Modern sociological theories

This ppt focuses on contemporary sociological theories

1. Contemporary Sociological Theories Summary, Commentary and Comparison of Contemporary Sociological Theories with Special Emphasis to Talcott Parsons, Robert K.Merton , Ralf Dahrendorf and C.Wright Mills By:Efa Tadesse     July1 , 2019

2. Contents 1. Structure of social action by Parsons 2. Social structure and social theory by Robert 3. The class and class conflict in industrial society by Dahrendorf 4. Power elite by Mills 5. Comparisons on convergences and divergences , concepts, methodology and theoretical orientation.

3. Talcott Parsons: Structure of social action Parsons (1966 ): monograph Theories vs. facts , empirical research; sterile theory ; scientific status. observation and theory; interdependence. theories and verification. But , Parsons does not show us his proof . rationalist and utilitarian ends, means and conditions of rational action. relates to utilitarian branch of positivistic tradition.

4. Parsons... Parsons concerns Empiricism and Analytical Theory in which he discussed scientific status of social theory and philosophical problems associated with theoretical development as well as epistemological position in relation to empiricism. Parsons asserts that epistemological position of analytical realism is realistic that leads to empirical realism. It seems sound but remains at philosophical stage. Parson proposed that the Action Frame of Reference is crucial to understand structure of social action that entails system of action which has sub-system and unit act. Action has a phenomenological /Ontological status.

5. Parsons... Parsons searched the place of Sociology in his theoretical work. He says sociologists deal with economics, politics, psychology just like as biologists works with physics and chemistry. Yet, Parsons did not correctly identify identity of sociology. Is it action science or system science or special science is not clear. Empirical science / natural science or positivistic and Idealistic / voluntaristic action theory debate is going on. synthetic science. But Parsons put sociology at crossroads which can complicate scientificness of sociology.

6. Parsons... Commentary on Talcott Parsons’ work Claim for empiricist position but no proof System thinking,, speculation, philosophical and observation not emphasized Deductivist position and action model Monograph, empiricism and validity issues Positivist versus idealist Preconception lead observation versus empirical observation led theory is still questionable Analytical realism and empirical realism need to be clarified Exaggerated integration/consensus Critical of intuition and aspiration versus logic and not empirical research. Even though Parsons indicated one side of such position is danger he did not underline which approach should be followed.

7. Robert K. Merton Social Theory and Social Structure Science and its founder Science’s ambition and its practice True theory and its applicability/substantive Merton believes that there is continuity and discontinuities in sociological theory.

8. Merton... Physical science versus humanistic sociology Cross-pressures, oscillation b/n naturalist and passionate sociologist Functions of Classical Theory. Educative function of classical theory for contemporary knowledge This implies that Merton’s intellectual position is shaped by critical thinking of his predecessor.

9. Merton... Merton dedicated to Sociological Theories of the Middle Range. lie between the minor and the all inclusive /unified theory principally used in sociology to guide empirical inquiry. It is intermediate to remote from and close to particular case Merton dealt with Total Systems of Sociological Theory. all-embracing /unified theory. philosophical systems have challenges and small promise. premature and apocalyptic belief /resembling biblical. Merton argued that a utilitarian pressure for total systems of sociology is not plausible.

10. Merton... Even though Merton refutes grand theory some of his work soundly latent grand theory such as social theory and social structure by itself testifies system theory. Primary concern for middle range theory can advance sociology From special theories to general theories In this regard, Merton did not show us how special theory develop into grand theory and if his ultimate goal is grand theory so why he criticize classical theorists. working philosophy. Polarization lead to status battle more than a search for truth. stereotyped as mere fact finders and merely descriptive sociographers whereas grand theorists are stereotyped as speculative, unconcerned empirical evidence and committed to doctrines that cannot be tested.

11. Merton... Assent to the policy of middle range theory emerged. help them in empirical research. juxtapose observation, theorization and verification intermediary of micro and macro sociological theory. addressing urgent relevant problems and grasps existing knowledge and strives for better knowledge. Manifest and Latent Functions are concepts of Merton which he defined as manifest function refers to intended or recognized. whereas latent function referring to unintended and unrecognized consequences. findings concerning latent functions represent a greater increment in knowledge than findings concerning manifest functions. the research which uncovers latent functions very often produces ‘’paradoxical ‘’results. The introduction of the concept of latent function in social research leads to conclusions which show that ‘’ social life is not as simple as it first seems.

12. Merton... Commentary on Robert K. Merton Merton’s theories are conceptual realism not empirical realism. Total system of sociology and utilitarian point of view How we avoid misinterpretation occur during identification of manifest and latent from emic and etic point of view. The theorization process of Merton and his claim for scientific status of sociology does not tell us what type of discipline he wants to project. Sociology and social psychology boundary. Codification process, quantitative research and descriptive Schematization of issues.

