Family Questions: Final Exam & Reminders

Below are the family questions I accepted for the final exam. They will be on the final, so copy them down. Each participating family member listed will receive 7 activity points for one question, and a bonus point for each additional question I accept.

BLACK FAMILY: (Jessie, MC) 7 points +2 bonus points

QUESTION: What did Rosa Luxemburg believe was needed to relieve some of the economic pressures due to overproduction in capitalist society? (1)
ANSWER: militarism. With imperialism and militarism comes war, which acts as a single phenomenon of capitalist expansion and profit making.

QUESTION: Define Weber's concept of "ideal type" and give one example. (2)
ANSWER: Ideal types are abstractions that emphasize the central elements of a phenomenon and have no moral or ethical implications. Eg. bureaucracy

QUESTION: What meaning of "corporate" does Ahrens use throughout his lectures, "Order and Disorder in Society?" (1)
ANSWER: The original Latin meaning: to make into a body; to unite or combine.


BLUE FAMILY: (Patrick, Scott, Shane, Jessica) 7 points (no bonus points)

QUESTION: In the context of Weber's contributions to methodology, what is "verstehen" sociology? (1)
ANSWER: empathetic understanding or trying to understand the subjective motivations behind social action.


YELLOW FAMILY: (Tye, McKenzie, Jennie, Brent, Justin) 7 points (no bonus points)

QUESTION: Name George Herbert Mead's three states of personality development. (3)
ANSWER: Play, Game, and Generalized Other Stages

_______________________________

I have just gotten into your Ahrens' essays, so I don't think I'll be able to turn them back tomorrow. I'll put them on my door on Friday. To start off our last class we need to do that Assessment Survey again (which should just take a few minutes). We'll wrap up Ahrens, then review for the final exam which is scheduled for MONDAY, (5/12) 2-5PM.

I was not very happy with my stumbling lecture yesterday. Let me just stress one point about how Ahrens tends to look at things, and that is that he focuses on the way human beings have physically modified their world (as do the human ecologists) and draws conclusions from that about our thought life (rather than the other way around). Hope that helps a bit.

Comments on "Overlooked Concepts or Ideas II" & Reminders

I read through summaries and questions the families submitted regarding our last family exercise and have decided not to accept any of the questions. Everyone who participated will get the 5 activity points however, but no bonus points of course. Frankly, after reading over these sections in the text again and your comments, I was not convinced these concepts or ideas were worth resurrecting, however central they may be regarded by the authors. I would say that I was sympathetic to the Black family's selection of Merton's theory of deviance (especially since I do talk about that in my criminology class), but the text does a real hatchet job on it (which I did not expect you to know) and the family presentation had some problems. I honestly tried to re-work some of the questions you submitted, but in the end I did not think it was worth the effort. Nonetheless, I trust you got something out of this exercise, even if it will not be covered on the final exam.

________________________

REMINDERS: (1) papers are due on Tuesday 4/29.
(2)check the April 25 blog post for a description of our last short essay assignment as well as a description of our last family activity involving making up questions for the final exam.

See you Tuesday.

Essay III & Final Family Activity

As promised yesterday, you'll see the description of our last essay assignment below. I do not intend to hand out a hard copy of it in class, so just refer to this blog post. The same goes for the final family activity described below, which is basically a replay of making up questions for the midterm, only now it is for the final exam.

_________________________

Essay III

A. In the last section of the excerpt from Prof. Ahrens' lectures (3 copies of which are on reserve in the library), "Work and the Development of Corporate or Ordered Life: Part III Outer Organization and Structures of Modern Society (pp. 189-208), Ahrens presents a distinctive view of modern society and its potential to enhance human life. In this context, I want you to write an essay discussing what Ahrens sees as the potential of modern society for good. But since he also recognizes problems with modern society, I want you to identify ONE such problem. Finally, and briefly, based on Ahrens' view, what would you say the future of society holds; that is, do you see the good outweighing the bad or vice versa?

B. The essay should be roughly 3 pages (single-spaced handwritten or double-spaced typewritten). Be sure to give the page #(s) of any quotations from Ahrens' lectures which you cite in your essay. The essay is worth 25 points and is due on TUESDAY, MAY 6TH.

__________________________

FINAL FAMILY ACTIVITY: This final family activity will involve making up questions from the latter half of the course for the final exam. The second half begins with class lectures on Chapter 6: Lenin & Luxemburg. Remember that you should make up SHORT-ANSWER questions and they should come from what we covered in class. I want each family to make up THREE (and only three) questions to submit to me, along with the answers of course. Each participating family member will earn 7 points for this exercise (7 points because we need to have a total of 25 such activity points for the semester). I will try to accept at least one question from each family; for each additional question I accept, that family will earn one bonus point. I will give you some class time next week to discuss this with your family members. The deadline for submitting these questions will be TUESDAY, MAY 6TH.

_____________________

Regarding the overlooked concepts and ideas, I will post brief summaries of the families' summaries that were submitted yesterday, along with your proposed question (if I can revise a couple of them). Look for this on the blog on MONDAY.

