Concise Reader in Sociological Theory. Группа авторов. Читать онлайн. Newlib. NEWLIB.NET

Автор: Группа авторов
Издательство: John Wiley & Sons Limited
Серия:
Жанр произведения: Социология
Год издания: 0
isbn: 9781119536178
Скачать книгу
not include an excerpt from him but instead an excerpt from his student and renowned fellow‐theorist Robert K. Merton, exemplifying the structural functionalist perspective. Parsons was famously concerned with how values consensus translated into the social roles and social institutions functional to maintain social order. Countering this focus, conflict theory, exemplified by Ralf Dahrendorf, highlighted the normalcy and functionality of conflict (as opposed to consensus) in society. From a different context, critiquing Parsons’s focus on American society as the paradigm of modernization, neo‐Marxist dependency theorists including Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Enzo Faletto highlighted the conflicting power interests between the West and Latin America, and within Latin American countries dependent on the US (chapter 5). Still other theorists pushed back against Parsons’s main focus on macro structures and what they saw as his diminishment of the individual (even though Parsons affirmed the relevance of the individual as a motivated social actor). With a micro focus on individuals and small groups (chapter 6), this line of critique was spearheaded by another student of Parsons, George Homans. Contrary to Parsons, he emphasized the core centrality of the individual and of individual interpersonal interaction or exchange as the foundational basis of all institutional and societal life. Homans’s student, Peter M. Blau, took a broader, more sociological view than Homans and elaborated on how power and status in particular interpersonal contexts are conveyed through, and result from, social exchange relations. Another theorist, James S. Coleman, adopted Parsons’s focus on shared societal values to focus on the functionality of trust to the accumulation of human and social capital in interpersonal and small group settings. Decades later, writing with a focus on a different set of questions – sexuality and gender in contemporary American society – Paula England elaborates on the relation between personal characteristics (skills/human capital, values) and social identity or social position to show the dynamic interaction between individuals’ personal characteristics and social position in accounting for variation in individual decision‐making outcomes.

      Section III includes what are generally seen as the three most prominent micro‐level perspectives in sociological theory: (1) symbolic interactionism which, building on George H. Mead’s theorizing on the self and elaborated by Erving Goffman, focuses on the micro‐dynamics of face‐to‐face or interpersonal interaction (chapter 7); (2) phenomenology which establishes credibility for the relevance of the individual’s subjective experiences of the social world and for the individual’s intra‐subjective reality, a perspective outlined by Alfred Schutz and elaborated by Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann in their widely influential book, The Social Construction of Reality (chapter 8); and (3) ethnomethodology which focuses on how individuals actually do the work of being members of a society in particular localized settings; its framing is indebted to Harold Garfinkel and subsequently further applied to gender issues by Sarah Fenstermaker and Candace West (chapter 9). It is important to note here, however, that though largely micro in their focus, each of these theories (and especially phenomenology) also variously point to the significance of macro structures, the dynamic interrelation of macro and micro social processes, and to the fact that the self is always necessarily in conversation with society, and is so at once both at a micro‐ and macro‐level.

      The fifth and final section continues the emancipatory spirit of the post‐1970s critique. This vibrant body of work includes (in chapter 13) selections from the early feminist theorist Charlotte Perkins Gilman, the ground‐breaking focus by Arlie Hochschild on emotion work and its gendered structure, and leading contemporary feminist theorist Dorothy E. Smith articulating the necessity of standpoints that seek to understand from within the experiences of outsiders (e.g. women, members of minority racial and ethnic groups, LGBTQ+). Additionally, Patricia Hill Collins gives sustained attention to a Black women’s standpoint as well as the complex intersectionality of individuals’ identities and experiences, and to what this requires of scholars who seek to study intersectionality. Important here also is the construal and reassessment of hegemonic and nonhegemonic masculinities by R.W. Connell and James W. Messerschmidt.

      In a parallel vein, postcolonial theories (chapter 14) draw attention to the structured dehumanization of racial and ethnic outsiders, and to the enduring legacies of slavery and colonial domination on the delegitimation of postcolonial identities and cultures. The pioneering Black sociologist W.E. Burghardt Du Bois was the first to forcefully articulate the bifurcating effect of slavery on the consciousness and identity of enslaved people and its legacy on postslavery generations of Black people. Edward W. Said focuses on the West’s construal of the (inferior) Otherness of the Orient, while Frantz Fanon evocatively conveys the everyday reality and experience of being a Black man in a racist society. Stuart Hall underscores the plurality and diversity of postcolonial histories, cultures, and identities and offers an emancipatory vision of cultural identity as an ongoing project that can dynamically integrate past and present into a new authentic synthesis. Contemporary scholars also increasingly point to the colonial and Northern/Western biases in what is regarded as legitimate knowledge, including biases in sociological knowledge, as elaborated by Raewyn Connell and colleagues. Others, such as Alondra Nelson, draw out the somewhat unexpected progressive social consequences of DNA testing and the use of genetic data by universities engaged in initiatives to make reparations to the descendants of freed slaves.