Mary S. and Peter R.

Senn

What is a Social Problem?

A History of its Definition*

Abstract

For more than a century all the major countries in the Western World have been con-
cerned with social problems. During this time many sociologists and other scholars
have attempted to develop a sound definition of a social problem. They recognized
that appropriate treatment requires understanding of what they are. The issue has
received only sporadic attention throughout the last century. Consensus has never
been achieved. All definitions contain one or more of the eight components of the
minimum requirements of modern scholarship that takes into account the existing
literature. This paper is the chronological story of how scholars arrived at the eight
components and now define a social problem. It is restricted to the study of
sociologists writing in English. The paper concludes that many difficulties remain and
that our understanding of this important subject needs more attention.

Introduction

From time immemorial societies have faced socia! problems. For more than a
century Europe and the United States have attempted to solve them on a
national level. They have been a persistent source of controversy. Nobody
can be concerned with all the social problems others declare - there are too
many.l Special obstacles for social scientists arise because of differences in
values. Problems, such as those of peace and security, the environment, and
economics are by nature controversial and extremely complex.
This paper is concerned with the development of the meaning of the term
"social problem" in sociology and an attempt to work toward a more satisfac-
tory definition. There is no standard work on this subject. One of the serious
obstacles to progress in the field is the almost total absence of any specialized

* This is a revised and abridged version of a paper given at the 31st International
Congress of the International Institute of Sociology, June 24, 1993, Sorbonne
Paris, France.
We are particularly obligated to Wolfgang Drechsler who read the paper in Paris
and constructively criticized it in detail causing us to make changes which im-
proved it greatly. Jürgen Backhaus, Oscar E. Shabat and Frank Hoover drew our
attention to certain scientific and theoretical problems. Carsten Klingemann's
suggestions for cutting were helpful. Anita Lauterstein did much of the typing
and handled the production and printing.
The authors may be reached at 1121 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, Illinois 60202,
Uni ted States.
C. Klingemann et al. (eds.), Jahrbuch für Soziologiegeschichte 1993
© Leske + Budrich, Opladen 1995
212 Mary S. and Peter R. Senn

evaluation literature. Another obstacle is the lack of a history of how the term
came to be defined as it iso
The term can mean many things. What follows, therefore, must be regarded
as a sampie of the literature, dealt with chronologicaIly. It is too early for an
adequate periodization. Instead, this is the story of how sociologists got the
definition of social problems they use today. A systematic treatment is
another subject.
Social science literature includes more than one way of defining a "social
problem." Educators and psychologists often use the term in an entirely diffe-
rent sense from that in sociology.2 Most commonly the term is not weIl defin-
ed and one result is a literature that is diffuse and often controversial.
Two methods of defining a social problem dominate the writings. The one
is explicit, in the sense of a formal definition and is the type with which the
paper is primarily concerned. The other is implicit because it must be inferred
from the discussion of a given problem. It is probable that implicit definitions
may have been more common than explicit definitions.
There are multiple definitional traditions reflecting politics, wide cultural
differences and values, ideologies and special interests. Perhaps most impor-
tantly, the lack of scholarly and intellectual intercourse between the followers
of the different traditions complicates the understanding of the essence of a
social problem. Too often a polemical tone and hyperbole are characteristics
of the literature.
The American understanding of social problems differs from the French
and German approaches. This paper is mostly limited to English sources.
There is a large literature in languages other than English, most notably in
German and French, on the subject of "social problems." A cursory review of
that literature does not find it in advance of that in English, primarily because
scientific definition is not sought after by most European sociologists.
Pursuing this idea of a scientific definition, the scholar must distinguish the
constituent parts of a social problem, the problem itself, its causes and its
proposed remedies. The definition of a social problem must be distinguished
from what caused the problem and what should be done about it. The medical
distinctions between causes, symptoms, diagnosis and treatment are sugges-
tive. In terms of the crude medical analogy, this paper focuses on symptoms
in the defining a social problem, not causes or remedies.
The definition of a social problem has many consequences for its "solu-
tion. "3 It is for this reason that those concerned with social problems must al-
so be concerned with how they are defined. A proper question for the intel-
lectual historian is what meanings have been and are associated with the term
"social problem. "4 One answer can be found by looking at the record.