More Lecture Notes

Since I have some time this morning, I thought I'd go ahead and wrap up my commentary on functionalism by posting my lecture notes on Robert Merton, Parsons' greatest student and colleague who just passed away in 2003. Again, copy these notes and insert them in your notebook. If you have any questions about any of these blog-posted lecture notes, don't hesitate to ask, preferably at the beginning of class. So, on Tuesday (4/22) we'll jump ahead to Chapter 16, and I will also give the families some time in class to consider the overlooked concept or idea you want to present on Thursday.

Robert K. Merton (1910-2003)

A. Of all of Parsons' students/colleagues/defenders, I believe it can be fairly said that Robert Merton left the biggest mark on contemporary American sociology. And he did so in many areas (deviance, methods, etc.), as well as by modifying some aspects of functionalism. It is this latter point that I want to focus on in particular.

B. Merton's contributions to functionalism are discussed under the heading, "Specifying Functionalism" (p. 361). There are three such conceptual specifications that are covered, which I would say have broad application.

1. First, the distinction between MANIFEST and LATENT function. MANIFEST FUNCTION being "the observed or intended outcome." LATENT FUNCTION being "the unintended or unrecognized result."

(a) The authors then proceed to give examples of this from Durkheim and Veblen. Merton apparently referred to Veblen's Theory of the Leisure Class and suggested that: "accumulation of material possessions had the manifest function of making life more comfortable and the latent function of providing status and prestige." (I am not so sure I agree -- I believe Veblen would have insisted that status and prestige are part of the manifest function of the accumulation of wealth.)

(b) I like the example of Piven and Cloward in their book, Regulating the Poor, where they distinguish bewteen the manifest function of welfare (reducing or eliminating poverty) and the latent function being regulating the poor (give the poor just enough so they will not rebel). This distinction suggests the need to look beneath the appearance of things.

2. Second, the concept of DYSFUNCTION (or negatively functional). Note that in describing this, the authors also note how it responds to an issue Inkeles raised. See middle two paragraphs, p. 362. (the term, dysfunction, should be in bold print.)

C. The above distinctions (manifest, latent, dysfunction) have implications for Parsons' focus on system equilibrium. See top p. 364.

D. Finally, I believe we need to acknowledge a contribution of Merton's that I know I've often made use of (although I wonder if it was really original with him) -- the concept of a SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY.

1. The authors note how "self-fulfilling prophecy" is connected with another well-known observation of W.I. Thomas -- "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences." See bank example, p. 365. Also, Dr. King -- Belief in racial inferiority justified slavery and later segregation, and that slavery and segregation kept Blacks inferior, which served to rationalize the perpetuation of that unequal system and convince many Blacks to accept their status.

E. The bottom line for Merton as regards his ammendments to functionalism is that he challenged the accusation that functionalism is inherently conservative.

Chapters in text to be covered & Lecture Notes

As I put on the blackboard on Tuesday, here is the list of chapters in the text that I plan to cover over the rest of the semester:
Chapter 14
Introduction to Section VIII
Chapter 16
Introduction to Section IX
Chapter 19
Chapter 24
Ahrens notes (3 copies of which are on reserve in the library)

I thought I would also post some lecture notes to catch up a bit, and also to give the families an indication of what I plan to cover (and not cover), which may help a bit in terms of making a decision about which overlooked concept or idea you want to present.

Section VII: Twentieth-Century Functionalism and Beyond

A. This introduction is surprisingly short and weak considering the fact that functionalism is one of the dominant sociological theories of the 20th century. It's a theory whose principal concern is ORDER in society, exploring the functions of various elements of society -- how the various elements or parts are integrated in the larger whole of society.

Chapter 14: Twentieth-Century Functionalism: Parsons and Merton

(As I have already noted in class, I don't believe the authors do a very good job presenting Parsons' overall view of society or the more important criticisms of this theory. So I am going to rely more on the short piece by Alex Inkeles which I handed out, as well as draw on the text occasionally.)

Talcott Parsons (1902-1979)

A. Despite the difficulty of his writing style (discussed p. 348), and the wide criticism of his theories, Parsons was one of the most important and influential sociological theorists America has produced.

1. Although it took him a while to break into the Sociology Dept. at Harvard (9 years as an untenured instructor), he eventually became chairman of that department which was re-named the Dept. of Social Relations under his leadership. As chairman, he helped train some of the most prominent American sociologists of the 20th century such as Robert Merton. Parsons even made the cover of Time magazine on the occasion of his death in 1979, a feat not too many social scientists have accomplished.

B. In his earliest major work -- The Structure of Social Action (briefly mentioned and discussed on p. 349), Parsons accomplished at least three major things:

1. First, he introduced an American audience to the work of some of the great European sociologists whose work had been largely neglected to this point (1937) -- namely, Durkheim, Weber, and Pareto. His commentary on Durkheim alone was well over 100 pages, and very insightful and comprehensive. He felt all three thinkers were converging on a comprehensive theory of social action, which he went on to present in the rest of the book. (Also, he translated some of Weber's work)

2. Second, Parsons was one of the first sociologists in America to take seriously the notion that society is a system, which is to say, he embraced SOCIAL REALISM.

