Living Theory

The Application of Classical Social Theory to Contemporary Life

Charles Hurst

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• eBook ISBN: 9781317346692
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Sociology
• Index: Social Sciences

Living Theory: The Application of Classical Social Theory to Contemporary Life, 2nd edition analyzes major features of modern society from the classical theory point of view, and suggests how modern life might be explained from this viewpoint.

The author examines the works of four classical figures - Marx, Durkheim, Simmel, and Weber - because of their continuing influence on social theory, and because they addressed many of the central issues we confront in modern society.

Topics new to this edition include:

• New electronic technologies
• The battle over valued property
• The role of trust in society
• Governmental secrecy
• Trafficking in human organs

CHAPTER 1

THE CONTEMPORARY
RELEVANCE OF OLD THEORIES

CHAPTER IN BRIEF

■ INTRODUCTION

examples and sources of divisiveness in society; role of media; diversity and freedom as sources of disunity and strength; issues of separation and unity

■ ORGANIZATION OF THE BOOK

■ SYMPTOMS OF STRAIN AND CHANGE

■ THE VALUE OF THEORY AND THEORIES OF VALUE

meaning of social theory; theories as explanations and models; practical importance of theory; reasons for choice of theorists

■ THE RELEVANCE OF THEORIES PAST: A PRIMER ON THEIR PERSPECTIVES

The View from Marx’s Eyes: Marx’s concerns; role of economy in structure and change; dialectical pattern of change; exploitative economic relations; alienation and ideology. The View from Durkheim’s Eyes: study of social facts; division of labor as moral phenomenon; positive roles of education and state; need for morality and rules; dangers of excessive individualism. The View from Simmel’s Eyes: conflict as necessary; society as outcome of opposing forces; nature of social forms; money and metropolis as forms; city as rational and objective; social distance; effects of size on group. The View from Weber’s Eyes: rationalization and disenchantment of modern life; decline of ultimate values; society as iron cage; bureaucracy and capitalism; class and status; work ethic

INTRODUCTION

The forces bringing individuals and institutions together and driving them apart are fundamental aspects of every society. The central theme of this book is social unity and separation in the contemporary United States. More specifically, and as examples of these broader dimensions, the focus is on how (1) an attachment to community, (2) the separation of groups, (3) feelings of connection to government, (4) the body as an object, and (5) inequality among individuals in the United States today might be better understood through application of the ideas of several classical social theorists. The general themes of social unity and disunity reverberate in the work of these scholars. Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, Georg Simmel, and Max Weber all wrote in the mid to late nineteenth century, and, with the exception of Marx, into the early twentieth century while modern industrial society was still developing. Yet, their ideas can enhance our understanding of modern, and even postmodern, industrial society as we move along in the twenty-first century. Perhaps the writings of these scholars can even illuminate our paths to solutions for many of the social problems that plague our society.

This is not to say that classical theory is without faults. Indeed, on several occasions, I note its inadequacies and omissions as it applies to contemporary society. Nor is it to say that social theory has not changed or developed since the days of the classicists. It certainly has. Many contemporary theorists have built on the work of classical theorists and served as their modern interpreters.

Karl Marx’s unrelenting emphasis on the centrality of economic forces formed a basis for the development of a variety of critical conflict theories as well as world-systems theory. Durkheim’s discussion about the importance of morality, rituals, and symbols in society helps explain structural functionalism’s emphasis on the importance of cultural elements for understanding the organization of societies, and has affected modern conflict theory’s arguments on the role of cultural factors in maintaining group boundaries. With his analysis of the urban setting and urbanism as a way of life, Simmel provided some of the groundwork for contemporary and postmodern perspectives on the character of alienation, freedom, anonymity, and constantly changing cultural artifacts in the city. Finally, Weber’s underlying theme of growing rationalization in modern Western society has been the seedbed for a host of recent theories dealing with the heavily methodical and mechanical nature of much of everyday life. Ritzer’s Mcdonaldization thesis is a good example.¹ In a nutshell, classical theorists have created a foundation upon which present-day theorists have developed their own ideas.

Even without its modern updating, however, classical theory still speaks directly to the issues being explored here. This is a book about the power of classical theory to shed light on several troublesome contemporary issues. To add contemporary theories would only make discussion of the issues more complicated and mute the real contribution of classical theory to understanding present society. In many ways, classical theory can stand on its own two feet.

