RECENT THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES IN SOCIOLOGY

UNIT – 1

INTRODUCTION
The beginning stages of theory were related to theory of a simpler society, when the
problems were not very serious, the beginning of human society depended upon
people’s co-operation and understanding of each other and their relationship with
nature. Earlier to Sociology framing its theory, it was the Anthropologists who
formulated theories related to the simple life of human beings and their growth from
simple to complex society.

The theoretical formation in Sociology begins with the founding father August Comte
and his followers. That is Herbert Spencer, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber. The
theoretical perspectives in Sociology were developed on the basis of Social events,
interactions and societal patterns. Every theory formulated will explain these
patterns of society at different levels, that is Micro and Macro levels. The Structural
Functionalism and Conflict theory are at the Macro level and Symbolic
Interactionalism is at Micro level.

The 3 major perspectives in Sociology

Sociologist analyze the social phenomenon at different levels and from different
perspectives. Anything which is concrete or not understood in its real sense can be
understood by a social theory. A Sociologist researches, a Micro level concept to
that of a Macro level understanding which gives us clarity about a social
phenomenon. The European Sociologist has a broader Conceptualization about the
fundamentals of society and it’s working. The concept and the paradigm provides a
Sociologist a philosophical explanation regarding the questions about the society
and its people.

Sociologist adopts the 3 perspectives in order to explain how society influences

people and Vice-versa, each perspective conceptualizes the society, the social
forces and human behavior.

The 3 perspectives are shown below:

Sl. Sociological Perspective Level of Focus
No. Analysis
1 Symbolic Interactionalism Micro Level Uses symbols & face-face
interactions
2 Functionalism Macro Level The relationship between the
parts of society & how the
parts function and adopt of the
available societal environment.
3 Conflict Theory Macro Level Competition for scares
resources & how the Elite
control the poor & the weak.

1
What is theory? What are the elements of theory? Or Building
blocks of theory.
Theory is a mental activity which is a process of developing ideas than can allow us
to explain how and why events occur. A theory is constructed with basic elements or
building blocks which are as follows.

1. Concepts.
2. Variables.
3. Statements.
4. Formats.

1. Concepts: It is the basis of the theory. It denotes a phenomenon and they

isolate or separate the features of the world which are considered important.
Example: The concepts of atom or neutron are considered to be isolated for some
analytical purpose.

 Some of the Sociological concepts are norms, status, socialization and others.
Each is a concept considered as a block.

 Concepts are constructed from definitions.

A Definition is a system of terms which seen in the form of language, symbols or
mathematical terms. Example: The concept “Conflict” will have a meaning when
it is defined otherwise it is just a term without real meaning.

 Concepts are useful in building theory and they have a specific characteristic
which they communicate with a uniform meaning to the user.

 Concepts are expressed through a language which is either technical or

subject oriented.

 Concepts of theory reveal a specific characteristic with its abstractness or not

much concrete.

 Concepts are related to the phenomena on a concrete basis only when it

depends on the time and location.

A concrete concept refers to the interaction of individuals of a particular group,

whereas an abstract concept would refer to those general properties of face to
face group, which are not related to a particular individual at a particular time or
location.

 A Concept is equally critical from the view point of the researcher or a social
scientist. Since the utility of a concept which is abstract can be made relevant
and utilize it for the purpose of investigation.

2. Variables: Variables are considered essential for building a theory while

Concepts denote a phenomenon.
2
  Variables gives a choice for the researcher to investigate in depth to consider
various causes for a reason, situation which is considered problematic.
Concepts sometimes are translated into Variables that is the things which
vary.

 Variables have different sizes, properties, intensity and so forth.

 To understand Variables we may consider an example of the aggregate of

people in a group which does not indicate what type of a group it is and so we
need to consider the different Variables available within the society.

 To understand the event, we need to understand the Variables related to it.

 Variables can also be translated into a Concept depending upon its usage.

3. Concept theories are interrelated and such connection can become a

Statement
 These Statements specify the way in which events denoted by Concepts are
interrelated and also provide interpretation of how and why events should be
connected to each other.

 A group of Statements constitute a theoretical format.

 A Statement in Sociological theory cannot be specifically formed since it takes

different meaning at different circumstances.

 In Sociology the structure of theoretical Statements keep changing according

to the expectation of Sociologist.

4. Format: Format in Sociological theories is considered general and can describe

many different ways to organize theoretical Statement.
 A Theoretical Statements are grouped together into a Format based on one’s
use of social science to conduct research.

 The 4 basic approaches for generating theoretical Statement and format are
as follows.

a. Meta theoretical Scheme – It is an activity which is complex in

theory.

b. Analytical Scheme – A typology or classification of

schemes.

c. Propositional Scheme – A theoretical Statement which specify the

connection between 2 or more Variables.

d. Modeling Scheme - A model meant for drawing a picture of a

social event.
3
SCOPE OF THEORETICAL SCHEMES

1. Axiomatic Schemes or Formats

They are the organization of theoretical Statements which involves the

following elements.

a. Containing a set of Concepts which are highly abstract and some which are
concrete to a set of existing Statements that describe the class and situation
in which the concepts and propositions try to find their existence.

b. Proposition Statement – are Statements in a hierarchical order.

2. Axioms are the theoretical Statements – are

 Highly abstract or very unclear which gives space for various other
Theoretical Statements, which are considered logical. These Theoretical
Statements can be theorems. Which has rules and it can be used for any
research activity.

 The selection of Axioms in reality, are usually selected based on certain

criticism.

 They should be consistent with each other.

 They should be highly abstract and should state relationships among abstract
concepts.

 Axioms should be appearing truthful and should be self evident.

The format which results in a particular theory will also contain the principles
proposition which work towards the construction of a theory. The advantages from
such theoretical constructions are as follows.

a. Highly abstract Concepts, comprising of a range of relative phenomenon can

be employed.
b. The abstract Concepts do not have direct measurable elements since they
are logically tied to some measurable propositions.

c. The use of logical system to derive propositions from Axiom can generate
additional propositions.

3. Limitations of the use of Axiomatic theories can be strictly related to a

concept or propositions.

 Axiomatic theory required control on all proposed Variables.

 Axiomatic theory can be used when there is a specific definition of concepts

and these concepts are well organized and extra variables are eliminated.
4
FORMAL THEORY

 They are considered to be the essence of Axiomatic Schemes to develop

highly abstract propositions.

 The use of Axiomatic schemes becomes helpful.

 Propositions are considered to be a group of higher order laws.

 The explanation of these laws is to give an empirical ways for any theory.

 In a Formal Theory the abstract principles are put together in the form of laws
from which we extract detection.

What is Paradigm (Pattern / Model)

 A Paradigm is a broad view of ordering and simplified the complex situations

which look very confusing to us which makes it for us to understand certain
fundamental imaginations about the nature.

 Paradigm are norms to the viewer which makes him to understand which is
important and unimportant, reasonable and unreasonable, legitimate and non-
legitimate, possible and impossible and what to attend and what to ignore.

 A Paradigm process to be constructive and it constitutes all scientific

activities.

 All the theories are generated and based on Paradigm.

The 4 dimensions of Paradigm

1. Functional Paradigm - It is a dominant Paradigm which seeks to give a

rational explanation. Relationship is a concrete concept which can be identified,
studied and questioned.

2. Interpretive Paradigm - It explains the stability of behavior from the

individuals view point. They are interested in understanding the world which is
created and understood by the individuals and explained to others as it is, that is
related to the spiritual world.

3. Radical Humanist Paradigm - The consciousness of man is dominated by

a powerful ideology with which he interacts, this is going to create a gap between
himself and his true consciousness, thereby stopping him to fulfill his needs.

The theorist is concerned about understanding the social constraints that stops an
individual from attaining that fulfillment.
5
4. Radical Structuralist Paradigm - The followers of this Paradigm
understands that the Radical change is built on the natural social structure. The
present society is about the conflicts which being him a radical change due to
Political and Economic crisis.

LEVELS OF THEORISATION
1. Meta Theory
2. Grand Theory
3. Middle Range Theory

Their focus and how they are used.

Sl. LEVELS FOCUS HOW THEY ARE USED
No.
1. Meta Theory The focus of Meta theory They are the informers about
is to deal with the nature what is possible to know and
of knowledge or the how do we start a research.
nature of reality. They are Ex: As a scientific realist a
the world view and look Sociologist may argue that
realities. human ideas are as real as a
natural thing and that is what is
possible to be proved by the
research, every human
behavior may not be equally
important for a scientist until
and unless he converts the
behavior into a realistic action
or event.
2. Grand Theory Grand theories are These theories are not very
concerned with broader useful for a researcher. Since
area of human society. It it covers the aspects of a
speaks about how human society in general, the users of
social structures and this grand theory were Karl
processes in general work Marx and Weber. However
or evolve. These are they were not able to decide
theories which are learnt about what were the impact
through perspectives than deriving forces in the
it being a working theory. development of society.
However in general on a
everyday basis, we understand
that every society consist of
the key deriving forces like
race, class and social network
as the important corner stone’s
in social science.

6
 3. Middle Range These theories deal with
Theory the specific aspects of
human behavior
especially social conflict
or social network. They
do not deal with a specific
topic, but various other
theories related to the
behavior of man or his
conflict can be taken to
prove a particular action.
Ex: Alcoholism can be
used as a topic for
research for which a
researcher adopts other
theories which can explain
the causes for alcoholism.
These theories are used in the
majority social research and
most of them gave clarity to the
researches which were not
completed under grand theory.
Ex: When George Simmel
used the term ‘Social Network’,
the theorist who came after
him took this idea of social
network and developed a
whole set of theories called
‘Exchange theory’, which
explored the role of social
exchange as a fundamental
component of human
interaction. These ‘Middle
Range Theories’ however, still
had features of Grand Theory,
but the researchers applied
these (Middle theory) to a
specific problem.
Ex: The health worker used
Exchange theory to understand
health behavior and fashion as
intervention to change that
behavior, they focused on the
role of social networks and
social support in health
behavior.

MIDDDLE RANGE THEORY

The term Sociological theory refers to the logically interconnected sets of

propositions from which empirical uniformities can be derived. Middle Range Theory
is principally cited in sociological guide empirical enquiry. It is intermediate to
general theories of social system which are too remote from particular classes of
social behavior and change to account for what is observed and to those detailed
orderly description of particulars that are not generalized at all. Middle Range
Theory involves abstractions of course, but they are close enough to observed data
to be incorporated in propositions that permit empirical testing.

Just as Parsons was beginning to embrace a form of requisite functionalism, Merton

launched a critique of Parsons functional strategy for building sociological theory.

For Merton, such Grand theoretical system is premature, because theoretical and
empirical ground work is necessary for their completion has not been performed.
Just as Einsteinian theory did not emerge without a long cumulative research
foundation. Thus sociological theory will have to wait for its Einstein.
7
Merton says in Middle Range theory that the term is not still developed to construct
Grand theory. It’s because sociologists have not done the fundamental research as
social being a small research area / subject matter to think of Grand theories.
Intellectual and natural scientists are successful in this field. The reason for this is
the wok of them for centuries. But still no such work is done in sociology.

GRAND THEORY
A Grand theory is a broad conceptual scheme with systems of interrelated
propositions that provide a general frame of reference for the study of social
processes and institutions. It differs from the speculative theory [Refers to an
abstract impressionistic rooted in the philosophical system]. Only in that its
propositions are somewhat anchored although not solidly in the empirical world,
whereas the propositions emancipating from the speculative theories are essentially
assumptions rooted in the philosophical system. The difference is only a matter of
degree not of kind. A Grand theory is a comprehensive formulation of generating a
host of propositions and it provides a master scheme of general social orientations.
Grand theories abound in jargon, tendency statements and intuitive generalizations.
Parsons general system theory is example of Grand theories.

According to Parson – A social system may be defined as a plurality of individual

interacting with each other according to shared cultural norms and meanings.

A system presupposes not only a structure, but also certain functions which its
structure is supposed to perform. Parsons has given a four function paradigm. This
paradigm explains that every social system must continue and solve 4 sets of
organized proposition. In abbreviated form the 4 functions paradigm is refereed as
AGIL.

1. Adaptation – The problem of adapting the social system to its physical and
social environment. The most important problem in this respect is procuring
resources needed for its activities, providing for protections of physical and
social threats and developing information relating to these.

2. Goal Attainment – The organizational problem of effecting coordination in

any collective tasks directed outside the system itself.

3. Integration – The internal problem of maintaining satisfying relations among

the interacting members and avoiding disrupting conflicts. For small groups,
these concerns inter personal relations. For larger organization, it concerns
with inter group relations.

4. Latent Pattern Maintenance – The internal organizational problem of

ordering activity patterns of the system and also of adjusting the role demands
on members, so that these are compatible with their other role commitments.

The first 2 organizational problems concerns the external relations of the social
system with its environment including its physical habitat, the bodily needs of its
8
members and other social systems with which it comes in contact. The second pair
of problems concerns the internal organization of the social system as a human
group of socialized and interacting persons with cultural commitments.

The society sets up various institutions which are a constellation of socially

significant customs collected around some function / set of functions such as ruling,
fighting and worshipping. We many identify these great social institutions namely
family, economic, political, educational and related institutions which are found in all
societies in all eras and in all parts of the world. These institutional centres upon
getting food and other items of wealth, procreation, worship and ruling, the societal
institution are all closed inter related and they form a complex whole that is why
institutions are referred to as a cluster of institutions, one impinging upon others.

Nature and Characteristics of Sociological Theories

Nature: Man living in a Society needs a social life, which is an essential
characteristic of a social group. He is guided by the culture and the values designed
by that culture. The law makes him discipline and adhere to the norms of the
society, failing which he will be punished. Every social relationship undergoes a
change in various dimensions which is leading to a study and research in these
changed areas, which can be considered as a social thought.

The beginning of a social thought was philosophical in nature, since man was highly
religious which make them to think from philosophical perspective towards a new
thought as the society became modern. This journey of social thought form ancient
modern and medieval can be best understood from the view of various social
thinkers who made a scientific study on the issues that existed in the society.

A Sociological theory or Sociological thought is concerned with the discovery of

universal principle which exists in a human society. It is an attempt to understand
the social phenomena by using scientific method which is objective in nature. A
Sociological thought or theory is the product of a combination between philosophy
and science.

A Sociological thought, the connection of the theories with the subject of Sociology,
the emergence of Sociological thought began in the 18 th Century with the founding
fathers and their theories as a contribution to the subject of Sociology. The French
Revolution and the Industrial Revolution caused the Sociologist to have a separate
discipline to think about the various social issues in the society during 18 th C. The
Industrial Revolution gave a new vision to the social thinkers in order to understand
the adjustability issues of the people towards a new Industrial society.

The French Revolution also created a new thought process in the minds of the
Sociologist, since the French wars in the 18 th C left the members of the society
dislocated and homeless. This is the major point towards which Sociology as
discipline was created by August Comte.

The beginning of modern times is dominated by the doctrine of Social contract. This
method was assigned to the churchmen and viewed by various Social thinkers in
9
different dimensions in order to solve the problems in the society. The emergence of
the middle class ‘due to the commercial revolution’ became a conflicting situation,
wherein the kings of the nation had to think about a new tax system for the middle
class to pay. In this kind of a situation the life of the man was at a confused state
due to which the new government had to be established in every society in order to
eliminate the difference in the treatment of the 3 classes, that is., the rich, the middle
and poor classes. During the creation of a new government all the states in that
particular society brought in a system of election through which the leader shall be
chosen by the citizens and a government shall reform.

The Transition from Social thought to Social Theory

The period between 1500 AD and 1800AD many Social thinkers and philosophers
gave a new thought on the basis of Social radicalism and democracy to introduce the
concept of equality. The 18 th C the Social thinkers shifted their view from being
subjective to that of being objective.

Ex: Montesquie, Boltaire and others spoke about the growing human society and its
issues.

According to Harry Barnes, the transition from Social philosophy through Sociology
to the places due to the changes in the following areas.