3. Third, in his theory of social action he tried to integrate aspects of PSYCHOLOGY (Freud), ANTHROPOLOGY, and SOCIOLOGY. As the authors observe (mid p. 349): "Social action, wrote Parsons, is (1) voluntaristic, or a matter of making choices; (2) subjective, or based on internal orientations and responses; and (3) at least partially grounded or limited by the norms and values of one's culture." (Note: this account does not directly correspond with those three disciplines.)

C. But beyond this early emphasis on social action, after WWII he came to focus more on the bigger picture of social order (Martindale -- move from Social Behaviorism to Macrofunctionalism, p. 349). It is in a book entitled, The Social System, that he most clearly (or turgidly) articulates the so-called "structural-functional framework," which I believe is better captured in the excerpt from Inkeles than in our text.

1. Inkeles observes that the so-called "organismic analogy" -- looking at society, like a biological organism, in terms of structures and functions -- has a long history. Certainly was evident in our discussion of many 19th century sociological theorists.

2. The structural-functional view focuses on society as a whole or a system, and on the interrelation of INSTITUTIONS moreso than individuals or groups.

3. It contends that what accounts for the persistence and continuity of society, as new generations come and go, is that "societies find means (structures) (which) fulfill needs (functions)...of organized social life." (p. 35)

4. Inkeles goes on to observe that the structural-functional view is more concerned with SOCIAL STATICS, or explaining the existing social order (not how it came to be or changes) -- how various institutions function to keep society in operation. (This supports the view of many commentators that Parsons is a "status quo conservative," ideologically speaking. p. 354 bottom)

(a) For example, as Inkeles brings out: the family is an institution set up to "...ensure fulfillment of the functions of sexual reproduction, of early care of the dependent infant, and of his training in the ways of society in which we will live." (this conservative view of the family comes through in the authors' discussion of gender, p. 356)

(b) Structural-functionalists also deal with the question of how these institutions are integrated or co-ordinated to preserve the unity of society, the social organism.

D. Inkeles argues that the most serious complaint against this perspective (which I did not notice in the text) is that structural-functionalists often fail to specify for whom or what something is "functional." "What is functional for society may not be functional for the individual." (I am not sure I agree, but...) Inkeles goes on to suggest that the functionalists tend to underemphasize the individual needs relative to the group or society.

E. Inkeles also gets at what I believe is a more serious charge -- that it tends to provide a rationalization for the existing institutions and social order -- that what exists is interpreted as functional, therefore, changing or removing an institution would be interpreted as detrimental to society.

1. This is the point at which the so-called "conflict theorists" (including C. Wright Mills) would challenge this perspective. (This criticism is referred to in the Critique and Contributions section, p. 358, but it is not well brought out.)

2. This has to do with Parsons' introduction of the concept of EQUILIBRIUM (which is very inadequately treated on p. 350, text). "Homeostatis" is another term for this -- the idea that just as the body regulates, adjusts itself (eg. body temperature, etc.), so too, society has mechanisms that seek to adjust parts of society -- to bring them back into order, stability (Inkeles, pp. 37-8).

(a) Inkeles puts his finger on a number of problems with this equilbrium model as it applies to society, especially how it ignores the role of conflict in society. See, pp. 38-9)

(b) More ammunition to expose the conservative bias built into this equilibrium notion is provided in the following passage from Walter Buckley (a systems' theorist in his own right): "From many statements made by functionalists, it seemed possible to conclude that since a social system persisting a long time is functionally integrated, or has reached a state of 'equilibrium,' it must have attained an ideal state of adjustment, whether in terms of individual happiness or common welfare. Such a situation, therefore, is evaluated as 'good' and must not be changed: what is, is best, and any change is for the worse."
(But Buckley went on to note that, although this has been the interpretation made by some, functionalism can also have radical implications. It all depends on what is defined as a stable, healthy society.)


That's all for now. This brings us up to Robert Merton, about whom I plan to focus on his distinction between "manifest" and "latent" functions.

Family Activity: Resurrecting Overlooked Concepts or Ideas II

As I have been hinting at in class, I have decided to go back to a family exercise we did during the first half of the course as described more specifically on the blog post for FEB 27th. Please refer to that post for the details of this new family activity. The only difference will be that you have much more material from which to draw. For this family activity you may choose an overlooked concept or idea from Chapter 5 thru Chapter 16 (which we'll get to next week). You are also welcome to draw from chapters in the text which we glossed over. I may give you some time tomorrow (Thurs. 4/17) to begin brainstorming and some additional time next Tuesday. We'll aim for next Thursday (4/24) to present your overlooked idea or concept to the rest of the class and turn in a brief write-up describing it, as well as a proposed short-answer question based on it, for which you may get a point extra credit if I choose to include it on the final exam. The activity itself is worth 5 points, as before.

Lecture Notes

As I indicated in my previous post (Apr. 11), I was considering posting some lecture notes in order to catch up a bit. So, here are some lecture notes on Chapters 9 & 10. You should either print these out or copy them and insert them in your class notebook.