ORGANIZATION OF THE BOOK

This chapter presents a preliminary glimpse of some of the issues of disunity to be addressed more fully in later chapters, followed by a demonstration of the usefulness of social theory in general and the classical theorists in particular. It ends with a brief overview of major emphases in the work of Marx, Durkheim, Simmel, and Weber. Chapter 2 further explores the general perspective of these theorists on contemporary society, and begins a more in-depth discussion of what they viewed as main sources of unity and disunity in society. This discussion will lay the foundation for the analyses of specific areas of disunity and unity that follow in Chapters 3 through 7.

SYMPTOMS OF STRAIN AND CHANGE

There are times when it appears undeniable that our society is falling apart. The signs pop up in different areas, like in the accelerating number of persons in prisons, continued residential segregation, and low levels of confidence in institutions. As a possible source of these difficulties, some experts point to individuals being raised without consciences and doing what they want regardless of the consequences for others. Others point to a decline in values and morals in society as a whole. The quest by certain corporate executives in recent years to amass personal fortunes without regard for and at the expense of average workers, coupled with their lack of deep remorse in doing so, betrays an apparent hollowness in conscience among some who had been considered leaders within our economy. To some, these acts signal an eroding of morality in society.

The fact that books such as The Moral Compass and The Book of Virtues can make the nonfiction best-sellers’ list is an indication that the morals argument has struck a chord among Americans. Indeed, a 2002 national poll revealed that 81 percent of adults feel that the condition of moral values is either fair or poor, and two-thirds believe that morality is getting worse in the United States.² Recent articles and symposia have also decried the “dissolution of shared moral and religious values” and “the disappearance of community or civil society in contemporary American life.”³ At least one scholar has concluded from evidence that the United States is experiencing a “wilding epidemic.”⁴ “Wilding” refers to selfish, individualistic behavior that is harmful to others. It is committed without a sense of guilt by the powerful and the powerless, the rich and the poor, black and white, and it can range from senseless beatings of innocent citizens to the abuse of office for personal gain. Derber traces the source of wilding in the United States to extreme individualism: It “is individualism run amok, and the wilding epidemic is the face of America’s individualistic culture in an advanced state of disrepair.”⁵

At the same time that concerns about declines in values have arisen, debates flourish about the need to place restraints on legal and illegal immigration because of concerns about too many people with too many differences, about job competition, about drains on welfare funds as well as educational and health resources, and because of downright racism. President Bush’s proposal in early 2004 to soften laws governing immigrant workers has again stirred up these deep-seated feelings. The presence of so many different cultural groups in the United States has also spurred debates about English as a national language and Ebonics as a legitimate language, about the necessity and fairness of affirmative action, and about the teaching of multiculturalism in schools. These conflicts are representative of cultural differences that appear to distance groups from each other.

Divisions in social life also abound. Segregation remains largely intact and economic inequality has increased. The growing popularity of walled or gated communities is only one indication of the desire of generally better-off individuals to choose a peaceful, more idyllic life seemingly removed from the social problems of city life. On the political front, continued revelations about illegal political contributions, influence peddling, and misuse of political offices do little to hearten the average person. Such discoveries encourage cynicism and distrust, and thereby weaken attachment to our role as citizens and create greater distance between ourselves and government. A government of and for the people becomes a government different from and against the people.

Recent polls suggest that many people do not have a great deal of trust in the federal government. For example, a Gallup poll in 2000 showed that under half of all adults (42 percent) believed that people could trust the federal government to do what is right at least most of the time. However, the percentage who had confidence increased after the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, jumping to 60 percent in late 2001. But Gallup results for early 2003 suggest that trust in the federal government to deal with domestic and international problems has fallen to levels that are below those just before September 11. Close to 40 percent had no or very little confidence in the government’s handling of domestic or international issues. Another post–9/11 national survey found that only about 27 percent of Americans had a lot of confidence in the executive branch, and only 13 percent felt that way about the Congress.⁶ These widespread feelings are fed by the media, which are eager to maintain or increase the size of their audiences. “Dirty laundry,” as a song suggests, includes the search by the media for sensationalistic stories highlighting the dark side of U.S. life.

Watching the news on TV or reading a newsmagazine or newspaper, we are exposed to a parade of stories that emphasize the negative and divisive forces in our society. Often, the events are depicted because they are rare rather than common occurrences. At other times, however, news items discuss problems that are deep or widespread. The proliferation of negative news items in the media has prompted some to suggest that, for our own mental health, we take a holiday from reading or watching the news once a week.