1. Cultural Sphere: The beginning of 18th C a new era in social philosophy

emerged and the interpretation of the society took a new turn to think about a
growing human progress. Here the classical economist studied economic influences
in the current society, social institutions were studied more scientifically and the
science of society began to be much more orderly.

2. Natural Sciences: It had its impact on political and social philosophy. The
social scientist felt a need for scientific formula which can be adopted into the
explanation of the control mechanism the social and political phenomena. Ex: The
Newton’s law of Gravitation where the gravitation of the earth pulls us down to the
ground level, wherein how the role of earth is important lives of human being in order
to control the movements. Similarly, the social control mechanism keeps the
individual adhering to the norms of the society.

A rational thinking towards understanding religion is also scientific in its approach.

3. Geographical Interpretations of Society: Montesquie in his opinion talks

about the main causes of the diversities in the culture due to geographical
influences. This geographical influence determines the laws of various institution of
any society. He adopts a comparative approach to the study of society and found
out that there is nothing called the ‘best law or the best institution’. Instead they are
best when it is suitable to the people and there are fewer deviants in the society.

4. Biological Interpretation of Society: Malthus has spoken in his work

“Essay on Population”. According to him population tends to increase in the
geometric ratio, that is., 1,2,4,8 …….., while the food supply increases in arithmetic

10
ratio. That is 1,2,3,4…… Malthus saw 2 kinds of checks for the increasing
population.

a) Positive war that is starvation and housing problem.

b) Negative effect that is postponement of marriage.

5. Psychological Interpretation of Society: According to Berkely

the natural sociability of man and a government to regulate his behavior and needed
for a smooth functioning of the society. According to Hume, the society finds its
origin in the instinct and not in the intelligent self interest the biological need for a
physical instinct wherein the man and the woman create family is the reason for the
birth of society. According William Good wins the abolition of the government which
is very cruel towards human beings and there has to be replaced by the clear
explanation about the human existence needs to be provided.

6. The Philosophy of Utilitarianism: The advocate’s assumption of

‘Jereny Bentham’ that man is motivated and controlled in desired to secure
pleasurable events and void painful experiences, the others who were influenced by
him or Herbert Spencer and W.G. Sumner.

The new law framed by the government, the new economic reformation or the new
relief the poor get from the local government is all the pleasurable events which
makes a man avoid the painful.

The historical approach, Giovannj Vico speaks about the historical approach,
wherein he rejects the theory of social contract and speaks about natural sociability
which determines the human personality.

Montesquieue spoke about human society in a historical manner.

Karl Marx influenced Hegelian dialectics in speaking about materialistic philosophy

of history of materialistic dialectics. This is the new thought which opposed the
historians view point in claiming the natural sociability which in reality is the struggle
of man within himself and how the society makes him to face competition of
communism.

7. Contribution to Legal Theory: Comparative jurisprudence developed with

the writings of Montesquieu and others, wherein the jurisprudence of many culture
were compared these legal theories, were rational in their approach however. But
John Lock spoke about the law of nature was opposed since it did not have a legal
theoretical base.

William Black Stone brought in a common law jurisprudence and historical

approach in order to explain the legal theory which again became a questionable
one, since it did not bring in the relation between two. The later part of the
Sociological aspect came from Beccaria who spoke about the reformation of
criminal code in America, France and Britain.

8. The Rise of Anthropology: The study to man’s physical attributes and

11
his cultural aspects began as a study under the science much earlier than Sociology.
This discipline spoke about the early man untouched by science or rational thoughts
when monoculture was practiced all over the world, there were only anthropological
studies in its original forms. As the societies expanded population wise, various
varieties of people from cultural backgrounds emerging to the process of assimilation
giving rise to a new discipline called Sociology and the later Sociologist started to
study about the effects of this cultural mix of this society.

9. The Sociological Theory: The clarity of social phenomena that exists and
occurs in any society. Theories do not involve in any particularization, but it’s about
the whole categories of events.

It is judged by its explanatory power and potential to describe a phenomenon in a

give social event. It helps in describing the phenomena, constructing and testing of
hypotheses, conceptualizing about phenomena and deriving of a certain prediction.

Sociological theory is a statement of a correlation between a class or group of

people and the actions involved in them. It consists of a logically connected set of
propositions, which explains the interconnections of concepts of variables which
represents social phenomena.

A Sociological theory is also a set of ideas, which provides explanation for a human
society. It is defined by Merton as logically inter-connected set of propositions from
which empirical uniformities can be derived. Sociological theory can also be logical
deductive inductive system of concepts, definitions and proposition which speaks
about a state of relationship between 2 or more selected aspects of phenomenon
from which are testable hypothesis can be derived.

The essence of Sociological theory is to study the problems of individuals in the

society and to explain the various social phenomena from all dimensions of any
Sociological incident. A Sociological perspective can become a theory only if it is
logically related to each other.

The Sociological enquiries are the aspects of social order or social change, while
theorizing these issues are taken into consideration, while formulating a theory. For
Ex: August Comte’s explanation about Social Statics and Social Dynamics,
Durkheim’s explanation of Collective ideas versus individual choices. These
examples which are Sociological concerns deal with problem of order and change.

CLASSIFICATION OF SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES

It deals with variety and diversity of the models in social realities. According to
Ferner.J, majority of the Sociological theories can be classified into informal,
descriptive, ideological deductive, specific or less specific and logically perfect or
logically inconsistent. These varieties could be because of the theorist viewing
social events in their own perspective and hence all of these can be put together as
theoretical perspective.
12
Helmat Wagner is of the opinion that there is no systematic theory which co-
ordinates and integrates Sociological knowledge and he gives a classificationary
system for distinguishing on Sociological theory from other, according to which there
are 3 classifications.

1. Positive Sociological Theories - Considers Sociology as a natural

science using objective method of investigation.

2. Interpretative Sociological Theories - Treats Sociology as general science

like symbolic interactional or social actions theory.

3. Evaluative Sociological Theories - Rejects natural science status given

to Sociology and disapprove the value of Sociology and so calls Sociology as
non- scientific theories. Ex: Social philosophical theory or humanitarian
reform theory.

The further presentation is about Herman Strasses, who speaks about 2 types of
Sociological theories.

a) Order – Conflict model.

b) Progressive – Conservative model.

According Herman, on the basis of these 2 schemes, the Sociological theories are
classifies into:

a) Conservative Conflict theories, which includes Industrial conflict theory of

Dahrendrof and Lewis Coser and Darwin’s conflict theory.

b) Transitional System Theory, which are identified with progressive

dimension.

c) Radical Conflict Theories, which are based on conflict model and aims at
the transformation of human actions liberated from system constrains.

d) Structural Function Theories, which follow the social order model.

CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

Scientific Theories can be referred to Sociological theory.

The beginning of human society was considered unscientific and unorganized.

The Sociology which began with August Comte spoke about scientific Social Laws
and Physical Science based on his positivist principles. In order to solve the societal
problem the Sociological theories were interpreted empirically in order to provide
more or less permanent solution.

1. Synthetic Approach – to study the nature of society. In the words of

Raymond Arom – Sociological theory consider the society in totality.
Anything in particular when under study considers the society in its totality.
13
The Sociological theories with function perspective adopt itself to the Synthetic
approach to explain the social phenomena. The best example is about Karl Marx,
in his Conflict theory he holds society responsible for the concept of creation of
‘Class Struggle’.

2. Analytical Approach – Analysis of the whole system is the basic theoretical

proposition. It deals with the parts in the society much in detailed there by
discovering the inter-relationship and inter-dependence of every unit in the
society. Ex: Social Psychological theories studies social institution or social
processes from the view point of behavioral aspects and then analyze
sociologically.

3. Ideological in its argument – It is necessary to develop Sociological theories

on the basis of certain unsolved assumptions and concerns. Ex: The views
of the founding father consider specific concern or perspectives of social
development or progress by looking at them using ideology as a basic model.

4. Empirical in its approach – The strength of a Sociological theory is

Empiricism, which is a process of life begins with social interaction and be any
conservative method. The study of social realities becomes the basis in
understanding any social issue practical or factual evidence which are
required to support the theory.

5. Historical in its relevance – Any social thought has historical basis, since
the study of the contemporary social situation needs the base of historical
thought. Ex: Karl Marx’s theory of historical materialism gives importance to
history which describes the various revolutions in the primitive society during
its transformation in the modern society.

6. Progressive thought towards Sociological theories – The social reality

guides humans towards progressive thought. In this way the gaps between
the real and unreal events can be minimized and a new theory can be
formulated. The goal of all knowledge is development. Hence, the theoretical
knowledge loaded with specific ideology makes it progressive in nature.

7. Transformative – This is considering a social order which is changing the

social phenomena, the direction of social change is seen from the view of
social theorist who looks at the future considering the existing conditions. As
and when the society undergoes change the transformation also occurs in the
Sociological perspectives due to the ideologies of the social thinkers who
think about a progressive society and formulate new theories suitable to the
contemporary society.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOCIOLOGICAL THOUGHT AND SOCIAL

THEORY

The terms Social Thought, Social Theory or Sociological Thought, though not one at
the same yet they are inter connected. The root of Sociology is found in Social
14
thought and Social Philosophy. The founding fathers were considered as Social
thinkers rather than Sociologists in the initial stages. The difference between Social
thought or Sociological thought can be understood in the following ways.

Sociological Thought Sociological Theory

1 Sociological thought of social theory is Sociological theory is nothing but a
the science of society, the purpose is to societal thought which is in total, the
study human life and activities and their thought of man and his relationships
relations in scientific manner. with his fellow beings. According to
Sociology is an independent science Bogardess, it is equivalent to that of
and follows scientific method for its social problems and as and when a
study. social problem evolves at the same
time a social thought takes the shape
of a social theory.
2 Sociological study is more scientific, it Sociological theory is based on
analyzes human society in all aspects values, norms and expectations from
using scientific methods. It is free from the people of a particular unit of a
subjectivity and its objective in its society. For ex: The belief systems
study. in religion cannot be considered
scientific but it is seen from the beliefs
and values. People hold with high
regards.
3 Sociological thought is ancient and it is Sociological theory have limited area,
something which began in human limited to specific context or themes
society and with the social thinkers which are social in nature.
August Comte
4 Sociology as such adapts Scientific Sociological theories are little
validation for its explanation medieval in its existence which came
as a theory only after the population
of a country expanding with diversity.
Ex: Multi religious, languages, birth of
sub cultures, birth of new states etc.
5 The subject of Sociology specialized Sociological theory do not have a
skill and contribution are necessary in scientific criteria for its explanation.
order to become a Sociologist.
6 Only contributors to the science of Knowledge about a social issue who
human society can be called can be a scientist or artist or even
Sociologist. illiterate man can contribute to the
Sociological theory in its
development.
Social reformers, Social philosophers
or Social revolutionaries can become
contributors to Social theories.

THEORY AND RESEARCH

They are 2 inseparable terms and in spite of this, there exists a difference. Theory
and Research are regularly used in all the disciplines for various purposes and in
various methods. Theory is a generalized thinking or a conclusion of something
15
which is the result of an analysis. Whereas a research is the way of expanding the
existing knowledge based on creating new knowledge. The difference between the
Theory and Research can be written in the following ways.

THEORY
1 Theory is generalized thinking
2 Theory is defined as the end result of
an analysis
3 Theories answers question arising at a
particular period and also to be
rejected at later period and vice-versa
4 Theory is a conceptual frame work
and it is used to explain things
5 Theory does not include practical
elements. But it is based on the
results of the practical activities which
was undertaken by research
6 Theory is the result of the research
7 Theories answer question which are
hypothetical
8 Theories explain what is left by a
previous researchers in their analysis
of a research topic
RESEARCH
Research is the expansion of the
existing
Research commencing the formulation
of hypothesis
Research arises whenever a problem
arises and used various methods to
solve such a problem
Research is a creative work that
generates new knowledge
Research is a practical approach. Here
the researcher takes up activities of
various types which he can experiment
and visualize
Research is the reason of outcome of
theory
Research answers to all the hidden and
unknown problems in a society.

UNIT – 2

STRUCTURAL – FUNCTIONALISM
CONCEPT OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE
A. R. RADCLIFFE BROWN

The Principles of describing a Social Structure

1. Radcliffe Brown formulates concerning the principles of the Social Structure
and its description by saying that every Social Structure in its description
should include not only the Social classes and Social group but the whole set
of socially fixed relationships of person to person as in kinship system.

2. The Social Structure of a particular place and time consists of the whole set of
social relationships among members.

3. Social relationship should be terms of Social Institutions.

THE CONSTITUENTS OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE

A Social Structure consists of the arrangement of persons in the relationships which
are in the form of a Social group.
16
According to Brown, “A Social group is a body of persons having certain difference
and they are named differently according to their different forms such as family,
kinship, tribe or a clan each of these Social groups are explained by Brown in the
following ways”.

1. The Family – According to Brown “The Family is a group which is formed

through Marriage and the birth of children and come to an end by the death of
the member one after the other and there by forming a different family
structure by the younger generations. Hence, according to Brown a Family is
composed of a man, his wife and their younger children. Family is considered
as domestic group and a group of families is called a Horde. This continuous
process which helps in the continuity of family as a Social Structure.

2. The Horde – The internal structure of the Horde is a group of families. A

Horde is defined by Radcliffe Brown as being politically autonomous, under
the authority of the older men and a very largely self-sufficient unit giving them
economic independence. The Hordes constitute a Clan.

3. The Clan – Several Hordes put together constitute a Clan which is a part of
Social Structure, the men connected with a particular territory form a distinct
group known as Clan. Radcliffe Brown identifies the Clan as a group of
people who were the natives of the land calling themselves as the beginners
of that particular world and they identify themselves that by their birth, Clan,
which is typical characteristics of primitive society. For ex: A woman belongs
to the Clan of father and after her marriage she belongs to the Clan of
husband. Hence, the marriages between the same Clan was forbidden.

4. The Tribe – The Clans on a wider system of Social Structure is known as a

Tribe. Brown says a number of Clans had the same language, customs and
practices and hence they are called Tribes. A Tribe is not a politically united
group and each Tribe has uniqueness and differs from each other for various
reasons.

5. The Kinship – Persons of different Hordes and of different Tribes are linked
with the means of Kinship system. According to Brown, the basis of collecting
the hierarchical chart of the human relationship is through the fellow members
of 2 different classes. Kinship is beyond the Tribe relationship and each
Kinship was unique because of the purity of blood and blood relations which
they maintained throughout Kinship relationship was denoted by the distance
which they maintained from one Kinship to another and Kinship Structure was
fixed on a person having his own status or position in his own Kinship either
due to descent or marriage.

6. Moieties – The Primitive Social Structure of the families are divided into
Moieties or Communities of Tribe. Each Moiety has a member of Tribes and
each Clan belonged to one of the Moieties. Every Moiety is bigger than the
Tribes.

17
THE CONCEPT OF STRUCTURE
Radcliffe Brown in his theory of Social Structure has written in his book ‘Structure
and Function of Primitive Society’. According to him the concept of Structure refers
to an arrangements of parts related to one another in a larger unit. An example of a
house and its structure resembles his explanation. In his view about the structure of
social life, he speaks about the existence of social glory internal structure of group
arrangements of social classes. Social distinction based on gender and economic
differences, arrangement of persons with one to one relations with each other and
process of interaction between 2 persons.

Every Social Structures is continued by formal and informal means of social control.
Mechanisms and overall regulated by the social institutions to which that social
structure belongs. According to Brown there are 2 types of models of studying social
structure.

 Actual Social Structure.

 General Social Structure.

1. Actual Social Structure – To Brown is the relationship between persons and

groups which change from time to time. New members coming in and going
out and those who stay enter into relationship, which are either Kinship
relations or marital relations and their membership ends at the time of their
death or by migration. And sometimes due to marital disturbances, hence the
actual Social Structure changes very frequently.

2. General Social Structure – remains more or less constant for a very long
period of time. For ex: A person who visits a particular place very frequently
and finds no change in the social Structure in spite of entry and exit of
members will be the actual Social Structure remaining in the same way as in
the beginning.