_____________________

On Thursday (4/10) I began talking about Vilfredo Pareto who the authors describe as the quintessential theorist of political cynicism, inspired by his fellow countryman, Machiavelli. But before he became a cynic, however, he was a cautious liberal who believed in progress. The passage I quoted in class from the bottom of p. 231 - 232 expressed an optimism that is absent in his later work.

2. But during his final 25 years he increasingly became, in his view, "a nonideological realist" about politics in society.

3. His concept of the "Circulation of Elites" reflects this (which can be compared to Michels' "Iron Law of Oligarchy") -- the basic idea being that society will always be governed by some sort of elite, whether it be in the context of a so-called democracy, or socialism, or whatever type of system. See especially p. 230, much of which I planned to quote in class.

(a) It is a harsh view, a realistic one (Pareto regarded himself as the only REAL social theorist), but a view which leaves no room for the possibility of change or substantial improvement. (The authors note how Pareto rejected Durkheim's quest for a new morality based on scientific principles as hopelessly naive.) See p. 236 (2nd to last paragraph)

4. Regarding gender, Pareto comes across as being to the right of Rush Limbaugh (and his criticism of feminists as "femi-nazis"). The authors suggest some personal experiences may have contributed to his misogynst views. He regarded women as naturally fickle and promiscuous, incapable of scientific thinking, etc., etc....

C. Robert Michels (1876-1936): his views of politics and society were not quite as hard-edged as Pareto's, but he clearly embraced a more realistic view and was not that hopeful about change.

1. His so-called "Iron Law of Oligarchy" (oligarchy meaning rule by a few) may come as close as anything to a sociological LAW. See bottom p. 238

(a) And note how this clearly applies to Marxist revolutions -- the state would never be abolished or "wither away." See mid p. 239.

(b) Michels was also sensitive to the difficulty of enlisting the support of the masses in overthrowing capitalism -- as long as there appeared some hope or opportunity for at least some members of the proletariat to rise to the top.

(c) In fact, Michels recognized that rather than demeaning, alienating work giving rise to radicalism, it is more likely to breed apathy among the workers.


Chapter 10 Economic Sociological Theories: Veblen and Schumpeter

A. Although both these thinkers had interesting insights into the nature of capitalist society, we are going to focus on Veblen as the better-known and more influential figure (being a major influence on C. Wright Mills) and gloss over Schumpeter, in part because I am not that familiar with his work, and I believe it could be characterized as more strictly economic rather than sociological.

B. The chapter opens, appropriately I believe, with a song from "Fiddler on the Roof" -- "If I were a rich man...." -- a song which especially illustrates some concepts in Veblen.

C. Biographically, Veblen was born and raised on the farm in the Midwest (Wis. & Minn.), but he clearly "broke the mold," becoming quite an intellectual, one with a critical, even sarcastic bent. (As we've seen before, the authors indulge in a little pop psychology, suggesting that Veblen's marginality and struggles obtaining and keeping an academic appointment fed his criticism of America and higher education. Perhaps, but to what extent is pure speculation, and suggesting such a connection tends to diminish the strength of his arguments.)


That's all for now, so on Tuesday (4/15) we'll pick up at this point in Chapter 10. And remember, after Chapter 10, we'll skip ahead to Chapter 13 in the text. Also, don't forget the extra credit opportunity I described in the previous post (4/11).

Extra Credit Opportunity &

Below I am going to describe the extra credit opportunity I briefly described yesterday in class. Also, I may be posting some lecture notes over the weekend or on Monday in an effort to catch up a bit, so you might want to look for that. If I do post some lecture notes, I'll let you know on Tuesday.

EXTRA CREDIT OPPORTUNITY: By attending any ONE of the events (such as a talk, roundtable, or panel discussion) associated with the upcoming Citizenship and Leadership Symposium (April 12-24) you may earn 3 extra credit points. To earn these three points you need to attend the event of course AND post a brief overview of the event in which you should also tie it in to our class. For example, I am sure the various speakers and panels will be referencing various social thinkers (such as Marx, among others) or broader theoretical perspectives that we have covered (or will cover in class). Or, even if the speakers do not drop any names you should be able to relate their remarks to at least one of the ideas, issues, or concepts we have discussed in class. You only have to make one such tie-in. I just want some evidence that you went and thought about what you heard in the context of this course. POST YOUR RESPONSES AS COMMENTS ON THIS BLOG POST (no more than two paragraphs).

Reminders

Just a few reminders, especially for some of you who missed classes during that final week.
(1) I handed out a write-up of Essay II on Tuesday. It will be due on April 8th, which is the first class after the break. Also, I will be happy to accept any essays that are finished before then. You may email them to me directly.
(2)Don't forget about the longer paper assignment, especially if you decide to do topic II which will involve some outside research. That paper is due on April 29th.
(3) We will get back to Chapter 8 in the text when we get back. I may post some lecture notes over the break to cover the remainder of Weber.

Have a good break. See you in a week and a half.

