).
37
Lesson 20
Critical theory: Juregen Habermas-II
(Topic 077-079)
Topic 077-079: Alternative forms of communication and rationality
For Habermas rationality is grounded in the communication process. If there is no coercion or
restrictions on communication, then people become more reflective regarding their implicit and
taken-for-granted common sense assumptions. Such discourse, in the absence of coercion or other
restrictions on communication, may lead to questioning and criticizing beliefs and values handed
down through tradition and accepted implicitly as “just the way things are.”
Forms of communication/discourse
Different forms of communication can be distinguished according to its concern with:
 The objective world
 The intersubjective world
 The subjective (or personal) world
Each of these different forms of discourse is associated with its own distinctive type of rationality
and its own specific type of action.
Types of action
The four types of action include:
1. Purposive (or teleological) action
2. Normative action
3. Dramaturgic action
4. Communicative action
The kinds of statements associated with these different types of rational action are summarized
below.
1. Factual statements and purposive (or teleological) action
Rationality in this area is reflected in the methods of scientific research whereby statements are
evaluated against objective empirical facts. Purposive action employs objective factual
knowledge in selecting means to achieve goals. This type of action corresponds to Weber’s
instrumental rationality and is also consistent with the rational choice perspective. Rationality
considerations are involved in assessing the effectiveness or efficiency of means in reaching
whatever ends are being sought. Habermas called it as the strategic action i.e. efforts to influence
other people’s actions as means for achieving one’s own ends. This form of relating to others is not
oriented toward reaching mutual understanding.
Strategic action is exemplified in market relations where buyers and sellers negotiating with one
another in terms of the individual interests they seek to satisfy. Buyer may be forced to buy because
of no alternative. It is also manifested in authority relations in organizations, where controlling the
actions of subordinates is simply the means for achieving the goals of an organization or those of
the authority figures within it.
2. Normative statements and normative action
Rationality in this area involves evaluating behaviors in terms of their conformity with widely
accepted norms. Such actions may also fulfill various goals for oneself or for others, but this is not
the primary motivation. Instead, the focus is on the norms themselves and the ideals and values they
reflect. Communication in this category may include efforts to establish consensus orto evaluate
the norms critically. This type of communication is particularly important for the critical theory
goal of changing normative patterns and institutionalized structures so as to improve human
welfare.
3. Expressive Statements and Dramaturgical Action
Expressive statements reflect one’s own personal subjective orientations and intentions. They
cannot be evaluated by “checking the facts,” since the “facts” are subjective in nature. And their
validity also does not depend on social consensus. Rationality with regard to expressive
38
communication would involve discourse that seeks to discover and correct patterns of deliberate
deceit or unwitting self-delusion or to improve self-disclosure. This type of action would include
dramaturgical action, including the various strategies of presentation of self as analyzed by
Goffman. If a person’s self-presentation is intended to manipulate the behavior of others to benefit
oneself, it could be seen as a form of strategic action as well. A high level of systematic and
disciplined expressive self-disclosure is represented by those involved in the creation of cultural
products such as art, music, and literature. The goal of these forms of creativity is to communicate
a subjective or experiential response to some aspect of the human condition. Expressive
communication of this type can be evaluated in terms of intersubjectively shared aesthetic
standards. Rational analysis of the meaning of such cultural products would involve evaluating how
well they represent common human experiences or convey a meaningful reaction to the human
condition that can be shared.
4. Communication And Communicative Action
Discourse is oriented explicitly toward:
a) Communicative competence
b) Mutual understanding
It Includes analysis of:
 The grammatical structure of sentences, paragraphs, texts, and speeches
 The expressed or implied meanings carried through different forms of communication
The goal of communicative action is mutual understanding - consensus. Actions are coordinated
on the basis of consensus in contrast with force, tradition, authority, or manipulation.
Habermas relates the forms of communication and rationality to:
i. Personality formation
ii. Social integration
iii. The creation and reproduction of cultural meanings and values
The process takes place through socialization whereby the individuals learn their culture.
Habermas argues that system integration at the level of the overall society has expandedin modern
society at the expense of the social integration of the lifeworld. The process of communication at
the lifeworld level has been overshadowed by the macro system level. It resulted in inadequate
levels of socialization, breakdown in normative consensus, and erosion of cultural meanings and
values. When such consequences are widespread, the symptoms may include antisocial behavior,
disruptive conflict, anomie, and alienation. These problems are more serious than simple
misunderstandings that can be corrected through communicative action within individuals’ micro-
level life worlds.
Social integration in Economic system:
The way social integration at the lifeworld level is subordinated to system integration can be seen
in the economic system in the growth of a consumer society. In various ways (particularly through
advertising), individuals are encouraged to pursue ever increasing levels of personal consumption
as the key to a fulfilling life. This lifestyle helps compensate them for their subordinate status and
lack of autonomy while their enthusiastic conformity to the consumer role promotes the expansion
of the economic system.
Social integration in political structure:
Within the political structure, system integration is promoted as citizens become clients or
beneficiaries of the state through their dependence on government for personal benefits or for
policies that will serve their interests. The roles of both consumer and citizen are also reinforced
through ideologies that simultaneously idealize individual freedom and material success, the “free
enterprise” economic system, and government responsibility for the general welfare in a democratic
system.
From a critical theory perspective, the increased allocation of general welfare responsibilities to the
39
government may be seen as restricting the freedom of individuals and organizations in the
private sector in many different ways. Here we see following things:
 Erosion of close-knit communities as well as shared “lifeworld.”
 No shared communication of lifeworld experiences.
 No open communication in large scale systems.
 Difficult for large public to communicate with one another and with officials or other
authority figures.
 Lack of “appropriate” knowledge for meaningful participation can be another hurdle.
 In large-scale macro systems, subordinates and others in marginal positions are oftenleft
out of the discussion.
 Nevertheless, they are affected in major ways by decisions or actions undertaken by
agents for macro-level systems.
40
Lesson 21
Critical theory: Juregen Habermas-III
(Topic 080-082)
Topic 080-082: Critical Theory Today
Habermas is considered the most prominent of today’s social thinkers. Yet he is not alone in
struggling to develop a critical theory that is better adapted to contemporary realities.
Axel Honneth has emerged as today’s leading critical theorist. To achieve that status, he has
developed a theoretical position that builds on:
 The work of the critical school
 That of Habermas in particular
For Honneth, critical theory must be based on and emerge from practical critiques that exist
in the everyday world.
The explanation of a social phenomenonmust be done in such a way that:
 A practical dimension of critique emerges as a constitutive requirement for critical
understanding.
 Its aim should be in emancipating people from the domination and oppression that they
experience in the real world.
Critical theory must have an integrative interest in both theory and practice. It must seek the
determination of the driving forces of society. So effort should stimulate two things:
i) The critical analysis of the historical process of the reality
ii) Finding ways to overcome established forms of domination within society
The emancipatory interest of critical theory lies within (is immanent within) society itself. For
Honneth, the basic problem with classic critical theory is:
 it’s totally administered view of the capitalist world led to negativism
 It left no hope for practical critique and emancipatory possibilities in the everyday world
and in critical theory itself.
Honneth thought that earlier critical theory supposed a:
 Closed circle between capitalist domination and cultural manipulation.
 There could remain within the social reality of their time no space for a zone of moral-
practical critique.
Honneth’s concluded that the key problem for critical theory today is:
a) How to come “to grips with the structure of social domination, as well as
b) With identifying the social resources for its practical transformation.”
Honneth sees Habermas’s communication theory as a step forward. This theory offered a way of
dealing with, and getting at, the everyday life-world. In everyday life world there exists alayer of
moral experiences (Normative expectations of interaction). Normative expectations can be the point
of reference for critique (critical analysis). Honneth’s focus is on the recognition of identity claims
made by individuals and collectivities. Consistent with critical theory he wants to deal with the
violence committed against claimants for recognition. Claimants of recognition of identity are
at lower position (subordinate). Dominants commit acts of violence against claimants of
recognition. Under the normative expectations of social world, it is considered as unfair. Hence
claimants of identity feel that they deserve recognition. Contrarily. Their sense of fair play is upset.
They resist those seen as unfair to them. It is violence to individual or collective claims to social
recognition within the life-world. Claimants consider this experience as moral injustice.
Historically people often have felt that they did not get the recognition they deserved. Possible,
even likely, that there is an increasing crisis of recognitionin contemporary society. For example it
is difficult for some entities like women to get recognition they need for their work. It becomes
disappointing and can result in conflict.
People needing three forms of recognition:
41
I. Love i.e. caring for a person’s needs and emotions. People gain confidence on such
recognition.
II. Respect for a person’s moral and legal dignity, and this leads to self-respect.
III. Esteem for a person’s social achievements, and this leads to self-esteem.
These forms of recognition are acquired and maintained intersubjectively. i.e. in order to relate to
themselves in these ways, people must receive recognition from others. Ultimately, the relations of
recognition are a necessary condition of our moral subjectivity. With adequate recognition people
can realize their full autonomy as human beings.
Disrespect occurs when people do not receive the recognition, they feel they deserve, and this
adversely affects their ability to form appropriate identities. Conflict and resistance are likely to
result when they do not get the recognition the normative system says they should.
Normative standards provide the basis for such actions of conflict, The evaluation of those actions,
and the concrete claims for recognition on which those actions are based. Use the normative
standards to evaluate claims for recognition.
Major criticisms of Honneth’s critical theory
There are four major criticisms of Honneth’s critical theory:
1. Why recognition is placed at the heart of social and ethical theory? Is recognition as
important as Honneth suggests? Is it as important as work and labor in Marx’s theory?
2. There are doubts about the kind of monistic theory created by Honneth: Is recognition all
that matters?
3. Why only three bases of recognition: Why not more or less?
4. It is hard to recognize the operations of power in Honneth’s theory.
42
Lesson 22
Feminism as Part of Conflict Perspective-I
(Topic 083-86)
Topic 083:The Challenge of Feminist Theory Introduction
In the late 1970s a new theoretical outsider issued a challenge to established sociological theories—
and even to Marxian sociology itself. This latest brand of radical perspective was contemporary
feminist theory. Critical feminist writings can be traced back to almost 500 years. There has been
an organized political movement by and for women for more than 150 years. In America in 1920,
the movement finally won the right for women to vote, fifty-five years after that right had been
constitutionally extended to all men. Exhausted and to a degree satiated by victory, the American
women’s movement over the next thirty years weakened in both size and vigor, only to spring back
to life, fully reawakened, in the 1960s.
Factors helped new wave of feminist activism
Three factors helped new wave of feminist activism. The factors are as follows:
i) The general climate of critical thinking that characterized the period;
ii) To encounter the sexist attitudes of the liberal and radical men to women activists who
participated in antiwar, civil rights, and student movements; and
iii) Women’s experience of prejudice and discrimination as they moved in ever-larger numbers
into wage work and higher education.
Movement continued into the 21st century and became international. A major feature of this
international women’s movement has been an explosively growing new literature on women that
makes visible all aspects of women’s hitherto unconsidered lives and experiences. This literature,
which is popularly referred to as women’s studies, is the work of an international and
interdisciplinary community of writers, located both within and outside universities and writing for
both the general public and specialized academic audiences.
Feminist scholars launched a probing, multifaceted critique that made visible the complexity of the
system that subordinates women. Feminist theory looks at the world from the vantage points of
women, with an eye to discovering the significant but unacknowledged ways in which the activities
of women subordinated by gender and variously affected by other stratificational practices, such as
class, race, age, enforced heterosexuality, and geosocial inequality help create our world.
Feminist theorists have challenged sociological theory, especially its classical statements and early
research. Feminist writings now assume a critical mass in sociology. They offer an exciting
paradigm for the study of social life.
Feminist theory is moving increasingly into the mainstream of the discipline; engaging all its
subspecialties; influencing many of its long-established theories; and interacting with the new
developments.
Feminist theory is a generalized, wide- ranging system of ideas about social life and human
experience developed from a woman- centered perspective. It is the work of an interdisciplinary
and international community of scholars, artists, and activists.
Topic 084-085: Feminism’s basic questions
Feminist theory has many questions. Of these, it begins with a simple first question:
First question “And what about the women?” In other words; where are the women in any
situation being investigated? If they are not present, why?
If they are present then:
 What exactly are they doing?
 How do they experience the situation?
 What do they contribute to it?
 What does it mean to them?
In response to this question, feminist scholarship has produced some generalizable answers.
Women are present in most social situations. Where they are not, it is not because they lack ability
43
or interest but because there have been deliberate efforts to exclude them. Where they have been
present, women have played roles very different from the popular conception of them (as, for
example, passive wives and mothers).
Despite women actively present in most social situations, scholars, publics, and social actors
themselves have been blind to their presence. Also, women’s roles in most social situations, though
essential, have been different from, less privileged than, and subordinate to the roles of men.
Second question is: “Why is all this as it is?” In answer, feminist theory has produced a general
social theory with broad implications for sociology.
One of feminist sociological theory’s major contributions to answering this question has been the
development ofthe concept of “gender.”
Feminist theorists made it possible for people to see the distinctions between:
(a) Biologically determined attributes associated with male and female
(b) The socially learned behaviors associated with masculinity and femininity.
They did so by designating the latter as “gender”.
Starting point of agreement among nearly all varieties of feminist theory is an understanding of
gender as a social construction, something not emanating from nature but created by people as part
of the processes of group.
Third question is. “How can we change and improve the social world so as to make it a more
just place for all people?” This commitment to social transformation in the interest of justice is
the distinctive characteristic of critical social theory, a commitment shared in sociology by
feminism, Marxism, neo- Marxism, and social theories being developed by racial and ethnic
minorities and in postcolonial societies.
Fourth question: “And what about the differences among women?”
The answers to this question lead to a general conclusion that the invisibility, inequality, and role
differences in relation to men that generally characterize women’s lives are profoundly affected by
a woman’s social location that is, by her class, race, age, affectional preference, marital status,
religion, ethnicity, and global location. Feminist theory is not just about women, nor is its major
project the creation of a middle-range theory of gender relations.
It is ano t h e r discovery which is similar to Marx’s accomplishment: He effectively
demonstrated that one also could view the world from the vantage point of the world’s workers.
This insight relativized ruling-class knowledge and, in allowing us to compare that knowledge with
knowledge gained from the workers’ perspective, vastly expanded our ability to analyze social
reality. The claim is to view the world from the vantage point of people concerned i.e. the laborers,
students, women.
Topic 086: Waves of Feminism
Feminism and sociology share a long-standing relationship originating in feminists turning to
sociology to answer feminism’s foundational questions: what about the women, why is all this as
it is, how can it be changed to produce a more just society, and, more recently, what about
differences among women? Sociology was identified from its beginning by activist women as one
possible source of explanation and change. Women, mostly feminist, were active in the
development of sociology. Repeatedly their achievements erased from the history of sociology by
a male-dominated professional. Feminist writing is linked to feminist social activism. Intensity
varied over the last two hundred years. High points occur in the liberationist ‘moments’ of modern
Western history. In US history, major periods of feminist mobilization frequently are understood as
“waves.”
First Wave feminism began in the 1830s as an offshoot of the antislaverymovement and focused
on women’s struggle for political rights, especially the vote.
Feminist ideas were abroad in the world in the1830s when Auguste Comte coined the term
“sociology.” Women were “present at the creation” of sociology, as writers, editors, publishes.
Period overlapped with the rise in activism in First Wave feminism as women pushed their crusade
44
for the right to vote. Between 1920 and 1960 feminist thinking and activism ebbed.
Second Wave feminism (1960-90) worked to translate basic political rights into economic and
social equality. Women sociologists did research on women’s lives. They Re-conceptualized
relations between men and women with the concept “gender.” Second wave of feminist activism
energized feminist thinking. Women in sociology drew strength to confront their professional
organization. They re-established a feminist perspective in the discipline. The effects of 2nd wave
feminism continue to this day in sociology.
Women have moved into the profession in unprecedented numbers, as students, teachers, scholars,
and office holders in professional associations. Central to this Second Wave triumph has been
establishing gender as a core concept in sociology. Gender is broadly understood as a social
construction. A Concept needed for classifying people and behaviors in terms of “man” and
“woman,” “masculine” and “feminine.” Inclusion of concept in research implies a normative
commitment to some standard of gender equality.
Third Wave Feminism is used in two senses:
i) To describe the responses by women of color, lesbians, and working-class women to the
ideas of white professional women claiming to be the voice of Second Wave feminism,
ii) To describe the feminist ideas of the generation of women who will live their adult lives in
21st century.
45
Lesson 23
Feminism as part of conflict perspective-II
(Topic 87-90)
Topic 87-88: Varieties of feminist theories, Gender difference
This section presents a typology of contemporary feminist theories that guide feminist sociological
theorizing. Our typology is organized around answers to feminism’s most basic question. And what
about the women?
Essentially, there have been five answers to that question.
1. The first of these can be framed in terms of gender difference women’s location in, and
experience of, most situations is different from that of the men in those situations.
2. The second is that of gender inequality: Women’s location in most situations is not only
different from but also less privileged than or unequal to that of men.
3. The third is that of gender oppression, which is a direct power relationship between men and
women through which women are restrained, subordinated, moulded, used, and abused by
men.
4. The fourth is that women’s experiences of difference, inequality, and oppression vary
according to their location within societies’ arrangements of structural oppression such as
class, race, ethnicity, age, affectional preference, marital status, and global location.
5. The fifth, a major focus in third-wave feminism, questions the concept of a woman
(interrogating gender) so central to other theoretical positions, asking what implications flow
from assuming the concept of "woman" as a given in social analysis.
All theories of gender difference have to confront the problem of what is usually termed "the
essentialist argument": the thesis that the fundamental differences between men and women are
immutable. That immutability is usually seen as traceable to three factors:
1. Biology
2. Social institutional needs for men and women to fill different roles, most especially but not
exclusively in the family; and
3. The existential or phenomenological need of human beings to produce an "other" as part of
the act of self-definition.
46
Gender differences
Cultural feminism focuses on the positive aspects of "feminine personality." Women’s virtues of
being cooperative, emotional, caring, passive, and less aggressive. Gender differences are valuable
for producing a just society. Sexual differences are there because humans are sexed beings.
Difference is a process, and masculine culture creates it. Creates a construct of the woman as "the
other." An objectified being who is assigned traits that represent the opposite of the subject male.
‘One is not born a woman; one becomes one.’
Existing Sociological Theories: Institutional and Interactionist Institutional theories see social
institutions as the major determinants of gender difference. Sexual division of labour that links
women to the functions of wife, mother, and household worker. Women’s lifelong series of events
and experiences is different from men's. Women’s roles as mothers and wives in producing and
reproducing a female personality and culture. Women’s roles carried over to other institutions.
Finally producing differences between women and men. Gender gap in voting, caring professions as
female (the mommy track, pink occupations).
Interactionist theories say that in interaction, "people do gender." At birth, children are assigned a
sex on the basis of their biological sex. Over time, people begin to identify with gender and act in
ways considered appropriate to the sex category designation. People act according to the norms of
appropriate gender behaviour. Gender is produced during interaction. Ways of hugging, laughing,
and complaining are deeply gendered and are situationally enacted.
Topic 89: Gender inequality
Four themes characterize feminist theorizing of gender inequality.
1. Men and women are situated in society not only differently but also unequally.
2. Women get less of the material resources, social status, power, and opportunities for self-
actualization than do men who share their social location—be it a location based on class,
race, occupation, ethnicity, religion, education, nationality, or any intersection of these
factors.
3. This inequality results from the organization of society, not from any significant biological or
personality differences between women and men.
4. Individual human beings may vary somewhat from each other in their profile of potentials
and traits, no significant pattern of natural variation distinguishes the sexes. Instead, allhuman
beings are characterized by a deep need for freedom to seek self-actualization and by a
fundamental malleability that leads them to adapt to the constraints or opportunities of the
situations in which they find themselves.
To say that there is gender inequality, then, is to claim that women are situationally less empowered
than men to realize the need they share with men for self-actualization. All inequality theories
assume that both women and men will respond fairly easily and naturally to more egalitarian social
structures and situations. They affirm, in other words, that it is possible to change the situation. In
this belief, theorists of gender inequality contrast with the theorists of gender difference, who present
a picture of social life in which gender differences are, whatever their cause, more durable, more
penetrative of personality, and less easily changed.
Liberal Feminism
The major expression of gender inequality theory is liberal feminism. The beliefs of liberal feminism
includes:
1. All human beings have certain essential features such as capacities for reason, moral agency,
and self-actualization,
2. Secure the capacities through legal recognition of universal rights,
47
3. The inequalities between men and women assigned by sex are social constructions having no
basis in ‘nature’ and
4. Social change for equality can be produced by an organized appeal to a reasonable public and
the use of the state.
Women equality possible if we change the division of labor by re-patterning of key institutions
i.e. law, work, family, education, and media. Gendered division of labor has organized society into
public and private spheres. Women allocated to private sphere. Men have access to the public sphere
(rewards of social life like money, power, status, freedom, opportunities for growth and self-
worth).Presently the two spheres interact. Women demand on men to assist in the work of private
sphere. Two spheres are still shaped by patriarchal ideology. Liberal feminists pursue change
through: law, appeal for reasoned moral judgments.
Topic 90: Gender oppression
Oppression is a result of direct power relationships between men and women. Men’s interest in
controlling, using, and oppressing women Practise dominance. Women being dominated and
oppressed by men is called patriarchy. Gender differences and gender inequality are byproducts of
patriarchy.
There are two major variants of gender oppression theory:
1. Psychoanalytic feminism
2. Radical feminism
Psychoanalytic feminism emphasizes the emotional dynamics of personality. Emotions are often
deeply buried in subconscious or unconscious areas of the psyche. See patriarchy as a universal and
durable system in which men subjugate women, women accepted their subordinate position.
Why is patriarchy sustained? Explanation of the socio-emotional environment that shapes the
personality in childhood.
Assumptions:
1. Humans grow up by learning to balance a never- resolved tension between ‘individuation’ and
'recognition.'
2. Infants in all societies experience their earliest development in close relationships with a woman.
Feelings for the woman or mother due to need, dependence, love, fear, possessiveness, and rage. A
relationship with a father or man is occasional, secondary, and emotionally uncluttered. A child grows
up in a culture that values maleness and devalues women. For males in adulthood, there is an
emotional carryover from early childhood towards women: the need for love, hate, and
possessiveness. It energizes the man’s quest for a woman who meets his emotional needs yet is
dependent on and controlled by his urge to dominate. A female child brings the same feelings towards
the woman or mother. She faces a culture that devalues women. Acts of freedom and recognition take
a different shape, often submissively.
Women’s oppression is explained in terms of men’s deep emotional need to control women. A drive
arising from ambivalence towards the women who reared them. Women are psychically lacking an
equivalent source of energy to resist dominance.
Radical Feminism: Two central beliefs
1. Women are of absolute positive value as women.
2. Women are everywhere oppressed by patriarchy.
A system of domination-subordination, i.e., patriarchy, exists in every institution. Image of patriarchy
as violence practiced by men and by male-dominated organizations against women. Violence can be
hidden in more complex practices of exploitation and control. Violence is used to protect patriarchy.
Men create and maintain patriarchy. Women serve as compliance tools. Defeating patriarchy. It must
begin with a basic reworking of women’s consciousness so that each woman recognizes her value
and strength; rejects patriarchal pressures to see herself as weak, dependent, and second-class;
and works in unity with other women to establish a broad-based sisterhood of trust, support,
appreciation, and mutual defence.
48
Lesson 24
Feminism as Part of conflict perspective-III
(Topic 91-96)
Topic 91-92: Structural oppression (socialist feminism)
Structural Oppression
Social structure: recurring and routinized large-scale arrangements of social relations that arise out
of history and are always arrangements of power Structural oppression: Some groups of people derive
direct benefits from controlling, using, and subjugating other groups of people. Focus on the
structures of patriarchy, capitalism, racism, and hetero sexism. Locate enactmentsof domination and
experiences of oppression in the interplay of these structures. Structures mutually reinforce each
other.
There are two types of structural oppression theories: socialist feminism theory and
intersectionality theory.
Socialist Feminism
Three goals:
1. To do a critique of the distinctive yet interrelated oppression of patriarchy and capitalism
inwomen’s experience.
2. To develop explicit methods of analysis out of an expanded understanding of
historicalmaterialism.
3. To incorporate an understanding of the significance of ideas into a materialist analysis of
thedetermination of human affairs.
For Marx, the major concern was social class oppression. Occasionally turned attention to gender
oppression. Marxian feminism is a relatively dormant theory that has influenced socialist feminism.
Marxian feminism claims that a woman’s subordination results not from her biology but from social
relations that have a clear and traceable history and that presumably can be changed. The relational
basis of subordination lies in the family. Family as it exists in complex societies It is a recent relational
invention. In prehistory, women had an independent economic base. Replacement of hunting and
gathering by farming economies. Amounts to the economic defeat of the female sex. Men had the
upper hand in resources and advantages over women. Invention of the concept of private property.
Male to own the economic resources of production needed a compliant labour force (slaves, captives,
women-wives, and children) and hires of property. The emergence of the master and his slave-
servants, wife-servants, and children-servants the exploitation of labour developed into complex
structures of dominance reflected the injustices of the economy and consistently enforced the
subordination of women. Destroy property rights through class revolution, and women will attain
freedom of social, political, economic, and personal action.
Locating the origin of patriarchy in the emergence of property relations subsumes women’s
oppression under the general framework of Marxian class analysis. "Property" understood not as
personal possessions but as ownership of the resources necessary for social production (the means of
production) is the basis of class division because it creates a situation in which some groups are able
to claim that they own the means of production while other groups work to do the producing. Marxian
analysis focuses particularly on how this class division works out under capitalism, the economic
system of modern societies. The distinctive feature of capitalism is that the class that owns the
means of production the capitalists operates on a logic of continuous capital accumulation; capital
is wealth (money and other assets), which can be used to generate the material infrastructure of
economic production.
Unlike other forms of economic organisation in which people may seek to exchange either goods or
money for more goods, capitalists seek to exchange goods in order to a mass wealth. The mechanism
49
by which capitalists turn goods into wealth is surplus value; surplus value is the difference between
the compensation given to workers for their production and the value of the goods they produce. This
surplus value is appropriated by the capitalist, who uses it to enhance his own lifestyle and power
and, above all, to reinvest in the ongoing process of capital accumulation and expansion.
Socialist feminists accept the Marxian analysis of capitalism’s class relations as an explication of one
major structure of oppression. But they reject the Marxian analysis of patriarchy as a byproduct of
the same economic production. Instead, they endorse the radical feminist argument that patriarchy,
while interacting with economic conditions, is an independent structure of oppression. Socialist
feminism sets out to bring together these dual pieces of knowledge—knowledge of oppression under
capitalism and oppression under patriarchy—into a unified explanation of all forms of social
oppression. One term used to try to unify these two oppressions is capitalist patriarchy. But the term
perhaps more widely used is domination, defined above (under "Gender Oppression") as a
relationship in which one party, the dominant, succeeds in making the other party, the subordinate,
an instrument of the dominant’s will, refusing to recognize the subordinate’s independent
subjectivity.
Socialist feminism’s explanations of oppression present domination as a large-scale structural
arrangement, a power relation between categories of social actors that is reproduced bythe willful
and intentional actions of individual actors. Women are central to socialist feminism as the primary
topic for analysis, and the patriarchy, while interacting with economic conditions, is an independent
structure of oppression. Socialist feminism sets out to bring together this dual knowledge—
knowledge of oppression under capitalism and oppression under patriarchy—into a unified
explanation of all forms of social oppression. One term used to try to unify these two oppression is
capitalist patriarchy. But the term perhaps more widely used is domination, defined above (under
"Gender Oppression") as a relationship in which one party, the dominant, succeeds in making the
other party, the subordinate, an instrument of the dominant’s will, refusing to recognize the
subordinate’s independent subjectivity.
Socialist feminism’s explanations of oppression present domination as a large-scale structural
arrangement, a power relation between categories of social actors that is reproduced by the willful
and intentional actions of individual actors. Women are central to socialist feminism as the primary
topic for analysis and as the essential vantage point on domination in all its forms. But these theorists
are concerned with all experiences of oppression, both by women and by men.They also explore how
some women, themselves oppressed, actively participate in the oppression of other women; for
example, privileged-class women in American society who oppress poor women provide an essential
vantage point on domination in all its forms. But these theorists are concerned with all experiences
of oppression, both by women and by men. They also explore how some women, themselves
oppressed, actively participate in the oppression of other women; for example, privileged-class
women in American society who oppress poor women.
Topic 93-94: Structural oppression (Intersectionality)
The central issue is that women experience oppression in varying configurations and with varying
degrees of intensity. The explanation for variation is that all women potentially experience
oppression on the basis of gender. Nevertheless, women are differentially oppressed because of the
varied intersections of other arrangements of social inequality. The vectors of oppression and
privilege include not only gender but also class, race, global location, sexual preference, and age. The
variation in these intersections qualitatively alters the experience of being a woman. The argument
in intersectionality theory is that it is the intersection itself that produces a particular experience of
oppression. It is not just an additive strategy of gender, plus race, plus class, plus sexuality. Some
women and men may be privileged.
The central point of theories is to understand the arrangements of inequality as hierarchical
50
structures based on unjust power relations. The theme of injustice signals the consistent critical
focus of this analysis. The link between ideology and power Dominants create ideals of superiority
or inferiority in differences. Use such ideals to justify oppressive practices. People are socialized
with such evaluations as ‘better’ or 'worse.' Ideologies create ‘a mythical norm’ against which
people evaluate. Mythical norm of US society: "white, thin, male, young, heterosexual, Christian,
and financially secure." Anyone not meeting this norm is devalued. Create criteria within their
own group for excluding, punishing, or marginalizing group members.
Observing the mythical norm is ‘othering." Establishing that a group member is unacceptable, an
"other," by some criterion. The intersection of vectors of oppression and privilege creates variations
in both the forms and the intensity of people’s experiences of oppression. In response to their material
circumstances, people create interpretations and strategies for surviving and resisting the persistent
exercise of unjust power. Take stock of the group knowledge worked out in specific life experiences
created by historical intersections of inequality. Develop various feminist expressions of this
knowledge. Intersectionality theory develops a critique of work done in Second Wave Feminism.
That work reflected the experiences and concerns of white, privileged-class feminists in North
Atlantic societies. This critique has produced questions about what we mean by categories such as
"woman," "gender," "race," and "sisterhood." Focused on the diversity of experience in such seeming
universals as "mothering" and "family."
This critique has led to a repositioning of the understandings of "whiteness" by white feminists who
seek to understand whiteness as a construction, the ways whiteness results in privilege, what they can
actively do to reduce racism, and how they can contribute to producing a more inclusive feminist
analysis. Vectors of oppression and privilege like race, class, gender, age, global location, and sexual
preferences intersect in all people’s lives. Intersectionality theorists argue that the way they intersect
markedly affects the degree to which a common standpoint is affirmed. Questions to be looked at:
How do these factors coexist? In balance? In hierarchy? in the shifting schema of ascendance? What
are the implications of this issue for methods of studying intersectionality?
Topic 95: Feminism and post modernism
The postmodernist theory begins with the observation that people no longer live under conditions of
modernity but now live in "postmodernity."
This postmodern world is produced by the interplay of four major changes:
1. An expansive stage in global capitalism;
2. The weakening of centralized state power (with the collapse of the old imperial systems, the
fragmentation of thecommunist bloc, and the rise of ethnic politics within nation-states);
3. The patterning of life by an increasingly powerful and penetrative technology that controls
production and promotes consumerism; and
4. The development of liberationist social movements based not in class but in other forms of
identity—nationalism, race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, and
environmentalism.
These changes, as feminist philosopher Susan Bordo explains, were brought about by people
worldwide engaged in political practice and asking a new set of questions: "Whose truth? Whose
nature? Whose version of reason? Whose history? Whose tradition?"
Humans can, through the exercise of pure reason, arrive at a complete and objective knowledge of
the world. That knowledge is a representation of reality, "a mirror of nature." This principle is full of
errors, as reflected in the questions, critiqued the methods, and suggested alternatives.
The major contribution of postmodernist theory to general feminist theory questioned the primary
category of feminist theory, i.e., women. Is there a coherent relationship between sex, gender, and
sexuality? Feminism is not a stable subject. Women are not a "seamless" category of women.
Deconstruct and see variety. Variety suggests the necessary limits of identity politics. The
51
paradoxical opposition to feminism from ‘women," whom feminism claims to represent.

