and outcomes of these variegated mediations, not least as they relate to biological characteristics of sex, race and age or the socio-cultural categories of gender, class or caste. In combination, these multiple and variable factors generate a stratified social landscape whose hierarchies of status and authority have direct but differentiated implications for the physical (e.g. health) and social (e.g. mobility) wellbeing of its members.
Traditionally treated through the oppositional themes of ‘integration’ and ‘deviance’, sociology also concerns itself with understanding the ways in which macro-processes and institutional dynamics engender the social conformity or manage the nonconformity of individuals and the groups to which they belong. In addition to analysing the concrete mechanisms of reward and punishment, sociology looks also to grasp the impact of prevailing values, conventional beliefs and common knowledges upon individual and collective behaviour. Exemplified by the recent prominence of cultural sociology, analysis of the socializing processes through which normative behaviour is inculcated has been increasingly complemented by critical attention to popular modes of symbolic expression and aesthetic production. Today, analysis of previously neglected modes of cultural production and everyday expression (e.g. television and popular humour) accompanies established critiques of ‘high’ culture, religious systems and civic traditions. In combination, the values, tastes, practices and conventions of the cultural domain furnish the means – material and symbolic – through which life (both individual and collective) is celebrated and rendered meaningful and its latent possibilities explored and expressed.
The way in which societies change over time is also an important object of sociological scrutiny. As noted above, modern society can be distinguished from earlier (for example feudal) societies through reference both to its typical institutional features and the way these institutions interact relative to the orchestration of particular macro-structural dynamics. As both institutions and macro-structures evolve over time, so too does their interaction and the implications it has for individual members of society. Whether analysing the transition from feudal through pre-modern to modern society or engaging the successive phases of modern society itself, sociology reflects upon the causes, consequences, continuities and ruptures involved in societal transformation. In addition to its concerns with longitudinal change, sociology has an international perspective as it compares or analyses the interaction between the different kinds and versions of society in existence across the world. For example, in recent decades the radicalization of globalizing processes has provided ample opportunity to study the tensions and transformations provoked by the interaction of modern, techno-industrial systems with nations and cultures that, at least until now, have existed in relative isolation from the particular socio-economic structures spawned by the industrial revolution. At the same time, the geographical spread of modernity is giving rise to different versions of modern society (‘multiple modernities’) as the original Western model is modified subsequent to its interaction with non-Western structures, institutions and cultures (see Chapter 10).
Variations on a sociological theme
While understanding society and our relationship with it is at the heart of the sociological endeavour, there is widespread disagreement among sociologists as to the best manner of undertaking its disciplinary labours. First of all, sociologists disagree about the most appropriate way of conceptualizing society and the interrelationship of its constitutive macro-structures, mid-range institutions and micro-social encounters. Second, sociologists disagree about the character and purpose of their chosen academic discipline.
Theoretical variations
Two of the most prevailing, but contrasting, ways of conceptualizing society will suffice as examples. Traditionally, the most dominant way of conceptualizing society has concentrated upon the dynamics of social order and systemic integration. The French sociologist Émile Durkheim (1858–1917) is generally credited with establishing this model as a theoretical mainstay of the sociological tradition. Often using biological analogies, society is here viewed as an organism which, like other living things, functions best when its constituent parts work harmoniously together. In the same vein, as with any biological entity, society has needs which must be met if it is not only to survive but to flourish and ultimately evolve. Furthermore, just as a living organism has inbuilt mechanisms to adjust in times of change and heal itself in times of need, so too does society have a range of processes and mechanisms which enable it to correct temporary disorders and partial imbalances.
Known as ‘functionalism’ in its most influential manifestation, this way of conceptualizing society focuses upon the manner in which social cohesion is achieved through the harmonious integration of the various structures, institutions and individuals who make up the social world. At the same time, this approach concerns itself with the ways in which society both optimizes its functionality and maintains its integrative harmony. In respect of optimizing functionality, this is achieved, for example, by society evaluating its various components relative to their overall systemic importance. Consequently, while the most important (‘imperative’) features of society are promoted through their prioritization, others occupy subordinate positions and justify their existence in respect of the service they offer to the more significant elements of the social order. The maintenance of integrative harmony is undertaken in both a general and specific fashion. Generally, social integration is achieved through the propagation of norms, values and beliefs which underwrite the social system by way of, for example, rationalizing both its hierarchical structures and the differential distribution of roles, status and benefits which they entail. Specifically, integrative harmony may be ensured through the active correction of ‘dysfunctional’ components (criminals and other ‘deviant’ elements) through their punishment, censure and, where possible, rehabilitation.
In stark contrast to the conceptualization of society as an organic whole which functions best when its component parts work harmoniously together, conflict models of the social world offer a very different picture. Popularized by the German social-philosopher Karl Marx (1818–83) and developed by his theoretical descendants, conflict models assume a wide variety of conceptual forms and analytical concerns both within and outwith the Marxist tradition. Whereas functionalist thought, for example, sees the hierarchical ordering of society as a necessary and thereby unproblematic condition of its existence, conflict models regard social hierarchies with deep suspicion. This is the case because existing social hierarchies are seen as the outcome of historical struggles in which one or a number of parties have achieved dominance over others. Rather than serving the good of the whole, social hierarchies actually serve the interests of those dominant groups which, for multiple reasons, enjoy the greatest influence in respect of, for example, their distribution of symbolic and practical resources. In effect, then, the macro-structures, mid-range institutions and micro-social encounters which comprise society are not neutral components but actively serve the interests of some to the detriment of others.
Complementing this picture, conflict theories have particular interpretations of the ways in which society goes about integrating its members and maintaining social order. In respect of the norms, values and beliefs underwriting social integration, for example, conflict theories identify a range of processes which both ensure and rationalize the unequal integration of individuals within societal structures. While Marxist approaches have traditionally used the term ‘ideology’ to emphasize the biased nature of these processes – particularly, but not solely, as they relate to socio-economic categories such as class – other conflict approaches employ the concepts of patriarchy (feminist theory) and heterosexism (queer theory) (see Chapter 6). In the same vein, conflict models also identify a range of corrective practices and disciplinary regimes which serve to maintain social inequality through the labelling, admonition and punishment of those who transgress the roles and identities given to them. Consequently, while the likes of functionalist theory speak of necessary hierarchy, conflict theories speak of historically contingent inequality. Where functionalist theory identifies social integration achieved through