Radcliffe Brown holds the view that sometimes the continuity of change
gradually or suddenly, but also this change is maintained for a very long
period, structure and Function is explained by Radcliffe Brown through the
biological aspect in comparison to that of an organism. The Structural and
orderly arrangements of the parts and their arrangements are interrelated
forming a total structure of an organism. Similarly a Social Structure is an
orderly arrangement of persons or groups, the functions of the persons are in
accordance with that of how the society is structured. Social Structure should
not be studied by considering the nature of individual members of a group, but
by examining the arrangement of function which help in the survival of the
society.

Social Function is the inter-connection between Social Structure and Social Life.
Social Structure should be studied by the individual members, but by considering the
arrangements of Social Structure. In his further explanation he points out that there
is no part in an organism which is Static. Since one part is dependent on other for its
survival. In the similar way the structure of the society is also inter-dependent for its
existence.
 18
The Structural Functionalism has undergone various criticisms because of its gap
between cause and the function. It does not reveal any differentiation between the
results of the behavior of individuals neither it provides the causes for any such
conflicting behavior. Structural functionalism of Brown is value biased and often
shows which are holding the Social Structure in its place on a very partial basis.

TALCOTT PARSON
STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONALISM
ANALYTICAL FUNCTIONALISM OF TALCOTT PARSON

Talcott Parsons theory on Structure can be found under his work, ‘The Structure of
Social Action’. He has given his opinion about the social actions that they place in
the structure of society. In his theory of Sociology he says the subject of Sociology
should utilize a limited number of important concepts which are going to speak about
the external world. According to him a theory must involve in developing a concept
that are abstract and analytical.

Social Actions according to Talcott Parson is a combination of concepts, science

and idealism. According to him the formulation of social order creates various issues
because questions relation to humans is always unclear and unanswerable, the
individuals are considered as actors who are in search of goals and choose various
actions for achieving these goals. He says cause-effect relationships are necessary
for any social action. Radical positive and physical parameters cause a social
action.

Individuals as actors voluntarily perform the actions and become decision maker.
These voluntary actions involve 6 basic elements.

1. The Actors – Goal seekers.

2. Actors – are individual persons and think individually.

3. Actors are possessive about their goals for which they find alternative
means to achieve them.

4. Actors are confronted with varieties of situational conditions that is they own
biological setup or hereditary influence.

5. In the fifth element Parsons speaks about how the actors are influenced by
the values, norms and ideas in selection of their goals.

6. Action involves the actors making subjective decisions about the means
to achieve their goals.

The Structure of Social Actions, Parson recognizes it as the automatic system that
deals with property identified in the unit, wherein the system of actions go with it, the
concepts of ‘Action points’ and the organic property of action systems relate to each
other as in social reality.
 19
The Structure of Social Action became more important because of the actor situation
frame of reference, the functional needs of social integration and the conditions
necessary for functioning of many actors in a unit of the society. In this aspect
Parson further developed various complex schemes to understand the Actors.

The Social System of Talcott Parson

 The ‘Social System’ as a work of Parson was drawn from Max Weber’s
typological approach to the social system.

 According to him, the Actors are oriented to a situation in terms of needs

through motivation and values.

The 3 types of motivations are:

a) Cognitive – A conception about what is appropriate.
b) Cathetic - A need for emotional attachment.
c) Evaluative – Need for assessment.

Values
a) Cognitive – Evaluation in terms of objective standards.
b) Appreciative – Evaluation in terms of aesthetic standards.
c) Moral – Evaluation in terms of absolute rightness and wrongness.

The Social actions required a social system for its functioning, the integration within
the social system and the cultural patterns and on the other hand between the social
system and the personality system on the other side. If such integration have to take
place, two function need to be met.

a) A Social system must have a sufficient proportion of its component actors who
are motivated to act in according to the role they are expected to follow.

b) Social system must avoid commitment to cultural patterns which either fail to
define a minimum of older or which play unexpected demands which may
make the people resort to a conflict.

The cultural values and the patterns become internalized in the personality of the
actors and hence it determines an actor’s willingness to enact his roles in a given
social system.

According to Parson an institution is both a process and a structure. He refers the

institution as an important element in the following ways.

 Actors who are oriented in different directions enter into situation where they
must interact.

 The way actors are oriented is a reflection of their need structure [desired
structured] and how this need structure has been altered by the learning of
culture and its patterns.
20
  Through specific interaction process though not very clear during the role play
or role exchange some norms emerge while actors adjust and orient towards
each other.

 Such norms regulate the further interactions giving it a stability, all these
terms help in creating institutional patterns, maintain them and help in further
alterations during the process of social change.

In conclusion, institutionalization is the process through which Social Structure is

built up and maintained. Institutionalized group of roles stabilize the pattern of
interaction which together make a social system. A total society may be defined as
one large group composed of inter-related institutions. Hence a social system is
comprising of cultural patterns mixed with personality system.

Setting up of Concepts or Pattern Variables

The development of concepts reflects the properties of all action systems. Parson
developed a set of concepts denoting the Variables for action system. He termed it
as ‘Pattern Variables’, which help in categorizing the modes of orientation in
personality system, the value patterns of culture and the normative requirements in
social system. These Variables are understood in the following ways.

a) (i) Affectivity (ii) Affective (iii) Neutrality

The amount of emotion and affect that is needed in a given interactive situation.

b) Differences Specificity – It denotes the issue of how for reaching obligations

in an interaction takes place. It also specifies whether the obligations are
narrow or specific and should it be extensive or diffused.

c) Universalities and Particularism – The points to the problems of whether

evaluation and judgment of others in an interactive situation is to apply to all
actors and whether all actors should be assessed on the same standards.

d) Achievement and Ascription – It deals with the issue of how to assess an

actor, whether in terms of his performance or in terms of his birth. It also says
whether an actor be treated on the qualities based on achievements or
ascribed that are not at all related to the performance.
e) Self-Collectivity – It denotes the extension to which action is to be oriented
to self-interest and individual goals or group goals should be considered. It
also denotes the goals to be related by the person should be considered as
self-oriented goals or groups oriented goals.

The Conception of Social System in the development of further

theory by Talcott Parson:
In his work the structure of Social Action Parson is of the opinion that the concepts
related to the society are elaborated in the way that personality systems and culture
are integrated into the social system, thereby giving assurity that some norms and
commitment by the actors make them to confirm to play their roles.
21
Parson conceptualizes two mechanisms that integrate the personality into the social
system.
1. The Mechanism of Socialization to
2. Mechanism of Social Control.

Parson speaks about the cultural patterns, that is the values or the beliefs which are
internalized into personality system through which the actors are motivated to
perform the roles and to abide by the norms.

This involves the process of reducing stress and deviant which are usually taken
care by the formal controlling mechanism. That is the law and the police.

These 2 mechanisms are visualized by Parson in two ways.

1. The Components of culture, that is, language or symbols which are necessary
for integration.
2. A related by a separable influence of culture which are contained in the
cultural patterns.

The Transition from Social System to Function imperativism :

The transition to functional imperativism was in collaboration with Robert Bales and
Edward Skills who were interested in functional aspect of society. The function of
structure of society were adopted into social action theory during which, the systems
of action had survival problems in these requisites.

AGIL – TALCOTT PARSON

1. Adaptation – That is the problem of securing from the environment sufficient
facilities and then distributing these facilities throughout the system.

2. Goal Attainment – Refers to the problem of establishing priorities among the

system goals and mobilizing system resources for their attainment.
3. Integration – Which denotes the problems of coordinating and maintaining
inter relationships among system units.

4. Latency which constitutes two related problems.

a) Pattern Maintenance pertaining to the problem of how to assure the
actors in the social system that they are displaying the expected role.

b) Tension Management concerns the problem of dealing with the internal

tensions and the strains of actors in the social system.

In a given social system Talcott Parson conceptualizes to the functioning of the

social system into AGIL concept. However AGIL can be further divided as a four
functional system which he calls it as ‘Functional Sectorization’. Every system within
a system works interchangeably in the given environment. Hence as important
interchange takes place in the subsystem, he further uses this concept among the
sub cultures which exists in the main culture which influences the personality of the
individuals living within the social system.

22
GENERALIZED MEDIA EXCHANGE
Talcott Parson, who concentrated on the intra and inter systematic relationship in the
4 action system, started to visualize in terms of Generalized Symbolic Media of
Exchange. Generalized media are used in the process of an institution of economy
which deals with exchange of goods and services, wherein money is involved.
Money is considered as symbolic mode of communication, the word money has no
value until land unless it is used symbolically in a particular transaction. Parson
proposes that link among the actions components which are informational, that is the
transaction is through symbols, which he converts into his own words as ‘Cyber netic
hierarchy control’. This information of exchange or cyber netic control is seen
operating in 3 ways.

1. The interchange or exchange among the 4 subsystems (AGIL) using different

means of symbolic media. Ex: Money, Power or Influence.

2. The interchange within AGIL is carried on by means of a distinctive or specific

symbolic media.

3. The system requisite of AGIL determining the type of generalized symbolic

media used in an, inter or intra subsystem.

 The Adaptive Sectors in the social system use money as the medium of
exchange and the 3 social systems. That is the goal attainment uses power to
induce conformity as its medium of exchange

 The Integrative Sector uses influence as mechanism to persuade people.

 The Latency Sector uses commitments or being loyal to a particular unit of

the society.

Hence, Parson is of the opinion that the nature of media uses a symbolic media
which links systems in the Cyber netic hierarchy control.

EMPIRICAL FUNCTIONALISM
ROBERT K. MERTON

 Robert K. Merton’s theory is called Empirical Functionalism.

 Robert K. Merton was a critic of Talcott Parson.
 He is associated with Parson, with regard to an all in encompassing system of
concepts which in certain areas have proved successful, whereas in some
areas it was futile.

In the opinion of Merton the Grand theory was premature because it did not contain
theoretical and empirical base necessary for incompletion to be considered as a
theory.

23
In order to consider a theoretical base from a Sociological theory towards orientation
of a data, Merton suggests various variables which were used by the theorist should
be considered to formulate a theoretical base, so that the variables can form a
relationship.

The strategies used by Parson are not theoretically based but they are philosophical.
Merton is of the opinion that in order to create a perfect strategy of constructing an
empirical proposition may prove not effective and hence Merton suggest the need for
theories for Middle range which are not abstract or broad.

Middle Range Theory according R.K. Merton or opinion of R.K.

Merton about Middle Range Theory
1. The Middle Range Theory in the view of R.K. Merton is more towards
theoretical perspective than Parson’s Grand theory.

2. Middle Range Theory formulated by R.K. Merton is at a lower level, less

abstract and less range of variation.

3. Since Middle Range Theory is less abstract, they are connected to empirical
world. Hence they encourage the necessary research for classifying the
concepts.

4. Merton says theoretical schemes explain concepts whereas empirical

research will remain unconnected on this oriented while expanding
Sociological knowledge for this purpose Merton suggest to follow Middle
Range Theory and adopted into Sociological theories, so that the concepts
and propositions in Sociological theories will become more organized, clear,
elaborated and empirical in its approach.

5. For Merton though it is necessary the concentration on the construction of

theories, a theorist must also be concerned with consolidating the special
theories into a more general theory. The special theory in Sociology much
therefore be formulated towards a general theory which Merton suggests a
solution that is a form of functionalism, should be utilized in formulating
theories of Middle Range.

A Functional theory takes the form of a paradigm which makes easy specification
and elaboration of relevant concepts which encourages a systematic formation of
theory.

For Merton functionalism became a method for building not only theory of middle
range, but also the grand theoretical schemes which would submerge together into a
middle range theory.

Functionalism represents a strategy for ordering concepts and for sorting out
significant from insignificant social processes.

 Merton’s Functionalist Strategy first requires formulation of a body of middle

range theory after which a theoretical perspective can be formulated.
24
  Functionalism and Middle Range Strategies are currently used in the most of
the theoretical formulation under Sociology. Thus Sociology has grown with
large number of theories with specific empirical processes of the society.
For Ex: The case of a Juvenile, a family issue, a social mobility or any current
trend of a society.

PARADIGM
Merton’s Paradigm for functional analysis

The functional theorizing of a particular concept consists of 3 questionable

postulates.

1. The functional unity of social system.

2. The function universality of social items.
3. The indispensability of functional items for social systems.

In the opinion of Sociologist, Radcliffe Brown, Durkheim is criticized for transforming

the hypothesis, which the social systems reveal which is going to be helpful for social
survival. However, Merton views it as a degree of integration without which it would
not be considered as a social system. The high degree of functional utility must be
in a social system which is going to define the theoretical and empirical questions.

The empirical questions could be:

1. What levels of integration exist for different systems to what various types of
integration can be disowned?

2. Are varying degrees of integration a proof for different segments of the

systems?

3. What varieties of the processes lead to different levels?

4. The analysis of postulate is of ‘functional unity’ or integration of the social

whole which can divert attention not only from these questions but also from
varied and despaired consequences of a given social or cultural aspects from
different social group.

POSTULATES

The Postulates are expanded into 3 additional functionalist requirements.

1. Adaptation
2. Goal Attainment AGL
3. Latency

The functionalism of Parson began with a concern towards the pre requisites,
however Merton says that this can be diverted from a theoretical and empirical
question towards a value based question.
25
The functionalists concern towards the emphasis on how different patterns of social
organization are created, not only by the requisite of the total system but also by
interaction among socio-cultural aspects within a social system.

The Grand theoretical schemes according to Merton is pre mature since the
theoretical and empirical ground work necessary for their completion has not been
performed and hence he chose Middle Range theory during his theoretical formation.

R.K. MERTON’S LATENT AND MANIFEST FUNCTION

Modern Sociological theory is highly influenced by the functional analysis during the period
of Parson and Merton.

Functional analysis is considered to be the only existing paradigm of contemporary

Sociology. It has given Sociology more association than any other mode of Sociological
analysis.

According to Adams and Sydic the functional analysis has a long history in both cultural and
social sciences, it borrows from biological sciences especially to bring in a relation between
society and organism.

As a school of thought the functional approach is considered to be the view of society which
works as a self regulating system of inter connected element with structured social
relationships and regularities.

In the view of Merton the paradigm for functional research and the process of analyzing the
state of functionalism is very important.

The 3 basic postulates that functionalist have given is not approved by Merton. However he
provides the clarification to divert himself from the 3 postulates on the following grounds.

Opinions of Radcliffe Brown and R.K. Merton

First Postulate
RADCLIFFE BROWN R.K. MERTON
1 Cultural items that are functional for the Same opinion from R.K. Merton
entire social or cultural system
2 The function of a particular social He points out that the cultural item that is
system, that is, the contribution it makesfunctional. The cultural items for functional
to the total social life as the functioning of
one group might in some cases be
the total social system. dysfunctional for other groups in some
society.
3 The view implies that the social system The opinion of anthropologist towards a
in which that structure appears and on cultural item is increased solidarity of the
which it depends for its continued usage community and increased family pride as
of existence has a kind of unity. an adaptive sentiment. Sometimes this
sentiment may disturb the solidarity of a
small community.
4 According to R. Brown the condition in According Merton most of the cultures
which all parts of the social system work studied by anthropologist were not large
together is the degree of harmony communities and hence not much of
without creating conflicts. conflicting situations were created.
26
Second Postulate is that all standardized
function.
RADCLIFFE BROWN
1 Functions related to social or cultural
items appear to be non functional and
people in general are comfortable by
following the orthodox and social
forms of behavior.
social and cultural forms have positive
R.K. MERTON
Merton is of the opinion that an action
of an individual depends upon how he
finds it suitable according to his culture.

Third Postulate is the functionalism and functional indispensability

Merton is of the opinion that just as the same cultural items have multiple function in
the same way each function alternates in its priority thereby helping the individuals to
adjust themselves to the existing social system.

