Post on 18-Dec-2015
transcript
THREE SOCIOLOGICAL
THEORIES
hypotheses that make up systems
WOUT ULTEE
UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA
NOVEMBER 11, 2012
FOR AT LEAST FOUR REASONS CONTEMPORARY STUDENTS OF
SOCIOLOGY STILL LIKE DURKHEIM’S SUICIDE FROM 1897
FIRSTLY, BECAUSE SUICIDE SEVERELY TESTS A THEORY AGAINST GOVERNMENTAL
STATISTICS
SECONDLY, BECAUSE SUICIDE TURNS A SEEMINGLY
PHILOSOPHICAL, PSYCHOPATHOLOGICAL AND
PSYCHOLOGICAL QUESTION INTO A SOCIOLOGICAL QUESTION
THIRDLY, DURKHEIM’S SUICIDE IS LIKED BECAUSE ITS THEORY
CONSISTS OF ABSTRACT HYPOTHESES AND CONCRETE
HYPOTHESES
BECAUSE OF THIS ‘MULTI-LAYERED THEORY’, DURKHEIM
SURPASSES MARX’ AND WEBER’S WORK
MARX’ LAW OF CAPITALIST ACCUMULATION (THE MORE CAPITAL IN A FREE MARKET
SOCIETY, THE LOWER THE WAGES) REMAINED A HYPOTHESIS NOT EXPLICITLY
DERIVED FROM SOME THEORY
WEBER DID NOT EVEN TRY TO FORMULATE HYPOTHESES, HE DEVELOPED A SPECIAL
TYPE OF CONCEPTS HE CALLED IDEALTYPES
EVERY HYPOTHESIS CONSISTS OF CONCEPTS, BUT MANY SOCIOLOGICAL CONCEPTS NEVER
WERE USED FOR HYPOTHESES
THE FOURTH REASON THAT DURKHEIM’S LE SUICIDE IS STILL LIKED IS THAT MULTI-LAYERED
THEORIES SEEM RARE IN SOCIOLOGY
HOWEVER, THIS REASON IS MISTAKEN
TODAY I WILL PRESENT TWO OTHER MULTI-LAYERED
THEORIES
MULTI-LAYERED THEORIES OCCUR IN ANY THEORETICAL
TRADITION OF SOCIOLOGY, AND EVEN WEBER WORKED WITH ONE
BUT WHY ARE MULTI-LAYERED THEORIES ATTRACTIVE?
FIRSTLY, BECAUSE BUILDING A MULTI-LAYERED THEORY
AMOUNTS TO SAYING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WITH A LIMITED
NUMBER OF WORDS AS POSSIBLE
SECONDLY, BECAUSE A HIGHER- LEVEL , ABSTRACT, HYPOTHESIS OF A MULTI-LAYERED THEORY
SHOWS WHY LOWER-LEVEL, CONCRETE, HYPOTHESES ARE
NOT ALWAYS TRUE
DURKHEIM’S THEORY OF SUICIDE WENT BEYOND THE THREE HYPOTHESES HE PRESENTED SUCCINTLY IN LE SUICIDE
DURKHEIM SOUGHT TO EXPLAIN AS MANY STATISTICAL
REGULARITIES AS POSSIBLE WITH AS SMALL A NUMBER OF
HYPOTHESES AS POSSIBLE
THAT IS THE ART OF THEORY FORMATION: SAYING A LOT
WITH A FEW WORDS
THE MORE STRONGLY INTEGRATED A RELIGIOUS GROUP, THE LOWER ITS SUICIDE RATE
CATHOLICS ARE A MORE INTEGRATED RELIGIOUS GROUP THAN PROTESTANTS
-----------------------------------PROTESTANTS HAVE A HIGHER SUICIDE RATE THAN CATHOLICS
EDUCATION LOWERS INTEGRATION IN RELIGIOUS GROUPS
---------------------------------
IN ITALIAN PROVINCES WITH A HIGHER PERCENT OF ILLITERATE PERSONS, THE SUICIDE RATE IS LOWER
--------------------------------------------
STANDS FOR THE DERIVATION OF THE MORE CONCRETE HYPOTHESIS FROM THE MORE ABSTRACT HYPOTHESIS AND AN AUXILIARY ASSUMPTION
IF THE AUXILIARY ASSUMPTION IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT,THE CONCRETE HYPOTHESIS CANNOT BE DERIVED
THE MORE INTEGRATED A HOUSEHOLD, THE LOWER ITS SUICIDE RATE
SINGLE PERSONS HAVE FEWER HOUSEHOLD TIES THAN MARRIED PERSONS
-------------------------------------