Families' Midterm Questions

Below are the questions from the families which I accepted and will appear on our upcoming midterm exam (Thurs. 3/20). There was one similar question that two families proposed, and I decided to accept the version that was closer to the kind of question I would have asked. As you will also note, I did edit some of the questions you submitted. And for those families which submitted more than the required three, I simply discounted the additional ones. All participating family members receive 5 points and two of the families earned an additional bonus point. So, here they are:

YELLOW FAMILY (Patrick, Shane, Justin P., Jessica) One bonus point.

1. What was the central interest of the Philosophes/Enlightenment thinkers? (2)

ANSWER: "...The attainment of human and social perfectibility in the here and now rather than in some heavenly future. They consider rational education and scientific understanding of self and society the routes to all human and social progress." (p. 11)

2. Name and briefly define ONE of the two principal varieties of status quo conservatism. (2)

ANSWER: (a) evolutionism -- society changes slowly and is self-corrective in the process OR (b) functionalism -- society is similar to an organism with interrelated structures that meet needs and perform functions.

BLUE FAMILY: (Brent, Jessie, Bryant, Jennie)

1. In advocating the use of interviews, Harriet Martineau also saw the need to do what to guard against the possible bias from interviewing just a few individuals? (1)

ANSWER: she saw the need to select a RANDOM SAMPLE.


BLACK FAMILY: (Tye, McKenzie, Scott, Phil, MC) One bonus point

1. Define "social realism" and identify one theorist who strongly advocated social realism. (2)

ANSWER: social realism is the idea that society exists in its own right and is above and apart from the individuals in society. Durkheim was a strong advocate (or, Comte)

2. The authors of our text introduced three Research Traditions in Chapter 1, at least two of which we have encountered so far. Identify and briefly describe ONE of these two research traditions and identify ONE sociological theorist who is associated with that tradition. (3)

ANSWER: (a) Positivism: search for scientific laws of society. (Comte, Martineau, Saint Simon, or Durkheim) OR (b) Critical theory: antagonistic to positivism; seeks to envision a better society and promotes change. (Marx, Engels, Lenin, or Luxemburg)



See you tomorrow, when we'll wrap up Chapter 5 on Marx and Engels and get into and perhaps finish Chapter 6. I'll also set aside some time for review and questions.

Comments and Questions About First Family Activity; Clarifying Marx, and Reminders

COMMENTS & QUESTIONS ON FIRST FAMILY ACTIVITY:

I appreciated all the family submissions presented in class yesterday. They serve as a reminder of how superficial in some respects my presentation of these various social theorists can be. Below I am going to summarize what each of the families turned in, drawing as much as possible on your wording. I accepted a question from each family (for which you will get an additional point), but I had to modify a couple of them substantially. Everyone should consider this material as part of what we covered in class, so you need to study this (and the questions, of course) for the midterm exam.

BLUE FAMILY: Sumner's theory of ANTAGONISTIC COOPERATION (p. 85)

Sumner's theory of antagonistic cooperation is a form of cooperation where people or groups combine to satisfy common interests while minor antagonisms of interest are suppressed. This is not to say that Sumner advocated state or government interference in individuals' lives, but only that he recognized the need for a minimum amount of cooperation to allow for competition. He saw any government interference against capitalism as producing "violence, bloodshed, poverty, and misery." Therefore, in his mind, there must be some "antagonistic" cooperation to serve the common good (although I would say, it is not clear how much or in what circumstances exactly), but not in the socialist sense because there will always be underlying conflict regarding scarce resources, which he regarded as a natural law. This is relevant to today because it balances the conservative ideology of survival of the fittest by saying that we have a need for government to ensure that underlying conflicts do not interfere with the common good.

Midterm Question: Although Sumner stressed survival of the fittest and conflict as essential to societal evolution and harmony, what theory (or concept) did he offer to explain people coming together to fight for a common cause such as in wartime? (1pt)

Answer: the theory of "antagonistic cooperation," or a form of cooperation which occurs when people or groups combine to "satisfy a great common interest while minor antagonisms of interest which exist between them are suppressed." (p. 85)

YELLOW FAMILY: Herbert Spencer's "Law of Adaptation" (pp. 65-66)

Spencer's "law of adaptation" is one of four social laws which Spencer believed were scientific. Presumably, Spencer believed these could be proven empirically, especially through observation. Spencer postulated the law of adaptation in order to express his ideas on social progress, thereby fusing science and ethics. He recognized that society is composed of individuals, and he believed that individual happiness was the ultimate end of life. The ultimate end of society, he believed, is to facilitate "the greatest happiness of all." (65) Spencer, therefore, argued that the state should limit its interference in the lives of its citizens. We may notice the vestiges of this today when we hear conservatives or libertarians arguing for an expansion of free enterprise and free markets (laissez faire).
In a nutshell, the law of adaptation is this: Human progress develops naturally when people are free. The evolutionary progress of society necessitates freedom....
Obviously, Spencer's law of adaptation is relevant because it offers a distinct contrast to the theories we've studied so far. It contrasts with the social realism of Comte and Saint Simon. Nonetheless, Spencer regarded it as a scientific social law just as Comte and Martineau assumed there were social laws.

