Theoretical Foundations Flashcards
When coming up with a theory what gets theorized the mechanism of the phenomenon or the observation that was made
The mechanism
What gets theorized is usually not was just observed but may have led to those observations
The circumstances that may have led to such observations
For example Ann swindler theorized the emergence of a new culture during unsettled times, a mechanism used to explain what led to the observation of the French Revolution
What is society basic structure
How do society develop and change
What is the relationship to social institution
How does culture reproduce and create society
The role of an individual in creating and reproducing society,
These are all considered what kinds of theory
Theoretical questions that explain the foundations of sociology
Why was Marx considered an interdisciplinary thinker?
Because he began theorizing and writing on sociology before its institutionalization
He wrote economic concepts, that collected information from history and philosophical backgrounds to understand society
What was Karl Marks theory Called
Historical materialism
Ideology, structure and agency have all considered to be what collectively introduced to understand society
But what are some concerns about these concepts created to understand society
Categories
These categories are not 100% sufficient enough to capture the complexity of society, but they are helpful in understanding society
In the relationship between ideology, agency and structure all interwoven together to understand society, what does Marx illustrate when understanding historical materialism as being the prime determinant to understand society
Structure
The fundamental nature of society is best understood through the structure
Ideology and agency are less influential when trying to understand social reality
So historical materialism is to be understood through structure existence not from agency or culture
Men make their own history
But they do not make it just as they please, they do not make it under circumstances of their own chosen but by themselves, but under circumstances directly found, given and transmitted from the past ‘
The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living
Who made this statement and what does it mean?
First line- men make their own history is agency
A point that Marx made about understanding how man experiences the society and the choices they make to lead them to be who or whatever they are
Second & third statement- goes further to explain even though we are free to make our own choices but they are highly influenced by the structure in place
Essentially structure defines who we are, no individual is their true self without the historical significance of structure allowing you to exist that way. Although agency exist but to understand the complexity of society is to focus on the structure
According to Marx if the core of human experience is not the virtue of being a human or our personal choices, then what gives meaning to being a humans and how does that differ us from animals
The collective production of our means of subsistence relates to why we are humans
What does that mean?
We are humans not because we think we are but because of what we do
What distinguishes us from animals is the need to transform nature to consume it
For example, a lion kills a deer and feeds on it immediately, we kill an animal and transform it into something edible. The act of doing this is the very nature of being human, having to DO, transform something into a different form before we can use it
Additionally, COLLECTIVE, we all work together, labour is divided in such a way that a human often requires another person to achieve this ability to DO things to achieve other things.
We are all working together by doing different things to sustain our existence as humans which justifies why we are humans.
For example, i buy stuff from a grocery story, which contains goods made by other humans, with money produced by other other humans, that i earned through working for other humans. We are all doing things to produce what we need to sustain and provide our needs.
Material condition and mode of production were also two concepts Mark introduced in his theory of historical materialism, what do they mean?
Material condition is the economic system we are embedded in, how this conditions, determine our behavior and the path our life would take
Our mode of production organizes the collective production of our means of subsistence
So the economic system determines the duties we take on in the society, we all work together affecting each others responsibilities through division of labour. But the type of responsibilities we take on is determined by the mode of production
How does swidler understanding of the French Revolution differ from how Marx’s view
Swindler theorized that a result of unsettled times and threat to maintenance of structure, the culture comes in to play to create an alternative and new understanding of the experience of agency
But Marx would disagree with Swidler stating that to understand the French Revolution would necessitate going back to the previous social economic implications that are affecting the experience of the people now
How does the mode of production organize people to create and maintain the means of subsistence together during the feudal economy according to Marx
The understanding of the mode of production allows us to understand the society
The mode of production or economic system ( material condition) that existed during was the feudal economy
How does this help in understanding the mode of production and how that collectively organizes people into different categories that gives meaning to the existence of being a human?