The category of woman arises out of the process that produces gender. This process is
"performativity" a work-in-progress. Gender arises as people perform it in interaction with each other.
The judge in the court pronounces two persons as man and wife for marriage. Repeated performances
lead to a sense of gender between women and men. People are not free to choose their performances.
Regulatory discourses and expressions control. Expressions even control the shape of a man's or
woman’s body. Exercise and diet mean being in shape. In response, it is said that postmodernists take
feminists away from the materiality of inequality, injustice, and oppression. Hence, it amounts to
moving feminism away from its commitment to progressive change—the foundational project of any
critical social theory.
Topic 96: Concluding remarks
▪ Feminism has a history as long as women’s subordination.
▪ Women have been subordinated almost always and everywhere.
▪ Feminist theory develops a system of ideas about human life that features women as:
 objects and subjects,
 doers and knowers.
▪ Feminist theory has typically expanded and contracted with societal swings.
▪ The contemporary stage of feminists shows a self-sustaining expansion despite new conservative
societal trends.
▪ Feminists guided by four basic questions:
 And what about the women?
 Why is women’s situation as it is?
 How can we change and improve the social world? and
 What about differences among women?
▪ Answers produce the varieties of feminist theory.
▪ Feminist theory offers five key propositions as a basis for the revision of standard
1. The practice of sociological theory must be based in a sociology of knowledge that recognizes
the partiality of all knowledge.
 The knower is embodied and socially located.
 The function of power in effecting what becomes knowledge.
2. Macro social structures are based in processes controlled by dominants.
 Subordinates’ work is made largely invisible and undervalued even tothemselves by
dominant ideology.
 Dominants appropriate productive work of society, including not only economic production
but also women’s work of social reproduction.
3. Micro-interactional processes in society are enactments of these dominant subordinate power
arrangements, enactments very differently interpreted by powerful actors and subordinate actors.
4. These conditions create in women’s subjectivity a bifurcated consciousness along the line of fault
caused by the just a position of patriarchal ideology and women’s experience of the actualities of
their lives.
5. What has been said for women may be applicable to all subordinate peoples in some parallel,
though not identical, form.
Questions to be looked at:
 How do these factors coexist?
 In balance?
 In hierarchy?
 In shifting schema of ascendance?
 What are the implications of this issue for methods of—studying intersectionality?
52
Lesson 25
Social Exchange
(Topic 97-98)
Introduction
In everyday life, we clearly understand the contrast between market transactions at the shopping mall
or an automobile dealership and our relationships with family members, friends, and lovers.In market
transactions, our goal is to get the best deal for ourselves without being obligated to show concern
for the personal welfare of the person with whom we happen to be doing business. In contrast, our
relationships with family members, friends, and lovers reflect our emotional attachments to one
another. This means we are expected to consider their wishes and needs as well as our own, and we
are confident they would do the same for us. But personal relationships, like market transactions, can
also be viewed in terms of costs and rewards.
Being involved in family relationships or spending time with close friends or lovers is intrinsically
rewarding. But there are certain costs to consider as well, even though they may not always be
experienced as such. At the very least, there are the costs of time, energy, and alternative activities
that may be foregone, plus the obligation to provide help to our family and friends when they need
it. Even though friends and family members may feel it is not appropriate to "keep score," their mutual
sharing and caring are probably expected to be balanced over time. If costs and rewards seem to either
party to be unevenly distributed, this may lead to feelings of resentment or conflict that may
eventually undermine the relationship.
Exchange theory and rational choice theory are related, yet there is a difference. One fundamental
difference is that rational choice theorists focus on individual decision-making, while exchange
theorists consider social relationships as their unit of analysis. Recently, exchange theorists have
devoted more attention to networks of social relationships. Exchange theory has its roots in
behaviourism. Behaviourism is best known in psychology. A behavioural sociologist is concerned
with the relationship between an actor’s behaviour and the environment. How do they affect each
other? This relationship is basic to operant conditioning: The learning process by which "behaviour
is modified by its consequences."The environment in which the behaviour exists and the environment
in which it occurs mutually affect each other. That reaction—positive, negative, or neutral—affects
the actor’s later behaviour. If the reaction has been rewarding to the actor, the same behaviour is
likely to be emitted in the future in similar situations. The past consequences of a given behaviour
govern its present state. So the behaviour can be predicted. Behaviourists are interested in rewards
(reinforcers) and costs (punishments).
Rewards are defined by their ability to strengthen (reinforce) behaviour, while costs inhibit the
likelihood of behaviour. The ideas of rewards and costs had a powerful impact on early exchange
theory. The contrast between market transactions and personal relationships Nothing personal vs.
emotional attachment Personal relationships, like market transactions, can also be viewed in terms of
costs and benefits. Family or friend relationships can be rewarding. Personal relationships also
involve costs, though they are not taken as such. Costs of time, energy, and alternative activities
foregone. Plus the obligation to provide help to family and friends when they need it. No record-
keeping of scores Mutual sharing and caring are balanced over time. Unevenly distributed costs and
rewards can result in feelings of resentment or conflict.Undermine the relationships.
The perspective of exchange and rational choice theory involves looking at all social relations—like
friendships and other personal relations, as well as one-time market transactions and long-term
formal contracts—in terms of costs and rewards, both material and nonmaterial.
53
Social exchanges of all types reflect individuals’ efforts to meet their own needs and interests through
the choices they make. Even if actions are consciously oriented towards others' welfare. In both social
exchange and rational choice theory, the focus is on the benefits received in return. Social exchange
has been around long before the current exchange and rational choice theories. The social exchange
process can be analyzed from an individualistic, utilitarian (rationalistic) perspective. A direct or
simple exchange. The basic law remains the same. People seek to avoid pain (reduce costs) and
maximise pleasure (rewards). Exchange is reflected in market transactions, individual transactions in
the market but the whole system is based on a collectivist version of exchange theory. The complex
division of labour (specialization) may be an expansion of exchange networks in modern society.
Change amounts to a shift from mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity. The shift from restricted
exchange to generalized exchange. The exchange of marriages between tribes or even families results
in a strong network of relations, also known as a restricted exchange. The generalized exchange
involves a larger network of transactions. Indirect, with less emphasis on personal negotiation of
exchange terms. Individuals were more oriented towards the overall system. Each party is expected
to make contributions that benefit others without expecting an immediate benefit in return. A high
level of trust is associated with a high level of moral development. This form of exchange is not a
matter for individuals to decide on their own. Exchange patterns are institutionalized and legitimized
by a moral code that transcends individuals’ utilitarian interests.
54
Lesson 26
Social Exchange: George C. Homans
(Topic 99-103)
Topic 99: George C. Homans Elementary Exchange
Introduction
The heart of George Homans’s exchange theory lies in a set of fundamental propositions. Although
some of his propositions deal with at least two interacting individuals, Homans was careful to point
out that these propositions are based on psychological principles. According to Homans, they are
psychological for two reasons.
First, "they are usually stated and empirically tested by persons who call themselves psychologists"
(Homans, 1967:39–40).
Second, and more importantly, they are psychological because of the level at which they deal with
the individual in society: "They are propositions about the behaviour of individual human beings,
rather than propositions about groups or societies as such; and the behaviour of men, as men, is
generally considered the province of psychology.
Reductionism, according to Homans, is "the process of showing how the propositions of one named
science [in this case, sociology] follow in logic from the more general propositions ofanother named
science [in this case, psychology]." Homans made the case for psychological principles, though. I
did not think of individuals as isolated; they are social and interact with others. Explained social
behaviour with psychological principles.
Homans tried to develop a theory that focuses on psychology, people, and the elementary forms
of social life. This theory envisages social behaviour as an exchange of activity, more or less
rewarding or costly, between at least two people. In exchange theory, Homans sought to explain
elementary social behavior in terms of rewards and costs. Homans’ exchange theory is derived from
both behavioural psychology and elementary economics (rational choice theory). Homans began with
a discussionof B. F. Skinner’s study of pigeons. In the pigeon’s inborn repertoire of behaviours,
which it uses to explore its environment, there is the "peck." As the pigeon wanders around the cage,
pecking away, it happens to hit a round red target. In response, the pigeon got some grain to feed on.
The probability of the pigeon’s emitting the behaviour again not just pecking but pecking on the
target has increased. The pigeon’s behaviour in pecking the target is an operant; the operant has been
reinforced.
Grain is the reinforcer, and the pigeon has undergone operant conditioning. The pigeon learned to
peck the target by being rewarded for doing so. Skinner was interested in this instance of pigeons'
concern for humans. Skinner’s pigeons are not engaged in a true exchange relationship with the
psychologist. Pigeons are one-sided (not a true exchange), whereas human exchanges are at least
two-sided. Sociologists study social behaviour. The activity of each of at least two animals reinforces
(or punishes) the activity of the other. Each influences the other. Homans restricted himself to
everyday social interaction. Homans developed several propositions.
Topic 100-103: Exchange Propositions
Focusing on this sort of situation, and basing his ideas on Skinner’s findings, Homans developed
several propositions.
The Success Proposition
For all actions taken by persons, the more often a particular action of a person is rewarded, the more
likely the person is to perform that action. (Homans, 1974:16) In terms of Homans’s Person-Other
example in an office situation, this proposition means that a person is more likely to ask others for
advice if he or she has been rewarded in the past with useful advice. Furthermore, the more often a
person received useful advice in the past, the more often he or she will request more advice. Similarly,
the other person will be more willing to give advice and giveit more frequently if he or she often has
been rewarded with approval in the past.
Three stages
55
Generally, behavior in accord with the success proposition involves three stages:
1. a person’s action
2. a rewarded result
3. a repetition of the original action or at minimum one similar in at least some respects.
Homans specified a number of things about the success proposition.
First, although it is generally true threateningly frequent rewards lead to increasingly frequent
actions, this reciprocation cannot go on indefinitely. At some point individuals simply cannot act that
way as frequently.
Second, the shorter the interval is between behavior and reward, the more likely a person is to repeat
the behavior. Conversely, long intervals between behavior and reward lower the likelihood of repeat
behavior.
Finally, it was Homans’s view that intermittent rewards are more likely to elicit repeat behavior than
regular rewards are. Regular rewards lead to boredom and satiation, whereas rewards at irregular
intervals are very likely to elicit repeat behaviors.
The Stimulus Proposition
If in the past the occurrence of a particular stimulus, or set of stimuli, has been the occasion on which
a person’s action has been rewarded, then the more similar the present stimuli are to the past ones,
the more likely the person is to perform the action, or some similar action. Again we look at Homans’s
office example: If, in the past, Person and Other found the giving and getting of advice rewarding,
they are likely to engage in similar actions in similar situations in the future.Homans offered an even
more down-to-earth example: “A fisherman who has cast his line into a dark pool and has caught a
fish becomes more apt to fish in dark pools again”. Homans was interested in the process of
generalization, that is, the tendency to extend behavior to similar circumstances. In the fishing
example, one aspect of generalization would be to move from fishing in dark pools to fishing in any
pool with any degree of shadiness. Similarly,success in catching fish is likely to lead from one kind
of fishing to another (for instance, freshwater to saltwater) or even from fishing to hunting. However,
the process of discrimination is also of importance. That is, the actor may fish only under the specific
circumstances that proved successful in the past. For one thing, if the conditions under which success
occurred were too complicated, similar conditions may not stimulate behavior. If the crucial stimulus
occurs too long before behavior is required, it may not actually stimulate that behavior. An actor
can become oversensitized to stimuli, especially if they are very valuable to the actor. In fact, the
actor could respond to irrelevant stimuli, at least until the situation is corrected by repeated failures.
All this is affected by the individual’s alertness or attentiveness to stimuli.
The Aggression-Approval Propositions
Proposition A: When a person’s action does not receive the reward he expected, or receives
punishment he did not expect, he will be angry; he becomes more likely to perform aggressive
behavior, and the results of such behavior become more valuable to him.(Homans, 1974:37) In the
office case, if Person does not get the advice he or she expected and Other does not receive the praise
he or she anticipated, both are likely to be angry. We are surprised to find the concepts of frustration
and anger in Homans’s work because they would seem to refer to mental states. In fact, Homans
admitted as much: “When a person does not get what he expected,he is said to be frustrated. A purist
in behaviorism would not refer to the expectation at all, because the word seems to refer to a state of
mind” (1974:31). Homans went on to argue that frustration of such expectations need not refer “only”
to an internal state. It also can refer to “wholly external events,” observable not just by Person but
also by outsiders. Proposition A on aggression-approval refers only to negative emotions, whereas
Proposition B deals with more positive emotions.
Proposition B: When a person’s action receives the reward he expected, especially a greater reward
than he expected, or does not receive punishment he expected, he will be pleased; he becomes more
likely to perform approving behavior, and the results of such behavior become more valuable to him.
(Homans, 1974:39) For example, in the office, when Person gets the advice that he or she expects
56
and Other gets the praise that he or she expects, both are pleased and are more likely to get or give
advice. Advice and praise become more valuable to each one.
The Rationality Proposition
In choosing between alternative actions, a person will choose that one for which, as perceived by him
at the time, the value, V, of the result, multiplied by the probability, of getting the result, is the greater.
(Homans, 1974:43) While the earlier propositions rely heavily on behaviorism, the rationality
proposition demonstrates most clearly the influence of rational choice theory on Homans’s approach.
In economic terms, actors who act in accord with the rationality proposition are maximizing their
utilities. Basically, people examine and make calculations about the various alternative actions open
to them. They compare the amount of rewards associated with each course of action. They also
calculate the likelihood that they actually will receive the rewards. Highly valued rewards will be
devalued if the actors think it unlikely that they will obtain them. In contrast, lesser-valued rewards
will be enhanced if they are seen as highly attainable. Thus, there is an interaction between the value
of the reward and the likelihood of attainment.
The most desirable rewards are those that are both very valuable and highly attainable. The least
desirable rewards are those that are not very valuable and are unlikely to be attained. Homans relates
the rationality proposition to the success, stimulus, and value propositions. The rationality proposition
tells us that whether people will perform an action depends on their perceptions of the probability of
success. But what determines this perception? Homans argues that perceptions of whether chances
of success are high or low are shaped by past successes and the similarity of the present situation to
past successful situations.
The rationality proposition also does not tell us why an actor values one reward more than another;
for this we need the value proposition. In these ways, Homans links his rationality principle to his
more behavioristic propositions. In the end, Homans’s theory can be condensed to a view of the
actor as a rational profit seeker. However, Homans’s theory was weak on mental states
(Abrahamsson, 1970; Mitchell, 1978) and large-scale structures (Ekeh, 1974). For example, on
consciousness Homans admitted the need for a “more fully developed psychology” (1974:45).
Despite such weaknesses, Homans remained a behaviorist who worked resolutely at the level of
individual behavior. He argued that large-scale structures can be understood if we adequately
understand elementary social behavior. He contended that exchange processes are “identical” at the
individual and societal levels, although he granted that at the societal level, “the way the fundamental
processes are combined is more complex”
57
Lesson 27
Social Exchange: Peter M. Blau-I
(Topic 104-107)
Topic 104: Blau Exchange theory Introduction
Peter Blau’s (1964) goal was “an understanding of social structure on the basis of an analysis of the
social processes that govern the relations between individuals and groups. The basic question,is how
social life becomes organized into increasingly complex structures of associations among men”
(1964:2). Blau’s intention was to go beyond Homans’s concern with elementary forms of social life
and into an analysis of complex structures: “The main sociological purpose of studying processes
of face to- face interaction is to lay the foundation for an understanding of the social structures that
evolve and the emergent social forces that characterize their development”. Blau focused on the
process of exchange, which, in his view, directs much of human behavior and underlies relationships
among individuals as well as among groups. In effect Blau envisioned a four-stage sequence leading
from interpersonal exchange to social structure and to social change:
Step 1: Personal exchange transactions between people give rise to
Step 2: Differentiation of status and power, which leads to
Step 3: Legitimization and organization, which sow the seeds of
Step 4: Opposition and change
Micro to Macro
On the individual level, Blau and Homans were interested in similar processes. However, Blau’s
concept of social exchange is limited to actions that are contingent, that depend, on rewarding
reactions from others—actions that cease when expected reactions are not forthcoming. People are
attracted to each other for a variety of reasons that induce them to establish social associations. Once
initial ties are forged, the rewards that they provide to each other serve to maintain and enhance the
bonds. The opposite situation is also possible: with insufficient rewards, an association will weaken
or break. Rewards that are exchanged can be either intrinsic (for instance, love, affection, respect) or
extrinsic (for instance, money, physical labor). The parties cannot always reward each other equally;
when there is inequality in the exchange, a difference of power will emerge within an association.
When one party needs something from another but has nothing comparable to offer in return, four
alternatives are available.
1. First, people can force other people to help them.
2. Second, they can find another source to obtain what they need.
3. Third, they can attempt to get along without what they need from the others.
4. Finally, and most important, they can subordinate themselves to the others, thereby giving the
others “generalized credit” in their relationship; the others then can draw on this credit when
they want them to do something. (This last alternative is, of course, the essential characteristic
of power.)
Topic 105-107: Mediation of Norms and Values in Exchange
For Blau, the mechanisms that mediate among the complex social structures are the norms and values
(the value consensus) that exist within society: Commonly agreed upon values and norms serve as
media of social life and as mediating links for social transactions. They make indirect social exchange
possible, and they govern the processes of social integration and differentiation in complex social
structures as well as the development of social organization and reorganization in them. Need to
reciprocate for benefits received in order to continue receiving them. Starting mechanism of social
interaction. Once exchanges have occurred, “norms of reciprocity” emerge. Norms regulate the
subsequent exchanges.
Norms establish the level of reward in exchange for a particular action. Exchange relations are
normatively regulated. Consider them as norms of fair exchange, Justice principle. Violation of
norms of fair exchange invites aggression. Norms and values govern: The processes of social
integration and differentiation in complex social structures. The development of social organization
58
and reorganization in them, major focus is on value consensus. One memberconforms to the group
norm, receives approval for that conformity. Conformity contributes to group’s maintenance and
stability.
The group or collectivity engages in an exchange relationship with the individual. In contrast to
Homans simpler notion, which focused on interpersonal exchange. Teacher and students. A teacher
helps students by imparting knowledge. This is help to collectivity of students/parents, he does not
receive reward (salary) from the students/parents, salary comes from the government. Look at
charitable organization and individuals who benefit. No direct contact between the doners to
organization and the individuals receiving help through organization. Exchange between collectivity
and individual. It is a replacement to individual- individual exchange. Organized philanthropy and
indirect social exchange. Norm. Norm in Blau’s formulation moves him to the level of exchange
between individual and collectivity.
The concept of the norm in Blau’s formulation moves him to the level of exchange between individual
and collectivity. The concept of values moves him to the largest-scale at societal level. Here he
