Classical Social Theory

Social Theory & Modernity Emergence of social theory and of modernity are concurrent processes Social theory (scientific way of thinking about society) is a product of modernity [this is in itself a theory, proposed in Harrington‘s chapter 1] Why should this be the case? If so, then a look at these conditions of origin might help to understand what social theory is all about

Modernity A contested concept Historical period: 15th, 16th, 17th or 18th century - ???? Attitude to time: critical reflection/distance from past (as history) + actively shaping the collective future Idea of progress ( cycle) Opposite of „tradition“ Tradition: accepting the way things have always been, following precedent and example of elders, priests, moral leaders Modernity & tradition can exist in a society at the same time Parsons: traditional s. – ascription, modern s. - achievement

Postmodernity Period after modernity (roughly since mid/late 20th century Time of constant change No universal laws possible Idea of progress gets blurred No linearity of thought, some even claim no truth, no right or wrong, nothing moral or immoral Everything is relative, flexible etc. Idea of Postmodernity is highly contested

Dimension of Modernity 1.Cultural Modernity 2.Political Modernity 3.Socio-Economic Modernity

Cultural Modernity Rise of natural science and mathematics There are laws of nature to be „observed“ and „experienced“ – Galileo, Newton, Descartes, Darwin rational thinking vs dogma Secularization: intellectual authority of religion has been replaced by science Enlightenment, the Age of Reason

Political Modernity Protestantism: rejection of authority of the Catholic Church in Rome Rise of the nation-state (sovereignty) Human rights (natural law) Popular sovereignty Representative democracy – Locke, Kant, Rousseau – American Revolution, French Revolution

Socio-economic Modernity Enclosures, property law, trading companies, banks (capital accumulation) Industrialization Urbanization Modern Capitalism

Theorizing Modernity Cultural, political and socio-economic dimension are strongly inter-related But how exactly? What is driving what? How can we explain the dramatic cultural, political and socio-economic changes of that time? This was the question of the early sociologists and classical social theory

Some answers (in a nutshell) Political Economy: Adam Smith Liberalism: J.S. Mill, Alexis de Toqueville Positivism: Auguste Comte Marxism Elite Theories: Mosca, Pareto, Michels

Political Economy: Adam Smith The Wealth of Nations 1776 Universal laws of economic behaviour Market theory: price = demand & supply Individual self-interest -> collective good „Hidden hand“ of the market (Yet, Smith knew that the state is needed)

Liberalism: Alexis de Tocqueville Liberalism: John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Alexis de Tocqueville Progress = freedom to own property and to trade, religious tolerance, constitutional law and representative democracy, yet limited government Negative concept of freedom: freedom from intervention Tocqueville / Democracy in America 1835 Importance of civil society (mediating between law/state and self-interested individuals Voluntary associations with roots in protestant sects of original settlers: individualism + egalitarianism

Positivism: Auguste Comte Knowledge arises from empirical observation not metaphysical preconceptions Social science should follow the natural sciences (this leads to social progress) Law of 3 stages of integration (theological, metaphysical, rational) Teleological view of history

Marxism Historical materialism History: dialectical process of class struggles between those who own the means of production and those who don‘t Economic base is determining social/cultural/political superstructure Marx takes part in class struggle (taking sides, changing the world) Yet: analysis of capitalism (Das Kapital, 1867) deterministic

Elite Theories: Mosca, Pareto, Michels Against Liberalism and Marxism Liberal Democracy: only formal Yet: socialism not possible Focus on the social/political elite Elite, „Ruling Class“ (Mosca), is power seeking Iron Rule of Oligarchy (even in socialist movements/parties) Robert Michels Pessimism Neither institutions, nor economic structures determine outcomes but elites Leads to Rational Choice, actor-centred approaches

These classical social theories are not „state of the art“ anymore, some would say they are outdated, did not stand the test of time (have been falsified by empirical evidence) However, many current social theories draw upon these thinkers, have adapted, refined or advanced some of their central arguments

Modernisation Theory ca. 1950s USA non modern societies (non-Western) seen as not-yet-modern Unilinear course through which all societies pass (towards modernity) All societies will/should eventually follow the Western model Linearity in social development (increasing differentiation of social, economic and political system)

Group Work Have a critical look at the central arguments of: – Liberalism – Marxism – Elite Theories and argue against them