Midterm Question: Spencer's "law of adaptation" is based on what view of the relationship between the individual and the state? (1 pt)

ANSWER: The individual must be naturally free, unconstrained by the state as much as possible, where the only duty of the state is to protect each citizen from the "trespasses of neighbors" and defend society against foreign aggression.

BLACK FAMILY: Herbert Spencer's Concept of "Social Types and Constitutions" (p. 71)

Herbert Spencer was concerned with the development and evolution of society. Spencer identified three functional systems that exist within society and suggested that as societies grow these systems become more complex through compounding and re-compounding. This growth leads to increasing specialization and eventually structural differentiation. We felt that Spencer's theories on functional social systems, and their relation to the evolution of society, are important because his theories show the way, and order, in which societies must grow and develop in order to become "great civilized nations." Additionally, by recognizing these three systems, Spencer shows that all societies needed to solve problems of control and coordination, production of goods, services, and ideas, and finally, find ways to distribute these resources....

The three functional social systems:
(1) Sustaining System: productive activities required by an organism or a society to maintain and develop itself.
(2) Regulating System: governing structures of the organism or society.
(3) Distributing System: means by which the sustaining and regulating systems are linked together. This system is critical to the maintenance of relationships between interdependent parts of both biological and social organisms. This involves communication channels, transporation means, and the circulation of goods and people.

Midterm Question: Name or describe TWO of Spencer's three types of functional systems within society? (2 pts)

ANSWER: See above.

Before we move on, let me stress that the above three questions will be on the midterm. Also, I would suggest you review the pages in the text from which these various concepts and theories came from. I may ask a couple more questions based on this material.

____________________________

Clarifying my opening lecture on Marx: I did not feel good at all about my lecture yesterday which I suspect may have been a bit confusing to some of you. When talking about Marx and Marxism I have a tendency to go off on tangents about political and historical events since I have also read extensively on revolutionary states and movements in the 20th century. So, let me backtrack a bit.

It is important to understand Marx's materialism, as well as the distinction between historical and dialectical materialism. The following passage (which I did not present in class yesterday) underscores his materialism in contrast to some other thinkers we've discussed:

"Like other nineteenth-century social scientists from Comte to Spencer, he (rightly) insisted that societies, like organisms, were systems, composed of parts (social institutions). Each part was influenced by its relationship to the rest, and the whole was greater than the sum of the parts. But this left open the question as to whether all institutions were of equal weight, and of how the different institutions fitted one another. The search was on for a master principle analogous to natural selection in biological evolution. For idealists, the dynamic of social development was humanity's intellectual capacity. For Marx, it had to be 'material' -- and he found it, eventually, in the concept of the mode of production."

The best statement of Marx's HISTORICAL MATERIALISM comes from his Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859), which the authors of our text do not cite, unfortunately:
"In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond to definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life."

And remember that DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM encompasses a view of social change, and I believe is perhaps best captured in a phrase Marx uses in The Communist Manifesto: that each stage of society (as long as there is a class hierarchy) contains within itself THE SEEDS OF ITS OWN DESTRUCTION (until, of course, in theory, a classless society comes into being).

I hope this helps. We'll get back to Marx tomorrow.

_________________________

REMINDERS: Remember, I'll give the families some more time to brainstorm some midterm exam questions, which should be short-answer. Each family needs to come up with THREE such questions which you will e-mail me NO LATER THAN NOON FRIDAY, 14TH. These questions can come from any material we've covered since the beginning of the term. Also, finish reading Chapter 5 in the text, if you haven't already.

IMPORTANT AMENDMENT TO NEW FAMILY ACTIVITY

Regarding the New Family Activity I posted last Thursday, 3/6, which involves making up midterm exam question, I am going to need to revise the due date. Instead of Tuesday, 3/18, I am going to need those questions by THURSDAY, 3/13. I will give you some class time on Tuesday to brainstorm some questions, and then I want each family to present its 3 proposed questions (and answers) on Thursday. The reason for the change is I need more time to make up the midterm exam; it would be very difficult to do that if I got your questions just two days before the exam. So please be advised of this change. And check out the previous post of 3/6 if you haven't already. See you Tuesday when I will also expect to hear from each family regarding overlooked concepts or ideas.

Remaining Lecture Notes on Durkheim & New Family Activity

Sorry I ran out of time this morning, but I had intended to finish Durkheim and move on to Section III: Radical Theory and Chapter 5. So, I'll post my remaining remarks on this blog:

A. Gender Relations

1. As the point I made about suicide and marriage (marriage being good for men but bad for women in terms of suicide) suggests, Durkheim accepted the notion that there were fundamental physical and mental differences between the sexes that were natural, biologically based, which meant that men and women were suited to different tasks in social life.

2. "Women's domestic role was "natural" and functional in the logic of progressive specialization, as well as being important to the moral health of society." (p. 112)

3. Durkheim also appears to have bought into the stereotype of women as closer to nature, men more rational and intellectual. And in this respect, if one of the marks of social progress is control of nature, then it is a sign of progress that men control women!!