THE SUICIDE RATE FOR SINGLE PERSONS IS HIGHER THAN FOR MARRIED PERSONS
A HOUSEHOLD WITH CHILDREN FORMS A MORE INTEGRATED GROUP THAN A HOUSEHOLD WITHOUT CHILDREN
--------------------------------
MARRIED PERSONS WITHOUT CHILDREN HAVE A HIGHER SUICIDE RATE THAN MARRIED PERSONS WITH CHILDREN
THE MORE INTEGRATED A POLITICAL GROUP, THE LOWER ITS SUICIDE RATE
IN TIMES OF WAR POLITICAL INTEGRATION RISES
-------------------------------------
IN TIMES OF WAR THE SUICIDE RATE IS LOWER THAN IN TIMES OF PEACE
SOME WARS HAVE LESS PUBLIC SUPPORT THAN OTHERS
---------------------------------
LESS POPULAR WARS LOWER THE SUICIDE RATE LESS
THE MORE INTEGRATED A GROUP, THE HIGHER THE CHANCES THAT ITS NORMS REGARDING SUICIDE ARE FOLLOWED
ALL GROUPS HAVE NORMS FORBIDDING SUICIDE
------------------------------------- THE MORE INTEGRATED ANY GROUP, THE LOWER ITS SUICIDE RATE
ARMIES ARE EXCEPTIONAL AND PLACE A LOW VALUE ON INDIVIDUAL LIFE
-----------------------------------SUICIDE IS MORE FREQUENT IN ARMIES THAN OUTSIDE THEM
THE MORE INTEGRATED A GROUP, THE HIGHER THE CHANCES THAT EACH AND EVERY OF ITS NORMS IS FOLLOWED
-----------------------------------THE MORE INTEGRATED A GROUP, THE HIGHER THE CHANCES THAT ITS NORMS REGARDING SUICIDE ARE FOLLOWED
GROUPS HAVE NORMS FORBIDDING YOUNG PEOPLE TO COMMIT PETTY CRIMES
--------------------------------
YOUNG PEOPLE COMMIT FEWER PETTY CRIMES IF THEIR TIES WITH THEIR PARENTS AND WITH SCHOOL ARE STRONGER
THE LAST IMPLICATION IS TESTED IN TRAVIS HIRSCHI’S CAUSES OF
DELINQUENCY FROM 1968
HIRSCHI DOES NOT REFER TO DURKHEIM’S SUICIDE
HIRSCHI’S INTERMEDIARY GROUPS OF YOUNG PEOPLE ARE PAARTLY NEW COMPARED TO
DURKHEIM:
THE FAMILY, SCHOOL, AND PEERS
THE OBVIOUS STRONG TEST PERTAINS TO YOUNG PERSONS WITH STRONG TIES TO OLDER
CRIMINAL FRIENDS
LETS US LOOK MORE CLOSELY AT DURKHEIM-HIRSCHI HYPOTHESIS:
THE MORE INTEGRATED A PERSON IS IN ANY OF A SOCIETY’S INTERMEDIARY GROUPS,
THE MORE LIKELY THIS PERSON IS TO LIVE OF TO ANY OF THE NORMS OF THESE
GROUPS
THIS HYPOTHESIS IS NOT SIMPLY GENERAL,
IT IS HIGHLY INFORMATIVE BECAUSE IT APPLIES TO ANY INTERMEDIARY GROUP
AND TO ANY OF THE NORMS OF THESE GROUPS
IN ADDITION, WITH THIS HYPOTHESIS ONE IS ABLE TO
SUGGEST WHY THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO, SAY, THE
STATISTICAL REGULARITY THAT PROTESTANTS HAVE A HIGHER
SUICIDE RATE THAN CATHOLICS
THE SUICIDE RATE FOR PROTESTANT ENGLAND WAS UNEXPECTEDLY LOW,
BUT IN ENGLAND PROTESTANTS WERE A STRONGLY INTEGRATED GROUP BECAUSE THE ANGLICAN
CHURCH WAS THE STATE CHURCH (UNLIKE GERMANY)
DURKHEIM ALSO SHOWED THAT MORE INTEGRATION IN THE ARMY MAKES FOR A
HIGHER SUICIDE RATE
THE SUICIDE RATE FOR OFFICERS WAS HIGHER THAN FOR ENLISTED MEN
THIS IS AN EXCEPTION TO THE LOWER-LEVEL HYPOTHESIS THAT MORE INTEGRATION
MAKES FOR LESS SUICIDE
HOWEVER, THE FINDING MAY BE EXPLAINED BY THE HYPOTHESIS THAT MORE