analyses the relationship among collectivities. “Interpersonal attraction” is replaced by shared values
at macro level. Common values of various types can be conceived of as “media of social transactions.”
Provide common set of standards for conducting the complex chain of indirect exchanges. Expands
the compass of social interaction and the structure of social relations through social space and time.
The consensus values extend the range of social transactions beyond the limits of direct social
contacts. Particularistic values are the media of integration and solidarity. Unites groups around
things like patriotism. Values transmitted through socialization.
Values can be codified into laws, enforced by those in power. Similar at the collective level to those
at the individuals on a face to face basis. Perpetuates social structures beyond the life span of human
beings. Compared with Homans’ individual level behaviors, Blau discussed groups, organizations,
collectivities, societies, norms, values.
Shared values provide standards for the calculation of:
a) expected rewards,
b) reciprocity, and
c) fair exchange.
Violation of the standards of fair exchange amount to the violation of principles of justice. Deprived
parties may turn to aggressive behavior to get justice. Blau’s analysis is concerned with: What holds
large-scale social units together? And What tears them apart? These are clearly traditional concerns
of the social factist. Value consensus is of crucial significance for the social processes in complex
social structures. Value standards commonly agreed upon serve as mediating link for social
transactions between individuals and groups. No direct contact. Sharing basic values creates
integrating bonds and social solidarity among people at society level. Common standards of valuation
produce media of exchange (like money).This media transcends personal transactions and develop
complex networks of indirect exchange. Legitimating values expand the scope of centralized control
beyond the reach of personal influence. Authority of legitimating govt. This is institutionalization.
The processes that regularize and stabilize complex exchange processes. High level of trust associated
with high level of moral development. This form of the exchange is not a matter for individuals to
decide on their own. Exchange patterns are institutionalized and legitimated by a moral code that
Institutions are a historical product. Institutional norms and underlying mediatingvalues are handed
down to from one generation to another. Limiting and circumscribing the kindsof indirect exchange
networks that can emerge. transcends individuals’ utilitarian interests.
Stabilization of Power Structures Through Norms and Values
If an acknowledged leader is perceived as fair, norms and values are likely eventually to emerge
whereby the leader’s power is stabilized and reinforced by being transformed into legitimate authority
(Blau, 1964:199–233). This means that the leader will be seen as having the right to expect
compliance from subordinates. To the extent that members accept the existing distribution of power
59
and authority, and are also satisfied with the rewards they receive, they may augment the leader’s
authority by rewarding one another with social approval for their compliance with the leader (or by
showing disapproval for noncompliance). This is especially likely if the values and norms that
develop are consistent with members’ own personal values and identities.Exchange relationships
result in power differentials.
60
Lesson 28
Social Exchange: Peter M. Blau-II
(Topic 108-110)
Topic 108-109: Exchange and power
Richard Emerson and Peter Blau have both offered analyses of power differentials which root them
in exchange relationships but also look beyond individual (or "dyadic") relationships to larger
structural settings. Both see power as originating when valued services are provided as part of an
unbalanced exchange, so that one party places a higher value on the out come than the other. The
approach is also that adopted by Homans in his more recent work.
Power originates when valued services are provided as part of an unbalanced exchange. One party
places a higher value on the outcome than the other. Power differential may be rooted in exchange
relationships. This principle is also applicable to larger structural settings, crucial notion that one
partner in exchange is dependent on the other for services. Values those services more than the other
person values anything he can offer. Coercive aspects of powerin this exchange like someone who is
in a position of power has the potential to secure submission and compliance. Conditions determining
the power of service provider:
1. The individual who wants a service has nothing the supplier needs in return.
2. The recipient has no alternative to turn to.
3. The recipient cannot use coercion to extract the services needed.
4. The recipient cannot live without the service or find a substitute.
2nd and 4th condition depicts monopoly. So the buyer pays more. In social exchange the supplier can
make general demands to secure compliance. Power is the ability of persons or groupsto impose their
will on others despite resistance. The acceptance of subordination. Superordinate power is a generic
social reward. Such power gives one generalized means, a ‘credit card,’ which may be used to obtain
variety of services. A person who commands services others need, and who is independent of any
at their command, attains power over others. Exchange processes give rise to differentiation of power.
This principle is applicable to the most intimate as well as to the most distant social relations.
Development of legitimate institutional power: Major determinants of legitimacy are found in the
exchange aspects of power. Do subordinates feel that power is being exercised fairly and generously?
If the subordinates feel that they derive fair returns for the costs they incurred for submission then
there is collective approval. Exercise of power is legitimized. Legitimacy makes it right and proper
to obey. Group develops norms, which help to enforce members’ obedience. People find that
deference and submission create costs of substantial order, should they comply with others
commands? When power is exercised generously, individuals rationalizeobedience. Such actions will
be transformed into a collective norm that mandates obedience to legitimate authority. Failure to
discharge obligations is subject to group sanctions. The more the reciprocal obligations of an
exchange relationship are violated, the more are the deprived parties disposed to sanction negatively
those violating the norms of reciprocity. Group norms regulate social exchange. Subordinates may
experience collectively the unfair exercise of power. Collective disapproval generates opposition
movements based on appropriate values.
Topic 110: Exchange among Structures
The emergence of power and authority structures enables leaders to control and coordinate the actions
of subordinates in developing a collective line of action. The extent of this control will reflect the
degree of dependency among group members, the value of the rewards they anticipate from the
group’s collective action, and their commitment to the group’s legitimating values and norms.
Members are being compensated for their contributions. Alternatively, goals may be based on group
members’ consensus. All are expectedto share the rewards of goal accomplishment. The challenge
for the leader is to coordinate members’ actions so that they fit together in a collective line of action.
It is the group, not its constituent members, that becomes the interacting unit.
Members may be seen as acting on behalf of the group or its leader. Members do not decide as
61
individuals whether to strike or go back to work. Personal goals are best served by united action. Is
a leadership structure necessary for a group's line of action? Team members want to win, yet they
need a captain. Groups can interact with each other through leaders. Macro structures consist of
relationships among groups or organizations, while micro structures consist only of individuals. Once
an organization is established, its collective action may be continued despite turnover in the group’s
membership.
62
Lesson 29
Social Exchange: Peter M. Blau-III
(Topic 111-113)
Topic 111: Exchange among Structures
The exchange patterns that develop among different groups and organizations are similar to the
processes that occur among individuals. Particular transactions may be balanced or imbalanced. If
balanced, relations of reciprocal interdependence will be established. Imbalanced exchanges will
result in the differentiation of status and power at the group level. The dominant group can organize
subordinate groups into an even larger group or organization to engage in a joint line of action, one
big collection of subordinate groups or organizations-coalition or alliance for action. Various patterns
of internal exchange are likely to develop within the alliance.
Additional differentiation of status and power within Internal subgroups may get organized and
engage in exchange transactions with other individuals or groups within or outsidethe coalition. When
relationships exist between similar subgroups in different organizations, the stage is set for the
emergence of new groupings for the pursuit of distinct goals. Another alliance is a complex society,
which has an elaborate network of associations. Associations are involved in numerous kinds of
exchange transactions. Many of these exchanges reflect varying degrees of imbalance and consequent
relations of power and dependency. Bureaucratic organizations dominate almost all institutional
sectors of society. Linked in various kinds of inter- organizational relationships. Modern society is
honeycombed with innumerable overlapping and interpenetrating groups and associations of various
types.
Topic 112-113: Legitimation versus Opposition to Power Structures
The legitimation of power structures through values and norms does not guarantee that members will
continue indefinitely to be satisfied with the existing distribution of costs and rewards. Power
structures are frequently resisted, sometimes overthrown, and replaced. This is true bothin small-
scale groups and large-scale complex associations, as well as in overall society. In the long run, the
legitimacy of structures of power and authority rests on reward and cost outcomes that are widely
perceived as fair. But if conditions change, the stage is set for the formation of an opposition
movement and, in an extreme case, the overthrow of the existing power structure (Blau, 1964:224–
252).
Numerous processes could adversely affect reward and cost outcomes for subordinates and lead to
dissatisfaction. For example, authority figures may begin to take advantage of subordinates’
dependency by increasing the demands made on them, which they would see as unfair. Or, even if
demands remain stable, the reward-cost ratio may become relatively less attractive as members
become satiated with the rewards they receive. Members may become aware of other groups in which
reward or cost outcomes are more favorable, may develop feelingof disadvantaged by comparison.
Power and authority structures are inherently precarious and potentially unstable. The member’s
continuing commitment rests in the long run on favorable reward and cost outcomes.
Even if dissatisfied with existing reward and cost outcomes, there is no guarantee that an opposition
movement will be developed or the power structure will be overthrown. Several reasons exist for not
starting a movement, e.g., people may fear that efforts to promote change would be unsuccessful, and
the negative consequences of failure would be even worse than putting up with the existing situation.
Despite the formation of an opposition movement, some
63
dissatisfied members may be reluctant to participate, they see such a struggle as risky and futile.
Some dissatisfied members may simply leave the group and join alternative groups with a more
favorable reward or cost outcome.
The relationship between legitimation mechanisms and opposition mechanisms can be seen as one
of more or less continuous dialectical conflict (Blau, 1964:312–338). The emergence of strong
authority structures invariably creates the conditions for the formation of opposition movements. For
one thing, the authority structure rests, as we have seen, on resources the leader controls that can be
used to reward subordinates for their compliance. But, to the extent that a leader is able to increase
the resources at his or her disposal, he or she is likely to arouse dissatisfaction on the part of
subordinates who would like to see these resources distributed more generously. Thus, for example,
the loss of legitimacy of the Communist Party in Russia and other countries of the former Soviet
Union in the late 1980s reflected in part the widespread resentment of the affluence that high-level
Communist Party officials enjoyed at a time when the emerging market system left many people
without the basic economic survival guarantees to which they had become accustomed.
The emergence of strong authority structures invariably creates the conditions for the formation of
opposition movements. The authority structure rests on resources the leader controls that can be used
to reward subordinates for their compliance. An undue increase in the resources of a leader is likely
to arouse dissatisfaction among subordinates. Imbalance in exchange. Subordinates want these
resources distributed more generously. The affluence of the powerful but the poverty of the powerless
Imbalanced exchange. Contradiction. Dissatisfied people would desire to change the imbalance. Will
evaluate and debate alternative goals and strategies. Mobilise support.
A leader in power will convince the dissatisfied about reality. May not succeed. Imbalanced
exchanges will develop the emerging opposition leader. Motivate the fellows to participate in a
movement for change. May negotiate: Options Changes in the distribution of costs and rewards
Replacing current authority figures. The revolutionary overthrow of the existing structure How
successful was the opposition leader? The success of the dissatisfied in opposing or replacing the
existing power structure depends on the emergence of its own leadership structure.
64
Lesson 30
Michael Hechter
(Topic 114-117)
Topic 114: Michael Hechter Rational choice theory
Assumption: People are rational.
Base their actions on what they perceive to be the most effective means to goal, constantly weighing
alternative means against alternative ends and choose between the means and ends. Hence the term
rational choice. The way to understand much of how people behave toward each other is by seeing
them as rational decision makers. Individuals reveal preferences or hierarchies of utility (value) They
seek to maximize these preferences, have their own rationale.
Some of the basics of rational choice theory by Hechter has been formulated by Turner like:
i. Humans are purposive and goal oriented.
ii. Humans have sets of hierarchically ordered preferences or utilities.
iii. In choosing lines of behavior, humans make rational calculations about:
a. The utility of alternative lines of conduct with reference to the preferencehierarchy.
b. The costs of each alternative in terms of utilities foregone.
c. The best way to maximize utility.
i. Emergent social phenomena are ultimately the result of rational choices made by
utilitymaximizing individuals. (Phenomena may include: social structures, collective
decisions, collective behavior.)
ii. Emergent phenomena that arise from rational choices constitute a set of parameters that
determine.
a. The distribution of resources among individuals.
b. The distribution of opportunities for various lines of behavior.
c. The distribution and nature of norms and obligations in a situation.
Rational action is its own explanation. An action can be held as “explained” if and only if it is treated
as “rational”: Action which can be accounted for. It contains no black boxes.
Topic 116: The Basis of Social control: Dependence, Monitoring, and Sanctioning
Groups exist to provide joint goods. Some individuals depend more on groups than others. Depends
on group for resources that rank high in hierarchy of the individual needs. Dependence determines
the potential power for group on that individual.
• Dependency over group is the rational for creating rules and obligations.
 No alternative available for the valued goods.
 Lack of information for alternatives sources.
 Costs of exiting the group are high
 Moving costs to another group are high.
 Personal ties are strong.
• Rules ensure access to this joint good. Dependence is incentive to create normative
obligations
• The extensiveness of normative obligations in a group is related to the degree of
dependence.
• Extensive norms guide and regulate.
• Eextensiveness of a group alone has no necessary implications for group solidarity.
• Crucial that all members comply with the norms.
• Compliance depends upon group’s capacity to control.
• Groups’ control capacity is a function of: Monitoring, and Sanctioning
Monitoring is the process of detecting the non-conformity to group norms and obligations.
Sanctioning is the use of rewards and punishments to induce conformity. Lower the monitoring
capacity, the lower to ensure compliance. Without monitoring sanctioning cannot effectively serve
as an inducement to conformity. For Hechter, solidarity is the product of dependence, monitoring,
65
and sanctioning.
Topic 117: Group solidarity
Control capacity different in two types of groups:
 Compensatory group and
 Obligatory group
Compensatory group: A grouping produces joint good for market and does not consume itself. Group
control capacity is reduced. Profit from sale used to buy conformity. Compensation bought for the
labor provided. Low dependence on group, low social solidarity. Reduces the extensiveness of norms.
Person can sell his labor elsewhere. Rational to leave the group.
Obligatory groups: Produce joint goods for members’ own consumption. Rational to create
obligations for contribution from members. Higher the dependence on joint good, higher the
incentive for conformity. No easy alternative to the joint good. Monitoring and sanctioning efficient.
Sanctions for violation very costly. Expulsion from the group possible Sanctioning and monitoring
costs low. High social solidarity.
Compensatory groups are large to produce marketable goods. Obligatory groups are smaller and
provide goods for their members that cannot be obtained in market. High solidarity. The extent to
which members’ private resources are contributed to a collective end. High solidarity can be achieved
only in obligatory groups. Here dependence, monitoring and sanctioning is high. As obligatory
groups get large, their monitoring and sanctioning capacity decreases.
Gemeinschaft vs. geselleschaft i.e. primary vs. secondary groups; mechanical vs. Organic solidarity.
Nature of joint goods consumed by members or produced for market determines the level of
dependence of individuals on the group. Also determines the control capacity of group. High and low
solidarity follow from rational choice of individuals.
66
Lesson 31
James Coleman-I
(Topic 118-120)
Topic 118: James Coleman Rational choice theory Introduction
Although it influenced the development of exchange theory, rational choice theory was generally
marginal to mainstream sociological theory. It is largely through the efforts of one man, James
S.Coleman, that rational choice theory has become one of the “hot” theories in contemporary
sociology. For one thing, in 1989 Coleman founded a journal, Rationality and Society, devoted tothe
dissemination of work from a rational choice perspective. For another, Coleman (1990b) published
an enormously influential book, Foundations of Social Theory, based on this perspective. Finally,
Coleman became president of the American Sociological Association in 1992 and used that forum to
push rational choice theory and to present an address entitled “The Rational Reconstruction of
Society” (Coleman, 1993b).
Since we have outlined the basic tenets of rational choice theory, it would be useful to begin with
Coleman’s (1989) introductory comments to the first issue of Rationality and Society.The journal
was to be interdisciplinary because rational choice theory (or, as Coleman calls it, “the paradigm of
rational action” [1989:5]) is the only theory with the possibility of producing paradigmatic
integration. Coleman does not hesitate to argue that the approach operates from a base in
methodological individualism and to use rational choice theory as the micro-level base for the
explanation of macro-level phenomena. Even more interesting is what Coleman’s approach does not
find “congenial”:
Topic 119: Foundations of Rational Choice Theory
Coleman argues that sociology should focus on social systems but that such macro phenomena must
be explained by factors internal to them, prototypically individuals. He favors working at this level
for several reasons, including the fact that data usually are gathered at the individual level and then
aggregated or composed to yield the system level. Among the other reasons for favoring a focus on
the individual level is that this is where “interventions” ordinarily are madeto create social changes.
As we will see, central to Coleman’s perspective is the idea that social theory is not merely an
academic exercise but should affect the social world through such “interventions.”
Two key elements in this theory: Actors and Resources.
Resources: those things over which actors have control and in which they have some interest. Others
also have interest in them. Interaction of individuals leads to the system of action level developments,
actors are purposive: Each having the goal of maximizing its realization.
Results in interdependence, a systemic character. Coleman has faith in rational choice theory. Yet
does not believe that this perspective, at least as yet, has all the answers. In reality people may not
always behave rationally it is relative. “My implicit assumption is that the theoretical predictions
made here will be substantively the same whether the actors act precisely according to rationality
as commonly conceived or deviate in the ways that have been observed.” Coleman.
Whether behavior is:
• Conformist or
• Deviant,
Focus is on micro to macro linkage: From the combination of individual actions to the behavior of
the system. System constrains the orientation of individuals it also interested in micro to micro
relationship. The impact of individual actions on other individual actions. A key step in the micro-
to-macro change is the granting of the authority and rights possessed by one individual to another
i.e. The subordination of one actor to another, creates the most basic macro phenomenon—an acting
unit consisting of two people, rather than two independent actors. This unit functions independently
of the actors takes priority over individual rational interests. Rational for the functioning of collective
unit. May have deficiencies and can generate special problems and problems need solutions.
Topic 120: Group solidarity
67
Actors have resources, they are interested in the resources of others they buy, borrow, and exchange
the resources. Resultant system of interaction between the actors is exchange. Resultantly social
organization revolve around transactions between those who have and those who seek resources.
Transactions can occur between individuals directly, and Also occur indirectly through
intermediaries.Can also occur in markets. Here resources are aggregated and bought and sold
according to law of supply and demand.
Coleman conceived resources as rights to act. Right to determine the exchange rate orPrice. Right
can be given away in exchange for other rights to act. Authorizing others to determine the norms of
exchange.
Authority relations consist of two types:
1. Conjoint authority: Actors unilaterally give control of their rights to act to another.Vesting of
authority in others seen in the best interests of all actors.
2. Disjoint authority: Actors give their rights away for extrinsic compensation (money).
For Coleman, disjoint authority model is applicable to norms. Transfer of rights of control to a system
of rules that are sanctioned by others. Norms are built by virtue of individuals giving up their rights
to control resources in exchange for expected benefits. Norms taken as given. People invoke them to
explain individual behavior. How norms can emerge and be maintained? Norms are initiated and
maintained by people. People see benefits in abiding by andharm stemming from the violation. People