During the feudal period the means of production was the technologies, hoes, looms, tools, plow, irrigation system. Technology used to achieve the means of subsistence
Those tools on their own have no use, they are essentially uses less things created, their use is defined by the humans, the relation of humans to the means of production
The peasants and common people making use ofg those tools allowed the ability to produce the means of subsistence
But who determined who would use those tools to make what was needed, the aristocrats. The economy at the time was delineated in such a way that to ensure that the means of production was created, we had to assign classes to people that would work on the farm or others that wont
This illustrates how agency is not a defining feature to understand the society, to understand the society required understanding the economic structure (material condition) that enforced that the core of human existence was not the right to be a human but the responsibilities you had been given, gave meaning to your existence
The systems that allows the society to achieve the collective production of the means of subsistence is
Mode of production
How does the mode of production relate to the means and relations of production
Understanding the core of humanity predates, understanding the stricture that lead to relation of people into groups that allowed the use of the means of production to achieve their needs
What are the relations of production n
What are the means of production
According to Marx during the French Revolution what caused the peasants to forceful contend with their roles and the difficulty of mainitiing those responsibilities
The structure of capitalism, if i decide to plant these crops they should be too my own profit if i decide eat them out sell them to get more profit they are mine not something for someone else
What were the relations of production that Marx introduced in the capitalist economy
The proletariat/ working class
Bourgeois/owning class
Under a capitalist economy how does the means of production and relations to production differ from the feudal economy
Under a capitalist economy the means of production is much more complex that having humans do the job waste time, efficiency and productivity
So rather machines, and tools like the internet are better measure of production
The bourgeois in a capitalist economy own the means of production, he’s own ability to meet with his own needs is to purchase and own the means of production
While the proletariat/ working class do not own the mean of production but they make use of the means of production that belongs to the burgenois to achieve their own means of subsistence
The means of production by them selves have no use, or meaning but when the owners of them allow the proletariat to make use of them, it allows the capitalist economy to be maintained
The capitalism ( the economic structure that determines the mode of production) is what determines the relationship between the relations of productions and means of production
What were the categories Marx proposed as the capitalist mode of production
Means of production
Relations of production (owning and working class)
Who was the owning and working class during the feudal period
Aristocrat and common people
What the Marx mean by the means and relations (that is the modes of production) exist in dialect to one another
They are in constant tension with each other
Any change to the means of production would likewise have an impact in the relations of production
They are connected that a change in one would produce a reciprocal change in the other
What was Marx’s theory of material condition and how does that correlate with the means and relations of production
Historical materialism
To understand the structure, we have to consider the relations and means of production and their impact historically that impacted the way the structure is now
The tension that exist between the means and relations, have led to historical changes in the structure—> historical materialism
When talking about cellphones how does that illustrate the categories of historical materialism according to Marx
Cell phone is a means of production, used for communication purposes
The boss (owning class) and the working class (employee) have used the cell phone in such a way that it defines the economic dynamic and historically change in communication from one year to another year
How are the relations of production also in conflict with each other
The working class and the owning class are in contention with each other constantly
The owning class, hopes to accumulate more wealth and capital by pushing the working class to the the most
While the working class are pushing back with the hope of increase in salary, better amenities and better working environment.
They is a constant tension between the two relations
How does the cell phone use today defer from the cell phone use before and how does that illustrate the relationship between the working class and the owning class
Before the advent of cell phones, the relationship between the working class and owning class required for example, waiting at home by a landline to reach your employee or connecting between both lost as each other went home until the next day of work,
With the advent of cellphones now the cellphone allows employees to be readily accessible to their boss. So even if someone is out scheduled to work or an emergency comes up you can be easily reached
How did the mechanism/processes of cellphone lead to a dialectical relationship between the means and relations of production
Cellphone invented—> cellphone increases the freedom to access employee and employer—> more working class obtain cellphones—> technology of cellphone becomes popular
—> this overall leads to a change in the worker/ boss relationship
Initially the invention of cellphones increased communicability in the advent of an emergency or workers were not forced to stay at home waiting on the landline in case of an emergency, allowed for freedom
This caused more people to buy phones further reconfiguring the worker boss relationship
Because as cellphones became increasingly popular, the owning class has more opportunity to take advantage of the working class since they are always so accessible. For example your boss calling you on your day off to help out at the office
How does cell phones illustrate the dialectical tension between the mode of production and relations of production
As the means (cell phone), becomes more ubiquitous and used
The Relations are getting more chances to communicate, that is the working class and owning class have in more tension, the employee and boss can communicate with each other after work hours, during vacations because of the ease of communicate but bridging the gap of privacy causing tension between both classes
Tension between the relations of production occurring because of the advent of the cello phone (Means of production)
How does the tension between the mode of production result in social change
and how did tension result in the change from one mode of production to another?