INTEGRATION MAKES FOR LESS NORMATIVE DEVIANCE
SO, AGAIN, THE DIFFICULTY IS SOLVED BY FIDDLING WITH THE AUXILIARY
ASSUMPTIONS
IN POWER AND PRIVILEGE FROM 1966 LENSKI MADE
EMPIRICAL REGULARITIES BY COMPARING REPORTS OF
THE FIELDWORK UNDERTAKEN BY
ENTHNOGRAPHERS AND ANTHROPOLOGISTS IN PRE-
INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES
LENSKI DISTINGUISHED SOCIETIES INTO TYPES AFTER THE LEVEL OF THEIR SUBSISTENCE
TECHNOLOGY
HUNTING AND GATHERING (BOW AND ARROW)
SIMPLE HORTICULTURE (DIGGING STICK OR HOE)
ADVANCED HORTICULTURE (METAL TOOLS)
SIMPLE AGRICULTURE (PLOW)
ADVANCED HORTICULTURE (IRON TOOLS)
INDUSTRY (MACHINES NEXT TO MANPOWER)
EACH (BRACKETED ) INVENTION MADE FOR MORE FOOD FROM LESS TERRITORY
LENSKI FOUND THAT DIFFERENCES IN THE STANDARD OF LIVING WERE SMALLER IN
HUNTING AND GATHERING SOCIETIES THAN IN SIMPLE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES
DIFFERENCES IN ADVANTAGES WERE SMALLER IN SIMPLE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES THAN IN
ADVANCED HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES
DIFFERENCES IN ADVANTAGES WERE SMALLER IN ADVANCED HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES
THAN IN SIMPLE AGRARIAN SOCIEITES
DIFFERENCES IN ADVANTAGES WERE SMALLER IN SIMPLE AGRARIAN SOCIETIES THAN IN
ADVANCED AGRARIAN SOCIETIES
THE TECHNOLOGY HYPOTHESIS:
THE MORE DEVELOPED A SOCIETY’S SUBSISTENCE TECHNOLOGY, THE LARGER
THE DIFFERENCES IN PRIVILEGES BETWEEN ITS INHABITANTS
HOWEVER, THE TECHNOLOGY HYPOTHESIS WAS CONTRADICTED BY LENSKI’S FINDING
FOR INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES:
IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES INCOME INEQUALITIES ARE SMALLER THAN IN
ADVANCED AGRARIAN SOCIETIES
LENSKI THEN POSITED THAT SOCIETIES NOT ONLY HAVE A TECHNOLOGY, BUT
ALSO AN IDEOLOGY
WHEREAS IN ADVANCED AGRARIAN SOCIETIES THE RULING IDEOLOGY WAS
THAT THE STATE WAS PRIVATE PROPERTY OF THE RULER
IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES GOVERNMENT WAS OF THE PEOPLE,
FOR THE PEOPLE AND BY THE PEOPLE
THE MORE EGALITARIAN THE IDEOLOGY OF INDUSTRIAL
SOCIETIES,
THE SMALLER THEIR INCOME INEQUALITIES
THREE TYPES OF IDEOLOGIES, RANKED AFTER DEGREE OF
EGALITARIANISM:
LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES
SOCIAL-DEMOCRATIC IDEOLOGIES
COMMUNIST IDEOLOGIES
INCOME INEQUALITIES ARE LARGER IN LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC
INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES THAN IN SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC INDUSTRIAL
SOCIETIES
BUT IN COMMUNIST INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES INCOME INEQUALITIES WARE BARELY SMALLER THAN IN SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC INDUSTRIAL
SOCIETIES
WHAT WENT WRONG WITH THE IDEOLOGY HYPOTHESIS – AND THE
TECHNOLOGY HYPOTHESIS?