are willing to give up some control over their own behavior. In return they gain some control (through
norms) over the behavior of others.
End result: the control which was held by each alone, becomes widely distributed over the whole set
of-actors, who exercise that control through norms. Actors may not act in terms of their self interest
but must act in the interest of the group. People maximize their utility by partially surrendering rights
of control over themselves and gaining partial control over others. There is equilibrium in the case of
norms.
For Coleman two key questions in understanding social solidarity are:
1 What conditions within a larger collectivity of individuals create demand for rational actors
to give their rights of control over resources to normative rules and sanctions
associated with these rules?
2 What conditions make realization of effective control by norms and sanctions?
68
Lesson 32
James Coleman-II
(Topic 121-123)
Topic 121: Group Solidarity
Two assumptions that help in group solidarity:
1. There is demand for norms; and
2. Realization of norms through effective sanctioning, i. e. making the normseffective.
There is demand for norms:
 To counter the negative externalities (Harmful results in a particular context);
 To enable actors to bargain and reduce negative externalities;
 To create rules that govern the exchange. Market. Regulating the transactions.
 To control the free riding. Some actors do not contribute to production of joint good.
Rein in the violators.
 To control he abusive use of authority, or any source of threat to others.
Actors see that by giving up some of their rights of control over their resources, they can reduce
externalities. As the group size increases, individual bargaining becomes difficult. Big markets
determine the price of resources i. e. supply and demand principle. Markets create their own negative
externalities i. e. cheating, hoarding, so there is demand for norms to regulate transactions. Systems
of norms, trust, and authority represent ways to organize actors. Norms can be proscriptive as well as
prescriptive. Realization of norms through their being proscriptive as well as prescriptive.
Proscriptive norms: the rule that prohibit certain type of behavior.
Impose negative sanctions.
Prescriptive norms: What is to be done?
Positive sanctions for conformity. Approval, support, esteem.
Operation of norms possible in small groups. Small groups have high social solidarity.
Topic 122: Principles of group solidarity
Turner summarized Coleman’s principles of group solidarity in four propositions.
I. The level of interest in creating norms among actors who are producing a joint good
increases with:
 The intensity of negative externalities the group experiences collectively.
 The rate of free riding in the production of goods.
 The level of actors’ dependence on the production of the joint good.
II. The extensiveness of the norms created by actors with an interest in regulating theproduction of
a joint good increases with:
 The actors’ dependence on the production of the joint goods.
 The degree to which actors consume the joint good they produce.
 The proportion of all actors receiving utilities for the production of joint good.
 The rates of communication among members engaged in the production of a joint
good which is:
1. Negatively related to the size of the group.
2. Positively related to the density of group network ties.
III. The ratio of prospective to prescriptive content of norms regulating the production of joint
goods increases with:
 The capacity to lower the costs of monitoring conformity to normativeobligations, which
in turn is positively related to:
1. Rates of communication among actors.
2. Density of networks ties.
3. Ratio of informal to formal sanctioning.
4. Ratio of positive to negative sanctioning.
69
IV. The level of social solidarity among actors producing joint goods is likely to increase when:
 Actors’ dependence on joint goods is high.
 The extensiveness of norms is great.
 The ratio of prescriptive to proscriptive content of norms is high.
 The ratio of positive to negative sanctions is high.
 The costs for monitoring and sanctioning are low.
 The proportion of actors receiving utilities from the joint good is high.
Topic 123: Concluding remarks about rational choice theory
Three conclusions:
1. Social action in the general case depends on beliefs.
2. Beliefs, actions, attitudes should be treated as rational. All based on reasonsperceived by
social actors as valid.
3. Reasons of the “cost-benefit” type should not be given more attention than theydeserve.
This is criticism: Rationality is one thing, expected utility another.
Rationality postulate:
 Social actors try to act in congruence with reasons they perceive as valid.
 They explain their behavior is normally meaningful to them.
 The context makes these reasons of the “cost-benefit” type.
 Action to be explained by its meaning to the actor.
 As part of general theory of rationality it is said:
 Any collective phenomenon is the effect of human individual actions.
 The action of an observed actor is always understandable. (provided the observer has
sufficient information)
 Strength of reasons is a function of the context.
 Reasons for capital punishment accepted at one time may not be accepted in another time.
 RCT criticized from many quarters for being overly ambitious for seeking to replaceall other
theoretical perspectives.
 RCT attacked for underplaying or ignoring things such as culture and chance events.
Smelser argued:
 RCT has degenerated as a result of internal evolution or responses to external criticisms.
 It has developed the “capacity to explain everything and hence nothing” (Smelser, 1992).
 The number of supporters of rational choice theory is increasing in sociology.
 So is the resistance to it by those who support other theoretical perspectives.
70
Lesson 33
Interactionism-I
(Topic 124-127)
Topic 124: Introduction – Micro sociological analysis
Micro Sociology focuses primarily on persons and interpersonal relations. Micro decisions can also
be aggregated to have huge effects. Individuals or families take decisions to have children ormigrate.
Have effects on population. Micro sociology grew as counterpoint to the dominance of structural
functionalism. It focusses on action system, which determines actions. Systems shape the humans.
Micro sociologists emphasized on the other side: social system was the creation of humans. Instead
of order being imposed on individuals by the system, social order is produced from below – the
human interaction.
Micro sociology places emphasis on three things:
a. Theface-to-face interaction. Focus on concrete humans.
b. The meanings rather than on the functions. This is interpretive approach. It emphasize to look at
the subjective motivations of actions, meanings that people assigned to their actions and verbal and
nonverbal symbols create meanings.
c. The lived experiences rather than an abstracted concept of “society.”
The exchange of symbols allows to form solidarity by allowing common definitions of reality.
Greeting rituals have important symbolic meanings. Interpretations depend on past experiences.
There are three main approaches to micro-sociological analysis:
(i) Phenomenology
(ii) symbolic interactionism
(iii) “Dramaturgical” approach of Erving Goffman.
Phenomenology emphasizes on close observation of human experience. The methods ordinary
people use to construct their own everyday understandings of social life, to confront practical
challenges, to shape reality through the ways in which they conceptualize it, Bottom up approach to
study in culture.
Symbolic Interactionism emphasizes the way in which people develop their own identities, their
senses of how society works, what constitutes fair play during interaction and all knowledge achieved
in practically situated action.
“Dramaturgical” approach of Erving Goffman emphasis on lived experiences, something
dramatized, acted upon. It Suggests that people are always staging their performance for others. This
approach focuses on how people play their roles in groups. Institutionalized. Govern the role-playing.
Topic 125: Edmund Husserl Phenomenology
In Europe, phenomenology began as a project of German philosopher, Husserl. Alfred Schutz took
his concepts and converted them into interactionist analysis.
Turner explained four features of his work relevant to phenomenology as:
(1) The basic philosophical dilemma,
(2) The properties of consciousness,
(3) The critique of naturalistic empiricism,
(4) The philosophical alternative to social science.
The first feature of his work Basic dilemma is about exploring the such as What is real? What
actually exists in world? And How is it possible to know what exists?Husserl reasoned Humans know
about the world only through experience. For experience, senses mediate through mental
consciousness. Awareness. The existence of other people, values, norms,and physical objects have
to be experienced. Experiencing is registered on one’s conscious awareness. No direct contact with
reality; only through the process of mind. To understand the process, we need to ask How this process
of consciousness operate? How it influences human affairs? How experience creates a sense of
external reality – became the central concern of phenomenology.
The second feature is Properties of consciousness. Humans operate in a taken for granted world
71
that permeate their mental life. Humans sense the existence of the world having material and
non-material objects. There are two conceptions of the world;
(a) This worldis taken for granted (Reality)
(b) Humans can experience this world or reality.
People experience through their own consciousness. It May not be correct because How we can
ascertain what is real? Answer can be biased.
Third feature is critique of naturalistic empiricism. Science assumesthat the world exists out there,
external to human senses. According to them world can be studied through positivistic approach.
Husserl criticised this approach. He said that how can science measure external world objectively?
Bring in their own biases.
Fourth feature is Solution: Philosophical alternative to social science. It search for the essence of
consciousness and the process to study events. It Suspend your natural attitude. Come up with ‘Pure
Mind.’ Suspend your own life world and understand the reality under study. There is no use of
structured measuring instruments. There are many limitations related to Husserl’s doctrine. His ideas
set a new line of thought which became the basis of modern phenomenology.
Topic 126: Alfred Schutz Introduction
Knowledge of the world based on our perceptions of it. Perceptions do not necessarily correspond
to the way the world really is. One’s knowledge of reality is based on one’s perceptions. Perceptions
are filtered through the senses. Perceptions are then organized through one’s particular cognitive
frameworks. The way we see and interpret the world is based largely on the formative influence of
our social environment. The cultural world into which we are born provides not only the language
we use to communicate but also the perceptual categories and cognitive and interpretive frameworks
through which we actually perceive and make sense of our world. At the micro level children learn
early in life from their parents and other adults how to name and respond to the various objects they
encounter in their environment. All this process helps in how we actually perceive and make sense
of our world. We see and interpret the worldin our cultural framework. Framework could vary by
social class, ethnicity, age, and gender. For example knowledge about police officer. It is based on
perceptions which can vary. The consciousness of each individual person will vary from that of
anyone else, despite similarities inpersonal characteristics or social background.
Schutz incorporated Weber’s concept of verstehn (subjective understanding) in his analysis. The
meaning that the individual attaches to situations in everyday life is of prime importance. It is
individual’s own definition of the situation. For Schutz, Weber simply assumed that actors share
subjective meanings. Schutz asked: Why and how do actors come to acquire subjective states ina
situation? How do they create a common view of the world? This is the problem of
“intersubjectivity,” and is central to Schutz’s intellectual scheme. For defining the situation, one
draws on a common “stock of knowledge.” These are social recipes for conceptions of reality.
Individuals construct an orderly world by using these typifications. These social types are “ideal
types.” This is the “stock of knowledge at hand.” The relationship between an individual’s unique
consciousness and the “intersubjective” or shared consciousness that develops among people who
share the same social world was explored in detail by Alfred Schutz.
Topic 127: Alfred Schutz Personal Vs. Intersubjective Consciousness
In the Phenomenology of the Social World, Schutz’s point of departure was a critique of Max
Weber’s analysis of social action. He noted that establishing the subjective meaning of an individual’s
action is not as simple as Weber had suggested. This is because it is impossible for anyone (even a
sociologist) to enter someone else’s stream of consciousness and have an identical subjective
experience, even when the other person is well known to the observer andthe action is being
observed as it actually takes place. Even when the other person’s behavior is accompanied by
observable facial indicators of subjective states (joy, satisfaction, frustration, anger, sadness, and so
on), this information would be perceived through the observer’s own perceptual and cognitive
framework. Thus, the observer’s experience could not be identical with that of the person being
72
observed. The difficulties are even greater if the observer is limited (as sociologists often are) to
observing the effects of the action, or hearing an account thereof, afterit has taken place, as opposed
to observing it as it actually occurs.
Weber did not indicate whether the subjective meaning applies during the time that an action is taking
place or after it has been completed. For Schutz, the two are not necessarily identical. The subjective
meanings of a particular action have to be interpreted in a framework. Meanings may vary by the
frame of reference used. Reading a textbook (action) may be defined as expanding one’s knowledge
or fulfilling course requirements. Attribution of meaning is a reflective process after an action takes
place. Yet the anticipated meaning of some goal-directed action can be defined in advance. Such as
action of student to achieve some goal. Actions may have multiple meanings. Student reading a book.
The meaning of action may have temporal dimension. Uniqueness of each individual’s background
experiences and life course. So impossible to enter the stream of consciousness of another person or
to have exactly the same subjective experience. Even so, people nevertheless manage to achieve
sufficient level of mutual understanding that they can adjust to one another’s actions, cooperate and
communicate with oneanother, share emotional experiences, and even gain limited insights into some
aspects of one another’s subjective thoughts and feelings. Through common experiences, shared
“stocks of knowledge” are developed that enable people to reach a certain level of mutual
understanding. A critically important component of this implicitly shared knowledge is the language
we use in communicating our subjective thoughts, feelings, intentions, and experiences—as
emphasized in symbolic interaction theory. This process contributes to the accumulation of shared,
or intersubjective, “stocks of knowledge” that are eventually taken for granted without additional
discussion. In seeking to understand one another’s subjective meanings, we typically make the
assumption that other people’s subjective experiences are probably similar to what ours would be in
similar circumstances. This would apply even in the absence of communication and would include
others who do not even share the same language. Thus, for example, when we observe television
news stories that portray grieving parents in another country whose loved ones have been killed as a
result of war or terrorism, we are able to understand and sympathize, despite the fact that our stream
of consciousness as we hear and watch the news cannot be identical to the stream of consciousness
of those who just received the bad news and are overcome with grief.
73
Lesson 34
Ineractionism-II
(Topic 128-131)
Topic 128: Alfred Schutz Meaning, Motive, and Accounts
The concept of motive is often used to try to grasp the subjective meaning of another person’s action.
Deciphering the meaning attributed to the motive to act as well as to the narrative of accounts of the
actions of others is a dilemma.
Here we need to ask two questions in order to understand motives and the meanings people attach
with action;
(i) What is the motive to act?
(ii) Does the actor and the “other” attach the same meaning to it?
Schutz distinguished between two clearly different meanings of this concept: the “in order to”
motive and the “because” motive.
The “in order to” motive is future-oriented and involves explaining an action in terms of the goal or
project for which it is being undertaken.
In contrast, the “because” motive involves looking to the past to identify background experiences
that contributed to the development of the action being analyzed. As Schutz put it, “The difference
between the two kinds of motive is that the in-order-to motive explains the act in terms of the
project, while the genuine because-motive explains the project in terms of the actor’s past
experiences.”.
His example is a murder explanation—a common challenge in criminology and in actual crime
investigations. An explanation using an “in-order-to” motive might be that the goal was to get the
victim’s money and then prevent the victim from contacting the police, while an explanation of the
“because” type of motive might focus on the criminal’s poverty, the prior influence of criminal
companions, or inadequate socialization due to parental neglect. With regard to the in- order-to
motive, questions can be raised as to whether the murderer intended from the beginning to kill the
victim, decided to do so on the spur of the moment to silence the victim, or did so accidentally when
the robbery did not go as planned or the victim fought back. Such questions beg for additional analysis
in providing an adequate account. For some actions these two types ofmotives may seem more closely
related than in the case of the two different explanations of murder. For example, a student studies
hard in order to earn a high grade for the course. But the time and effort spent in preparing for the
test may have resulted because the instructor indicated the test would be difficult and urged the
students to study diligently. Such explanations may be incorporated in the accounts people are
sometimes expected to provide of their own behavior. (The concept of accounts will be examined in
more detail in connection with the ethnomethodological perspective.) At the same time observers (or
social scientists) may be able to identify possible motives of which individuals are unaware.
The question of motivations and other aspects of subjective meaning are often of interest to other
parties. In addition to trying to understand or account for our own behavior, people frequently make
attributions regarding the motives of others, despite the difficulties involved in understanding what
goes on in anyone else’s subjective consciousness. In addition to simple curiosity, we may have
practical reasons for wanting to understand how to motivate people, perhaps because of an interest in
influencing their behavior. In any case, whether the motivations we attribute are consistent with the
conscious motivations of the person whose behavior we are trying to understand or predict is always
an empirical question that may be difficult to answer. People have varying interests in explaining
their own motives or the motives of others. In the case of an accused murderer brought to trial, for
example, efforts to provide explanations (including both in-order-to and because motives will likely
differ for the individual accused, the arresting officer, the state’s attorney, the defense attorney, the
victim’s family, and the alleged perpetrator’s own family. Though none of them actually witnessed
the murder , and state of mindof the accused. Even when an individual is being observed in the actual
performance of an act, the observer’s ability to understand the action is limited. The observer’s
74
ongoing stream of consciousness while viewing the action may differ from that of the actor
performing it.
Topic 129: Mutual Understanding In Personal Vs. Impersonal Relations
Despite the difficulties in reaching mutual understanding, the language people use to attribute motives
and other kinds of subjective experiences (intentions, feelings, goals, wishes) makes it possible to
develop a common frame of reference for mutual understanding. People have the ability to understand
each other through the inter-subjective consciousness they share. They become aware of each other
minds. Understanding can influence one another to make ongoing mutual adjustments in their
behaviors. Schutz identified the highest level of mutual understanding as a “thou” orientation. This
occurs in face-to-face relationships when the parties involved intentionally seek to “tune in” and share
one another’s subjective thoughts and feelings.Such relationships are the type Cooley referred to as
“primary group” relations. When people share this kind of mutual orientation, they form a “we-
relationship” which can be contrasted with the less personal orientations involved in “they-
relationships.” In face-to-face relationships people are able to gain a level of mutual understanding
of one another’s subjective experiences that is much greater than in more impersonal relations. They
can literally “read” one another’s faces, which are highly expressive of their current subjective states,
as well as communicate theirthoughts and feelings— which, of course, may or may not always be
consistent with their facial expressions.
In contrast to “we-relationships” with mutual “thou” orientations, Schutz’s concept of “they
relationships” describes encounters in which individuals’ orientations toward one another are more
limited or impersonal. In such secondary relationships people may be in one another’s presence, read
one another’s facial expressions, and actually influence one another, but they do not relate to one
another as unique persons. Relationships may change over time from “they- relationships” to “we-
relationships” and then back again. For example, students and professors initially see one another in
rather impersonal terms, but over the course of a semester personal relationships sometimes develop.
Such relationships usually end when the course is over, and the students and the professor will
thereafter see one another as “former professors” and “former students.” In a successful employment
interview, however, the relationship may change during the course of the interview from an
impersonal encounter to a relationship that both parties anticipate will probably be longer lasting and
perhaps somewhat more personal, though within limits. The same pattern of ebb and flow may also
be seen in long-term relationships between couples who divorce, neighbors who move. The detailed
mutual understanding that develops in “we-relationships” is not generalizable to the larger social
world. Despite the similarities in best friend, lover, and family relationships everywhere, people
generally see their relationships with their own friends and families as distinctive and unique.
Topic 130: Contemporaries, Procedures And Successors
If we move beyond the range of our own personal experiences in both personal and impersonal
encounters, a comprehensive description of the social world would also include all of our
contemporaries throughout our society and beyond—plus our predecessors from previous
generations and our successors in future generations. All of these “others” are relevant for a
phenomenological analysis because they are included in our subjective awareness of the social world
as well as the intersubjective understanding we share with others. Our knowledge of particular
persons beyond our own social circle is likely to be based on reputation and thus limited to second-
hand reports by people we know (whose information may also be second- hand) or by the news
