Sociological Theory. Study Of Society And Social Facts - Essay Example

? “Sociological Theory” What has sociological theory contributed to our understanding of modern capitalist societies? Answer with reference to the works of one of the major figures in the classical tradition of sociological theory. There a great deal of sociological theories due to the fact that the world is not stagnant and keeps going through changes both on a micro and macro level. These theories basically encompass all the societal factors and structures that help shaping the society that we see around us at any point or over a period of time. (Berger, et al., 1989) As with everything else in the world, sociological theories also impact capitalism and pioneers of sociology also contribute to our understanding of modern capitalist theories. Emile Durkheim was also a French sociologist who was one of the pioneers in shaping sociology today along with Karl Marx and Weber. One of his main beliefs is that society cannot be reduced into the elements that make it up and therefore is different and unique as a whole. This is also called ‘sui generis’ reality. He believes that the whole was greater than the sum of its part and it was formed by individuals and their interactions but was completely new form what happened individually in society. He further went on to state that societies could also be observed scientifically. He called his methodology ‘social facts’ or elements of life as whole that were individual but were able to influence an individual in society. (Giddins, 1978) Study of society and social facts Durkheim believed that every aspect of society was due to history and they had no separate origin and therefore they could be analyzed in a scientific sense and therefore sociology could be considered as a science. Particularly used as a science, sociology was important for all beliefs and institutions. Building further on social facts, which was the methodology to prove that society was greater than individual interactions, they are “a category of facts which present very special characteristics: they consist of manners of acting, thinking, and feeling external to the individual, which are invested with a coercive power by virtue of which they exercise control over him” (Berger, 1989). How scientists observe physical facts in the world, similarly social facts can also be observed as they are objective. They are also internal aspects of individuals much like physical aspects and they exist through individuals as well. This makes social facts a paradox; they seem to be both external and internal since facts which are internal to one individual may be external to another individual. This adds vagueness to Durkheim’s work and leaves it open to criticism. (Parkin, 1992) Society it is believed is not just people living in one place geographically and social facts cannot be understood with this mindset. Society however is more than that; it is a combination of ideas which are emanated when individuals associate and meet each other and their consciences come into play. Therefore it is beyond one individual or phenomenon but rather a ‘sui generis’ reality which also means that society is more complex, deeper and richer than one individual who is entirely different from society yet part of forming it. This is also called ‘conscience collective’ which means the mixture of different consciences. Social facts are also what allows individuals in a society to have certain traits such as values, a religious and belief system and even technology and having or not having the right to goods and property. There also two different kinds of social facts. The first kind revolves around psychology such as what is to be deemed beautiful, or a dressing style, religion and the legal code of society. Society therefore will impose itself on individuals in the society. How people express themselves and opinions also comprise of this first kind of social facts such as birth, death rate etc. The influence of society on individuals in this case is difficult to trace unlike the former. However they can be quantified by seeing individual components and then compiling them into a collective procedure. The second kind of social facts are structural in nature and they are usually concerned with the materialistic aspects of life such as the number of people living in a society, an area, a country etc. and how they communicate and how this impacts their lifestyle and they buildings and so on. Their influences are less obvious on the collectivist thought of society; however they have the same aspects as the former set of social facts. Social fact was later revised by Durkheim to become flexible and include all kinds of social phenomena. Durkheim also lays down some rules for social facts and their existence. The first rule is that social facts are things and they should be treated so. This means that they have an existing and independent identity and they create some impact on those who observe them. Individuals cannot impact social facts however and therefore changing them requires a great deal of effort. Secondly, sociologists who are observing social facts must define the phenomena of the society that they will observe and delimit them as well. This will lead to a more structured research and makes the object that will be observed something that has validity and can be verified. The researcher needs to be unbiased and unattached to the subject of investigation as well and therefore facts should be objective. Lastly, researchers should examine and observe the facts closely and not have any conceptions about the social facts before hand All this means that data needs to be treated rationally and eliminating any bias and by using his rules, a cause and effect relationship for the phenomenon can be withdrawn. In this way, Durkheim developed universality in his laws and he believed that all social facts were linked to the events that caused them and those that came before them. (Durkheim, et al., 1979) He also believed that the main root of the sociological method of his was the comparative historical approach which was a process of finding similarities between the social facts of different societies and this would eradicate the extraneous variables in a situation. Sociology essentially functioned as a changing function of social facts overtime for Durkheim. Social Realism The first claim made by Durkheim was the ‘sui generis’ of life