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.
Section IV returns us to the influence of European theorists on the development of sociology, especially as the discipline both emerged from the influence of Parsons in the late 1970s, and also attempted to take stock of the social changes of the post‐World War II era, an era that for all of its progress – increased affluence, the expansion of university education, the growth of the middle classes, and the expansion of mass media – did not eliminate social inequality. This section includes excerpts from theorists associated with the Frankfurt School (chapter 10), most notably Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno who wrote extensively and in a withering manner critiquing the strategic manipulation and manipulating effects of politics and consumer culture by economic interests. The Frankfurt School’s second generation, and undoubtedly the most renowned social theorist alive today, Jürgen Habermas, outlines a way forward from the contemporary debasement of reason, one that returns attention to the possibility of using reason to discuss societal problems and to craft solutions that serve the common good. This section also includes excerpts from the extensive work of Pierre Bourdieu (chapter 11) who has been highly impactful in getting sociologists to think differently and to conduct innovative research (e.g. Lareau 1987) about how social inequality is reproduced, especially through the informal cultures of school and in the ordinary everyday habits and tastes prevalent in family life. Michel Foucault is perhaps the most intellectually radical of all social theorists (chapter 12). His originality is especially seen in his construal of biopower and how he frames and analyzes the birth of sexuality and of other body‐controlling structures (clinics, prisons). Widely read beyond sociology, his analysis of the fluidity of sexuality and power underpins much of queer theory, elaborated for sociologists by Steven Seidman (chapter 12).
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.
The final chapter (chapter 15) features excerpts highlighting what is distinctive about global society, our contemporary moment of late modernity, characterized by an array of transnational actors and processes. Zygmunt Bauman highlights what he sees as the diminishing role of the nation state and of its protective function toward its citizens and their well‐being. Anthony Giddens discusses the disembeddedness of time and space and its consequences for individual selves and social processes. Ulrich Beck elaborates on the globalization of risk society and highlights its encompassing nature. Additionally, he and Edgar Grande highlight the variations in modernity and suggest the need for a cosmopolitanism that would more fully recognize the mutuality of all peoples and societies across the world. Focusing primarily on the post‐secular West, and the political and cultural divisions between moderate religious and secular impulses, Jürgen Habermas articulates how we might go about crafting more respectful and enriching discourses with those whose beliefs, ideas and experiences are different to ours.
REFERENCES
1 Comte,
