Social Thought and Social Change - Essay Example

?Running Head: Social Thought and Social Change Social Thought and Social Change [Institute’s Social Thought and Social Change Q. Using key ideas of TWO theorists - Marx, Weber, and/or Durkheim - critically examine the concept of ‘post-industrial’ society. Daniel Bell is the American sociologist who coined the term, “post industrial” society. Nations all around the world have moved from the industrialism into an era where the manufacturing sector has lost its importance. This can come under illustration in a few statistics where the workforce has moved from the manufacturing sector into services, which might include insurance, banking, medicine, hotels, and restaurants. There has been a “social change” in United States (Cornish, 1993, pp. 162). Various sociologists belonging to different school of thoughts have interpreted social change differently. In particular, notion of Social Change will under evaluation according to the works of Karl Marx and Max Webber. Marx simply defined social change as something, which emerges from class conflict, and this social change might be in the form of revolutions and not necessarily peaceful (Tischler, 2007, pp. 14). Weber’s ideas on social change were not economically based like that of Marx, but he emphasized that social change is brought about by ideas and ideals (Denhardt, 2004, pp.26). Society has undergone various transformations; the theories of Marx and Weber highlight how social change brought about these transformations. The paper explains the theories of Marx and Weber to explain the concept of “post industrialist” society. Bell does not really define post industrialist society as a transition into service industry. Bell places great emphasis on scientific knowledge in this era and this scientific knowledge is a catalyst for social change (Mackay, Maples, Reynolds, 2001, pp. 24). Postindustrial era emerged after the Second World War that saw immense technological developments some of which included the transformation of matter into energy, atom bomb and the first digital computer (Bell, 1973, pp. 339). The character of ‘knowledge’ itself stands out in postindustrial societies. The main features of a postindustrial society include that of an increase in the size of the service industry, extensive use of machinery, an increase in the amount of information technology and knowledge and creativity standing out (Society, n.d, n.p). Karl Marx was particularly focused on the inequality perpetuated by capitalism. He argued that a particular technology did not define capitalism, and was the relation of social forces within the capitalist society that was significant. In the sense, that the people who owned the means of production and the workers who worked on these means of production had an important relationship. Although technology was vital to the process but it resulted only “as consequence of the relationship between those who produce surplus value and who appropriate it” (Jordan, Pile, 2002, pp.102). The works of Marx itself were based on the industrialist society. However, various contemporary Marxist theorists have identified that the conflicts within the framework of work, which occurred in industrial society have still not been removed with the introduction of the post industrialist era, also widely known as Information Communications Technology (ICT). In addition, even Bell has identified that the landowner and soldier were central figures in pre-industrial society and the businesspersons in industrial society, largely scientists and researchers dominate the postindustrial society (Cornish, 1993, pp. 162). Marxists therefore would emphasize that the scientists and researchers have the ‘elite’ knowledge, which is in the hands of the powerful few. Hence, there is inequality in the society. Furthermore, there has been an integration of ICT into the manufacturing world. This is an addition of modernity to the trend, which Marx had established. Therefore, according to Marxists, ICT is a ‘normal’ feature of the way in which scientific knowledge has been included into production process. This has resulted in the production process becoming more efficient, leading to a larger accumulation of capital. ICT (post-industrial era); however has not helped in the development of the Information era as such (Jordan & Pile, 2002, pp. 102). A study (Edgell, 2006, pp. 53) by Braverman in America shows the influence of capitalist production from the ICT. The study was primarily focused in the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century. Mass production in America was the result of increased scientific knowledge. In addition, only a few corporations were the beneficiaries of this increased scientific knowledge. The thesis by Braverman had also focused on the capitalist mode of production, which has led to the inequality between the employer and the employee. The labor force is largely dominated by the accumulation of capital. Braverman’s analysis is drawn from Marx, whose empirical point was based on Britain (Edgell, 2006, pp. 53). According to Marx, human capital is adaptable and due to its extreme intelligence can, produce large amounts of profits and therefore have to be controlled. With the development of ICT, the issue of controlling labor had become complex, therefore, capitalists turned to developments in machinery and management. This has led to the de-skilling of labor, a very prominent feature of the ‘post industrialist’ society. Braverman was not the first ‘deskilling’ theorist. Historically, it was Karl Marx (Edgell, 2006, pp. 53). Therefore, this deskilling of labor also leads to a decrease in employment in opportunities for a number of manual workers. They have to seek education, and according to Marx, the ‘elite’ can only acquire the best form of education. Hence, post industrialist society has perpetuated more inequality, if we drawn upon the work of Marx. In addition, as previously mentioned is that in American society, only a few large corporations were benefiting from increased scientific knowledge. Marx would view this as inequality as well. In contemporary times, only the developed countries are the beneficiaries of scientific knowledge, while the other side of the World have not benefited from the post industrialist era. One prominent feature of the Post Industrial era is that of globalization. It is through globalization that the world