as previously discussed and then the second was the fact that social facts should be seen as things which are not in the researcher’s mind and have a coercive ability. Social facts therefore have properties that can be uncovered and used if treated in the proper way. Social realism seems to be Durkheim’s theory to converge the different schools of though. Realism can be seen as a viewpoint which states that there are social realities that exist outside an individual and his perceptions do not affect it nor do they determine it. Knowledge and its sociology Durkheim was a pioneer in the West of the thought that a person’s society will affect the perception of the individual about the world. He believed that all aspects of an individual’s thought is affected by the society that they live in. And these do not necessarily have to be the common beliefs of society that influence an individual such as their beliefs and their language but even logical thinking aspects and concepts such as numbers, space, time. This logical though process helps to structure the world and analyze it, to make sure that all individuals have a proper as well as a homogenous perception and belief of the society as well as the world as a whole and how it functions. Without this homogeneity, society would not be possible. And no society therefore survived in anarchy. For this purpose of a homogenous society, Durkheim introduced the concept of collective representations. Humanity therefore has to reflect knowledge of the world for the knowledge to actually exist. That is, no knowledge exists if humanity cannot represent it. Collective representations are therefore a pool of representations in a society by which it represents itself in reality and these are the things that affect society. They aren’t just projections and images, but the actual reality that comes about by interaction between the society and the outside world, which means that they are not projections but aspects that are concrete and have value. They can be for example fables, photographs and can take on many other forms as well such as concepts, thought and even language. (Durkheim, 1998) Language Language ensures that society functions in a communicative manner. Words, concepts etc. are transcendent of time and they do not change with time and therefore are a stable representation of society. Truth is also explained by language and individuals in a society can believe that there is a stable world which is understandable even for people with different intelligences. Stability and impersonality allow for the society to function in a communicative manner and these are the two requirements for truth to exist according to Durkheim. Language is a product of the society and the belief of ‘sui generis’ and since it is only important when more than one individual exists and there needs to be a mix of different consciences, this further reinforces the point of society being greater than the individuals that make it up. Language is too developed not by an individual but a society which is different to the intelligence of a unique individual and only once they share ideas and concepts. An individual seems to only accumulate and make sense of concepts and furnished them in his own frame of mind so that he can transfer or communicate to others what he believes. Language will eventually also impact the way an individual perceives reality. Objects of society do not exist without a society; they only exist because they have a relation with the society and language is one of those factors which also allow knowledge to be passed around, knowledge which one individual wouldn’t know because everyone has limited experiences and it can transform the way an individual thinks and feels. Society doesn’t only create language; it also creates thoughts such as numbers, personality etc. Rationalists believe that human thought is generalizable and universal and are not dependant on the environment. Durkheim contradicts them by saying that these categories are not vague. Categories of have certain limits and concrete forms and characteristics such as for time there are weeks, seconds, minutes etc. The characteristics are furthermore not universal since they are different for every culture and therefore are part of a history and origin. Empiricists believe that thought categories are a result of the experiences of the individual in the world. Durkheim believes that concepts and these thought categories are similar. They are stable and impersonal and arise again due to the interaction of individuals such as language. This is also under the category of collective representatives. The importance of these categories is also due to the existence of society and the society influences them and not vice versa. And there are different categories of social thought as well which are affected by different aspects of society and its beings such as time is affected by different aspects of society and groupings in a society such as clans of nomads etc. lead to the formation of the category of class in society. The categories are used throughout the entire world and help individuals understand society better. These notions and understandings of the world by different individuals may vary either slightly or with a vast difference. Knowledge and cultural relativism Knowledge according to Durkheim is the compilation of human experiences into a system that can be applicable in the entire world. Religion was one of the first entities that allowed humans to make sense of the world and explain it rationally. Logic therefore came about as result of religion. He also believed that each society has its own truth and this comes about due to reality. Scientific representations were different from collective representations but equally important to a society. They are also unique and build the limits in a society. (Giddens, 1991) Modern capitalism and social change in the West Social thought was one of the main aspects in Durkheim’s theories. He knew that Europe was going through a transition phase from a medieval to a modern society and he focused on that and built his structural analysis around it the dynamic nature of societies. He believed that social change was not intended to move in a certain direction. The way that people interact with each other in a society impacts the society and the condition in which it functions and this brings about social change be it the material situation or the demographics of the society. The major factors of social change due to change in interaction are the change in technology towards advancement especially in the transport and communication sector and the demographics of the population. They make the world more connected and interactions increase and so the differences in interaction will also increase such as the type, quantity and content of communication. And the rate at which the contact happens in a society is termed by Durkheim as ‘moral density.’ This has brought about specialization and division of labor. Societies when they started out were typically mechanical in nature and interactions were less, their groups were smaller in size, and the groups could also be similar. The conscience of an individual could also be similar to the collective conscience of society. Individuals didn’t exist but groups and society did. However, as moral density increases, the world begins to change. The increase in groups and their similarity will mean that all will demand the same resources and since there are scarce resources in this world, the amount of competition rises. Individuals will find something that they are good at and move in that direction in order to reduce this competition so that they can live in a peaceful world and do what they are good at. And therefore it seems that the greater the size of the society, the greater the specialization in it. This will lead to ‘organic solidarity’ which is dependent on the different components of society. This will retain control in modern societies and Durkheim focuses primarily on Europe. Since society has moved in a different direction and as people being to specialize, individualism begins to rise and with that the importance of the individual. Simultaneously, individuals have greater freedom to choose what they work on and how they go about it and society will not be able to dictate and influence what and individual does or doesn’t do. Groups will begin to disintegrate as everyone specializes and this will give rise to differing points of views and diversity in the world as well as in the society. The individual is created in this way and this is the major characteristic of the world’s transition and the beginning of modern times. Durkheim holds fast to his principle that the individual doesn’t create the society or the individual, but society creates the interactions and forms the groups, and the society is the one who gives rise to individuals. In the olden times, Europe had distinct institutions for politics, religion, economy, education etc. The economic sector was the most important and it was at the centre of society around which it grew and other institutions established themselves. This sector was the one which was in charge of keeping production and prices regulated and there were good relationships between members and groups of society. This integrated individuals and brought them closer, building society and improving ties. Technology and demographic changes in the 18th and 19th centuries lead to a massive increase in the population. There were also lesser restrictions on the movement of products and services ad cities expanded, goods were produced centrally and the equilibrium that was previously created was in ruins. The institutions couldn’t grasp this change and therefore there was interdependence not just between societies but internationally. Institutions were free from any regulations and limitations and so they expanded and became more influential than they were before and in turn affected the components of society more. This was essentially the rise of a new industrial state which meant a huge change in the way people had previously lead their lives. People also couldn’t relate to each other in the same way or communicate the same way. The relations between people became weak and people as individuals became freer and exercised that freedom in the society. The worker’s lives were also very different no; they spent a great deal of their time in the factory and away from their family, so not only could they not have a relationship with their family, but also they suffered from greater stress being in the factory all day and their nervous systems were under great pressure. Those who worked on assemble lines also experiences a regime of mechanization and their movements became what the machine wanted them to do. Even religion suffered and the belief in God was dying out and so all walks of life changed due to this transition into the modern world and so the society couldn’t remain the same and nor could the individuals in it. The modern society is therefore disintegrated and European society for the most part has lost its structure. Individuals have a hard time finding meaning and associations in the society and so the unity is lost. Christianity also suffered since the tradition didn’t answer the questions of society and the world towards modern science and justice and courts. Society has therefore lost its pressure and force that it once had on individuals and their perceptions and morality is no longer important. Suicide rate has also risen as result since society doesn’t act as a guide anymore and there are no ties in society with anyone. Lastly, the government and any other ruling force will have little control over the society and its components due to the individuality factor and people have differing opinions and ideas and they are competitive. This gives rise to the modern capitalist societies that we see today in which private institutes produce goods and services and sell them at a profit demanding capital, wages and they function in a competitive market where everybody demands the same scarce resources. The government has a weakened control and class and power dynamics are strong in the modern capitalist society. (Frankel, 1970) Bibliography Berger, J., Zelditch, M. & Anderson, B., 1989. Sociological theories in progress. s.l.:s.n. Durkheim, 1998. Emile durkheim : contributions to l'annee sociologique.. s.l.:s.n. Durkheim, E., Pickering, W. S. F. & Sutcliffe, H. L., 1979. Durkheim.. s.l.:s.n. Frankel, H., 1970. Capitalist society and modern sociology. s.l.:Lawrence & Wishart,. Giddens, A., 1991. Capitalism and modern social theory : an analysis of the writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber. s.l.:University Press. Giddins, A., 1978. Durkheim. s.l.:Harvester. Parkin, F., 1992. Durkheim. s.l.:Oxford University Press. Read More