There are at least two basic ways to look at these stories. It is generally the negative side that is emphasized because they often address serious issues that need to be confronted. But on the positive side, they also reflect what many consider to be positive trademarks of our society—its social and cultural diversity, tolerance, openness, and freedom of choice. These features are double-edged swords. Diversity, for example, rather than just being viewed as a source of division and disunity, is also a source of social strength, cultural richness, and adaptability for a society. That very freedom and openness makes it possible for individuals to go their separate ways but also to live in their own private cocoons without active regard for the lives of others. Openness and freedom also permit separate and often antagonistic groups to develop and flourish within a single society. This means that groups that represent racist interests and those that fight racism, as well as those with liberal, radical, conservative, or reactionary perspectives, exist alongside each other. Some want nothing to do with the others. Recent stories have related the widespread existence of underground militias and separatist groups that do not recognize the full authority and legitimacy of the federal government or that wish to set up their own countries. Tolerance encourages the social and cultural differences that are a source of creativity and dynamism but also a major cause of social conflicts and divisiveness.

Clearly, there are costs and benefits to living in a capitalist and democratic society. We are both victims and benefactors of society, and we are its creators as well as its creations. Society is not falling apart, but neither is it static. Because of its dynamism and great sociocultural diversity, there is always a question about how a society with so many subcultural groups, economic classes, religious camps, and political constituencies can avoid falling apart and maintain a level of cohesion that permits it to function effectively without snuffing out individual creativity and differences. How can the center hold in the face of so many differences? Do we even need to have a center to have cohesion? Can there be more than one center? Can individuals be separate and free and still be an effective part of a unified society? Classical theorists have provided some answers to these questions. Core concepts used by the theorists are highlighted throughout the text and summarized in the Glossary at the end of the book.

THE VALUE OF THEORY AND THEORIES OF VALUE

How is theory helpful, and why are Marx, Durkheim, Simmel, and Weber especially helpful in understanding our present social life and its problems? There is always a question about whether “theory” can really help us understand and grapple with “real-life” problems. In this view, theory is something impractical, residing in the realm of philosophy, with little connection to the facts of the concrete world.⁷ Theorists are often viewed as “armchair” people who theorize about the world to little effect. These are common views of people outside academia. As an example, in the preface of her recent book, Americans No More, in which she takes up the issue of social and cultural disunity and its implication for citizenship, Georgie Anne Geyer takes pains to distance herself from being considered a mere theorist by emphasizing her real-life experiences as a journalist as the basis for her claims: “But this book does not pretend to reflect the world of the theoretician or philosopher. These words are the honed and considered thoughts of a highly trained and experienced observer…. Moreover, as a journalist, I am interested in exploring what we can know, not in theorizing or speculating about what we don’t or cannot know.”⁸ This statement offers a faulty stereotype of theory and theorists. Modern social theorists are not ungrounded philosophers nor are theory and speculation the same thing. Nothing could be further from the truth. I share many of the same concerns as Geyer, but her comments on theory betray a common misunderstanding of its nature and possibilities. Theories are explanations or sometimes models for understanding reality.

As explanations, social theories suggest causes for behaviors, events, and social structures. All of us carry around theories in our heads about why certain things are as they are—why people commit murders, why people get laid off from work, why people marry each other, why racial groups do not get along with each other, and so on. The trouble is that these informal, unorganized theories are usually not well thought out, nor are they based on an abundance of evidence systematically collected. In contrast, the selection of causes in scientific theories is generally based on evidence drawn from thorough examinations of history, observations, and empirical scientific studies rather than drawn out of the thin air while ruminating in some easy-chair.

Identification of causes is at the heart of theories, and, of course, knowledge about causes is of great practical importance if we are interested in creating, enhancing, reinforcing, reducing, or eliminating a given situation or behavior. Consider poverty, or creativity, or group solidarity, or urban decay, or any other phenomenon. If we want to do something about any of these for the long run, we need to understand their causes. To change something, it is generally desirable to be able to identify its roots rather than to de...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Chapter One The Contemporary Relevance of Old Theories
• Chapter Two The Janus-Faced Nature of Society
• Chapter Three Private Lives and Public Connections
• Chapter Four Separatism and Status
• Chapter Five Cynicism, Distrust, and Corruption
• Chapter Six Commodification and the Value of Human Life
• Chapter Seven The Polarization of Economic Resources
• A Summing Up
• Glossary of Classical Theoretical Terms
• Notes