Merton speaks about the manifest and latent function by keeping the basis of
anthropology for his studies in order to produce a proper functional analysis.
According to him a manifest function refers to the conscious intensions of actors
acting in a particular social system, the latent function refers to the unexpected
objective consequences of individual’s actions.

Theory of Social Structure – Radcliffe Brown

Radcliffe Brown was on anthropologist who was interested in providing a clear cut
meaning of social anthropology. He says that in studying of anthropology, it is going
to be difficult, since different places have different attributes that is going to be seen
in the understanding of human race. His view of providing answer to the question as
how these differences gets structured into different units made him to look at
anthropology from social structure perspective.

According to Radcliffe Brown the concept of structure refers to an arrangement of

parts or components related to one another in some sort of larger unit. The structure
of the human body at first appears as an arrangement of various tissues and organs
and similarly the social life also comprises of various units and sub units. A social
structure according to Brown is therefore the continuing arrangements of persons in
relationships defined or controlled by institutions, that is socially established norms
or patterns of behavior. By the statement continuing arrangement of persons,
Brown says that the arrangement of persons differs from one type of society to the
other and each of them form a social structure and form their characteristics.

Social structure according to Brown is related to the social life and they constitute the
following features of social life.

1. The existence of group in every society comprises of varieties of social

groups which together form a social structure.
2. Internal structure of groups – every social group has its own way of
structuring itself, there by function effectively.
3. Arrangement into social classes – These groups which are of different
types comprises of social classes like racial classification, class, sect, caste
and differences on the basis of economy.
27
 4. Social distinctions are based on authority – Caste and class and the social
distance can be seen between 2 classes in different types or society.
5. Arrangements of persons in dyadic relationship – The persons belonging
to different communities are identified through their kinship relations, which
Brown says the basis of the relationship being the clan relationship
contributes to dyadic relationships, that is, people who belong to 2 different
clans are related to each other because they hold dual relationship between 2
different clans.
6. Social sections – According to Brown which is seen in a clan is on the basis
of categorizing the members into the major sections of male, female, adult,
children and these are the structured relationship among the 4 which exists in
irrespective of the society type.
7. The totemic group – Each clan has its own sacred totem centre which has
its own myth, norms, rituals, and rites. And each totem is united and basically
the contributors towards the development of religion.

NEO FUNCTIONALISM
The mid of 1980’s was introduced with a new concept called Neo-functionalism,
when the structural functionalism lost its importance. The term Neo-functionalism
was introduced by J. Alexander and Paul Coloney. They defined Neo-
functionalism as self criticized group of functional theories that looks at broadening
the functionalism intellectual scope retaining its theoretical aspect. In order to
remove the narrowness of structural functionalism Alexander and Paul used the
term Neo-functionalism.

The functionalism of Talcott Parson was dealing with the inter relationship of the
major domains of the social world while explaining this Parson became narrow in his
view point about the cultural system of the society and Alexander has replaced it
with Neo-functionalism.

Alexander has considered the problems under structural functionalism like the
conservative attitude, anti-empirical bias and the ideal thought under structural
functionalism.

In the middle 1980’s Alexander became perfect by the explanation about Neo-
functionalism and finally said that Neo-functionalism is the tendency towards change
rather than a theory which is all its way to development. The orientations of the Neo-
functionalism are as follows.

1. Neo-functionalism operates with a descriptive modern of society that sees

society as composed of elements which interact and form a pattern which
further makes a difference in each of the pattern differing from each other.

2. On the macro level the sources of order in social structures and culture draw
attention towards the more micro level patterns.

3. Neo-functionalism retains the structural-functional interest in integration and

not as accomplished fact, but as a social possibility. For ex: The deviants and
28
 4. social control are the realities within a social system and Neo-functionalism
orients itself towards bringing balance between the two. According to
Alexander equilibrium is in the terms of functional analysis but not as a
description of the life of the individuals in a social system.

5. Neo-functionalism accepts the traditional Parsonian theory which emphasis

personality and social system.

6. Neo-functionalism focuses on social change which takes place during the

process of differentiating socio-cultural and personality system. Because of
this Alexander calls institutional strains and individualism which is the
outcome of Neo-functionalism.
7. According to Alexander ‘Neo-functionalism’ refers to the commitment made
for the purpose of conceptualizing and theorizing from other social levels of
Sociological analysis.

Alexander and Paul says that Neo-functionalism is not seen in terms of the
elaboration and the revision of structural functionalism, but the reconstruction of a
clearly accepted ways to enhance the other theories which needs clarity. Alexander
and Paul combine’s Structural functionalism with other traditional theories and such
a reconstruction will divide the structural functionalism and create a base for the
development of new theoretical tradition.

R.K. MERTON DEVIANT’S TYPOLOGY

Cultural Goals
Institutionalized means
Accept Reject
Reject Conformity Innovation
Accept Ritualism Retreatism

This type of deviants is often used in typology criminology and helps in explaining
human behavior that go against the norms laid by the society.

R.K. Merton’s deviant typology is on a micro level and it is a functional theory,

because it tries to explain those function and disfunction with regard to the concept
of deviants in a society.

In reality a deviant behavior depends on 2 criteria.

1. Whether a person accepts the institutionalized means.

2. Whether an individual accepts the cultural goal set by the society on these 2
criteria the typology of deviants can be explained.

Conformist – These individuals accept both institutionalized means and the cultural
goals put forth by the society. At the same time there are individuals or groups, who
either reject the means or the goals, and also reject both that is the means and the
goals wherein he becomes a deviant.
29
Ritualist – Individuals or groups who belong to this type accept the institutionalized
means but reject the cultural goals. These are individuals who convince themselves
with whatever the institution allots and do not have any desire to achieve their
personal goal.

Retreatism – Individuals or groups who reject both institutionalized means and

cultural goals but also try to replace their means and goals without the support of
both.

Innovators – Individual or group who belong to these types reject the

institutionalized means but accept the cultural goal. They have various goals to
achieve but do not accept the means set by the society to achieve these goals.

Rebellion – Individuals or groups who not only reject the institutionalized means and
the cultural means but also try to replace the whole social structure of society with a
new one, these people are not satisfied with the system which is existing.

From Merton typology has created a research project that is applicable to society;
however how to use this application is always questionable due to certain reasons.
For ex: If we have to use this typology to apply it to a particular community or tribe.
The question is whether the typology suits this community or tribe since some of
these may not at all be applicable to them since they may have a totally different
methodology of dealing with its individuals.

UNIT – 3

CONFLICT THEORY

ORIGIN OF CONFLICT THEORY

In the 1950’s the Parson’s theories were criticized due to the reasons that they were
lacking in application. The functional theory in Sociology was under emphasized
since it clashed with social realities. To replace these functional theories the birth of
Conflict Theory took place after the 1960’s.

David Lockwood argued that consumption of the social world which was fantasized
by Parson, in which the mechanism of dealing with social reality was to maintain
social order than to speak about disorder and change. The instability which occurs
in society creates instability given among the individuals in their behavior of which is
labeled as deviant abnormal and illegal. With this point of view Lockwood insisted
on mechanism which shall make conflict in evadible and unavoidable. Ex: Power
has a mechanism, shall exploit some groups and create a tension and conflict in a
social system. The resources in the society will generate over the distribution
process due to which these oppressed groups shall develop a different interest
groups there by developing different goals and finally conflict with the ones who had
oppressed them.

Ralf Dahrendorf composes the functional theory to a Ethiopian States. Talcott

Parson’s theory speaks about institutionalization in the process of a social system
30
and this if it is contrasted with Ethiopian State or condition do not change much from
the functional aspects, also they consider less of conflicting situation in these 2
aspects.

Conflict criticisms emerged due to the functional varieties which seek to understand
the social world without exposing the pattern of exploitation by the powerful.
Theoretical knowledge does not merely describe events but it must expose
exploiters of social arrangements and suggest alternative ways to organize humans,
so that operation is minimized. To some extent the Parson’s functionalism is
contradictory in the work of Karl Marx. The failure of Parsons to examine conflict
accepted the positivistic opinion of Marx in developing the conflict theory since
conflict is the social reality of any society.

Karl Marx and the Origin of Conflict Theory

Karl Marx in his work ‘The German Ideology’, which is different from another work
capital and communist manifesto consider the development of conflict theory which
has taken place due to the positivistic attitude of Karl Marx. The theory of the
German Ideology was initially rejected because it was against the young Hegelians,
who were critical about the oppressive arrangements in the society and it was
creating a negative environment in the society. In the view of Marx human beings
are aware of their consciousness and their situation around them and are the
realistic ideas in the social structure of a society. According to Marx people produce
ideas and conceive the world in the light of the social structure in which they are born
and live.

Karl Marx in his work about the Class Struggle speaks about 2 classes one the
Proletariat to Bourgeoisie who are related to Industrial Society. This classification
explains about the Social Conflict that exists in an Industrial society between the
Employer and the Employees.

Marx is of the view that a society is related to its major classes that is the Proletariat
and Bourgeoisie where in the former is the owner of the industry and later is the
workers. Conflict is always between these 2 in an Industrial setup. According to
Marx conflict is the outcome of a deviation from the normal social structure and
individuals living in the society enter in the field of Class Struggle. According to him
a class is defined by the ownership of the property, wherein the man in power owns
the property and excludes the other from the ownership and creates inequality to the
access of property.

Class determines property not income or by status but they are determined by
distribution and consumption which ultimately reflects the production and power
relation of classes. In relation to the property there are 3 great classes of society
which Karl Marx mentions in his Conflict theory during the 19 th C, modern society.

1. First the Bourgeoisie – the one who owns the means production in an
industry and who is bothered about profit alone.
2. Second the Land owners – whose income is rent.
3. Third the Proletariat – who sell their labour for wages / profit / money.

31
Emergence or History of Conflict theory
The theory of Conflict takes its beginning with the initial social thinkers, Machiavelli
and Machiavelli and Tomas Hopes. Both of them have dealt with human beings.
According to them Conflict Theory attempts to over shadow functionalism in which it
considers that society’s and organization function in order to make the individuals
play their specific roles and for this the social thinkers hold 2 things responsible.

1. The continuous changing behavior of society.

2. The conflict between the various customs of the society.

The Conflict theory is best explained in a ‘Pyramid Structure’ wherein the elite dictate
a larger mass and all the major social structures, laws and traditions of the society
which are going to be supportive to the superior class of the societies who are in
power. On this ground conflict theorists say that all groups in the society have taken
their existence because of conflicts among themselves.

The theory of conflict is opposed to functionalism because in functionalism the

groups cooperate for the benefit of society, whereas in conflict theory it is argued
that the groups are in opposition to one another because they are always in search
of ‘ Master’ who would be favouring them.
On understanding the conflict theory, the competition between the various types of
classes can be classified in the following base, which is also an understanding of the
modern conflict theory.

1. Competition – This occurs over scarcity of resources in a society and they

are the one which also create inequality in human relationship.
2. Structural Inequality – This is inequality in power and revolt which are built
into social structure, it is the duty of the individuals and groups that benefit
from a particular structure to see to it that the social structure is maintained.
3. Revolution – Change occurs because of the conflict between social classes
who are competing with the common interest to achieve same scarcity of
resources rather than accepting and adapting themselves to the change. It
creates revolution whenever a competition takes place.
4. War – A war creates unification of a society and it may be the reason for the
end of a society or creator a new society.

Conflict Theory according to Karl Marx

The theory of conflict began with Marxist opinion about the possession of property by
the few hands, which the state upholds like for Ex: Owners, Capitalist or Workers.
Property is a materialistic aspect which is in the hands of the people who are in
power.

For Marx conflict arises because all things of value to man is the outcome of the hard
work which he has done. A Capitalist exploits the workers in order to get their work
done and they do not get share in the profit, with the labourers equally. This makes
the owner class to become all powerful and enter the field to polities and make the
law in favour of them so that they always remain in power.
32
Conflict theory looks at society as a competition for limited resources. In the view of
Marx the access to scarcity of resources creates competition, therefore creating
inequality and over all creating a class based society.

Base and Super Structure of Society

Karl Marx’s opinion about the construction of society is based on his idea about
‘Base and Super Structure’. This term refers to the idea that the society’s economic
character is the base and the culture and social institutions form the super structure.
He also refers to the economy as the base and all other elements of the society from
the super structure. All the time the economy of the country maintains stability and
holds the elements strong until and unless these elements are stable by themselves.
Any change in the societal set up and an increase in the size of the elements can
create a conflicting situations which create a conflicting situation which results in
social change leading to the economic change. According to him conflict in a society
is the primary means of change and most of the times it is the conflict between the
Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat.

The conflicting situation create social revolution, these revolutions create class
differences and a particular class dominating over other classes. In Germany the
Bourgeoisie classes were revolutionary in the sense that they were expecting a
radical change or a drastic change in the structure of society. However in the 19 th C
the industrial boon or growth created a change wherein the owners started to exploit
much more the working class which gave rise to the monopoly of the powerful.
Along with the change they were the young labourers who were children recruited as
labourers, wherein they were treated in equal terms as that of the adult labourers.

The Theory of Alienation

The modern society according to Marx is explained by the word ‘Alienation’ by which
he means a condition in which the individual is isolated and diverted from his or her
society, work place or from oneself. This situation was the outcome set up which is
entirely opposite to that of agrarian society. The characteristics of agrarian society
was that of working together at a common place, primary relationship with the sense
of we feeling and belongingness, presence of coworkers next door, availability of raw
materials at a quicker speed, ownership feeling, towards the equipment for
agriculture and a feeling of one’s own land for cultivation. Every worker had
ownership even about the crops grown and also distribution of the produce was in
the hands of the owner but still the owner shared the profit equally with the workers,
when the shift came towards the modern industrial setup during which some of the
workers from villages of different areas migrated towards the industrial society,
wherein they became aliens in such a society. This feeling of alienation is explained
by Marx in the following ways.

1. Alienation from the product of one’s labour –

In an Industrial set up, the workers do not have the opportunity to relate the
products which he created. The workers in the industry spend hours of their
hardship for producing the goods were not he has an attitude of behaving to
that particular product which is similar to that of the society of agriculture from
which he is related to earlier.
33
 The industrial set up such that each worker is assigned to manufacture
different parts of a particular product, wherein he would not have seen the
finished product even though he was a part of it.

2. Alienation from the process of one’s labour –

A worker does not control the conditions of his job since he does not know
that he is not the owner in reality, but feels like an owner. Since he knows the
job, everything is decided by the owner and the process of work is also
decided by him and alienation in the worker arises because of this.

3. Alienation from other workers –

The employees in an industry are allotted separate job, time, place,
compensation, salary and appreciation. These elements separate the
workers from each other and make them insecure and alienated. This kind of
an alienation leads to job skipping, job dissatisfaction and separation.

4. Alienation from oneself –

The workers and the job are disconnected because the person feels he is not
identified with the skills he process, rather he is there, in that field, either due
to necessity or due to the expectations from the society for him to work.

DIALECTICAL CONFLICT THEORY OF RALF DAHRENDORF

In Dialectical conflict theory, the conflict which is central to the development of an
objective or scientific society. In his work the Class Conflict in Industrial Society
(1959), he has spoken about the Parsonian scheme and functionalism, in general
presents integrated and static vision of society.

According to Ralf Dahrendorf a society has two faces. One is of the consciousness
and other of conflict. In this angle he begins his analysis of society, whereby he
rejects the blind assumptions about a society, which he calls the Dialectical conflict
perspective.

Dahrendorf is of the opinion that to take Marx’s theory of conflict is little less
important and due to which we many have to consider the insights of Marx alone to
be considered and so Dahrendorf uses dialectic conflict in order to explain social
system. At the same time he rejects Parson’s functionalism which over emphasizes
social integration. In the view of Dahrendorf the conflict model represents a more
comprehensive theory of society that provides an adequate base for theories about
social organization than either functionalism or other alternatives.

DAHRENDORF’S IMAGE OF SOCIAL ORDER

The process of Institutionalization according to Dahrendorf is the creation of

Imperatively Coordinated Association [ICA] which distinguishes organizational roles
which is characterized by power relationship. Ex: Owner, who is in power, executes
power over his subordinates. It is like expectations by the powerful from the workers
to be conforming to the norms framed by them.