media, through their cultural products (movies, songs, books, articles). Or general awareness about
the roles played by individuals as teachers, parents, students, bankers, clerks physicians, city officials.
The social world of our intersubjective awareness also includes a general awareness of past
generations. For example; Historic role played by great leaders. Legacies of writers, artists, Tales of
late great leaders like Quaid e Azam. Their innumerable artifacts preserved in museums.
In contrast to the world of our predecessors, which is now closed and unchangeable, and the world
of our contemporaries, which is partially open and contingent on choices not yet made and
75
circumstances not yet determined, the world of our successors is one about which our subjective
understanding is obviously limited. We know in general terms that our generation and all our
contemporaries will eventually be replaced by future generations, and we tend also to assume that
our successors will probably be like us in many ways, but no doubt different in other ways. Yet, the
world of the future is open and unknown. Unlike the past, it is not yet determined, even though we
may anticipate the continuation of present trends. People vary greatly in terms of their conscious
concerns for the needs of future generations and their sense of commitment to them. Political leaders
promote policies that they claim will preserve and protect the environment or Social Security for
future generations. But rhetorical references such as these are not the same as knowledge about the
actual life experiences of future generations. Moreover, our concerns for the future are always
constrained by the need to deal with the problems and challenges of the present. Although we know
that the world of future generations will be affected by the legacy we leave, for good or for ill, our
ability to predict the long-range impact of our own actions is limited.
Topic 131: Alfred Schutz Concluding remarks
Schutz’s work began with a critique of Weber. Weber employed the concept of social action in his
research. For Weber, social action occurs when actors are consciously aware of each other and
attribute meanings to their common situation. Understand social reality i.e. the phenomenon “at the
level of meaning.” Sociological study must penetrate people’s consciousness to find how they view,
define, and see the world. Weber called this method as verstehen: sympathetic introspection
(understanding subjective meaning of actor). It is necessary to get inside the subjective world of
actors. For Schutz, it was not enough. Few questions are important here such as Why, and through
what processes, actors create common subjective world? How do they create a common subjective
view of the world?. This is the problem of “intersubjectivity.” It is central to Schutz. People’s stock
knowledge about reality is a sense of an absolute reality that shapes and guides all other social events
and interactions. Stock knowledge gives the social world a taken for granted character. It is
knowledge learned through socialization. Stock knowledge helps in creating a sense of “reciprocity
of perspectives.” Stock of knowledge gives the actors a sense that the world is the same for all. It
holds society united. Presumption of common world allows actors to engage in the process of
typification. It helps to categorize one another and to adjust to their responses to these typifications.
Humans can treat each other as categories, or typical objects of a particular kind. On the basis
this stock knowledge actors categorize one another adjust to their responses to these typifications.
Humans can treat each other as categories, or typical objects of a particular kind. Schutz recognized
the limitations of sociologists in achieving the in-depth understanding of other people’s subjective
consciousness. Such understanding is possible in genuine “we-relationships” where participants share
mutual “thou” orientations. This insight seems inconsistent with the optimistic expectations
regarding the possibilities for deepening our sociological understanding through participant
observation research leading to ethnographic “thick descriptions” of the ways of life among particular
people in their local setting. This type of qualitative research is often promoted by symbolic
interactionists as being able to provide in-depth insights that cannot be captured through the
more impersonal strategy of survey research. Although ethnographic research may indeed reveal
interesting details that might be missed in survey research, it is important to recognize that the
understanding researchers may gain regarding social processes they observe and document is likely
to differ from insiders’ own collective self-understanding. In fact, insiders themselves may be
expected to vary in terms of their understanding of themselves. Schutz proposed that sociological
knowledge should be based on the ideal-type form of understanding. Identify patterns of action and
relationships that can be associated with general social types.
76
Lesson 35
Symbolic Interactionism-I
(Topic 132-135)
Topic 132: Symbolic Interactionism
Background
Interaction is a form of communication where people use symbols to convey meaning through
vocal, facial, and physical gestures. Symbols are created and used by humans as a means of
communication, such as language composed of letters, sounds, and signs. The interpretation of
symbols varies from person to person based on their understanding and subjective meanings they
assign to objects, events, ideas, and behaviors. Some meanings may be socially constructed, like
those related to race, gender, status, gestures, and actions. People decide whom to interact with and
how to behave based on their interpretation of symbols and meanings. Communication involves the
exchange of meaning through language and symbols.
Symbolic interactionism, introduced by Herbert Blumer, emphasizes the significance of
shared symbols in shaping individuals' interactions. This perspective focuses on individuals as
active participants in constructing their behavior, interpreting their thoughts and emotions, and
engaging in small-scale interpersonal relationships. Individuals are seen as decision-makers who
form opinions and make choices based on their own understanding and evaluation of situations.
Blumer highlights the processes through which individuals make decisions and shape their
actions.
Topic 133: Georg Simmel Primary Concerns
Georg Simmel is best known as a micro sociologist who made significant contributions to small-
group research, symbolic interactionism, and exchange theory. He was one of the first European
sociologists to dig into the study of social interaction. Simmel believed that macrostructures such
as class, the state, family, and religion are reflections of specific interactions among people. He
emphasized the importance of studying forms and types of social interaction to understand
emergent social phenomena. By focusing on various types of interactions, he explored the
forms and consequences of social interactions. Simmel's work on the forms of interaction is part
of a broader theory that examines the relationships between individuals and society. He viewed
society as a collection of countless minor syntheses created through interactions among
individuals, which account for the richness and complexity of social life. These interactions are
the building blocks of society, shaping its dynamics and structure.
Topic 134: Levels And Areas Of Concerns
Simmel's work on social reality encompasses four levels of concern, each building upon the
previous one. The first level focuses on microscopic assumptions about the psychological aspects
of social life, followed by the second level which examines sociological components of
interpersonal relationships. The third level delves into the structure and changes in the social and
cultural "spirit" at a macroscopic level. These higher levels replace immediate interacting forces
with higher supra-individual formations, such as individuals versus society. The fourth level of
concern explores ultimate metaphysical principles of life.
Simmel's exploration of multiple levels of social reality is evident in his delineation of three
distinct problem "areas" in sociology in "The Problem Areas of Sociology." The first area,
"pure" sociology, combines psychological variables with forms of interactions, focusing on the
forms and types of people engaged in interactions. The forms include subordination, super-
ordination, exchange, conflict, and sociability, while the types range from "competitor" and
"coquette" to "miser," "spendthrift," "stranger," and "adventurer."
In the intermediate level, Simmel's "general" sociology examines the social and cultural products
of human history, emphasizing group dynamics, societal structures, and cultural histories. Finally,
in Simmel's "philosophical" sociology, he delves into his views on the fundamental nature and
inevitable destiny of humankind. Throughout this chapter, we will explore these levels and
77
sociologies, noting how Simmel often integrates them into a broader totality rather than keeping
them separate.
Topic 135: Dialectical thinking
Simmel’s way of dealing with the interrelationships among three basic levels of social reality
(leaving out his fourth, metaphysical, level) gave his sociology a dialectical character reminiscent
of Marx’s sociology dialectical is concerned with both conflicts and contradictions. Simmel’s
sociology was concerned with relationships/interaction. For Simmel everything interacts in some
way with everything else. He was attuned to dualisms, conflicts, and contradictions. He
understands the world in terms of conflicts and contrasts between opposed categories. We can
understand his point by taking example of fashion. The example of fashion shows the
contradictions in a variety of ways. Fashion is a form of social relationship that allows those who
wish to conform to the demands of the group to do so. Fashion also provides the norm from
individualists can deviate. Fashion involves a historical process as well at the initial stage,
everyone accepts what is fashionable; Inevitably, individuals deviate from this; and Finally, in the
process of deviation, they may adopt a whole new view of what is in fashion.
Fashion is dialectical as it is the success and spread of any given fashion lead to its eventual failure.
The distinctiveness of something leads to its being considered fashionable. As large numbers of
people come to accept it, it ceases to be distinctive and hence it loses its attractiveness. Another
duality involves the role of the leader of a fashion movement. Such a person leads the group by
adopting the fashion more strictly then he has to be innovative. Look at those who are out of
fashion. Unfashionable view the fashionables as being imitators and themselves as mavericks or
independents. Simmel argued that the latter are simply engaging in an inverse form of imitation.
They avoid what is in fashion because they are afraid that they will lose their individuality. Such
a fear is hardly a sign of great personal strength and independence. In fashion all leading
antithetical tendencies are represented in one way or another. That is dialectical.
Individual (subjective) culture and objective culture is another example. Objective culture
refers to those things that people produce (art, science, philosophy). Individual (subjective)
culture is the capacity of the actor to produce, absorb, and control the elements of objective
culture. The two cultures shape each other. For Simmel people are influenced, and even threatened,
by social structures and by their cultural products. The problem is that objective culture comes
to have alive of its own. It controls those who created them. Cultural products create contradictions
with the actors who created them. Objective culture acquires fixed identities, a logic and lawfulness
ofits own. It creates a contradiction with the actors who created them because it controls their
deviations. In Simmel’s dialectic, man is always in danger of being slain by those objects of his
own creation which have lost their organic human touch.
78
Lesson 36
Symbolic Interactionism-I
(Topic 136-139)
Topic 136-137: Social Interaction
Simmel contributed to the understanding of patterns of social interaction, emphasizing the range of
relations between individuals. Human life is governed by interactions, whether pleasant or
unpleasant, at various levels. These interactions, akin to atoms of society, are only visible through
psychological observation. Simmel focused on interactions among conscious actors, exploring
both seemingly insignificant and crucial interactions. While he emphasized the significance of
interaction in sociology, some overlook his insights into broader aspects of social reality. He
sometimes linked society with interaction, seeing it as the result of particular social interactions.
Topic 137: Interaction: Forms and Types
Simmel focuses on the structure of social interaction rather than its content. He believes that the
world is filled with countless events, actions, and interactions, which people organize by imposing
patterns or forms on them. This helps individuals make sense of the complexity of reality by reducing
it to a limited number of recognizable forms. For example, the dynamics of superordination and
subordination can be observed in various contexts such as the state, religious communities,
conspiratorial groups, economic associations, art schools, and families.
Donald Levine, a prominent contemporary scholar of Simmel's work, explains that Simmel's
approach to formal interactional sociology involves selecting a specific phenomenon, analyzing its
elements, and revealing the underlying form that gives it coherence. Additionally, Simmel explores
the origins of these forms and their structural implications. Levine emphasizes that forms represent
the patterns of social associations among people.
Social Geometry
In Simmel's formal sociology, one can observe his attempt to create a "geometry" of social
relations, focusing on numbers and distance as key geometric coefficients. Simmel was particularly
interested in the impact of group size on interaction quality, as evident in his comparison of dyads
and triads. He emphasized the significant difference between a dyad (two-person group) and a
triad (three-person group). The addition of a third member in a triad brings about a fundamental
change, unlike increasing the group size beyond three.
In a dyad, there is no group structure beyond the two individuals involved, allowing for a high level
of individuality for each member. On the other hand, a triad has the potential to develop an
independent group structure, posing a threat to individuality as the group gains meaning beyond the
individuals. The introduction of a third party in a triad opens up new social roles such as arbitrator or
mediator, leading to power dynamics and competition within the group.
The transition from a dyad to a triad is crucial for the emergence of social structures that can
dominate individuals, creating a dialectical relationship between individuals and society. While
society enables individuality and autonomy, it also constrains them, leading to feelings of isolation
and segmentation. This dynamic interaction between individuals and social structures shapes the
complexity of human relationships.
Group Size
At a more general level, Simmel had an ambivalent attitude towards the impact of group size. A
small group or society can exert complete control over the individual, while increasing size and
differentiation can weaken the bonds between individuals, leading to greater individual
freedom. Being involved in multiple groups allows individuals to express different aspects of their
personality, enhancing individuality. However, large societies can pose challenges that threaten
individuality. In large groups, individuals may be influenced by simplistic ideas due to physical
proximity, leading to suggestibility and mindless, emotional actions.
Distance
Simmel's social geometry also explores the concept of distance in social relationships. The value
79
of something is influenced by its proximity to the individual. Objects that are easily accessible or too
distant lose their value. The most valuable objects are those that are attainable but require effort to
obtain. In his work "The Stranger," Simmel discusses how the distance between individuals
affects their interactions. When someone is too close, they are no longer a stranger, and when they
are too far, contact is lost. The distance of the stranger determines the unique interaction patterns and
the level of unfamiliarity.
Social Types
We have already encountered one of Simmel’s types, the stranger; others include the miser, the
spendthrift, the adventurer, and the nobleman. To illustrate his mode of thinking in this area, we will
focus on one of his types, the poor.
 The Poor
In Simmel's work, the concept of poor is defined in terms of social relationships, where the poor
are seen as those who receive aid or have the right to it. Simmel believed that poverty is not solely
about a lack of money, but rather about the reciprocal rights and obligations between those in need
and those who give. The needy have the right to receive aid, which eases the burden of receiving
help, while the giver has the duty to provide assistance. Simmel also argued that society benefits from
helping the poor, as it prevents them from becoming a threat and helps make their contributions more
productive. Poverty is a relative concept that can be felt across all social classes, as individuals may
perceive themselves as poor in comparison to their peers.
Social Forms
Simmel examined various social forms, such as exchange, conflict, prostitution, and sociability,
similar to social types. One of his key concepts is domination, which involves superordination and
subordination.
• Superordination and Subordination
Superordination and subordination are interrelated. A leader does not seek to control others entirely
but expects a response from subordinates, whether positive or negative. All interactions, including
domination, rely on mutual relationships. Subordination can occur to an individual, a group, or
an external force, with relationships evolving in different ways in each scenario.
Topic 138: Social Structures
Simmel focused on patterns of interaction in society rather than large-scale structures. He
viewed society as a set of interactions among individuals, rather than a tangible entity or organism.
Society is a network of interconnected individuals. Simmel believed that society operates
independently of individuals and follows its own laws, presenting individuals with historical
imperatives. Larger structures like the state, clan, family, city, or trade union emerge from
interactions and can take on a life of their own, appearing as external forces to individuals. This
dynamic can make individuals seem passive rather than active participants in society, creating a
paradox.
Topic 139: Objective culture
In Simmel's view, people create culture, but due to their ability to objectify social reality, the
cultural and social worlds develop lives of their own, which increasingly dominate the actors who
originally created them. Objective culture includes things produced by people such as art,
science, and philosophy, while individual (subjective) culture refers to the capacity of
individuals to interact with and control elements of objective culture. These two cultures
influence each other, with individuals retaining the ability to shape and reshape culture. However,
over time, culture exerts a coercive influence on individuals.
Components of objective culture include tools, transportation, scientific products, technology, arts,
language, religion, philosophy, legal systems, moral codes, and ideals. Objective culture expands
with modernization, leading to a growth in scientific knowledge and an increase in the number of
cultural components. Simmel viewed this growth as a threat to individual culture, describing it
as the "tragedy of culture."
80
Simmel observed interactions in the modern metropolis, which he considered the primary arena
for the growth of objective culture and the decline of individual culture. The prevalence of a
money economy in the city has a significant impact on human relationships, emphasizing
calculability and rationality over genuine connections. In contrast, small towns are characterized by
greater emotionality and personal relationships.
Simmel also discussed the liberating aspects of modernity, highlighting the increased freedom
individuals experience in the city compared to the constraints of small-town life. He viewed
exchange as a fundamental form of interaction, with all social exchanges involving elements of
"profit and loss." Simmel's microsociological analysis focused on the impact of money economy
on social structures and the alienation of individuals in modern society.
81
Lesson 37
Charles H. Cooley
(Topic140-144)
Topic 140: Charles H. Cooley
Introduction
Cooley was involved in developing symbolic interaction theory, particularly through his concept of
the "looking glass self." This theory posits that individuals form their identity based on the
reflections they see in the reactions of others. These reactions serve as a mirror, influencing one's
emotional responses and self-perception. Cooley emphasized the significance of how others'
approval or disapproval can lead to feelings of pride or shame. Self-identity is shaped through
social interactions, as individuals interpret gestures and imagine how others perceive them.
This process, known as the looking glass self, involves individuals deriving self-images and attitudes
based on others' feedback. The focus is on the relationship between one's self-concept and
interactions within primary groups, such as family or close-knit social circles. These primary groups
play a crucial role in shaping individuals' sense of self, fostering unity and mutual regard among
members. By identifying strongly with these groups, individuals expand their self-concept to
include these relationships, distinguishing them from secondary groups characterized by more
impersonal interactions. Through primary groups, individuals experience a sense of cohesion
and shared identity, strengthening their bonds through intimate face-to-face relationships.
Topic 141: Interaction and society
For Cooley, society functions as an organic entity where social processes shape networks of
reciprocal activity. Society comprises various social forms, ranging from small groups to large
institutions. Humans possess the capacity to attribute shared meanings to gestures, facilitating
communication through constructed gestural communication. This communication fosters
relationships, interactions, and organizational structures. By interpreting gestures,
individuals can understand each other's thoughts and attitudes, leading to the development of
self. The self plays a crucial role in forming and sustaining society through patterns of reciprocal
communication and interaction.
Topic 142-143: Looking Glass Self
Cooley posits that humans possess the capacity for self-consciousness, which emerges through
group interactions and enables individuals to organize themselves in society. The concept of self
involves the ability to perceive and recognize oneself as an object, often influenced by the gestures
of others. People form images of themselves based on reflections of their behavior in the eyes of
others. By interpreting the gestures of others, individuals gain insight into how they are perceived
and develop a sense of self-awareness.
Self-awareness evolves over an individual's life span, with young infants initially lacking the
ability to see themselves as objects in the "looking glass." Through exposure to various social
interactions, practice, and biological maturation, individuals gradually develop self-awareness and
a stable sense of self. Cooley uses the metaphor of the "looking glass" to symbolize this process,
emphasizing that self-perception is shaped by how one believes others perceive them.
The formation of self is influenced by interactions with others, as individuals internalize external
perceptions to construct their self-concept, self-image, and self-consciousness. Cooley identifies
three aspects of consciousness: self-consciousness, social consciousness, and public
consciousness, which collectively contribute to stable action and cooperative interaction
within society. These aspects serve as a foundation for social control and are essential for the
development of a cohesive sense of self.
Topic 144: Primary groups

