- •Innholdsfortegnelse Constitution of society del 3, fra side 180 og ut
- •Chapter 4 (continued from part one)
- •Critical Notes: 'Structural Sociology' and Methodological In dividualism
- •References: Structure, System, Social Reproduction
- •13 Karl Marx, Capital (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1970), p. 72. An
- •References Critical Notes: `Structural Sociology' and Methodological Individualism
- •19 J. W. N. Watkins, `Historical explanation in the social sciences', in
- •5. Change, Evolution and Power
- •Critical Notes: Parsons on Evolution
- •References: Change, Evolution and Power
- •10 Julian h. Steward, Theory of Culture Change (Urbana: University
- •31 See some of the examples discussed in a. Kardiner, The Individual and His Society (New York: Columbia University Press, 1939).
- •References: Critical Notes: Parsons on Evolution
- •6. Structuration Theory, Empirical Research and Social Critique
- •306 Structuration Theory, Empirical Research and Social Critique
- •Critical Notes: Social Science, History and Geography
- •References: Structuration Theory, Empirical Research and Social Critique
- •32 A point made by Skocpol; see Theda Skocpol, States and Social
- •33 G. K. Ingham, Capitalism Divided? The City and Industry in Britain
- •48 `Classical social theory and the origins of modern sociology', in
- •References: Critical Notes: Social Science, History and Geography
- •Glossary of Terminology of Structuration Theory
- •Bibliography
References Critical Notes: `Structural Sociology' and Methodological Individualism
1 Cf. Raymond Boudon, The Uses of Structuralism (London: Heinemann, 1971). Boudon categorizes a number of divergent uses of the concept. For a rather different set of approaches, see Peter M. Blau, Approaches to the Study of Social Structure (London: Collier-Macmillan, 1975).
2 Walter L. Wallace, `Structure and action in the theories of Coleman and Parsons', in Blau, Approaches to the Study of Social Structure, p. 121.
3 Bruce H. Mayhew, `Structuralism versus individualism', Parts 1 and 2, Social Forces, vol. 59, 1980, p. 349.
4 Ibid., p. 348.
5 Peter M. Blau, Inequality and Heterogeneity (New York: Free Press, 1977); `Structural effects', American Sociological Review, vol. 25, 1960; `Parameters of social structure', in Blau, Approaches to the Study of Social Structure; `A macrosociological theory of social structure', American Journal of Sociology, vol. 83, 1977.
6 Inequality and Heterogeneity, p. ix.
7 `Parameters of social structure', p. 221.
8 Inequality and Heterogeneity, p. x.
9 `Parameters of social structure', pp. 252-3. `What poses this threat is the dominant position of powerful organizations in contemporary society, such as the Pentagon, the White House, and huge conglomerates. The trend has been toward increasing concentration of economic and manpower resources and powers derived from them in giant organizations and their top executives, which implies a growing consolidation of major resources and forms of power....'
10 Inequality and Heterogeneity, p. 246.
11 `A macrosociological theory of social structure', p. 28.
((225))
12 Peter M. Blau, `A formal theory of differentiation in organizations', American Sociology Review, vol. 35, 1970, p. 203.
13 This point is made in Stephen P. Turner, 'Blau's theory of differentiation: is it explanatory?', Sociological Quarterly, vol. 18, 1977. Some of these issues are aired again in Blau: `Comments on the prospects for a nomothetic theory of social structure', Journal ,for the Theory of Social Behaviour, vol. 13, 1983. See also an extraordinary piece by Mayhew, in the same volume on `Causality, historical particularism and other errors in sociological discourse'. Blau's contribution continues to display the shortcomings I have indicated. (1) Hermeneutic elements in the formulation of concepts of social analysis are suppressed in favour of the view that `the objective of sociology is to study the influence of the "social environment" on "people's observable tendencies"' (p. 268). (2) Reference to agents' motives, reasons and intentions is persistently equated with `psychology', relegated to a realm separate from the concerns of `sociology'. (3) A version of a discredited philosophy of natural science, in which `explanation' is regarded as necessarily to do with `nomothetic-deductive theorizing' (p. 265), is accepted unquestioningly. (4) No consideration is given to the possibility that even if the philosophy of natural science thus implied were acceptable, the character of `laws' in social science might be fundamentally different from laws of nature. (5) The whole standpoint is wrapped up in the familiar but erroneous claim that social science, as compared with natural science, is in the early phases of its development. Blau accepts that there are, `at least so far', `no deterministic laws in sociology' (p. 266). But he expresses faith that these will one day be found — we certainly cannot write off the possibility because `nomothetic theory of social structure is undoubtedly still in a most rudimentary stage' (p. 269).
14 Quoted in Wolfgang Mommsen, `Max Weber's political sociology and his philosophy of world history', International Social Science Journal, vol. 17, 1965, p. 25. Of course, it is a moot point how far Weber's substantive writings were guided by this principle.
15 Max Weber, Economy and Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), vol. 1, p. 13.
16 Steven Lukes, `Methodological individualism reconsidered', in Essays in Social Theory (London: Macmillan, 1977).
17 F. A. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949). p. 6.
18 Lukes also identifies a further connotation of methodological individualism, a doctrine of `social individualism' which '(ambiguously) asserts that society has as its end the good of individuals'. Lukes, `Methodological individualism reconsidered', pp. 181—2.
((226))