The ICA’s plays role in an organization which is going to differentiate them from
34
others. These power relations in ICA’s have become legitimate, thereby becoming
an authority images, wherein some of them force the subordinate to accept the
normative elements framed by them for the workers. Hence, according to
Dahrendorf, the process of creating authority relations in the various types of ICA’s
which exists among all layers of social systems.

Power and authority are the scarcity resources over which the sub groups within ICS
compete and fight. Hence, they are the major source of conflict and this conflict
reflects where the clusters of roles in a ICA stand in relation to authority. Even
though the roles in ICA possess varying degrees of authority any particular ICA can
be typical in terms of two basic types of roles – The ruling and the ruled. The
ruling group has an interested in preserving the status – quo and the ruled have an
interest in redistributing power and authority under a specific condition awareness of
these conflicting groups, leading to the ICA created two conflict groups, who are
going to become much more aware about the interest and try to contest between
each other.

The analysis of Conflict – Ralf Dahrendorf

In his analysis of conflict, he says that in a society conflict is not the only one, but in
a society there is something more which create a conflicting situation which is going
to disturb the human social organization in its functioning and in its structure. The
following are the reasons for the conflicting situation in a society.

Authority – It is considered to be an inherent tendency which creates a conflict in a

society. Some groups in the society who are in power exhibit domination over the
subordinates accept the domination and do not fight back for power. However, this
situation of the balancing acts between the authorities and subordinates which can
bring in a drastic change in the societal structures. Darhendorf concentrates on the
larger societal structure speaks about the distribution of power among the members,
wherein he speaks about the authority which does not reside in a particular group at
a particular time, since conflict emerges among the authority groups leading to the
change in power structure, accordingly also the change in positions. Hence authority
is attached with the positional change which becomes the key analysis in Ralf’s
theory. These authoritative groups who make norms occupy the position of authority
of controlling the subordinates by dominating them because of the expectations of
those who surround them and not because of their psychological characters.

Authority is not generalized social phenomena and those who execute authority are
specified in society as powerful, however legitimate authority is shown through
sanctions (Norms), which can bring the members under control, since authority is not
constant. It can shift from on societal structure to another societal structure in
different forms and with different persons. Ex: A person in authority in one group
may not be in power or becomes subordinate in another group, because society is
consisting of a number of units, which he called the ICA’s where a group of people
control and another set of group shall occupy the subordinate positions within every
association. Those in dominant positions seek to maintain the Status-Quo, while
those who are subordinate work towards an improvement in their positions. Even
though power denotes a pressure by some positions have3 accepted the normative
rights to dominate others in conclusion. Ralf concludes that the social order
35
maintained by the process of a society creates authority relations in the various
types of ICA’s which exists at all layers of social system.

The Image of Social Organization represents Marxist exhibition of social

reality, which are as follows –
1) Social system are seen by both Darendorf and Marx as in a continuous state
of conflict.
2) The conflict arising out of such social systems is assumed by both the authors
to be generated by the opposed interest that over a period of time in evitability
occurs in social structure of the society.
3) The opposed interest of people are viewed by both as the reflections of
differences in the distribution of power among the dominant and subordinate
groups.
4) Interest is seen by both which creates a conflict between the two.
5) According to them conflict is always an opposing idea or which is dialectical
wherein one conflict creates a new set of opposed interest that under certain
conditions will generate further conflict.
6) Social change is seen by both as an important feature of a social system and
the conflict differences or dialectics within various types of institutions and its
pattern causes conflict further.

The imagination of institutions as a cyclical or dialectical process has lead Darendorf

to analyse certain casual relations in the following ways.

a. Conflict is assumed to be an indefinite process arising out of opposing forces

within social structural arrangement.
b. The conflict arising out of opposing forces retarded by a series of inter
connected structural conditions or variables.
c. The conflict resolution at one point of a time creates a structural situation that
under a specific condition will further lead to new conflict among the opposed
forces.

According to Marx, the source of conflict lies beneath the cultural values and
institutional arrangements which represents ideas constructed by those with power.
In reality the dynamics of a society are found in its sub structure, where the
difference in distribution of property and power initiates a series of events leading to
revolutionary class conflict.

Darendorf borrows much of Marxist opinion about power and cohesion in social
system. He is more interested with the ICA which are created from a super structure
which is dominated by the powerful classes of any society. The authority relations
created by the dominant group will be destroyed due to conflict within the institutional
arrangements.

Darendorf and Marx speak about a causal chain of events which lead to conflict and
reorganization of social structure. The relations of domination create an opposition
between the 2 groups under specific conditions. However under the normal
condition this conflict becomes the reason for the political organization and the
36
joining of subordinate groups together who conflict with the powerful. This further
leads to a new social organization, the chain reaction of conflict leads to awareness
about themselves who are considered as conflict groups.

The conditions under which an institution becomes dominant thereby putting down
the less powerful, who not have any kind of a thought that they will be put down by
the powerful, because they have been loyal to the powerful and to the institution. In
this viewpoint the views of Darendorf and Marx speaks about an empirical condition
needed for a social organization in order to reduce the conflict between the 2 groups
who are opposing this causal analysis by both brings us to the awareness of class
consciousness about their objectives and interest which enhances social
organization in its functioning.

Criticism against the dialectical conflict model:

1. Darendorf’s causal imaginary comes from Peter Weingest more importantly
than Karl Marx.

2. While he is deviated from Marx and his opinion about the sub structure of
opposed interest which exists below the cultural and institutional norms of the
ruling class. Darendorf speaks more about a causal analysis of conflict and
provides explanation of how patterns of social organization change.

3. Regarding ICA’s the criticism is about how the same structure generates
social conflict and also social integration.

4. Marxist opinion about empirical problems is serious, since the source of

conflict is economic interest which is different from the institutional and
cultural arrangement. This concept of separation between economic and
institutional interest is not made by Darendorf and he fails to prove that he has
taken his theoretical opinion from Karl Marx.

CONFLICT FUNCTIONALISM THEORY

GEORGE SIMMEL
Simmel’s Conflict approach speaks about conflict being inevitable and which is
obvious in a society. Simmel’s view on social world is about the conflict, which
resolves dualism and helps in achieving a kind of unity, wherein even though the 2
parties are not agreeable on any social issues. In his view conflict is a reflection of
interest and also the opposing interest of 2 groups.

Simmel recognized that a very cooperative and integrated society will not show that
it has not life process and conflict is loaded with the direction in which conflict should
promote solidarity and unification. In this view Simmel is different from Marx, which
is highlighted in the following ways.

1. Social relationships occur within a systematic context which is categorized as

organic inter-linked associated or disassociated processes.

2. A process of association or disassociation reflects on the impulses of actors

dictated by various social relationships.
37
 3. Conflict processes is an important feature of a social system and also they do
not lead to the breakdown of a system or bringing a change.

4. Conflict is one of the principle processes operating to preserve the whole

society or its parts.

The assumptions about conflict when Simmels views that event occurring around
him, he says that conflict is a variable that brings in different states of intensity. The
2 polar ends of these variables are competition and fight.

a. Competition involves the more regulated and parallel parties towards a

mutually exclusive end.
b. Fight denotes the less regulated and more direct fighting activities of 2
opposing parties.

Unlike Marx who saw conflict as the creator of violence and revolution bringing in
structural change, Simmel is of the opinion that conflict which is less violent and less
intense promotes solidarity, integration and orderly social change. Simmel’s
proposition of conflict theory falls under the following points.

1. Proposition one – The grater is the degree of emotional involvement of

parties to a conflict the more likely is the conflict to be more violent.

a. The greater is the respective solidarity among members of conflict parties,

the greater is the degree of emotions involvement.
b. The greater is the previous harmony between members of conflicting
parties, the greater is the degree of their emotional involvement.

2. The more the conflict is perceived by the members of conflict groups to go

against individual aims and interest the more likely is the conflict to be violent.

3. The more the conflict which acts as a means to clearly specify the ends the
less likely is the conflict to be violent.

CULTURE AND OBJECTIVITY OF CULTURE – GEORGE SIMMEL

Culture according to Simmel focuses on the philosophical and at the social reality he
calls it objective culture. The cultural objects get linked to each other in a self
contained world which has fewer contacts. The cultural objects becomes more and
more linked to each other in a self contained world which has increasingly fewer
contacts with the subject and its desire and sensibility. The objective dominating the
subjective culture which developed during the 19 th C has an increasing influence on
individual’s mind which creates a new culture at a slower phase. Simmel’s identify
the components of objective culture or materialistic culture is specialized in growing
and expanding at a faster phase than the subjective culture, due to increase in
modernization the components of objective culture also expands at a greater speed.

The individual culture which is facing threat by the objective culture, he describes
this as the tragedy of culture. His understanding of objective culture is further
38
explained in his work ‘The Metropolis and Mental life’. Here he analyzed the forms
of inter action that take place in the modern city which is the area of growth of
objective culture and which brings in a decline in the subjective culture [individual].

Money is the centre of any human relationship and this relationship is characterized
by the feeling of emotion in a simple society and an intense intellectuality in a
modern society. The maintenance of individual culture is easy in a subjective
culture, but complicated in an objective culture. The influence of money is the purest
form of exchange in an objective world and hence the development of modern
society in totality is based on economy and not the culture.

COSER’S CONFLICT THEORY

Conflict according to Coser is a psychological instinct and because of this we find it
everywhere in a human society. Any conflict which exists on daily life is tentative
and can be solved at a faster face; however a conflict like war cannot have a
permanent and quicker solution until and unless negotiation works out between the 2
conflicting groups.

Coser believes that there is something through conflict individuals try to achieve and
there are various paths to achieve this, since he believes conflict as a normal
function, he also says that conflict can lead to functional changes in a society.

BASIC SOURCES OF CONFLICT

1. Conflict is based on unequal distribution of scarce resources, in this aspect
Weber’s opinion is used by Coser where Weber identifies those scarce
resources as status, class, power also Simmel gives importance to certain
influential elements like money and politics which brings in inequality and
change in structure. For ex: A working class Black may not share the same
political interest as that of a working class White. This difference is due to the
cross culture differentiations.
2. The stratification system also leads to conflict. In the stratification system
when a particular group controls the resources which are powerful that is
class, status and power. The perseveration of people is questioned about
how they look at 3 resources and question about their legitimacy. This sense
of deprivation is what leads to class conflict.
3. Marxist opinion of status which creates conflict. According to him the level of
education and worker concentration brings a structural change which
becomes the reason for a conflicting society in a capitalistic society. The
present conflict theory of Marx [1950] has modified the idea of deprivation
which is a shift from permanent to temporary deprivation that is a condition of
living a destitute life of poverty and helplessness, such people does not have
the will power to become involved in conflict and social change.

The world relative depreciation means a sense of being under privileged relative to
some other person or group. These people who are deprived feel that the others are
doing better and they are losing out, these people have the emotional and material
resources to become involved in conflict and social change.

Assuming the level of violence Simmel and Coser, speak about the causes which
39
lead to conflict. One of the important ways in which conflict can differ from one
society to another in its level of violence, if people can look at conflict as a means to
achieve a rational goal than conflict tends to be less violent. For ex: When people
use a simple exchange system, conflict may exist, but at a lower level, since the
conflicting groups are looking at a simple rational exchange of their goods.

A positive response towards a conflict can be peaceful; however conflict can become
violent for which Coser give two factors for the emergence of a violent conflict.

1. Emotional involvement that is, if violence has to be created people must be

emotionally involved. According to Durkheim, the group involves emotionally
creating moral boundaries of various values and goals. Similarly Coser says
the more involvement into a conflicting group emotionally the higher the
violence takes place. Ex: Regionalism in India.

2. Transcendent goals that is conflict also takes place leading to greater

violence, when the efforts of the group are understood and directed towards
everyday concerns and hence people try to keep their emotional involvement
very moderate and very rational. For ex: Protest against labour rights
deprivation in small scale industries.

Concepts and Theory of Conflict – Coser

The bonding forces of conflict are explained by Coser in 2 kinds of functions.

1. Conflict that occurs within the group – Between 2 castes in Hindu religion.

2. Conflict that occurs outside the group – Between 2 different groups to

which the individual does not belong.

Coser is concerned with low level and more frequent conflict. Internal conflict in the
social system between different groups creates norms for dealing with conflict and
develops lines of authority and judiciary systems. The psychological need of conflict
by individuals incase if not solved can build up over time and explode at some point
of time. But at lower level conflict the society is made aware of emerging conflict to
avoid the explosion so that the problems are rectified.

Coser notes that every internal conflict is functional and it depends on the type of the
conflict – Internal or External and the social structure which is involved in it. In
Coser’s conflict theory there are 2 types of internal conflicts.

1. Those that threaten or oppose the fundamental assumptions of the group

relationship. Ex: Hinduism opposed Basaveshwara, therefore forming a new
community by itself called Veerashaiva.

2. That group who follow the fundamental assumption and do not conflict. Ex:
Each religion not opposing the other religion.

Every group is based on certain beliefs and these basic beliefs are the ones which
40
create unity and avoid conflict. Thus according to Coser a society must always be
contended with the psychological means of individual for a conflict to evolve, by this
we can see a dynamicity operating at a dual level. For Ex: In a social system the
development of formal authority and the judgment to handle a conflict experience
repeated conflicts and later on try to find out various method to solve the conflict.

According to Coser the group structure will also help to determine whether a conflict
is functional or not. Every social structure differs in the way in which they allow a
distinction based on network density. That is how often a group gets together the
longevity of the group. The demand of the group of their involvement in the conflict
when there is a continuous interaction between the members in a group highest is
the personal involvement and that group has high density network.

Groups sometimes try to suppress or discourage conflict and in spite of this is

conflict still arises it is because of 2 reasons.

1. The group will have some unsolved problems and suppressed frustrations
and when these 2 are addressed they lead to give rise to conflict.

2. The kind of total personal involvement the groups have made, the mobility of
all emotions easily thrown up.

A group which has members who less interact and less involve experience the
functional benefits of conflict and these have very low network density. An external
conflict is experienced by the internal members beyond their boundaries and the
internal members at that situation show solidarity. Ex: When a war exists between 2
countries the internal members develop a sense of solidarity by giving up their own
personal biases in order to face the conflict.

In this process, the external and internal conflict some people are included and some
are excluded from the group. This is done because due to the varieties of ideology
within a group members. Some might oppose the norms of the internal group or
some groups are considered less powerful and hence are excluded. Ex: Indian
caste system excluded some caste groups from internal acceptance due to their birth
into an under privileged caste. This inclusion or exclusion process involves
producing and regulating different behavior, feelings, thinking, culture etc. As the
groups experience conflict, the boundaries surrounding the groups become stronger.
Hence conflict makes a group stronger in the sense of external and internal
differences and strengthens group consciousness among the members.

Conflict is more centralized in terms of the power structure. A centralized

government is more efficient than the decentralized governments in sense of
response time shown towards danger. Violent conflict produces unlikely thoughts
among the powerful since they are much conscious than being prepared for such
dangers.

41
 UNIT IV

FEMINIST THEORIES
FEMINISM: It is described as a political, cultural and an economic movement which
aims at establishing equal rights and legal protection for women. It also involves
political and sociological theories concerned with gender differences. The campaign
for women rights and interests involves the terms called feminism and feminist. The
work feminism refers to an intense awareness of identity as a women and interest in
feminine problems. The subordination of women is the central fact of history and it is
the main cause of most of the conflict that occurs in society. Women all over the
world are not recognized as individuals as that of the man. During certain periods in
the history women did have equality with that of men especially when the society
was a simple society. However over a period of time due to the domination and
superior complex among the men all over the world let to their subordination and
various problems. This awareness about a problem about various classes of the
women has let to various women thinkers to have a separate social thought towards
liberalizing and emancipating women. The stages at which the women social
thinkers gave their voice to the world can be marked as the growth of feminism and
gave various view point and thoughts in the following base.