13. Ralf Dahrendorf Class and class conflict in industrial society The Marxian Doctrine in the light of Historical Changes and Sociological Insights Dahrendorf (1959) states society has two features :-consensus and coercion Karl Marx’s Model of the class society examined by Dahrendorf (1959) and he identified two false approaches in Marx’s class model( Source money and amount of money as source of class identity). Deviated from economic structure and preferred system analysis. Synthesized integrative and coercive forces. F orce behind class formation is class interest. Classes are political groups united by a common interest. Every class struggle is a political struggle. The history of all societies up to the present is the history of class struggles which is similar with Marx’s theory.

14. Dahrendorf... The concept of class was for Marx not ‘static but’dynamic’not’descriptive but analytical . He overlooks integrative forces but emphasizes on conflicting forces. But , Dahrendorf attempts to balance both. Marx’s Image of the capitalist class society is different from Dahrendorf that Marx believes capitalist society constitutes antagonistic classes or hostile camps: bourgeoisie and proletariat whereas Dahrendorf conceives society dualistic entity .

15. Dahrendorf... Unforeseen changes by Marx; class society VS melting pot . Industrial society is comprehensive but capitalist is particular. It is clear that not every industrial society is capitalist society . Some Recent Theories of Class Conflict in Modern Societies argued Marxian relations of production fade and political bureaucratic absorbs the economy itself (Dahrendorf, 1959 ). Indeed, our unsolved problem is the explanation of systematic social conflicts in industrial societies (Dahrendorf, 1959). Marx was criticized from Sociological point of view concerning relevance and empiricism of his works. Of course, as Einstein criticized and no proves all his theory so Marx but people refute’’ class theory’’ yet not supersedes it (Dahrendorf, 1959).

16. Dahrendorf... Dahrendorf argued property does not imply authority because property is particular but authority is general. He believes struggle is for authority cause conflict not property because of level of authority . As of Dahrendorf Authority structure matters. Irrespective of both social thinkers the issue of societal formation, societal structure, societal movement and societal vision can outweigh role of class and authority structure. For Dahrendorf class is not historical concept but class signifies conflict group generated from differential distribution of authority in imperatively coordinated association. He preferred conflict group instead of class assuming class is general concept lacks substantive. But the point is whether class is theoretical imposition or social reality.

17. Dahrendorf... Integration theory of society of Parsons (1951) believes stability, functionalism, equilibrium, consensus and integration Coercion theory of society of Dahrendorf (1959) argues changes, dissensus, conflict ,disintegration, and coercion. Dahrendorf developed Latent and Manifest Interests concepts. manifest interests are the psychological interests/realities whereas Latent interests are independent of conscious orientation Manifest interest is similar with Marx’s class consciousness but class consciousness in manifest interest is real category. Quasi group is latent interests. interest groups recruited from larger quasi-groups. Not all interest groups are conflict groups . E.g. Political Party and Chess club In terms of domination and subjection. How Quasi-groups become interest groups is similar with how class in itself becomes class for itself (Dahrendorf, 1959).

18. Dahrendorf... M odel of conflict group’s formation implies two contradictory orientation interests i.e. dominating and subjection. Many Sociologists emphasize on how dominating groups maintain and defend their position, how form and disintegrate but they neglected rest of people considering as residuary or not effective force. Masses and suppressed c lasses were appeared in Marx work. Suppressed classes is proletariat of his time (Dahrendorf, 1959). Social conflicts have functions. Conflict removes dissociating element and reestablish unity. Conflict resolves tension between antagonists and stabilizes functions and integrates components of the relationship. Not all conflicts are positively functional. Continuing group conflict is an important way of giving direction to social change. In fact, conflict is variable in terms of degree of intensity and violence which is also true for class conflict.

19. Dahrendorf... Inclusive society is the picture of a multitude of competing conflicts and conflict groups which question two class models. Another important issue in class theory is mobility versus immobility which associates with the classless society. For Dahrendorf (1959) the concept classless society means either of two things: no structures of authority and it is powerless But in this sense the categories of classless society is sociologically meaningless. Moreover , the regulation of Class Conflict was missed in Marx’s class theory.

20. Dahrendorf... Capitalist society is known by superimposition in which one group at same time may be dominating group via family, in person and agent. But , subjected groups are excluded from political authority . So history cannot be explained solely in terms of class. There are interest groups in contemporary society in different forms e.g. trade unions, employers’ association, progressive and conservative political parties. Of course, if post capitalist society has quasi-groups and interest groups, it has classes also. The issue is not absence or presence of class is a given society but its nature and patterns.