has witnessed the emergence of new socio-economic forms. It is a form, which is subjected greatly by computer, and information and communication flows (Jordan & Pile, 2002, pp.96). Globalization has not benefited the larger proportion of the world. Therefore, Marxists would view this as inequality. The concept of ‘post industrial’ society is very much focused on inequality according to Marxists. Braverman’s analysis and the inequality perpetuated by post industrialist society shows that the concept of post industrialist society is not different from the structure of the industrialist society. Marx would not have viewed this era differently. Post industrialist society therefore is just a modification of the features of the industrialist society. In addition, in no way these can lead to revolutions or any significant shift in the socio economic conditions of the under privileged (Jordan & Pile, 2002, pp. 104). However, the Marxist view can be criticized with the recent phenomena of the Social Network Revolution brought about in Middle East in the beginning of the year 2011. This revolution was largely aided by the ICT, signifying that ICT has indeed aided the developing part of the world, and not only the developed world. The paper shall now examine Weber theory and the way it is applicable to the ‘post industrial’ concept. Capitalism was viewed by Weber as the element of an emergence of socio cultural phenomena, which is rationalization. According to Weber, traditional thoughts that consisted of magical and metaphysical beliefs were replaced by rational calculation. Rationalization, according to Weber aided the process of Civilization, which instilled new values and norms in the society. Rationalization, as Weber states occurred in two main arenas of the society, which was market economy and modern organizations. The market economy represented the true essence of rationalization for it operated on the principles of demand and supply, not hindered by the traditional values and beliefs. Modern organizations were also developed largely through the phenomena of bureaucratization. Different organizations developed within the society, based on explicit rules. Such social organizations were needed in the development of modern societies. These organizations had the goal of organizing time and space (Jordan & Pile, 2002, pp 103). Rationalization and bureaucratization occurs in postindustrial societies as well. The whole system of capital accounting using double entry system dominant in the capitalist era has been replaced by the different software of double entry in contemporary times. In addition, ICT is a way of broadening the ‘technical rationality of bureaucracy’. Computers can store and transfer massive amounts of information, and therefore this is a tool of the modern organization. This connects the local, national, and global world in all sorts of ways. Artificial intelligence also further aids the concept of postindustrial societies according to Weber. It is technology, which has guided the development of the state historically. Weberian perspective does not view ICT as a revolutionary change of industrial society, but it has only led to a more advanced form of society. ICT is viewed as an ‘extension of rationalization into other spheres of life’. In that sense, postindustrial era has been the same as industrial era (Jordan & Pile, 2002, pp. 104). One can come across a number of theories regarding up skilling that can be traced back to Weber. Up skilling theories in contemporary times regard that due to the increasing number of bureaucratic organizations, there has been an increase in the demand for education. Bell has presented a theory which emphasizes on the ‘centrality of knowledge’ and growth of technical experts’. He also emphasizes that other non-profit organizations would significantly develop in this era, which might include health, education, and research. In this sense, Bell has argued that knowledge will become the factor of production (Edgell, 2006, pp.63). The postindustrial society is very relevant to Weber’s notion of ‘Iron cage’. Because of strict rigid rules due to bureaucracy, the society would be caught up in iron cage from which it would be impossible to get out. In the postindustrial society, the democratization of society would lead to world of ‘cultural sameness’ through the process of oligarchy. Bureaucracy and its iron cage would lead to the destruction of individuality (Holton & Turner, 1989, pp. 62). The postindustrial era has evolved during the past century largely in United States of America, but now has evolved to other parts of the world. Bell, when he coined the postindustrial era was talking mainly about America, which showed the features in the 1970s. Lenski, another sociologist had identified the different types of society that have existed in the world until now. Post-industrial era or ICT is the latest one. It is clearly hard defining it because to this day, the world is experiencing postindustrial era. However, although it was meant to be a catalyst for social change, it has merely been a modification of the industrial era. It is due to this reason no revolutions have occurred according to Marx. In addition, it is because of this reason that iron cage has not been escaped, if one puts Weber’s theory on social change into perspective. References Cornish, E. 1993. “Chapter 9: Futurists and their Ideas.” The study of the future: an introduction to the art and science of Understanding and Shaping Tomorrow's World. Maryland: World Future Society. Denhardt, R. B. 2004. “Chapter 2.” Theories of Public Organization. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Edgell, S. 2006. “Chapter3 and 4”. The sociology of work: continuity and change in paid and unpaid work. London: SAGE Publishers. Holton, R., & Turner, B. S. 1989. Max Weber on Economy and Society. Routledge: Taylor and E Francis Library. Jordan, T., & Pile, S. 2002. “Introduction”. Social Change. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Limited. Mackay, H., Reynolds, P., & Maples, W. 2001. “Bell's Post Industrial Society.” Investigating the information society. London: Routledge. Society. (n.d). Sociology Education | an Insight to Human Social Relations. Retrieved on May 9, 2011: http://edu.learnsoc.org/Chapters/6%20society/1%20society.htm Tischler, H. L. 2007. Introduction to Sociology. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Read More