HISTORY ON FEMINISM
THEORIES ON FEMINISM
Feminism is a term which is used to describe the political, cultural or economic
movement which aims at establishing equal rights and legal protection for women.
However, the word Feminism and Feminist is inter-changeably used by different
Feminist and Sociologist. According to Maggie Humn and Rebecca Walker, the
history of Feminism can be divided into 3 Ways / Periods or 3 Waves.

1. The First Feminist Wave was in the 19th C and early 20th C.
2. The Second Wave was in the 1960’s and 1970’s.
3. The Third Wave commences from 1990 and has continued till date in various
perspectives.

This explanation about various feminist viewpoints can be learnt from the various
historical stages till present under different disciplines like Feminist History, Feminist
Literature, Feminist Sociology and Feminist Geography.

Feminism began with the Western countries dealing with cultural and legal
approaches. The legal aspect of feminism looks at providing her, the legal rights to
contract, property rights and voting rights. The cultural rights are providing her equal
opportunity at home in all aspects, giving her identification.
The feminist movements and theories had leaders who belonged to the middle class
white woman from Western Europe and North America. In 1960’s the Civil Rights
movements in the United States and the end of European Colonialism in Africa and
in Latin America made the women of those countries to fight for their rights.

Feminists and Scholars who have divided the history of Feminism movements in 3
42
Waves and basically social reformers who look at egalitarian society are as follows.

1. The First Wave – This refers to the period of feminist activities during 19 th
and early 20th centuries.

Feminist movement originated at United Kingdom and USA promoted equal

contract and property rights for women and opposed child marriages and
ownership of wife and children by the husband.

In the beginning of 20th C, they look at political power to women and fight
against harassment.

The Feminist of this era are Margaret Sanger and Bobtaline be Gheyre.

In 1854 Florence Nightingale established female nurses in the Military

working.

2. The Second Wave – This Wave refers to the period of activities in the early
1960’s up to 1980’s. A scholar by name Imelda Whelehal suggests that the
second wave was the continuation of the first wave which also began in UK
and USA. According to Estelle Freedman, who compasses the first and the
second waves were different in aspects of the rights of women which were
important during the first wave and the issue of equality and ending
discrimination was seen in the second wave. In this period the French
author Simmons de veauvoir, who has spoken about the women in the
novels especially the second sex, where she refers to the operation of women
even in the contemporary society.

3. The Third Wave – Which began in 1990’s when the approaches towards
women rights were not successful during e second wave, the 3 rd wave
challenges against the power which provides no status to women and started
to view the problems from gender inequality and sexuality towards women.

They also focused on providing the women in political base and looking at her
status from psychological approach of differentiating between men and
women on the basis of social conditioning.

POST MODERN FEMINISM

It describes range of viewpoints which reacts to women problems. It believes that

women have achieved a lot of their goals in the 2 nd wave itself. The word Post
Modern Feminism was first used during 1980’s and today it has given way to various
theories on women. The word Post Feminism was used by Susan Bolotin in 1982
in her article ‘Voices of the Post Feminist Generation at New York’. This was
based on interviewing the women about the goals of feminism. Post Feminism was
also used by Angela Mc Robbie, wherein she says feminism has worked towards
achieving equality for everyone and now women can fight better for their rights due
to their freedom from educational and employment issues and restrictions.

43
Various types / Varieties / Concepts of Feminism

1. LIBERAL FEMINISM OR EGALITARIAN FEMINISM

 All people are created equally; women are essentially the same as man.

 Based upon principle of equality, opportunity and freedom.

 Gender which is not determined by biological sex.

 Inequality arises out of unequal participation outside the family especially in

education and labor.

 Faith in rationality regarding the power of man and woman being less
powerful opposing women’s powers as not powerful since she may not be the
contributor for economic development.

 Liberalism aims at providing woman legislative measures and equality before

law.

 Providing facilities to working and non working women as contributors to

social developments.

 Establishing National Organization of Women [NOW]. Liberal Feminists

are Mary Woolstone Craft and Marie Stewart.

 Liberal feminism looks at the state to bring about a position change in the
women’s status through legislative measures.

 The programs initiated by the states look at providing equal opportunity on the
basis of their capacities and skill in areas of employment and salary.

 Liberal feminism aims at providing equal opportunities to professional and the

middle class women.

2. MARXIST FEMINISM
 Marx’s in his view about women calls them as the oppressed class on the
basis of capitalist economic system within and outside the family structure.

 Women subordination according to Marx was the consequence of the

introduction of private property where women were considered to be the
property of man thereby exploiting the helplessness of the women class.

 Another reason for exploitation was the economic dependency of women and
the women labor class, who are considered to be the reserved labor class,
who were used when there were absence of men or male laborers.

 The unpaid workers as a house wife and the job she does and did not carry
any respect or status.
44
 With this regard Marx suggested that the women should equally participate in
the economic production process, thereby becoming employed and demand
for a better status.

 Marx called such women as the working class women.

3. SOCIALIST FEMINISM
 Integrate the issue of gender and class that is mix the concept of patriarchy
and capitalism which looks at eliminatory of both class and gender
oppression.
 Women’s oppression caused by their economic dependence shall be
removed.
 Economic production of a country is equally proportionate to that of the
women being the case taken of all members and role in socializing the
younger generation.
 Abolition of gender discrimination, class and power relations thereby liberating
the women class.
 The working class women need to be provided the basic amenities for her to
contribute to the society in a better way.

4. RADICAL FEMINISM
 Women live under the conditions of inequality in most system of economic
production regardless of, whether it is a capitalist, a socialist or a communist
society.

 They believe that gender is the fundamental form of difference created by a

society, wherein it fixes its expectations from the two genders.

 Patriarchy is the major form of discrimination and domination over the women.

 Radical feminism introduced in the terms personal involvement in politics and

considering politics as personal.

 These feminist look for alternative to gender inequality and gender roles.

 These feminist look at the male or the female physical habits and
psychological aspects which leads to the subordinate position of women.

 They also look at the various feminist issues like mental and physical violence
on women.

 Media and pornography and role of women in media for the purpose of
commodification and domestic violence.

5. CULTURAL FEMINISM
 It is a branch or radical feminism.

 It identifies the suppression of women due to the causes from the social
45
 values and expected female qualities from the society.

 This feminism does not eliminate the patriarchal domination but rather looks
at creating an alternative female consciousness where the gender differences
are tried to eliminate through identification and nurturing women qualities.

 The ideas of women’s culture which enhances her responsibility inside and
outside the home.

 This looks at creating institutions which favour women and promote healthy
relation with the male in the society.

6. POST MODERN FEMINISM

This type of approach looks at women being considered as separate individuals
and each woman is looked at having a separate identity and hence it is promoting
women subject experts to look at women issues as more practical.

7. BLACK FEMINISM
According to the following of Black Feminism, Sexism, Class operation and
Racism are bound together and these are the elements which discriminate many
people including the women. This feminism aimed at liberating the black women
from various harassment, women freedom fighter, Alice Walker let to the changes
to be brought in the lives of black women where the involvement of the white
women was seen. It was analyzed that the harassment was more among the
black.

8. ECO FEMINISM
It links with ecology where the domination of women is equal where the
domination of women is equal to that of domination of the environment. The
patriarchal system, where men dominate all the aspects of life and there by
oppressing the women and overall distract the natural environment and the
ecological balance. The Eco feminist argued that the men in power exploit the
nature, owning the land to earn a profit and derive pleasure for having dominated
it. Similarly they look at women how they look at the land which they own. In this
connection eco feminist believe that the women must work towards creating a
healthy environment, wherein they stop the feel of domination of men over the
land and them, which provides their families the comfort of life.

UNIT – 5
POST MODERN SOCIAL THEORIES

The Classical Theory of Modernity

The Classical theories on modernity have been brought into effect with the
contributions of Karl Marx – speaking about Commodification, Max Weber – in
terms of Rationality, Emile Durkheim – In terms of Differentiation, George
Simmel – his contribution towards City and Economy making modernity. The
classical theorist and they are pioneer thinkers. These thinkers have not taken the
concept of modernity in a formal way, but their works indicate that they are
46
concerned with the process of modernization. In their own way they have shown
their approaches towards modernity under the title ‘The Classical Theories of
Modernity’.

1) Karl Marx – Speaking about Commodification .

According to him the concern of modernity is in terms of production relations. Every
capitalist aims at increase in production because, he expects high profit and hence
according to Marx capitalism means profit. Application of classical theory of means
of production or the theory of capitalism towards modernity is explained by Marx
considering all those which are materialistic or man made3 can be considered as a
commodity. For ex: The art and architecture, religion, rituals, all the types of goods
produced in the market are considered to be commodity which is sold and purchased
by the individuals of a society. Hence modernization according to him itself is a
commodity, since everything which is produced in the market becomes a
commodification process in the modern world. Through the religion and rituals are
non-materialistic, yet the followers of religion and the rituals for the purpose of
developing them for the purpose of various mechanism to consider its growth for
own survival, hence he said the commodification process.

2) Max Weber – In terms of Rationality.

He is a Sociologist who developed a Theory of Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of
Capitalism. Though religion is spiritual, it is run on the concept of rationality,
because in the modern world everything needs a rational explanation. Every human
action is guided by religion and rationality and these become characteristics of the
human society. According to him modernity can be interchangeably used with the
term rationality.

3) Emile Durkheim – In terms of Differentiation .

He had a very good knowledge about Industrialization and Urbanization and he was
not influenced by anyone because, he was functionalist, he was concerned about
functioning of society and regarded society as the highest entity of human world.
According to him, society is never static and it is evolutionary. It existed as a
continuity and collective representation of the people in a particular society.
According to him modernity is explained in terms of social solidarity and it depends
on differentiations. People depend on each other and this dependency creates
solidarity. Higher the stratification of a society, higher is the level of modernity.

4) George Simmel – Contribution towards City and Economy .

Simmel is considered to be the father of modernity. According to Simmel a society
which has the system of urbanization has scope for development making it more
modern, since the people living in a city are well organized and progressive. Another
reason for modernity according to Simmel is economy. The economic structure of a
particular city or urban area contributes to its growth towards a wholesome
development of a society.

5) George Ritzer – He is of the opinion that Simmel’s idea about City and
Modernity.
Ritzer is of the opinion that the philosophy of money according to the people is all
that which makes a society modern and progressive. The attitude of people towards
47
money is proportionate to that of religion and its ideas towards the usage of money.
In conclusion modernity in terms of various Sociologists is looked at the concept to
be used accordingly depending upon the acceptance of people as to what is
modernity and how helpful it is for them.

THE JUGGERNAUT OF MODERNITY – ANTHONY GIDDENS

According to Giddens Modernity is a Juggernaut. That is the highest level of
confusions and conflict. In his explanation of this theory, he considers the modern
society as a Juggernaut or what he describes as an advanced stage of modernity.
Here Giddens means to say about modernity as the highest radical stage, which
began in 1990’s. According to him modernity refers to the institution and modes of
behavior established during the post feudal Europe, but wherein the 20 th C spread to
the entire world. He equalizes modernity with that of Industrialization. According to
him modernity has a form of Juggernaut is extremely dynamic, which has the highest
pace, scope and changing attitude over the entire system of the society. A
Juggernaut situation comprises of various conflicting and contradicting parts of a
society.

By modernity Antony Giddens refers to the institutions and modes, later modernity is
with reference to Industrialization, the historical continuity and change rather than the
differences. Modernity is extremely dynamic or what he calls Juggernaut or the
runaway world. Further a conflict and contradiction becomes a part of modernity,
since the changes which occur during the process of modernization may sometimes
not give alert to the individuals who are not ready for the preparation for the change.

Modernity and its Consequences

Antony Giddens marks the 1600’s year as the beginning of modernity in Europe.
Modernity has developed as a result of or the outcome of the number of institutional
dimension that is Capitalism, Industrialism and Information Control of Nation and
State along with military power. According to him the new complexities due to these
institutional dimensions are essential for a Sociological theory that speaks about a
society. So the following are the dimensions of modernity.

1. Capitalism – Capitalism is the system of production followed by Marxism

concept of the means of production. According to Marx “Capitalism is
characterized by commodity, production, ownership, property rights or
ownership, labour wages and a class system.

2. Industrialism – It is the application of inanimate sources of power for

productive techniques in an industrial set up by industrialism. He needs to
say about every setting in a society which is progressive and new to the
society due to modernity. Ex: Transportation, Communication, Coordination
and Administrative power.

3. The Coordination and Administrative Power (Surveillance Capacities)

By Surveillance, he refers to the supervision of the activities of the subject
who are present in the political sphere. It involves the control of information
and monitoring of the activities of the individuals by the State Authority.
48
 Giddens holds Surveillance as important as that of the process of modernity,
since modernity needs powerful monetary system. In his explanation about
the social democracy is not just a theory but an action programme.

4. The Military Power – Another dimension of modernity is Military Power,

which rest in the hands of Nation and State. The development of Military
power enhances the development of society and at the same time, it also
affects the regular pattern of society due to the various classes, conflicting
with each other over the control of the Military power.

Modern society is much more dynamic compared to the pre modern societies,
because of the concepts like pace of intensity and the scope of change it
undergoes. The major characteristics of our civilization are the Nation and the
State, the modern political system, hyper mechanized and hyper technology
oriented means of production, the labor wages allocation and majority
commodification of all relations.

Modernity is given the 3 dimensional essential aspects according to Giddens in his

‘Theory of Social Structure’.

1. Distentiation
2. Disembedding
3. Reflexitivity

1. Distentiation or Time or Space separation

In the pre modern society time and space was at a peak of leisure. But in modern
society the time and space is a matter of consideration, since the time chosen for
various development aspects as spread across the world. Because of which there is
lack of leisure and since Industrialism has spread across the world space has
become the constrain leading to time and space distentiation. However, this time
and space separation is important for modernity for several reasons.

a. It makes possible for the growth of rationales and organized bureaucracies

and the nation and state with their dynamicity and their ability to link local and
global domains.

b. Time and Space distinction in the modern world is position within a radical
sense of world history and it is able to draw upon that history to shape the
present.

c. Such distentiation between time and space is an important distinction and pre
requisite for the dynamicity of modernity.

2. Disembedding of Social System

Disembedding involves lifting the social relation from local contacts of interaction and
restructuring them across time and spaces thereby producing the new set of inter
active mechanisms.

According to Giddens the Disembedding Mechanism consists of 2 different types.

49
 a. Symbolic token – As a medium of exchange can be passed on from one
individual or institution to others. Ex. Money allows for time and space
distentiation and it is symbolic token because money is the creator of a
structural change in economic aspects through money transaction we are able
to link ourselves with various communities of the world in spite of the distance
between time and space.

b. Expert System – It is defined as the system of technical accomplishment or

professional expertise that organize large areas of the material and social
environment in which we live, expert system consists of professionals like
Doctors and Engineers who are the runners of the community, since they
promise regular performance, through their expertise in spite of the time and
space distentiation of Giddens also holds responsible ‘Trust’ as an important
element of a modern society which is the highest level of complex and time
and space distentiation. Trust is an important element because of the gap
between the time and space and it is an important social phenomenon of
every society which is modernized. Giddens defines Trust as confidence in
the individual or a system about a given set of events in a society and where
that confidence expresses a faith in each other or correcting certain abstract
or vague principle in a society. Trust is also considered as a Symbolic Token
and an Expert system that is, living along with the other systems of the world.

3. Reflexitivity of Modern Society

The 3rd dynamic characteristics of modernity are its reflexitivity, which is the
fundamental feature according to Giddens. Structural theory reflexes as a special
meaning in modernity as social practices are examined in the modern society,
because of various rational explanation that come from various parts of the world
regarding those practices. The modern world acts as a mirror to the people who look
into it thereby giving clarifications to whatever they are reflecting in the modern
world.

The constituents of modern society alternatives characteristics thereby reacting to

the changes, that occurs in a society, whereby the members in the society are either
uncertain or confused with the changes that are taking place. Modernity is reflexive
at the moment and its reacts back because of the actions of the individuals.