Cooley viewed the "primary group" as the foundational unit of society, characterized by small
size, intimate relationships, face-to-face interactions, durability, and cooperation. These groups,
82
such as family and friendship circles, play a crucial role in shaping individuals' social nature and
values. In primary groups, personal connections take precedence over goal-oriented interactions
found in secondary groups. The fusion of individual identities within a common purpose fosters
a sense of self through shared activities and mutual support. The reflective interactions within
primary groups are essential for self-development and maintenance. By participating in
organized face-to-face activities, individuals form a bridge between personal identity and societal
norms. Primary groups serve as a key agent of socialization, transmitting traditions, morals,
and cultural values to individuals. Interaction within these groups is vital for the formation of self-
awareness and self-esteem. According to Cooley, primary groups are essential for both individual
well-being and the stability of social institutions. G. H. Mead further elaborated on this concept in
his theory.
83
Lesson 38
George H. Mead-I
(Topic 145-147)
Topic 145: George H. Mead: Introduction
Mead is a key figure in symbolic interactionism, emphasizing the link between social interaction and
individual mental processes. He coined the term "social behaviorism" and his ideas influenced
symbolic interaction theory. Mead critiqued psychological behaviorism for neglecting the social
and subjective aspects of behavior. He highlighted the role of interpretation in responses to stimuli,
emphasizing that meanings are constructed through interaction. Communication involves gestures
that symbolize intentions and trigger responses. Shared interpretations and expectations develop
through interaction. Symbols, including words, convey shared meanings and shape interactions.
Gestures and symbols play a crucial role in communication, creating shared understandings
and shaping social interactions.
Topic 146: Symbolic Meaning And Behaviorism
The meaning of a symbol is derived from the definition of a gesture, which is not only the initial
element of an action but also a sign of the entire action. Gestures are internalized as significant
symbols by group members, eliciting similar responses. According to Mead, a symbol is a stimulus
to which a response is predetermined, such as a threatening person being knocked down. Actions are
based on interpretation, creating a stimulus-response situation aligned with the community's attitude.
The relationship between the stimulus and the attitude towards it signifies a significant symbol.
Self-interaction involves the internal dialogue of gestures within an individual's mind. Significant
symbols are gestures that convey meaning and elicit responses from others. It is essential to
communicate with others through symbols and understand how they interpret them, leading to
observable behavior influenced by internal thinking within a social context.
Topic 147: Life As Ongoing Process: Mind, Self, And Society
Mead considered life as an ongoing process of adaptation to environmental conditions. Attributes of
species are the result of the selection of their suitability for adaptation to conditions. This is
pragmatism. Humans are “pragmatic” creatures. Humans use the available facilities for achieving
adjustment to the world. There is variation in the environment and available facilities. Adjustment
can be unique to any individual/group/community. Adjustments are based on rational thinking. Call
it pragmatic behavior. The stimulus-response approach as well as the pleasure and pain principle is
compatible with behaviorist notions of reinforcement. The unique attributes of humans emerge from
the processes of adaptation and adjustment. Such attributes can be:
(a) The capacity to use language i.e. symbols to designate objects in the environment.
(b) Ability to talk to each other and to themselves.
(c) Ability to view themselves as objects.
(d) Capacity to reason.
The most distinctive attributes are mind, self, and society that emerge from the basic process of
adaptation. Each individual of the human species is like the individuals of other species. What they
are is the result of the common biological heritage of their species as well as their adjustment to a
given environment. Mead considered mind and self as the two distinctive aspects of human
personality. Society is maintained by mind and self and should be viewed as part of ongoing social
processes.
84
Lesson 39
George H. Mead-II
(Topic 148-150)
Topic 148: Mind: Contribution of Interaction
Mind is defined by Mead as a process and not a thing. Mind is something functional, not substantive.
It is an inner conversation with oneself (thinking). It arises and develops within the social process
and is an integral part of that process. The social process precedes the mind. 'Mind' is the thinking
ability that emerges out of social interaction. It arises and develops within the empirical matrix of
interactions. Gestures are central to communication, which is necessary for interaction. Gesture acts
as a stimulus for an adjusted response, i.e., "conversation of gestures" → communication and
interaction. The "meaning" of a gesture is a stimulus. Shared meaning will signal the subsequent
behavior of the other. It may be called an adjusted response to each other. It happens among living
beings. Humans have the peculiar capacity to elicit the response they are seeking from others.
A distinctive quality of the mind is the ability of the individual to elicit not only a single response
from the other but also the response of the community as a whole. Thus, the thinking ability of an
individual to give a response to a stimulus is termed as 'mind,' i.e., to do anything now means a
certain organized response, and if one has that response within themselves, they have what is
termed as 'mind.' Mead also looks at the mind in another pragmatic way, i.e., the mind involves
thought processes oriented toward problem-solving. The real world is full of problems, and it is the
function of the mind to try to solve those problems and permit people to operate more effectively in
the world.
Topic 149: Symbols and Mind
The act involves only one person, but the social act involves two or more persons. The gesture is the
basic mechanism in the social act and in the social process. For Mead, 'gestures are movements of
the first organism which act as specific stimuli calling forth the appropriate responses of the second
organism.' Both lower animals and humans are capable of gestures. For example, growling of dogs;
instinctive (automatic response). It may not involve a thought process. Call it a “conversation of
gestures.” Mead calls such unconscious actions 'non-significant gestures.' Humans have the
ability to employ “significant” gestures, i.e., thinking before action. Gestures can be physical
and vocal. Gestures become symbols, which can be significant when made by humans.
Gestures become significant symbols when they arouse in the individual who is making them the
same kind of response they are supposed to elicit from those to whom the gestures are addressed.
Significant symbols are necessary for true communication. Physical gestures can be significant
symbols. They are not ideally suited to be significant symbols because people cannot easily see or
hear their physical gestures. Vocal utterances are most likely to become significant symbols. The set
of vocal gestures most likely to become significant symbols is language. Significant symbols have
mutually agreed meaning, i.e., with language, the gestures and their meaning are communicated. For
Mead, another function of significant symbols is that they make the mind, mental processes. Through
significant symbols, especially language, human thinking is possible.
Thinking is “simply an internalized or implicit conversation of the individual with himself by means
of such gestures.” Thinking is the same as talking to other people. It amounts to talking to oneself.
This is a behaviorist approach. Human capacity for language (communication by symbols) makes for
the emergence of their unique capacities for mind and self. The capacity for language is necessary to
have a mind. The mind involves several behavioral capacities, such as;
i. To denote objects in the environment with significant symbols;
ii. To use these symbols as a stimulus to one’s response;
iii. To read and interpret the gestures of others and use these as a stimulus for one’s response;
iv. To temporarily suspend or inhibit overt behavioral responses to one’s own gestural
denotations or those of others; and
v. To ‘imaginatively rehearse’ alternative lines of conduct, visualize their consequences, and
85
select the response that will facilitate adjustment to the environment. The mind is an “internal
conversation of gestures,” just like talking to oneself. The capacity for mind is not inborn.
Interaction is a necessary prerequisite.
Topic 150: Role-Taking and Mind
The capacity of the mind is not inborn. It requires a certain level of biological maturation. The
most important requirement is an individual's social interaction. The emergence of the mind is
necessary for human survival. An individual, right from infancy, must adjust and adapt to the social
environment. For adjustment and adaptation to a world of organized activity, the emergence of the
mind is needed. An infant's response to a stimulus is based on inborn basic reflexes. The
responses or actions are performed without conscious thinking. Such responses are neither efficient
nor adaptive. For example, a baby's cry (a response) does not communicate what it wants. It cannot
interpret the vocal and other gestures of people around it, leading to adjustment problems. Therefore,
there is a 'selective pressure' for acquiring the ability to use and interpret significant gestures, resulting
in adjustment to the environment. Using and interpreting significant gestures is a critical process.
The ability to use significant symbols means that the gestures emitted by others allow a person to
read and interpret the dispositions of others. We can imitate the gestures and potential actions of
others. Mead called this process 'taking the role of the other' or role-taking. "Taking on" the
role or perspective of others means putting oneself in the shoes of others (e.g., a child copying
the mother). Taking on the role of others means putting oneself in someone else's shoes, allowing
one to understand how someone else feels and thinks and to anticipate how that person will act. Inner
conversation means that individuals are talking to themselves. Young children attain this ability only
gradually. For Mead, the ability to think is the mind. Role-taking is critical to the emergence of the
mind.
86
Lesson 40
George H. Mead-III
(Topic 151-153)
Topic 151: Self: Social Nature
The capacity to view oneself as an object in the field of experience is a type of learned behavior.
Learning takes place through interaction with others. The self is something that is developed; it
is not present at birth. It arises in the process of social experience and activity. The self is not part of
the body; it develops only as an individual interacts with others. Interaction is experienced through
the exchange of symbols, i.e., language. The process requires the capacity to use language and
to take the role of others. The social self emerges from a process in which an individual reads the
gestures of others (their attitudes) and derives an image or picture of themselves as a certain type of
object in a situation. This process was labeled as the looking glass self by Cooley. The image of
self-acts as a stimulus calling for a certain response. The responses then act as a stimulus for others
to respond. The emission of gestures enables one to take on the role of others and acts as a stimulus
for others. It helps in making adjustments in the role in view of others' reactions and interpretations.
Individuals do not experience directly but indirectly through reading the gestures of others from the
standpoint of others in a social group. This is called a 'generalized' standpoint of the group to
which an individual belongs. The individual becomes an object to oneself and accepts the attitude
of others toward oneself in a particular context. There can be multiple situations, multiple contexts,
multiple experiences, and multiple attitudes. The self is a product of social interaction and therefore
has a social nature.
Topic 152: Self: “I” and “Me”
The self has two parts. One part operates as the subject, being active, creative, and spontaneous.
Mead called this active part the "I" (subjective form of the personal pronoun). The "I" is the self as
the subject: the active, spontaneous, creative part of the self. The other part of the self works
as an object: the way we imagine others see us. It is composed of others' attitudes internalized
from our interactions. Mead called this objective side of the self the "me" (objective form of
the personal pronoun). All social experiences have both components. We initiate an action (I-phase
or subject side of the self). We continue the action based on how others respond to us (the me-phase,
or object side, of the self). The image of a person's behavior is what Mead termed as the me. The me
represents the attitudes of others and the broader community. These attitudes influence an individual's
retrospective interpretation of behavior. These are me images that are received by reading the gestures
of specific others.
In contrast to the "me" is the "I," which is the actual emission of behavior. When a person speaks too
loudly, this is the "I." When a person reacts to this loudness, the "me" phase of action is initiated. The
"I" can only be known in experience (waiting for "me" images to know just what "I" did). The "me"
is the expectations of others about the "I." The "I" and "me" represent the self as a constant process
of behavior and self-image. People act to view themselves as objects, to assess the consequences of
action, to interpret others' reactions, and to decide how to act in the future. The "I" has a built-in
mechanism of social control. The self is a process of adaptation to the environment.
Topic 153: The Genesis of Self
Genesis of self refers to the emergence of self and self-conception in humans. The self is a social
product, a type of behavior that arises from the human organism's efforts to adjust and adapt to its
environment. The development of self is a process. In order for the self to form, an infant must acquire
the ability to use significant symbols. This ability is crucial for;
(a) Role-taking with others
(b) Interpreting the gestures of others
(c) Developing a self-image. The self also relies on the capacities of the mind. Individuals must be
able to linguistically identify themselves as an object in their experiential field and organize others'
responses towards themselves as an object. Therefore, the prerequisites for self-development include;
87
(i) The use of significant symbols