4. I believe it is undeniable that Durkheim made some significant contributions to sociology and explored some important issues regarding the transition to modern society, but on the gender issue I fully concur with the authors' assessment: "Like so many classical sociologists, Durkheim's sociological imagination seems to have deserted him when it comes to the question of gender." (p. 114)

B. Finally, the authors rightly challenge the simple application of the conservative label to Durkheim. True, he was interested in restoring order and stability to society, but he was not advocating a form of sociological totalitarianism. Individual rights (at least for men) needed to be protected. Furthermore, they suggest the issues and problems Durkheim dealt with a century ago are still very much with us. (see p. 117)

1. In this context, read carefully the bracketed portion of the xerox handout (pp. 146-147)which I believe very accurately characterizes Durkheim's ultimate position on what was necessary for modern society to achieve a harmonious social order.

Section III: Radical Theory

A. The authors open this section by drawing a clear contrast between the conservative theories we've been discussing and radical theory which will be the focus of the next couple chapters. The whole of p. 119 gets at both the general and some specific differences between conservative and radical theory. (I planned to quote and comment on most of that in class.)

So, that brings us up to the beginning of Chapter 5 where we will begin on Tuesday (3/11) after we hear from the families about overlooked concepts or ideas.

_________________________

FAMILY ACTIVITY: Midterm Questions

For this second family activity, as I mentioned in class today, I want to give you a shot at making up some questions for our upcoming midterm exam (3/20). I want each of the families to come up with THREE short-answer questions on anything we have covered since the beginning of the term. Use class (or blog) lecture notes as your guide, as well as xerox handouts which I used to supplement the text. DO NOT MAKE UP QUESTIONS ON PORTIONS OF THE TEXT OR BOLD-PRINT TERMS THAT I DID NOT REFER TO IN CLASS (OR ON THE BLOG). I'll give the families a chance to brainstorm some questions next week. You'll have to come to some consensus on which three you want to present. You'll need to have these written up, along with answers, by TUESDAY 3/18. I will make every effort to accept at least one question from each family. For each additional question I accept you will earn a bonus point, so if I accept all three each participating family member may earn two bonus points. This activity is worth 5 points.

Key Quotes on Durkheim's Division of Labor in Society & Additional Lecture Material

Below are the passages I quoted in class yesterday from sources other than our text which I believe help elucidate Durkheim's argument in The Division of Labor in Society:

First, his use of the organic analogy in comparing "restitutive law" in modern society to the nervous system in the body:
"This law (restitutive) definitely plays a role in society analogous to that played by the nervous system in the organism. The latter has as its task, in effect, the regulation of the different functions of the body in such a way as to make them harmonize."

Durkheim had doubts about the possibility of "organic solidarity" emerging automatically from the increasing division of labor. He believed the modern world was in a transitional phase in which what was needed was a new set of moral rules to address the condition of ANOMIE (often defined simply as a condition of normlessness or breakdown of moral guidelines). But I quoted a longer description of ANOMIE:

"In general, the anomic state of modern society has led to a relatively unrestrained citizenry, wherein people primarily look out for their own interests and have disregard for those of others....The individual's social part, Durkheim insisted, is just as natural to humans as their individual (self-interest) part. The problems of modern society are due not to a basically anti-social human nature but to the structure of contemporary society, which does not adequately nurture, develop, and sustain the individual's socially oriented part." -- and sociology could play a key role in developing a new morality (a "science of ethics") to cultivate the "individual's socially oriented part."

So, what Durkheim perceives is a "moral crisis" (NOT one rooted in a capitalist economic system, as Marx would contend). As George Ritzer observed -- "In the end, structural reform was subordinated in Durkheim's mind to changes in the collective morality. He believed the essential problems of modern society were moral in nature and that the only real solution lay in reinforcing the strength of the collective morality."

1. Initially, the OCCUPATIONAL GROUP was seen as the key intermediate institution (or vehicle) through which this new morality could take hold, but ultimately Durkheim advocated a MORAL EDUCATION (which is also the title of his last book).

The theme of a moral education is taken up a bit later by the authors of our text, and they do a good job describing what it involves and why it is needed in modern society.


I am going to leave it there. As you'll note, I provided a bit of lecture material along with those passages I quoted. We'll be able to wrap up Chapter 4 tomorrow (Thurs. 3/6) and move on to Radical Theory and Chapters 5 & 6. I will also give the families some more time to work on your family activity for next Tuesday (3/11).

First Family Activity: Resurrecting Overlooked Concepts or Ideas

In covering the first four chapters in our text in class lecture, which we will have done by the end of next week, I have glossed over any number of concepts, ideas, arguments which you may have felt were significant and insightful. For this exercise I want each of the families to identify, discuss, and write up a brief description (no more than one page) of an overlooked concept, idea, or argument from the text. In your write-up you should briefly describe the concept, idea, or argument, tell why you believe it is significant, and how it relates to some aspect of what I have already presented in class. For example, if it was a point from Spencer, who we just covered, you should be able to relate it to something I did present about Spencer in class. Designate a spokesperson for your family who will present this to the class at some point in the near future (probably after we finish Chapter 4 in the text). I will give you some time in class next week to discuss this with your family members, but you may need to do a little work outside of class. Finally, I will consider each of the family submissions for possible inclusion on the midterm exam. This activity is worth 5 points, and I may consider some extra credit for those submissions I deem worthy of inclusion on the midterm.