Reflexitivity helps in explaining the human actions through the ‘Modern Self’ which is
characterized by the characteristics of contemporary world at both institutional and
personal level. There is a crucial point which leads to a greater modernity which is
supported by the development of mass communication and rational thinking.
According to Giddens these changes influence the members to think rationally and
scientifically, so that modernity grows towards enrichment and development of a
society.

The disembedded characteristic of modern life also leads to various issues explained
by Giddens in the following ways.

1. The younger generations are socialized towards trust development and

makes them very protective about their actions which might affect their growth
50
 2. during adult hood since the imbibing of trust at such an age, which does not
take them across the changing world, since their maturity at adulthood is
hindered or stopped because of their acceptability of what they believed and
in what they were trained.

3. Giddens sees disembedding as a mechanism of providing security to us in

various areas which create at the same time risk, over a period of time people
are ready to take up various risk is practice systems of customs and
traditions, because over a period of time the risk taken by them in order to
change themselves will accept what is rational and helpful to them. The
expert system supports the people to develop ability to fight the risk and it is
here Giddens speaks about the Juggernaut situation and calls modernity as
the creator or runner away feeling thereby making modernity a negative
consequence.

The Negative consequences of the Juggernaut modernity are due to the

following reasons:
a. The fault in the designing of the modern world.

b. Operational failure that was traceable those which were not traceable by the
designers of the world who failed to be with the changing trends in modern
society. At the same time Giddens also says that in spite of the negative
consequences of modernity, he says that modernity helps us to live in an era
of high society and towards post modernity, by that he means a world of full
multilayered democratic and humanizing of technology. But in spite of all
these no one can assist a permanent direction at which modernity progresses
towards post modernity.

What is true for a social class is also true for the nation that is the risk is more
centered with the poor nation while the rich nations adjust and bear with the
risk factors by handling them in an effective manner because it has the
capacity of Science and Technology to be used to handle modernity.

RISK SOCIETY OF ULRICH BECK

COPING OR MANAGING WITH RISKS
Modernism and post modernism produces risk in all areas and also allows it to
question itself as to how the risk was produced in that nation. In every nation the risk
is introduced by the people and also handled by the people, and are able to reflect
them on the risk taken. They being the experts handle the risks and in case if the
experts fail, they themselves try to handle with various scientific methods. In fact
they use science or take the help of science to maintain the risk factors thereby
leading comfortable life of rationality and reputation.

Coping with the risk in the classical industrial societies was easier than the modern
societies. In spite of the various environmental changes that have remained some.
According to Beck nature is society and society is nature. In fact he calls nature has
been politised. In this he explained by saying that the traditional politics that is the
government is using its power today. The sub politics for ex: The large companies
51
which manages the scientific labor which is much powerful than the actual politics.
Modernity depends on Science and Technology for its growth. This Beck calls
“Unbinding of politics”. The sub groups and the individual are more self critical than
the central government and are better in handling the risks associated with
modernity and post modernity.

GEORGE RITZER
Mc DONALDIZATION

According to George Ritzer, the issue of modernity can be explained in 3 ways:

1. Mc Donaldization of society.
2. The relationship between Mc Donaldization and Globalization and
Americanization.
3. The development of the new means of consumptions.

1. Mc Donaldization of society:
The concept of Mc Donaldization of society is focused on the fast food
Restaurant which represents the contemporary world.

Here Ritzer speaks about Weber’s model of formally rational system, which is
compared by Ritzer to that of fast food concept. According to Ritzer the concept
of modern world is related to rationality which is formal and which can be
explained in 4 dimensions, they are Efficiency, Predictability, Emphasis on
Quantity rather than Quality, substitution of Non human technology.

a. Efficiency – means the search for the best means to an end. Ex: In the fast
food concept that drives through window is the good example of an increased
efficiency of getting a meal.

b. Predictability – means something which is expected and no more a surprise.

Ex: The preserved food pack over a period of one year is assumed to be
good at the time of purchase.

c. Rational system is towards Emphasizing Quantity rather than Quality –

Ex: The unskilled labourers works at Mc Donalds are not as efficient and
trained as that of a restaurant cook because they use non human
technologies in serving the food.

d. Non human Technologies – As they used non human technologies in

serving the food, the fast food restaurants bring new heights to formal
rationality in general and the rest of the world while dealing with food
technology follows the fast food concept. We can relate modernity to the
concept of fast food rationality, because these fast food restaurants deal with
all the qualities of modernity. It further shows that we are moving towards
post modernity. There by leading to a change in the economic system of a
society.

52
 AMERICANIZATION

In the Sociological theory of George Simmel the growing Americanism is seen as

‘Enormous desire for happiness of Modern man’. Over the years many theories
have dealt with Americanization and associating it with the modern theory. At a very
general level Americanization is a term to describe the life of America and its norms,
values, structures and institutions, most of the literature on Americanization is written
by Americans themselves and criticized by Non Americans. The concept of Mc
Donaldization has spread across the world by opening food outlets and maximum
profit is from the world across which is a profitable one for Americans. The
conversion of localized food outlets to that of Americanized food outlets clearly
indicates the concept of Americanization.

GLOBALIZATION

The concept of Americanization has less concern with the social theories since in the
contemporary society. Globalization concept has over taken the other concepts
related to modernity. The concept of Globalization according to Feather Stone is
that there is a general agreement and logic to the Globalization process, which
operate independent in the socio-cultural concept. Globalization is a term which
indicates the exchange of goods and services between the countries making or
taking a society towards post modern world. The international trade in stocks, land
and currency is a part of Globalization. The concept of ethnoscape (Global cultural
flow), that is the movement of large number of people through tourisms. A tourist
attraction of a particular country once visited by a person or people shall be imitated
and brought into the native land. Therefore enhancing their own tourism concept of
Techno scope, that is, exchange of technology from one country to another. Ex:
Internet. The Globalization theory does not specify itself to anyone nation. It helps
the third nations to come into land light, by helping them to come in contact with the
other nations by using its own resources thereby converting it as Globalized
resource.

CONTRIBUTION OF JACQUES DERRIDA AND FOUCAULT

JACQUES DERRIDA – POST STRUCTURALISM

The deconstructive theory in the view of Derrida in the post structuralist age, in
contrast to the structuralist, who follow the linguistic pattern and who saw a social
institution as nothing but the structure of language. He reduced language to writing
and so sees society and social institution as nothing but writing.

In contemporary society Derrida reconstructed language of social institutions, finally

coming to the conclusion that writing about social institution was more influential on
the structure of people. He believes though language exists in the society, the
writings do not restrict the people in construction of the society. Structuralist saw
order and stability in the language as disorderly and unstable. Different contact in a
society gives different meaning as a result of which language cannot have a
53
constraining power over the people. Hence, Derrida provides a deconstruction of
language. According to him the emergence of post modernism becomes important
in order to deconstruct the language. Derrida speaks about a concept called ‘ Logo
Centrism’ – The search for a universal system of thought that reveals, what is true
or beautiful. This Logo Centrism has dominated the western social thought.
However Derrida says Logo Centrism has ended philosophy and human sciences
because of which he wants to deconstruct these closures, thereby freezing writing
from those elements which has closed it. Hence, Derrida focus is on deconstruction
of Logo Centrism. Deconstruction involves the decomposition of those united
elements in order to reveal their hidden differences. For this he gives an example
about the traditional theater which was dominated by a logical thought of believing
what takes place on the stage represents, what takes place in real life. The
expectations of the writers are seen through their writings keeping this concept.

An alternative stage is recognized by Derrida, where language will not be given

much importance. That is, that it will not be guided by authors and texts, thereby
making the actors not to follow the writings. The writers will no longer dictate the
action to the actors, but the stage will be active. This is the outcome of the
deconstruction of language and through this a radical deconstruction takes place,
replaced by removing the traditional theater by his deconstruction language, he
wants to see society free of ideas from the intellectual authorities and freezing the
individuals from being dominated by the writings of the writer.

The decentering concept of post structuralist or post modernists is explained by

Derrida, that the theatre has to move away from actors. It’s traditional centre
focusing on the writers and their expectations, whereby the actors are more free to
play. This concept can be applied to the whole of the society. A theater or a society
without a new play and some differences will be considered as a Static society and
finally sects its end in contrast a society without a centre of what Derrida calls as the
writer will be seen as a society, which is progressive open and self reflexive. The
future is not going to be in the past as back drop rather than the future is found in
being made3 by us, written by us and the actions we do.

MICHEAL FOUCAULT – POST STRUCTURALIST

He was opposed by the structuralist as his work deals with the difference between
post- structuralism and structuralism. His approach provides various input towards
understanding post-structuralism and at the same time complicated too. He has
provided the contrasting view points, since he transforms the previous theorists and
their theories in a different orientation.

Weber’s theory of rationalism has an impact on the entire society, but for Foucault, it
is found only in certain important areas of the society.

Marxian idea are found and explained in Foucault’s work, wherein he does not focus
on economy alone, but speaks about all the aspects of ‘Social institution’ and it is
more interested in the micro politics of power, rather than the Marxian view of power
at the societal level. He has the opinion about the relationship between power and
knowledge and explained in Sociological aspects.
54
Foucault’s work is clearly post-structuralist, but as he progressed in his theory, he
started to focus on other aspects, which took him into different directions or different
ideas to formulate a theory.

1. The First idea was on his methodology, wherein he speaks about Archeology
of knowledge and Genealogy of power. Foucault’s Archeology of knowledge
involves a search for a set of rules that determines the conditions of possibility
for all that can be told within a particular time.

Archeology is a search for a general formation and transformation of

statements which were into discussive formations. These discuss either
spoken or written documents which has influenced Foucault’s work on
structuralism.

2. Foucault’s Archeology organizes the documents, divides it and distributes it,

in an orderly and arranged level distinguishing what is relevant and less
relevant. It also helps in discovering new elements, describing relations and
defining unities.

Foucault is interested in seeking rationality and is concerned about the

direction, which leads his study to the disposes and that leads to the formation
of human science called psychology. The concern for saying the truth relates
to the power which he calls Genealogy of power. Genealogy is a type of
intellectual history, that are linked with historical contents which help in
organizing and placing in order, which are not very simple in unfolding its
origin, nor help in realizing the ends. It is a way of analyzing multiple open
ended, disposes or practice and establishing a pattern of relationships.
Hence Genealogy is opposite to the types of historical studies which focus on
laws and necessities.

Genealogy of power according to Foucault is concerned with how people

govern themselves and others through the production of knowledge.
According to him the knowledge which generates power by constituting
people as subjects and then governing the subjects with the knowledge.

He is criticizing the hierarchy of knowledge because the highest ranking forms

of knowledge, that is, science have the greatest power. He is interested in the
techniques and technology that are developed from knowledge which are
scientific and this knowledge are used by various institutions to constitute
power over people.
The elite members of the society used the power as being conscious actors
and they use knowledge and power to the maximum. In his views history is
one system which is based on knowledge and hence it is powerful.

Foucault theory is post structuralism as led to post modern theories even with
the minute different in the post modern thinking in the existence of post
structural and hence they widely used in the post modern theory.

55
 POST MODERN SOCIAL THEORY
Postmodern social theory has come to reality. It has begun to take roots. Some
think that it is the declaration of the death of sociological theory. Others argue that it
is an appropriate moment for sociological theory to transform itself by accepting
some criticisms made by postmodern social theory. Sociological theory and social
theory are not and should not be at different poles. Postmodern social theory surly is
not the result of the contributions of many non-sociologist thinkers only; it is also a
product of sociologist thinkers. In fact, social theory is differentiated from
sociological theory for its being interdisciplinary. But it also means that social theory
can also be looked from the sociological vantage point. There is yet another
perspective. Scholars like George Ritzer consider social theory not only from
sociological perspective but from the perspective of modernity.

Thus, postmodern social theory includes perspectives of sociological theory, non-

sociological perspectives such as literacy criticism, anthropology and so on and
modernist perspective. Ritzer seems to be liberal for looking at and analyzing
postmodern social theory from the vantage point of modernism.

The most radical postmodernists disregard the views of Ritzer. They have
proclaimed the death of modernity, and not only the modernity but the discipline of
sociology also. These are extreme positions: appropriation of modernist and
sociological perspectives by postmodern social theory and denial of existence of
modernity and sociology. There is an alternative way between these extremes. All
good postmodernists – radical or modern – have created perspectives, ideas and
concepts that deserve, nay, need a hearing in sociology. Sociological theory may, in
many ways, be quite vibrant, but it seems to lack a plethora of new ideas.

What postmodern social theory offers is a storehouse full of such ideas. Some will
not prove very useful but many will be of great interest and utility to sociologists. In
any case, the infusion of so many ideas cannot help invigorate sociology and
sociological theory. In any description and analysis of postmodern social theory, one
is obliged to see it with reference to sociological theory and modernity. There are
postmodernists who are liberal and look to post modernity only in the perspective of
modernity. Among these are included Giddens and Habermas. At the outset, it
should be stated that the postmodern social theorists do not apply any rigid
framework for constructing a theory. The criteria laid down for theory formation by
sociological theorists are at once abandoned by postmodernists.

There is no statement of problem, concepts, variables or theoretical statements as

are given in Meta theoretical schemes. Each theoretician has certain ideas about
society and he throws them up by contributing towards the understanding of
contemporary society. As a result of this we do not have any coherent theory about
postmodern society. There is no depth and essence in these theories. Nor any
universality is seen in them. The theories are characterized by fragmentation,
differenced and plurality. And, then, there are postmodernists who even go to the
extent of saying that, in the words of Best and Kellner, “postmodern critiques are
directed against the notion of ‘theory’ itself ……. A systematically developed
conceptual structure anchored in the real. That is, there is opposition to the idea that
to be considered a theory, a body of systematic ideas must somehow model or
56
represent reality”. George Ritzer is also of the opinion that it is not necessary to
follow the rigid norms of theorizing. What is important is to understand what we call
social or what we mean by social.

Ritzer writes: However, in my view, bodies of ideas do not need to be either

systematic or representations of the real to qualify as theories. While
postmodernists may reject theory, what most of them in fact do is to theorize, often
about the social. Perhaps they are haphazard at times, but the fact is that these are,
at least in part, social theories, and they are relevant to the concerns of sociological
theories.

There are sociologists, and there is no dearth of them in India, who in categorical
terms deny the status of any theory to post-modernity. Such a denial does not block
the progressive way of post-modernity. It must be admitted that for the development
of sociology, the iron case of sociological framework and boundary has to be
shattered. And, Ritzer is very right that any theorizing about the social is relevant for
the analysis of society. Whom do we include for building the postmodern social
theory? There are dilemmas. There are postmodernists who deny labeling
themselves as such; and there are modernists who can be labeled as
postmodernists; and there are others who are uncomfortable to any such label of
modernist or postmodernist.

Despite the absence of any specific identity, what seems to be a safer way is to pick
up some important or dominant postmodernists from France and America. France is
considered to be the cradle of post-modernity and post-structuralism. Next to it is
America. Postmodernists, who have influenced sociological theory and modernity,
have therefore been taken up by us for their social theory.

Some of the major features of post modernity are as follows:

Postmodernism is a cultural matter, that is, a matter of changes in arts. In some

ways, this distinction between social and cultural is quite artificial. The two can be
said to inform each other to such a degree, in reality, that they cannot be separated.
What we do here is to enumerate some of the major features of post modernity in
this article.

1. Cultural relations or the politics of culture

Postmodern thought is against modern art and architecture. The modern art is
considered to be highly influenced by elitism. It indicates a decline in standards.
The postmodern architecture dwells in populism; it is a manifestation of cheap
populism. Characterizing postmodern architecture, it is argued that it is regressive
rather than progressive, reactionary rather than radical; a sell-out of all that
architecture should stand for.