(ii) The capacity for role-taking
(iii) The behavioral abilities of the mind.
88
Lesson 41
George H. Mead-III
(Topic 154-157)
Topic 154: Genesis of Self (Cont.)
Mead visualized the development of self in three stages, each marked by an increased capacity to
role-take with a wider audience. All three stages are discussed below:
1) Play stage: At this stage, there is a very limited capacity to role-take with a wider audience. The
child can assume the perspective of only one or two others at a time, often through imaginary
companions. The child may enact the role of a mother or assume the role of a baby.
2) Game stage: In this stage, the child can take on the role of multiple others engaged in ongoing
and organized activities. In games, the child must assume the roles of other players, anticipate their
actions, and coordinate with the team. The number and variety of such situations expand, and the
child sees themselves as an object in relation to others, deriving images of themselves from the
viewpoint of others.
3) Generalized other: In this stage, there is a "community of attitudes" among members of a
collectivity. The individual views themselves in relation to this "community of attitudes" and adjusts
accordingly. This is role-taking with the generalized other. For Mead, play and game present the
initial stages in the development of self. In the final stage, the individual can generalize the varied
attitudes of others, seeing and regulating their actions from a broader perspective. The generalized
other reflects the norms, values, attitudes, and expectations of people "in general." In a complex
society, there can be multiple generalized others, and individuals adjust to specific and generalized
attitudes of others. At this stage, individuals possess a complete and unified self.
Topic 155-156: Society: Conception, Process, and Culture
Conception of Society
Mead is widely known in sociology for his concept of the “Self,” but much less for his concept of
“Society.” The two concepts are intimately connected in his thought. It is simply impossible to fully
understand Mead’s concept of Self without an appropriate understanding of his concept of Society.
Society is the organism within which the self arises. Human society could not exist without minds
and selves. Society presupposes the possession of minds and selves by its individual members. Yet,
the mind and self cannot develop unless there is society. Individual members would not possess minds
and selves if there were no society. Mead used the term society in two senses:
(a) Society refers to ongoing, organized activity among pluralities of individuals. The activity may
be of a small group or of a total society.
(b) Society pertains to geopolitical units, such as nation-states (morphology).
For Mead, the term society primarily means the ongoing social process that precedes both the mind
and the self. Given its importance in shaping the mind and self, society is clearly of central importance
to Mead. Society, to Mead, represents the organized set of responses that are taken over by the
individual in the form of the “me.” In this sense, individuals carry society around with them, giving
them the ability, through self-criticism, to control themselves.
The Process of Society
Mead recognizes the general nature of the processes underlying the maintenance of social order. It
requires the identification of the relevant factors or variables that influence the accuracy of role-
taking and the convergence of “generalized others.” There are divergent “generalized others” in a
socially differentiated society. They can be different situations, different roles, different sets of
expectations, different “generalized others.” It means a divergent community of attitudes. Role-taking
with varieties of specific and “generalized others.”
Coordination Issue
The coordination of action is made possible by the behavioral capacities of mind and self. Not only
is society created by role-taking, but it can be changed by the same processes. A society may have a
variety of actors, differentiated social situations, a community of attitudes, and the regulation of
89
actions. People do readjust. Society is maintained by virtue of humans’ ability to role-take with each
other and to assume the perspective of ‘generalized others.’ The structure and dynamics of society
influence the number, salience, scope, and proximity of “generalized others.” Humans readjust.
The Culture of Society
Mead never used the concept of culture in the modern sense of the term. Culture is a system of
symbols by which human thought, perception, and action are mobilized and regulated. Humans
regulate their conduct in terms of ‘generalized others’ who embody these communities of attitudes.
“Generalized other” refers to those symbol systems of broader cultural systems that regulate
perception, thought, and action. Mead’s “generalized other” includes norms, values, beliefs, and other
regulatory systems of symbols. Individuals with mind and self role-take with varieties of “generalized
others.” “Generalized others” regulate their conduct and coordinate their actions. Mead’s
conception of society emphasizes the basic nature of processes underlying ongoing social activity.
He was not concerned with the details of social structure or components of culture. Regardless of the
structure of society, the processes by which society is created, maintained, and changed are the same.
Topic 157: The Act: The Basic Unit of Behavior
The most basic unit of behavior is "the act." The behavior of an individual is nothing more than a
series of acts. Acts may be enacted singularly but more often emitted simultaneously. In order to gain
insight into the nature of human behavior, it is necessary to comprehend the constituents of behavior,
i.e., the "acts."
Basic Assumptions
The basic assumptions are as follows:
a. Acts are part of a larger life process of organisms adjusting to their environmental conditions.
b. Human acts are unique due to their capacities for mind and self.
c. What motivates humans to act?
d. How does it operate? Or how does the behavior of human organisms with mind and self, operating
within society, get initiated and directed?
Mead visualized the act as composed of four stages:
1. The impulse;
2. Perception;
3. Manipulation; and
4. Consummation.
The four stages are not entirely discrete, i.e., they blend into each other. Also, they constitute
distinctive phases involving somewhat different behavioral capacities. Stages of a given act are not
separable from each other or isolated from the stages of another act. Humans can simultaneously be
involved in different stages of different acts. Acts vary in length, degree of overlap, consistency,
intensity, and other similar states.
90
Lesson 42
George H. Mead-IV
(Topic 158-163)
Topic 158: Stages of Act: Impulse
There are four stages in the act. The stages are: Impulse, Perception, Manipulation, and
Consummation. In the following paragraphs, each stage is discussed one by one.
1. Impulse: For Mead, an impulse represents a state of disequilibrium or tension between an organism
and its environment. The two implicit propositions of impulse are:
(a) The greater the degree of disequilibrium between an organism and its environment, the stronger
the impulse, and the more likely behavior is to reflect this fact,
(b) The longer an impulse persists, the more it will serve to initiate and guide behavior until it is
consumed.
Sources of disequilibrium for an organism are as follows:
- Some impulses come from organic needs that are unfulfilled.
- Others come from interpersonal maladjustments.
- Still others come from self-inflicted reflections.
- Many are a combination of organic, interpersonal, and intra-psychic sources of tension.
The key point here is that impulses initiate efforts at their consummation, giving the behavior
of an organism a general direction. Though a state of disequilibrium can be eliminated in many
different ways, the specific direction of behavior will be determined by the conditions of the
environment. For Mead, humans are not pushed and pulled around by impulses. On the contrary, an
impulse is defined in terms of the degree of harmony with the environment. The precise ways it is
consummated are influenced by the manner in which an organism is prepared to adjust to its
environment. Hunger, an organic drive, is seen as arising from behavioral adaptations to the
environment. The types of foods considered edible, the way they are eaten, and when they can
be eaten will be shaped by environmental forces as they impinge on actors with mind and self.
For Mead, impulse initiates behavior and gives it a general direction. The next stage of the act –
perception – will determine what aspects of the environment are relevant for eliminating the impulse.
Topic 159: Stages of Act: Perception
Perception: Perception is the act of becoming aware through the senses. What people perceive in
their environment is highly selective. One basis for selective perception is impulse. People become
attuned to objects in their environment that are perceived as relevant to satisfying an impulse. The
relevance of objects in eliminating a specific impulse depends on past socialization, self-conceptions,
and expectations from others. For example, will a hungry person see a cow as a relevant food source?
It depends on how they have been sensitized to potential food sources. The process of perception
sensitizes an individual to certain objects in the environment, which then become stimuli for
behavioral responses. It involves storing permissible responses to stimuli. Perception is essentially
the activation of potential responses to stimuli. As the organism becomes aware of relevant objects,
it also prepares to act in certain ways. Humans approach objects with hypotheses or ideas about how
certain responses towards objects can eliminate their discomfort.
Topic 160: Manipulation
The emission of behaviors toward objects is termed manipulation. It is a process of handling in a
skillful manner. Humans have a mind and self, therefore they can engage in covert as well as overt
manipulation. Humans can covertly imagine consequences of action toward objects for
eliminating an impulse; can manipulate the world; and can imagine the consequences of various
lines of action. But what determines whether manipulation will be covert before it is overt? The key
condition is what Mead saw as blockage. Blockage is a condition where the consummation of an
impulse is inhibited or delayed. For example, look at breaking a pencil while writing. It creates an
impulse or disequilibrium with the environment. It leads to efforts at manipulation. There can be two
possible outcomes: one sees a pile of pencils readily available and covertly starts thinking about
91
finding a pencil. Blockage of the impulse generates conscious imagery, and manipulation becomes
overt. When the impulse, perception, and overt manipulation stages of the act do not lead to
consummation, thinking occurs and manipulation becomes covert.
We need to utilize the capacities of mind and self. In the case of blockage, an actor immediately
starts covert thinking. Thinking is a behavioral adaptation of an organism experiencing
disequilibrium with its environment and unable to perceive objects or manipulate behaviors in ways
leading to the consummation of an impulse. In the process of thinking, a few things happen such as:
an actor comes to perceive relevant objects; the actor may even role-take with the object if it is another
individual or a group; self-image may be derived, and one may see self as yet another object; and
various lines of conduct are imaginatively rehearsed.
The stage of manipulation involves behavior, feedback, readjustment of behavior, feedback,
readjustment. The process continues until an impulse is eliminated. Call it ‘cybernetic’ having
automatic control systems. It requires persistent motivation. Motivation is a process of constant
adjustment and readjustment of behaviors to restore equilibrium with the environment. The
assumption is that the more often an impulse is blocked, the more it grows in intensity, and the more
it consumes the process of thinking and the phases of self.
Topic 161: Consummation
Consummation: Consummation denotes the completion of an act through the elimination of
disequilibrium between an organism and its environment. For any person, there are multiple
impulses operating, each at various stages of consummation, and potential points of blockage.
Successful consummation of acts leads to the development of stable behavior patterns. It becomes
guidelines for others. For humans, perception involves seeing physical objects, oneself, others,
and various generalized others as part of their environment. Manipulation for humans with the
capacities for mind and self involves overt behavior and covert deliberations. Covertly, individuals
weigh alternatives and assess their consequences. Alternatives and consequences are assessed with
reference to individuals' conception, the expectations of specific others, and various generalized
others. Humans must live and survive in social groups. Consummation for humans almost always
revolves around adaptation to and cooperation with others in ongoing collective enterprises.
The point of blockage at any point determines the strength of a particular stage of the act. Intense
impulses are typically those that have been blocked, thereby causing heightened perception. The
heightened perception generates greater overt and covert manipulation. If blockage occurs, then
perception is further heightened, as are impulses, and the same applies to manipulation. If
manipulation is unsuccessful, escalated covert manipulation ensues, thereby heightened
perception and impulse. Humans initiate and direct their actions in an effort to achieve
integration into ongoing social processes.
Topic 162: George H. Mead Summarizing the Contributions
Mead’s basic premise of behaviorism is that behaviors that facilitate the adjustment and adaptation
of organisms to their environment will be retained. For any individual organism, its environment is
society. The young infant must adjust to society; develop its behavioral capacities for language,
role-taking, mind, and self. For the mature individual, the continued use of the fundamental
capacities is essential for ongoing adjustment and adaptation to society. For Mead, the capacities
for mind and self are behaviors. These capacities ensure that much of human action will be covert
and involve role-taking, reflective thinking, self-criticism, and self-assessment. Behavioral
capacities for mind and self make humans distinctive. Only through interaction by actors with
mind and self is society possible. For a species not organized by instincts, as are ants and bees, the
ability to role-take becomes crucial in such interactions. Humans have to learn their behaviors.
Impulses are both caused and constrained by the capacity to role-take as regulated by culture.
Cultural constraints on impulses allow for the organization of species into society. The
behavioral abilities facilitate the adjustment and adaptation of the species as a whole to the
environment. The acquisition of mind and self enables the individual to adapt to its social
92
environment. The flexible interactive abilities of individuals with mind and self facilitate the species’
adaptation to the environment. It helps in the creation, maintenance, and change of society.
Topic 163: Concluding Remarks
The main focus of this perspective has been on discussions of the self, self-interaction, taking the role
of others, interpretation, gestures, and symbolic meanings. The discussions in these major areas have
emphasized studying processes of interaction between individuals. The methodology primarily used
is inductive, qualitative, and geared toward micro-sociological analysis. The perspective is basically
socio-psychological. The results can be described as a “moving picture” rather than a still
photograph of human behavior, providing a close-up picture. This perspective places primary
value on subjective meaning and on processes opposed to structure. Researchers take great pains to
capture the “world of the other” as seen by that other and ask important sociological questions that
cannot be answered by mainstream sociology. This perspective does not appear to be a
“mainstream” of sociology. Nevertheless, many of its core concepts have been accepted. Some
interactionists have developed concepts that connect the macro and structural demands of sociology.
Symbolic interactionism can be seen as an alternative perspective providing theoretical tools missing
in other perspectives. It follows a distinctive approach that makes important contributions to
sociology. Symbolic interactionism has experienced resurgence recently.
93
Lesson 43
Symbolic Interactions: Some Basic Principles
(Topic164-165)
Topic 164: Symbolic Interactions: Some Basic Principles
The number of basic principles of the symbolic interactionist perspective varies. Turner, Beeghley,
and Powers have listed 25 basic principles of this perspective under six subheadings: principles of
animal action, principles of animal interaction, principles of the emergence of the human mind,
principles of the emergence of self, principles of human action and interaction, and principles of
human social organization. According to Ritzer, some symbolic interactionists (Blumer, Manis and
Meltzer, Rose, and Snow) have tried to enumerate seven basic principles of this perspective.
Ritzer discussed these principles under seven subheadings:
1. Capacity for thought: Human beings, unlike lower animals, are endowed with the capacity for
thought.
2. Thinking and interaction: The capacity for thought is shaped by social interaction.
3. Learning meanings and symbols: In social interaction, people learn the meanings and symbols
that allow them to exercise their distinctively human capacity for thought.
4. Action and interaction: Meanings and symbols allow people to carry out distinctively human
action and interaction.
5. Modification of meanings and action: People can modify or alter the meanings and symbols they
use in action and interaction based on their interpretation of the situation.
6. Making choices: People can make these modifications and alterations because, in part, of their
ability to interact with themselves, which allows them to examine possible courses of action, assess
their relative advantages and disadvantages, and then choose one.
7. Groups and societies: The intertwined patterns of action and interaction make up groups and
societies.
Topic 165: Capacity For Thought &Thinking And Interaction
Capacity for Thought: The assumption of the human capacity for thought is one of the major
contributions of early symbolic interactionists. The crucial assumption is that human beings possess
the ability to think. This assumption differentiates symbolic interactionism from its behaviorist roots.
The same assumption also provides the basis for the entire theoretical orientation of symbolic
interactionism. Individuals in human society were not seen as units that are motivated by
external/internal forces beyond their control, or within the confines of a more orless fixed structure.
Here humans were viewed as reflective or interacting units which comprise the societal entity.
The ability to think enables people to act reflectively. People must often construct and guide what
they do, rather than just release it. The ability to think is embedded in the mind. For symbolic
interactionists mind is not something physiological like the brain. Brain may be necessary for the
emergence of mind but it does not inevitably produce mind. Here mind is a process that is itself part
of the larger process of stimulus and response. The mind is related
94
to virtually every other aspect of symbolic interactionism, including socialization, meanings,