What Constitutes "Theory" in the Context of the First Essay on Harriet Martineau

The following comment is intended to clarify, as best I can, some confusion regarding your first essay assignment. As many of you have probably observed in reading that section of the text on Harriet Martineau, the authors seem to focus almost entirely on her methodological insights and it is harder to pick out her "theories." Of course, it was the authors of the text who entitled this section "Martineau's Central Theories and Methods." And I believe they are using "theory" in a very broad sense to refer to any ideas or statements ABOUT society (as opposed to ideas or statements on HOW to study or look at society). Now these two questions are not always easy to separate. Indeed, their definition of sociological theory seems to include both ABOUT & HOW: "Sociological theory is an abstract, symbolic representation of, and explanation of, social reality. But when we talk about sociological theory, we are talking about guidelines for thinking in a disciplined manner about the social world." (p. 4) The latter sentence in that definition seems to include methods as well. This is a pretty deep issue which I am not fully prepared to address in this blog; however, if you keep in mind the distinction I made above between ABOUT & HOW, I believe you should be able to complete this essay. In general, I am interested in seeing how well you understand some of Martineau's ideas and can see their relevance to modern society.

Finally, let me remind you this first essay is due on Tuesday, 2/26. Good luck.

EXTRA CREDIT Follow-up to "are you already a social theorist" exercise

Before I describe this extra credit follow-up to our first exercise, just a couple reminders for next week. First, there are still a few of you who have not posted a comment on that first exercise and you need to do so ASAP. On Tuesday, I will hand out a write-up of our first essay which will be out-of-class. I'll be talking mainly about Auguste Comte on Tuesday.

EXTRA CREDIT follow-up to first exercise:

At some point during the remainder of the semester, you may briefly discuss (one or two paragraphs) how what you wrote about in your first exercise relates to anything you encounter in the text or class lecture. You may run across a concept or perhaps a broad theoretical perspective which helps shed light on the question you posed and your tentative answer. You may respond to this at ANY time during the semester. The deadline will be the last day of classes,FRIDAY, MAY 9. This is worth 3 points.

"Explanation" & A Reminder

As of 8:15AM this morning (Wed. 2/13) it appears that only five people have posted a comment in response to the activity, "Are you already a social theorist?". If you have not done this, try to do so by tomorrow. It is 3 easy activity points designed mainly to get you accustomed to commenting on the blog.

Below, as promised in class, are some thoughts from an unpublished manuscript of Prof. Erich Ahrens on the nature of explanation.

"We are sometimes inclined to fall into a very primitive idea of explanation. We think that a thing is explained by some force or power back of it. Wind is explained by a wind spirit, an instinctive act by instinct, or any thought or act is explained by some power in us or outside us which accounts for its existence. We should like to point out that there is nothing back of anything. That is not the function of explanation to tell us what causes space, time, life, thinking, acting, society, or even cause itself. The essence of explanation is to say what things are and to define them in and through their relations to other phenomena or forms of phenomena. We cannot be magicians in our explanations and pull things into being out of the void. Biologists explain one function of the body in relation to other functions. They relate the form of one animal body to that of other animal bodies, even to plants and inorganic compounds. But they do not ask for the cause of animal bodies, do not assume some entity back of that class of things which brought them into existence. Why, then, do we assume that there is something separate from and back of action? Thought, action, personality, life, society, etc., are categories as ultimate as space, time, and cause. They are the ground of explanation. It is in relation to these categories that life phenomena are made intelligible. Ignore them and you fall into the blue of empty abstractions and purely fictive explanations."

E.A. Ahrens
University of Illinois
Unpublished manuscript

Something to think about. The key passage being: "The essence of explanation is to say what things are and to define them in and through their relations to other phenomena or forms of phenomena."

"Are you already a social theorist?"

The title of this first individual exercise comes from "A Note to Students" in the opening of our text. What I want you to do is state a question about our world, other than ones mentioned in the text (p. xxix) that you have pondered and tried to answer in your own mind (not necessarily something you've researched or written a paper for in another class). In addition to stating the question, briefly describe how you tried to answer it.

I am only looking for a paragraph (or two) at the most. This first exercise is worth 3 points. And please try to post it no later than next Thursday, 2/14.

Welcome

Dear Social Theory students, Welcome to the course blog for Sociology 340: The Development of Sociological Theory which will give us an opportunity to continue our discussion of the issues presented in this course beyond the classroom. I will use this blog from time to time to post lecture notes, if I happen to get behind, and post reminders of due dates for essays, papers, exams. More importantly, it will be an opportunity for you to post questions and make comments about anything covered in the class. I would suggest that, as a rule, you should check the blog at least once a week.