LENSKI’S HIGHER-LEVEL HYPOTHESIS INVOKES THE
BALANCE OF POWER OR THE WEIGHT OF RESOURCES BETWEEN THE INHABITANTS OF SOCIETIES
LENSKI’S HIGHER LEVEL HYPOTHESIS:
A PERSON WITH MORE POWER HAS MORE PRIVILEGES
THE MORE ASYMMETRIC THE BALANCE OF POWERS IN A SOCIETY
ARE, THE LARGER ARE THE INEQUALITIES IN ADVANTAGES IN
THIS SOCIETY
IN HUNTING AND GATHERING SOCIETIES THERE ARE NO PERMANENT
DIFFERENCES IN STRENGTH AND SKILLS BETWEEN THE MALE HUNTERS
THE HUNTING GROUNDS ARE COMMUNAL PROPERTY
IN SIMPLE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES GARDENS ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND A STRONGER MAN WITH MORE WIVES
OWNS A LARGER GARDEN
METAL TOOLS INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY OF THE LAND BUT ALSO
ARE USED AS EFECTIVE WEAPONS BY STRONG MEN
THE PLOW ALLOWS FOR CULTIVATING MORE LAND THAN THE HOE OR DIGGING STICK
IN SIMPLE AGRARIAN SOCIETIES DIFFERENCES IN LAND OWNERSHIP MAKE FOR NEW
INEQUALTIES IN ADVANTAGES
IN ADVANCED AGRARIAN SOCIETIES OWENERSHIP OF IRON TOOLS, PARTICULARLY
WEAPONS, MAKES FOR ADDITIONAL INEQUALITIES IN ADVANTAGES
THE PERSONS WITH THE MOST WEAPONS IMPOSE TAXES AND FORM A SOCIETY’S STATE
WEAPONS BRING LAND
EACH TECHNOLOGICAL INVENTION IS A NEW MEANS OF
POWER OR A RESOURCE
AND NEW AND OLD RESOURCES TEND TO ACCUMULATE IN THE
SAME HANDS
WITH THE NEW RESOURCES BEING MORE POWERFUL THAN
THE OLD ONES
HOW ABOUT THE INVENTION OF MACHINES?