However, some of these criticisms of modern art, not only in architecture, music and
entertainment programs, but in media too, are defended by postmodernists. It must
be accepted that the new art has reached to the grass roots and common people. It
is closer to the ground reality.
57
Glen Ward (1997) makes the following observations in characterizing the
cultural aspects of post modernity:

When the postmodernists do the same they are said to be welcoming the plurality of
contemporary cultural life with open arms. On radio, television, video and home
computer the whole of world culture seems to be at your finger tips. The media, it
has been argued are placeless imagery spaces which refuse to make clear
distinctions between things.

Adverts for ice cream and sun block interrupt an art history programme. Moving into
different realities can be done at the push of a button. Everywhere you look,
different perhaps contradictory, messages, images and ideas jostle for attention. In
this new media domain anything can go with anything like a game without rules.

Or, at least you can make up your own rules; culture can no longer be administered,
there is no legislation about what can and cannot be consumed. Modernists would
bemoan this as a slackening of aesthetic criteria. Postmodernists would agree but
would say ‘good thing too’. They would ask, exactly whose criteria were they in the
first place? And why should anybody have taken notice of them?

Post modernity actually came to the field of art sometime in 1980s. It was during this
period that huge, splashy things became fashion of the day. Postmodern art soon
got associated with a pluralist, ‘anything goes’ attitude and an obsession with the
past. Old styles and techniques were reshaped.

At a later stage, it took to political postmodernism.

2. The end of reality: Baudrillard says it is a society of simulations

It is sometimes said that theories of postmodernism proclaim the ‘end of the real’.
This era of postmodernism has developed communications and electronic
reproduction of sound, image, and text. Television has often been central in this
area. What is worse in this postmodern development of communications is that
there have emerged doubts about the relationship between reality and
representation.

Baudrillard has developed a theory which says that there is nothing real in this world.
Instead, there are simulations, that is, carbon copies of reality and worse enough,
there is no original copy. Signs and images float. Through the media, we do not
purchase commodities, we purchase signs and images. And, interestingly enough,
we consume these signs and images.

Baudrillard says that the things available in the market are heavily charged by signs
and images. The two combined constitute the representation. These
representations have no solid ground of facts, reality or history.

Consider the example given by Baudrillard: You are watching on a video tape of a
contemporary film, an image of a woman smoking a cigarette. She looks cool,

58
seductive and fairly dangerous. Her smoking gives her this sort of aura. This is
something about the way she lights her cigarette ….. You find this an alternative
image. Perhaps you would quite like to look like that yourself.

Simulations, therefore, are the fake, counterfeit and unauthentic reality of society. In
such a situation we might assume simulations either duplicates or are emitted by a
pre-given real. In a sense we might think that simulations and reality have a
necessary attachment. But, for Baudrillard, this connection has long since swapped,
so that simulation can no longer be taken either as imitation or distortion of reality or
as a copy of the original.

3. Postmodern society is multicultural and incoherent

One of the differentiating characteristics of postmodern society is its multiculturalism.
Our national leaders, when make a public speech, often start with the phrase: “We
the people of this community …..” By the term ‘we’ they convey the notion that we
are common people, have common lifestyle and common values.

But such a phrasing would not be acceptable to postmodernists. They argue that the
community is never ‘one’. It has varying ethnicities, feelings, religious followings and
linguistic learning’s. It is never possible to think of a community as a large family.
There is enough fragmentation in a society.

Lyotard’s ‘The Postmodern Condition (1984), report commissioned by Qubec’s

Counseil des Universities, is a wonderful document on the state of scientific
knowledge and information. Lyotard finds out the grounds of knowledge and informs
us how it controls the society. He says that science is never a superior form of
knowledge. It cannot find permanent answers to everything; it only comes up with
temporarily valid opinions, and seeks to solve merely immediate, local problems.

There is splintering of knowledge because human beings in a society are never

uniform. They are multicultural, multi-ethnic. Thus, the science which is developed
and created in postmodern society is not coherent. It can no longer be valued for the
contribution it makes towards human progress.

Postmodern science has given up the idea that one day the sum of all knowledge will
add up to a state of perfect information. Lyotard strongly believes that postmodern
science has become a mass of incompatible little things with no goal other than to
generate further research.

4. Rejection metanarratives
Postmodernists have no love left for the past. In the Indian situation, post modernity
if it is there, it would at once, as Yogendra Singh would agree, abandon indologists
who make all sorts of generalization on the basis of scriptures and epics. As the
postmodernists in Europe and U.S. reject metanarratives, so will the coming
postmodernists in India reject G.S. Ghurye, M.N. Srinivas and other sociologists of
this category.

As a matter fact, when we are entering a postmodern age, one of its most distinctive
59
characteristics is a loss of rational and social coherence in favour of cultural images
and social reforms and identities marked fragmentation, multiplicity, plurality and
indeterminacy.

Viewed from this perspective postmodernism totally rejects metanarratives. When

postmodernism represents fragmented culture, how difficult it is for such
metanarratives to survive in contemporary society. Postmodernists have explained
the concept of metanarratives.

The foundational thinkers have developed their theories which are universal and can
be applied to all the societies of the world. For instance, Durkheim’s theory of
suicide has general application for India and also Europe. Similarly, capitalism is the
byproduct of religious ethics as propounded by Max Weber.

Marxian economic determinism has universal application. And, with the same logic,
functional theory and methods have uniform applications notwithstanding the
specificity of social. These theories are therefore, labeled as totalizing.

When the society is plural, multi-ethnic and fragmented, how metanarratives can
explain its structure and function. These narratives miserably fail to identify any
fundamental truth underpinning human society. They have anti-foundational attitude
in their approach.

5. Post modernity is deconstruction: Derrida’s post-structuralism

Post modernity is multi-dimensional. Each author has defined it from his own
theoretical perspective. Jacques Derrida is a poststructuralist and is, therefore,
postmodernist also. He characterized post modernity by the concept of
deconstruction and difference.

Derrida actually initiated the movement of deconstruction after reading Martin

Heidegger in 1960s. This has influenced postmodernist way of thinking:
“Deconstructionism is less a philosophical position than a way of thinking about the
reading texts: writers who create texts or use words on the basis of all the other
texts and words they have encountered, while readers deal with them in the same
way. Cultural life is thus viewed as a series of texts intersecting with other texts
producing more texts. This inter textual weaving has a life of its own.

Whatever we write conveys meanings we do not or could not possibly intend, and
our words cannot say what we mean. It is vain to try and master a text because the
perpetual interweaving of texts and meaning is beyond our control. Language works
through us. Recognizing that, the deconstructionist impulse is to look inside one text
for another, or build one text into another”.

Derrida is basically a poststructuralist and his postulate of deconstruction is therefore

structural construction. He argues that though deconstruction digs up the hidden
suppressions and exclusions upon which texts are constructed, it is far from being an
act of interpretation in the normal sense.

Deconstruction does not mean trying to root out what a text is ‘really saying’. On the
60
contrary, it tries to show that the grounds from which texts and theories seem to
proceed are always shifting and unstable. One way it achieves this is by recognizing
the active role played by the invisible or marginalized in any text. Another is by
exposing a text’s system of imaginary oppositions.

6. Postmodern social identity is constructed by images

In the present era where we have reached post modernity, the problem of the
identity of individual is passing through a severe crisis. The identity of the individual
has gone through a serious transformation. In ancient Indian society, the individual
identity was fixed or ascribed.

One is born as a Brahmin, he is a vegetarian for being a Brahmin, he is also

assumed to be a learned person, and his position in his kin group was
predetermined. His enemy ties were also largely of his past. The traditional identity
elsewhere as in India also witnessed change during the modern period.

The possibilities of expanding identity witnessed within this period. Modernity

involved the belief that rejecting the shackles of tradition was a step forward towards
human emancipation.

Postmodernism gave a new dimension to the expansion of individual identity. During

this period, social life is faster and more complex than it was in modernity. More and
more demands are placed on the individuals, more and more identities are paraded
before individuals and they have to juggle hard with the rapidly expanding number of
roles as society starts to fragment.

Identity has now become an issue. In place of the serious modernist search for the
deep, authentic self, the individuals have recognition and sometimes a celebration of
disintegration, fragmented desires, superficiality and identity as something you shop
for image is now all that matters. One of the major characteristics of post modernity
is, therefore, to win over the crisis of self-identity formation.

7. Foucault: Knowledge-power relationships are major attributes of post

modernity
Michel Foucault is known for giving post modernity a distinct identity. If Lyotard
characterized it by the rejection of metanarratives, Baudrillard identified it with
simulation, that is, signs and images and Derrida introduced it with deconstruction.
Foucault attributed it with knowledge and power.

He argued that there are several social institutions in the society including penal
system, psychiatry which deals with the activities of men. Foucault believed that
none of these institutions is neutral or independent. All these are tied up in the
complex of power in our society.

The power, all through the history of mankind, is exercised through surveillance,
monitoring and other forms of regulation of people’s lives. For Foucault, the modern
day notion of the self is bound up with, and inseparable from the workings of such
institutions and so none of us can claim to stand apart from the exercise of power.
61
He does not provide a theory of how naturally free human individuals are oppressed
from above the laws of any one dominant class or group. Instead, he proposes that
humanity is simply an idea and that, like any other idea, it has a history.

The history of all social institutions is the history of power relations. And, where does
power come from? Power originates from knowledge, that is, expertise. In the
postmodern period it is the knowledge-power relationship which controls and
governs the society.

8. “The Death of the Author”: The slogan is the idiom of post modernity :
The postmodern society, which is known for its plurality, diversity, multi-ethnicity and
fragmentation, is also understood for having varying interpretations of the writings of
authors. Take an instance from Indian Hindi fiction writer Munshi Premchand.
Premchand all through his stories and fictions wrote about the Indian peasantry,
which lived in poverty and died in poverty.

Today, there is no reason to assume the Premchand is exactly interpreted in this

way. The present peasantry is the outcome of green revolution and benefits from
agricultural development programs. The postmodernists argue that a text (and for
that matter, a novel, story or a poem) moves from history, geography and culture. It
is in this context that there is death of an author in postmodern period. But this
requires a little elaboration.

In 1968, Barthes published a short essay called “The Death of the Author” in an
obscure Parisian literary journal. In 1977, the essay resurfaced in an English
translation in the collection of Barthes’ essays called Image-Music-Text. Its original
publication in French journal went unnoticed but its translation reached to wider
public.

It triggered a tidal wave of comment. Overnight it became a slogan of post

modernity. Barthes wants to convey through his slogan that it is the language which
speaks, and not the author. There exists in individual author an idea, experience,
sensation or mental state. This occurs in the author independently of any verbal or
visual language.

It does not signify anything yet. It just is now the author expresses his ideas by
manipulating language. In other words, his ideas are put into signs, words, images
etc. At the third stage, the readers get the meaning of the author. The meaning is
interpreted differently by the readers as they are themselves fragmented.

In this process, the real meaning of the author fades and it is his death. The lesson
of Barthes’ essay is that you cannot have an idea without any already existing signs
in the form of language. In other words, we cannot have a language less thought.
Our ideas are restricted to what our language has made available to us. Post
modernity is very much influenced by linguistics. It is the language which speaks
and not the author.

9. The transformation of Marxism in post modernity:

Postmodernists in a larger way have established that the present world has come to
62
such a stage where there seems to be no alternate to capitalism. Marxism died in
1989 with the disintegration of Soviet Russia. Marxists have tended to see social
class as the key site of oppression and the resulting conflict between dominant and
subordinate classes as the basis for future revolution. In this view faith is put in the
proletariat as the universal class (workers of the world unite) which will lead the way
to socialism. Marx also advocated the theory that “the economic structure
determines the social and cultural life”.

The whole Marxian thesis of the revolution for socialism has been transformed by the
Marxist postmodernists. They have challenged the idea that any one class, structure
or factor can single handedly explain history or bring about change. The ideas of
Foucault, Baudrillard and others reject Marx.

The post-Marxist tendency of these authors seeks a less reductive view of history
and society. And try to formulate a more radical version of democracy than Marxism
has often provided. It aims to address political theory to a more chaotic social
landscape full of fluid identities and diverse social groups. It asks whether revolution
is still possible in an age apparently without agreed values and whether radical
gestures can have any effect in a world which seems able to absorb all attempts at
subversion.

10. Farewell to class war:

Social formations have undergone massive change due to modes of production.
The society has gone through Fordism to post-Fordism and mass production to
flexible production. It has become a consumer society. It is more capital-intensive
than labour-intensive. Peter Berger argues that in the postmodern society, the place
of industrial labour has been taken over by the knowledge class.

This class is highly paid and occupies a place of status in this society. It is said that
such a development in industry has ended the primacy of class-based politics. Add
to it the increase in social pluralism and multi-polity of social groups. Jameson, a
Marxist, also admits that one of the most profoundly social phenomena is the
emergence of a whole range of small group, non-class political practices, and micro
politics. These groups give rise to new social movements such as that of women,
ecologists, regional autonomists which take the role of class war. And, here is the
farewell to class conflicts. The days of labour unrest have now become the thing of
the past.

11. Goodbye to systemic approach:

Foundational theories of Durkheim, Marx and Weber have their boundaries limited to
system. Parsons’ theory of system is a typical example of boundary maintenance. A
system is a complex unit of some kind, with boundaries within which the parts are
connected, and within which something takes place. Parsons distinguishes three
systems: The cultural, the personality, and the social.

The cultural system includes the values and norms which influence the individual’s
choices. The personality system involves individual’s motivations and need-
63
dispositions that govern, along with the norms, the choice they make. The social
system is based on the interrelations between actors. With the social system
Parsons looked at roles, equilibrium and the pattern variables.

System has least possibility of change outside it. It has a strong tendency to pattern
maintenance. This approach, that is, the whole system theory is rejected by
postmodernists. Its inherent tendency is flexibility. And, flexibility is against system.
What is this postmodern flexibility? Post modernity made a shift from ass
consumption of Fordian type of flexible production.

In this shift, there is a new pluralism of products and a new importance for
innovation. In postmodern society flexible manufacture is linked with innovative
organization. In this shift the focus is on the needs of the customers. And, the
customer’s needs are ever changing. The production changes with the needs of the
customers. For example: General Motors took nine hours to change the dyes on its
presses in the early 1980s. The Toyota has lowered the time to two minutes. The
history of demand flexibility and innovation in production clearly states that the post
modernity is against any theory of system.

Add to it, the rejection of metanarratives. Metanarratives are based on system

theory. Functionalism and conflict theory are, in fact, system narratives. Post
modernity, at least, negatively has vehemently rejected system approach to society.
Its efforts to theorize the present broken world, on the other hand, has yet not
yielded any hopeful result. But, the battle is ongoing. Whether post modernity
succeeds to build a new social theory or not, it is certain it has made a goodbye to
system approach.

12. Postmodern science is little science:

During the postmodern period, once upon a time, big science has become little
science. Around 18th century onwards, that is, modern times, faith was placed in
science as the source of enlightenment. For instance, instead of answering to
religion as the guarantee of truth, political and economic fields claimed to have the
standing of science. In sociology, all the founding fathers Comte to Merton, tried to
develop and establish it as a discipline. It was assumed that scientific knowledge
could (1) get behind mystification and superstition; (2) reveal the facts about the
world, and (3) lead human beings to a brighter day. It was further believed that
science is progressive and universal.

Lyotard and a few other postmodernists demystified some of these assumptions of

science. Lyotard was in fact, officially appointed to find out the state of knowledge of
science. He claims that around the end of the Second World War, these myths had
collapsed. It is the science which is responsible for the destruction of our
environment; it is science which has created chemical weapons and this leads us to
believe that science may be anything, but surely not progressive. Approaches like
‘chaos theory’, quantum mechanics have highlighted uncertainty in measure.
Because of these it has become harder to see science “as the activity of a rational
mind confronting a concrete reality”.

A new development has taken place in the post-industrial production. Research has
64
made a place in commercial enterprise as a result of which there has been rapid
growth of computerized means of information processing. The outcome of this has
been that theories and discoveries are now judged on the basis of performance and
efficiency rather than truth or purpose. Scientists are now primarily interested in
putting out work which will both generate further research finding and add to their
own power and prestige within the academic ‘market place’.

65