Tension within the mode of production results in shift from pre modernity to modernity. Changes within the means of production results in changes in the economic structure/ Material condition
While a social change from one modeof production occurs due to the constant clash between them would result in a build up that eventually leads to an earthquake for example the French Revolution
What is the impact of dialectical tension that results in social a change
Historical change within the mode of production
Historical change from one mode of production to another
According to material culture what was the impact of cell phone on the economic structyre
The use of cellphones/ choice to purchase by humans did not lead to a change in the process of the cellphone
But the introduction of the means, cellphone and it’s relationship to the relations of production resulted in the change of economic structure
What were the criticism of Marx’s theory according to Weber?
The neglect of culture and individuals in the society in impacting the structure. Mark does not talk about the subjective reality of individuals. He did not regard the individuals choice and influences necessary to understand tje society
The lack of recognition of Marx that his observations of categories and processes are not an objective view of realty they are just models proposed by Marx himself. The working and owning class are categories that Marx came up with to explain or illustrate his observations
According to Weber what two facets a should be recognized when trying to understand the society
Ideology and culture
Structure
What is the Verstehen sociology and who introduced this word
Weber
The social world cannot be simply described, it must be interpreted, so the observations by Marx were not just descriptions of true reality but assumptions and theories, ontologies proposed my Marx to understand societies influence
Understanding the society from the social actors point of view
What would the verstehen analysis of the history of cellphones look like
The analysis of cellphone would not be limited to how it Marx used objectively but the subjective meaning derived from use buy the culture, the meaning assigned to it that determined its use
To illustrate how culture impacts and leads to the understanding of structure, Weber uses what?
And how were they used?
Class and status
Class how an individual is related to the economy, for example their job as a doctor, plumber, actuary, accountant, professor
While the status is what the social order ascribes you
What describes a persons relationship to the economy
Class
What describes a persons relationship to the cultural order
Status
What is the cultural order
The way the society ascribes status to a person based on their relationship to the economy
How does the view of a persons relation to the economy differ between Webers and Marx’s theory?
In Marx theory, all working class are united in interest of a common goal because of their relationship to the structure. All working class are similar and see the same as all working under the control of the owning class
While Weber, the working class do not all consider themselves as united in a similar way,
Why?
Because of status, although a professor and a plumber these classes may have similar pay but the status ascribed by culture to each class is vastly different even though both of them are under the working class.