OWNERSHIP OF MACHINES IS A NEW AND POWERFUL RESOURCE IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES
BUT OWNERS OF MACHINES ARE NOT ALWAYS ABLE TO INVENT MACHINES ON THEIR OWN, TO
MAKE THEM AND TO RUN THEM
MAKING MACHINES REQUIRES COMPLEX SKILLS
OPERATING MACHINES REQUIRES COMPLEX SKILLS
INDUSTRY CREATES NEW RESOURCES THAT DO NOT CUMULATE WITH THE PRIME NEW RESOURCE OWNERSHIP OF MACHINES
SO, THE AUXILIARY ASSUMPTION THAT WITH EACH HIGHER LEVEL OF
SUBSISTENCE TECHNOLOGY, A SOCIETY’S BALANCE OF POWER BECOMES MORE
ASYMMETRIC
GOES WRONG FOR INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES
HERE AGAIN A DIFFICULTY IS SOLVED BY FIDDLING WITH
THE AUXILIARY ASSUMPTIONS
IN A DEMOCRACY, IN CONTRAST TO AN ABSOLUTE RULER OR AN OLIGARCHY,
EVERYBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO VOTE
THIS POLITICAL RESOURCE IS EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED AND MAKES FOR LOWER
INCOME INEQUALITIES
POLITICAL OUTCOMES DEPEND UPON THE PARTY VOTED FOR
IF THE NEW VOTERS VOTE FOR THE PARTY OF THE OLD RULERS, LITTLE WILL
CHANGE
IF THE NEW VOTERS VOTE FOR EGALITARIAN PARTIES, INCOME
INEQUALITIES WILL BECOME SMALLER
COMMUNISM DID NOT CHANGE INCOME INEQUALITIES MORE THAN SOCIAL
DEMOCRACY
BECAUSE THE STATE OWNED ALL THE MEANS OF DESTRUCTION (COERCION), ALL THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION AND ALL THE
MEANS MEANS OF COMMUNICATION,
MAKING FOR STRONGLY PRIVILEGED BUREAUCRATS
BUT WHY DID EGALITARIAN IDEOLOGIES ARISE?
IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES MAKING AND WORKING MACHINES REQUIRES
MORE KNOWLEDGE THAN THE OWNERS OF MACHINES CAN POSSESS
THESE PERSONS WITH PRODUCTIVE SKILLS HAVE NOT ONLY A
BARGAINING POWER FOR WAGES, BUT ALSO FOR A SAY IN POLITICS
KNOWLEDGE CANNOT EASILY BE SUBSTITUTED
SO, LENSKI’S POWER HYPOTHESIS
EXPLAINS THE KNOWN EXCEPTIONS FOR HIS TECHNOLOGY HYPOTHESIS
AND HIS IDEOLOGY HYPOTHESIS
IN MY OPINION, THE STRONGER TESTS OF LENSKI’S HYPOTHESES
PERTAIN NOT TO INCOME INEQUALITY
BUT TO SOCIAL MOBILITY
THE STRUCTURE OF LENSKI’S THEORY
POWER HYPOTHESIS
TECHOLOGY HYPOTHESIS IDEOLOGY HYPOTHESIS
ETHNOGRAPHIC FINDINGS STATE INCOME FIGURES
THE THIRD MULTI-LAYERED THEORY MAY BE FOUND IN
NORBERT ELIAS’
UBER DEN PROZESS DER CIVILIZATION (ON THE CIVILZING
PROCESS)
FROM 1939
FOR THIS THEORY AND
FOR FIDDLING WITH ITS AUXILIARY ASSUMPTIONS TO DEAL WITH CONTRADICTORY FINDINGS
SEE THE 2001 ARTICLE OF FLAP & ULTEE
THE STRONGER A SOCIETY’S STATE, THE STRICTER THE RULES OF CIVILIZED BEHAVIOR
IN FRANCE, FROM 1300 UNTIL 1850 THE MONOPOLY OF THE STATE ON THE MEANS OF VIOLENCE BECAME STRONGER AND STRONGER-----------------------------------------------------------IN FRANCE, FROM 1300 UNTIL 1850 A TREND TOWARDS STRICTER STANDARDS OF CIVILIZED BEHAVIOR
BUT WHY WOULD A STRONGER STATE MAKE FOR MORE CIVILIZED BEHAVIOR?
THIS QUESTION LEADS TO A HIGHER-LEVEL HYPOTHESIS IN ELIAS’ THEORY:
THE MORE DEPENDED THE MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY ARE UPON ITS OTHER
MEMBERS,
WHETHER POLITICALLY, ECONOMICALLY OR ANY OTHER FORM
OF DEPENDENCY,
THE STRICTER THEIR STANDARDS FOR CIVILIZED BEHAVIOR WILL BE