symbols, the self, interaction, and even society.
Thinking and Interaction: People have a general capacity for thought that is shaped and refined
through social interaction. The focus is on socialization as a specific form of social interaction. The
human ability to think is developed during childhood socialization and further refined in adult
socialization. This process helps to cultivate the ability to think and develop distinctively human ways
of thinking. Humans adapt and shape information according to their own perspectives in this process.
Interaction plays a crucial role in both developing and expressing the ability to think. All forms of
interaction contribute to refining our thinking abilities. Additionally, thinking influences the
interaction process as individuals must consider others and determine how to align their actions with
those of others.
95
Lesson 44
Learning Meanings And Symbols
(Topic 166-167)
Topic 166: Learning Meanings And Symbols
Symbolic interactionists tend to accord causal significance to social interaction. Meaning stems not
from solitary mental processes but from interaction. People learn symbols as well as meanings in
social interaction. People respond to signs unthinkingly but respond to symbols in a thoughtful
manner. Signs stand for themselves (the gestures of angry dogs). Symbols are social objects used to
represent whatever people agree they shall represent. Words, physical artifacts, and physical actions
(e.g., the word boat, crescent, cross, a clenched fist) can all be symbols. Language is a vast system of
symbols. Words are symbols because they are used to stand for things. Symbols in general and
language in particular have a number of specific functions for the actor.
Functions Of Symbols
There are seven functions of symbols, which are discussed below:
1. Symbols enable people to deal with the material and social world by allowing them to name,
categorize, and remember the objects they encounter there. In this way, people can order a world
that would otherwise be confusing.
2. Symbols improve people’s ability to perceive the environment. Instead of being flooded by a
mass of indistinguishable stimuli, the actor can be alerted to some parts of the environment rather
than others.
3. Symbols enhance the ability to think. Language greatly expands this ability. Thinking, in these
terms, can be conceived of as symbolic interaction with oneself.
4. Symbols greatly increase the ability to solve various problems. Actors can think through
symbolically a variety of alternative actions before actually taking one.
5. The use of symbols allows actors to transcend time, space, and even their own persons.
Through the use of symbols, actors can imagine what it was like to live in the past or what it might
be like to live in the future. Actors can also empathize with others.
6. Symbols allow us to imagine a metaphysical reality, such as heaven or hell.
7. Symbols enable people to avoid being enslaved by their environment. They can be active rather
than passive—that is, self-directed in what they do.
Topic 167: Action and interaction & Modification of meanings and symbols
Action and Interaction: Meanings and symbols play a crucial role in human action and interaction.
The primary focus is on how meanings and symbols impact human behavior. Behavior can be
categorized as covert or overt. Covert behavior involves the internal thought process, which includes
symbols and meanings, while overt behavior refers to the actual actions performed by individuals. In
most cases, human action involves a combination of both covert and overt behavior. Symbolic
interactionists are particularly interested in covert behavior as it involves the use of symbols and
meanings.
Meanings and symbols give human social action and interaction distinct characteristics. Social action
occurs when individuals consider others in their actions, while social interaction involves the
symbolic communication of meanings to others. Individuals interpret these symbols and base their
responses on their understanding of them. In social interaction, actors engage in a process of mutual
influence.
Modification of Meanings and Symbols: Individuals have the ability to modify or change the
meanings and symbols they use in action and interaction based on their interpretation of the situation.
Symbols and their meanings are created by humans and can be situation-specific. Humans have the
capacity to create new symbols and alter the meanings associated with existing symbols. This process
of modification and creation of symbols and meanings is ongoing.
96
Lesson 45
Making choices
(Topic 168-170)
Topic 168: Making choices
People have the ability to make modifications and alterations by interacting with themselves
and considering various courses of action. They evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of
different options and make choices based on their assessments. Humans possess the capacity to
interpret meanings and symbols, enabling them to decide on their actions. They are not bound
to accept externally imposed meanings and symbols, as they can create new interpretations based on
their own understanding of the situation. Symbolic interactionists believe that individuals have some
level of autonomy and can make independent choices, shaping their lives with a unique style. When
individuals perceive situations as real, the consequences of these perceptions are also real. While
society often provides definitions of situations, individuals can also create their own interpretations,
allowing them to change and adapt meanings and symbols.
Topic 169: Groups and Societies
The intertwined patterns of action and interaction form groups and societies. Symbolic interactionists
are critical of the focus on macro structures by other sociologists. Blumer is at the forefront of those
who criticize this "sociological determinism," where social action is seen as a result of external
forces rather than individuals interpreting their situations. Traditional sociologists tend to view actors
as mindless robots influenced by societal structures, while symbolic interactionists believe actors
actively define their situations. Blumer presents a different perspective on large-scale social
structures, emphasizing the importance of actors and their actions in society.
Society is defined by human actions, with group life being a complex of ongoing activities. Collective
action involves individuals aligning their actions and communicating with each other, leading to joint
action. Blumer acknowledges the emergence of large-scale structures from micro processes,
highlighting the flexibility and repetitive nature of joint action guided by pre-established
meanings. While large-scale structures play a role in shaping human action, they do not determine it
in symbolic interactionism. People act in situations, not within societal structures. Structures provide
conditions and limitations for action, but individuals create and uphold rules through social processes
in group life. Blumer does not view culture and social structure as independent or coercive
entities.
Topic 170: Concluding Remarks
The single most important theory in symbolic interactionism is that of G. H. Mead. Substantively,
Mead’s theory accords primacy and priority to the social world. It is out of the social world that
consciousness, the mind, the self, and so on, emerges. Symbolic interactionism has been criticized
for a few things, i.e., First, it is criticized because the mainstream of symbolic interactionism has too
readily given up on conventional scientific techniques. “Just because the contents of consciousness
are qualitative, does not mean that their exterior expression cannot be coded, classified, even
counted.” Science and subjectivism are not mutually exclusive. Secondly, there is vagueness in
essential Meadian concepts such as mind, self, I, and me. Basic concepts are confused and imprecise
and therefore incapable of providing a firm basis for theory and research. It is difficult to
operationalize the concepts. As a result, testable propositions cannot be generated. Third, Symbolic
interactionism has a tendency to downplay or ignore large-scale social structures. The concept of
social structure is necessary to deal with the incredible density and complexity of relations through
which episodes of interaction are interconnected. It minimizes the facts of social structure and the
impact of the macro-organizational features of society on behavior. Fourth, Symbolic interactionism
is not sufficiently microscopic. It ignores the importance of factors such as the unconscious and
emotions. It ignores psychological factors such as needs, motives, intentions, and aspirations.
Psychological factors might impel the actor to act.
Symbolic interactionism has moved in a decidedly micro direction. This is in contrast to at least the
97
implications of the more integrative title of Mead’s "Mind, Self, and Society." Symbolic
interactionism has entered a new, “post-Blumerian” age. It is argued that Blumerian theory always
had an interest in macro-level phenomena. There are ongoing efforts to synthesize symbolic
interactionism with ideas derived from a number of other theories. This “new” symbolic
interactionism has “cobbled a new theory from the shards of other theoretical approaches,” both micro
and macro, trying to redefine Mead’s ideas.
98

Handouts SOC 402

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Handouts SOC 402

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Handouts SOC 402

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sociological Perspectives-SOC402 VU

Key assumptions of this perspective

evaluation of others, and scope of obligations in social relationships.

 Conflict of interest is always latent but may become manifest.

also looked at:

paradoxical opposition to feminism from ‘women," whom feminism claims to represent.

Topic 144: Primary groups

(i) The use of significant symbols

to virtually every other aspect of symbolic interactionism, including socialization, meanings,

You might also like