Therefore, Weber asserts that the difference between the working class because of status is a reason of culture
How does the understanding ascribes to status and class correlate with Dubois concept of racial wage
In Dubois concept of racial wage, although the black peoples at the time and the working class whites were under the same class but they the virtue of being white are is far greater than being black
Just being white is far better than being black that they could not be seen as the same people even though their means of subsistence required they both work under the same boss and also experienced the same working conditions and opportunities and the white who were working under the people who owned the means of production like the plantations
What is the relationship between status and cell phone use that gives meaning to the means Of production cellphones and accounts for how ubiquitous it becomes
Cells phones popularity was not because of what it is and the use, but because of the meaning given to it,
That it’s unlike Marx’s view, cellphones impact in the society is highly influenced by the culture
So the popularity of cellphones were due to how cool thy were
The vershaen perspective is that because the culture sees cellphones as cool, thats why million of people bought
The coolness, ease and convenience of a cellphone resulted in its popularity
How does Weber views and Marx’s view on the cellphone cause a difference in structure between the classes
From Marx’s view cellphones popularity resulted because it was a means of production that created tension with th e relationship of production causing a social change that made cell phone use ubiquitous and thus reconfigured the workers and employer relationship
While for Weber, the culture of cellphone being cool, the coolness assigned to it by the culture, led to its increasing ubiquity and overall reconfiguration of the working class and owning class relationsh
What does it mean that Marx saw less a reconfiguration of the political order of society but more of the emergence of modernity through the modes of production
According to Marx, what accounts for the emergence of modernity is less related to the political order nor the culture but the modes of production means and relations that lead to the reconfiguration from a feudal economy to a capitalist economy
What did Marx refer to as the reason for the emergence of modernity
According to Marx, what accounted for social change, is the modes and means of production
The result of Modernity is due to the tension against both sides, opposing each other
How according to Marx did the emergence of Pro-Bourgioise account for the emergence of modernity
As more peasants such as merchants amassed wealth, they became a new group of people who were not born aristocrats but had as much wealth to not be in the same class as peasants but in a similar wealth rank as the aristocrats. Having so much wealth, they desired a higher rank than just the peasant
But by the virtue of birth and the impermeable barrier they were still seen as just being peasants
So the Pro-Bourgeois deviced a means to change their class, which was marry the daughter of aristocrats
With the aristocrats females marrying some of the Pro-Bourgeois male, how did that lead to the emergence of modernity
In order to gain access into the higher class the Pre-Bourgeoise marriage into the aristocrats class
They try to gain access to political power through marriages, since the impermanence between classes made impossible for them to be considered aristocrats regardless of how much money they had
Why did the methods the Pro- Bourgeois used to amass wealth differ from that of the aristocrat and what did it result in
They did so through the capitalist means, a method that was greatly influential to them,as it encouraged them to gain more money
While the aristocrats means of amassing wealth, by taxing peasants became increasingly difficult, that increasing the tax did not help them get more wealth
In order to deal with their limited finances, they decided to marry into the rich Pro-Bourgeois
So to overcome the inequality the rich peasants used the structure and capitalist means to their advantage to increase their rank
In the book by Hilary mantel, when Henry said the following,
The world is not run from where he thinks. Not form the border fortresses, nor Whitehall. The world is run from Antwerp, form Florence, from the places he has never imagined, form Lisbon, form where the ships with white sails of silk drift and are burned up in the sun. Not from castles, but from counting houses, not by the call of the bugle but by the scrape of the pen on the page of the promissory note that that pays for the gun and the gunsmith and the power and the shot
what did these words mean from Marx’s view?
Here Henry was thinking about how he would have replied to an aristocrat that was scolding him because of a suggestion Henry had made to do something a certain way
It represents a shift in power, in the premodern era, by virtue of being an aristocrat does not give you power, power came form the amassment of wealth. Wealth comes from the capitalist view of growing wealth through your own efforts and less from just being born into one
Because of the tension between the means and relations of wealth, this accounts for how the structure from the feudal era to the capitalist era is leading to social change
The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism was proposed by who
Weber
Why was webers work considered a critique of Marx
Although Weber did not completely negate the words of Marx, he considered it as an unfinished puzzle which required the influence of culture to understand the society
What does Weber think accounts for the role of culture in the development of capitalism
According to Weber capitalism did not proliferate because of the relations or modes of structure but due to the emergence of the religious understanding of work ethic
Why did Weber consider work ethic as what accounts for capitalism through the point of view of the culture
Weber said work ethic is developed based on an individuals choice
Work ethic was historically organized through religious understandings which led people to work because of their calling
How does the outlook of Marx about why people work differ or why how the cultural mindset of the alpha grind-set differ from what webers views work as
According to Marx, people worked because it gives meaning to them, as humans, they required it because they needed to survive, thats how the working class makes money by using the means of exchange.
Then what might cause someone to work more hours at work, put in more effort, than they require to achieve their task,that would be because capitalism is coercive. There is no freedom, freedom is to starve if you don’t work
But according to Weber, the over working of one self, to achieve even more than the structure expects us to is not because of capitalism but because of personal decision, this is beyond coercion by the structure.
People work because they want to achieve whatever it is based on their own self motivation and mindset.
So therefore Weber emphasizes that the growth of economic structure into capitalism is the need to consider personal decisions, although Marxist is not wrong about the influence of the mode and relations but there is more to that
In Webers theology of Catholicism, Lutheranism and Calvinism does the truth about the existence of God count?
No
Weber was not trying to assert whether their religion is truth or not, he was using a sociological perspective of how religion accounts for the influence of culture in maintaining the structure
What according to Weber was the significance of Lutheranism that accounts for the development of work ethic
Martin Luther a Protestant, argued that peoples relation to God should not be based of the church, but rather their personal relationship to God
to encourage this, he translated the Latin Bible into German
If this was evaluated from Marx’s point of view it may be seen as a mere translation
but from Webers view the translation involved interpretation that gave meaning to a whole different set of people, the translation of the word CALLING
One thing was unquestionably new, the valuation of the fulfillment of duty in worldly affairs as the highest form which the moral activity of the individual could consume
What does this statement by WEBER mean?
According to Weber, the translation by Matin Luther led people to understand that by fulfilling their daily tasks and work not just for the pay but as a personal duty to which they internalize as they do this they are fulfilling their calling therefore building their relationship with God
What effect did the translation of CALLING lead to
A new culture narrative about how one could live in accordance with Gods will by doing their tasks not for personal gain but for r the betterment of others as well
How did WEBER use the concept of Catholicism to explain how the emergence of culture led to the development of a work ethic
The concept of Catholicism was that a person could sin all their life and on their dying bed, apologize to God and ask for forgiveness and everything is fine
But Martin countered this statement saying that, to be a Christian was not to live a sinful life and finally repent on your dying bed but God wants us to live the right way throughout our lives not just right before death
Okay how does this lead to development 0f a work ethic,
By serving God, we throughout our lives, we are fulfilling what we are supposed to do, but not just in our service to Him but that extends to our daily tasks and work we do
What was the catholic view in premodern Europe
Transgression is forgiven via confession and penance
Sin all through your life and ask forgiveness at your dying bed and thats the right way to serve God
The dogma of predestination was a concept introduced by who and in what context
WEBER
Calvinism
“On one hand it is considered an absolute duty to consider oneself chooses, and to combat all doubts as temptations of the devil, since lack of self-confident is the result of insufficient faith, hence of imperfect grace…… “
“In the other hand, in order to attain that self-confidence intense worldly activity is recommended as the most suitable means”
Who wrote this quote and what does it mean?
WEBER
This is the Calvinism point of view that Weber regarded as the Dogma of predestination
The Calvinism point of view asserts that whatever you do in heaven or hell does not matter, God has already decided where we would go after death
Therefore to be considered as one predestined for Heave, you have to have an unwavering faith, that strongly believes you would get there, any sort of doubt, lack of faith, you may have already means you would go to hell
But apart from an unwavering faith, you also need to INTENSIFY YOUR WORLDLY ACTIVITY, so, to live in accordance with God will to one day make it to heaven, you need to work intensely not just for the reward alone but for the fact that you’ll get ton heaven
The harder i work, combined with my unwavering faith, the more my chances are to get to heaven——-> This is what led to the alpha grind mindset, the harder you work, the more your rewards regardless of if you need to even work that hard for the sake of structure
But now the only difference is the grind mindset is not related to the need to get to heaven as Calvinism but for the (capitalist), your own gain
Who was most committed to establishing sociology as an academic discipline out of all the three classical theorists
EMILE DURKHEIM
He wanted to differentiate sociology not as a branch of psychology or as a economics, but for it’s own thing
Who made the statement and what does it mean?
The object of sociological study are social facts, which are external to individuals
EMILE
He meant that we could understand society by completely taking out agency
We can study society without referring to individuals, give an example that illustrates what this statement means
EMILE could understand the society, without regarding the individuals in it
For example, he could study the emergence of suicide, suicide is something that is highly individually dependent and subjective
But EMILE says he could for example study the suicide rate in Germany, Africa, Canada, by using social forces to compare the rate between the countries
The ontological assumption that society is an organism was proposed by who and what does it means?
Proposed by EMILE
When studying the society, we can study a specific aspect of it and what led to that points or social forces that are affecting it, without regarding the individuals
Which of the 3 theorist are related and the other somewhat different for the others
Marx and Weber
EMILE Durkheim
What were the epistemological assumptions made by Durkheim
The claims he made were that society could be studied as an objectively, from what it actually is not what it is made up of
We can understand society without involving the individuals in it but not that we choose to completely disregards them like Marx
According to Durkheim naturally the society tends to want to create what?
Stability and order
How does Durkheim explain that stability is built and maintained?
Through solidarity
The condition of being in it together is a concept of………….
Solidarity
What’s the relationship between solidarity and social cohesion
Solidarity is the experience of being in it together in order for people sharing a commonality to want to work together because they know it is to everyones betterment
But solidarity encourages social cohesion, the forcing everyone to act a certain way to maintain order
So it is not so much the being in it together because it is to everyone’s betterment, it is more being it together because we have to, we are indirectly forced to because by doing that it maintains the stability and sense of order order desired by the society
A society without solidarity is considered as:
Disordered
The study of suicide rate from the text, what would be Durkheim explanation for the cause of suicide rate
The level of solidarity that the society exhibits on the social force determines the nations suicide rate
Higher solidarity- less suicide
Less solidarity- more suicide
What are the two sources of solidarity
Mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity
How does the traditional societies source of solidarity differ from modern day society
Traditional societies made use of mechanical solidarity, where people having things in common leads to social cohesion
While in the modern day society solidarity is achieved through interdependence on each other to exist
What is mechanical solidarity and give two examples of how it was achieved in the traditional society
In mechanical solidarity, social cohesion is achieved when peopler have a common goal
For exmaple, the homogeneity in religion, as many thousands of people read the Bible, follow the church, they shared a commonality in the way to live life, what to eat, how to work, understanding of death, these similarity allowed them to develop social cohesion
For example in crime everyone has a similar view before of what was considered a crime, a sin and was against the law , for example many people all had the similar thought that homosexuality at the time was seen as a crime or mental issue
What is organic solidarity and why is it common in the modern society nit the traditional society
Now there are a lot more heterogenous view on concept of religion, what is considered a crime or form of deviance
Since these views all vary that doesn’t create solidarity, so what does?
Organic solidarity- solidarity derived objectively from the need of interdependence
For example economic interdependence, for example, i work a part time job that earns me money, then the money made cannot be what i eat, I can’t eat paper or wear paper, but i use that economically as a source of exchange to get clothes and food, relying on Walmart and H&M workers to provide what’s available in their store, they also rely on their manufactures make the clothes, and famers to rear and grow the crops to be sold out me. So regardless of if H&M/ Walmart workers have a different background religious than i do, thats not what causes my social cohesion because i am forced and have to rely on them for my means of survival
The organization of the economic system of capitalism is a much better means to achieve solidarity than a consensus in belief
What according to Durkheim would be the relationship between culture, structure and agency in understanding the society and how does that differ from Marx
According to EMILE, society can be understood independent of the social actors within it, he doesn’t say we should disregards them completely, he just says we can understand an organism (society) by itself without understand the molecular structures (Humans) that it is made up of
Marx completely disregards the importance of culture and agency
Why does a society require solidarity?
To maintain order