21. Dahrendorf... Dahrendorf ( 1959) conceived post capitalist society in terms of the Authority Structure of the Industrial Enterprise . He believes there is authority relation in industrial enterprise in terms of super and subordination. The super and subordination produce industrial conflict that can be regulated by Industrial Democracy. But all segments are not part of industrial society since industry is a single sector this cannot represent aggregate society. In post-capitalist society the industrial enterprise is no longer the model after which all other relations are fashioned. Moreover, Dahrendorf ( 1959) less emphasizes Class in post capitalist society rather he was critical of political conflict and how people See Society. Dahrendorf states seeing society as cooperative whole is not a half truth but untruth. The dichotomous image of society is not sociological constructions rather it is truth. Dahrendorf’s theory is intermediary between conflict theorists and functionalists.

22. Dahrendorf... Dahrendorf examined bureaucratic roles and political Authority in relation to quasi-groups and interest groups. The manifest interest control bureaucracy. Civil servant is manifest interest. However , we noticed that civil servants are classes in themselves . In abstract, the ruling political class of post-capitalist society consists of the administrative staff of the state, the governmental elites at its head and those interested parties which are represented by the governmental elite. Veto group: defense group and interest group that can influence governmental authority. Veto group are rather than exponent, they are but a switchboard of political authority. If favored party is in power then the ruling class of the society in question consists of the four elements bureaucracy, governmental elites, majority party and its favored veto groups. The issue of veto group is new insight but whether activist group or latent interest group should be well defined.

23. Dahrendorf... Dahrendorf (1959) distinguished totalitarian societies and free societies. A free society encourages diversity and conflict is the life breath of freedom. A totalitarian society insists on unity to the extent of uniformity and conflict is a threat to its coherence and survival. Superimposed conflicts so as to form a single and embracing antagonism. Under this condition, the intensity of political conflict reaches its maximum. However , in free society no political conflict, separate organizations, no misuse of authority, competition and leadership is not all embracing . Totalitarian monism is founded on the idea that conflict can and should be eliminated that a homogenous and uniform social and political order is the desirable state of affairs . This idea is no less dangerous for the fact that it is mistaken in its sociological premises.

24. Dahrendorf... Commentary on Ralf Dahrendorf Exclude other aspect of society except political authority Abstract class and substantiate conflict group Industrial enterprise is micro, meso or macro? Conception of history Political issues outweighs other issues Political economy is not discussed Dahrendorf neglect social prestige or status matters. Economic group and economic struggle since politics is different. Dahrendorf mainly focuses on industrial society but conflict is not only within industrial society (materialism is one sided). Class/conflict group/manifest interest-blurred Why coercion theory outweighs integration theory is not explained adequately.

25. Charles Wright Mills The Power Elite: Metropolitan Mills’s (1956) work is on: What society is and what should be Power centralized by few men in USA Power elite influence and decide life of masses Few men beyond the structure Charles Wright Mills (1956) identified key positions power elites hold in America Society. Power elites rule the big corporations. They run the machinery of the state and claim its prerogatives. They direct military establishment. Power elites occupy the strategic command posts of the social structure:power,wealth and the celebrity which they enjoy. Social stratification of American society particularly in Cities and towns

26. Charles Wright Mills Metropolitan is the center of power elites where they control and influence the economic sector. Mills (1956) says that the flourishing power elites of upper class remove sense of society in USA. Richest as distinct caste Changes after civil war Division by family background But, the pedigreed society challenged by absence of feudal , presence of mobility and prevailing immigration . Americanization via immigration leads to organized movement between those who believe in ‘’ glorious melting pot’’ and those who attempt to maintain ‘racial descent or pedigreed /registered society. This movement strengthened American democratic institution so as to meet societal needs. Mills attempted to understand American society through power elite or power structure but America society is the most assimilated and ever diversified society.

27. Charles Wright Mills Commentary on Mills Power elites model disproved by melting pot Is USA society dichotomous or continuum Assimilation and stratification in USA Power elites and veto group’s difference Pedigreed society (descent) and caste system difference Wealth and racial differences Relevance of Mills’ model questioned

28. Comparison of contemporary Sociological Theorists’ works with Particular Emphasis on Parsons, Dahrendorf, Merton and Mills Parson and Dahrendorf: integration vs coercion , grand vs middle range , Both evolutionary not revolutionary. Parsons and Merton : integration ,functions vs dysfunction , nonfunctional and net balance, grand vs middle range theories. Parsons and Mills : stable vs conflicting , social action vs power structure Dahrendorf and Merton: industrial conflict group vs reference groups, institutions and associations including conflicting groups, conflict group within structure vs both integrated and conflicting groups. Dahrendorf and Mills : both coercion theory and studies stratification within society.; authority structure vs power structure in military, economic and political. Merton and Mills: integration vs coercion theorist, middle range theories vs general. Both believe in social change via progressive or evolutionary course of development.

29. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION!