Introduction to Sociology - Poverty, Social Exclusion, and Welfare PDF

Introduction to Sociology VO 140.018 Winter term 2023/24 Mag. Dr. Christian Dayé Poverty, social exclusion and welfare Chapter 11 in Giddens & Sutton What is poverty? World Bank: “Poverty is pronounced deprivation in well-being.” (GS11) Well-being? Useful: differentiation between Absolute...

Introduction to Sociology VO 140.018 Winter term 2023/24 Mag. Dr. Christian Dayé Poverty, social exclusion and welfare Chapter 11 in Giddens & Sutton What is poverty? World Bank: “Poverty is pronounced deprivation in well-being.” (GS11) Well-being? Useful: differentiation between Absolute poverty Relative poverty What is poverty? Absolute poverty: People who do not have the means to sustain subsistence, i.e. to meet the basic conditions for a physically healthy existence. It is usually assumed that these conditions, or standards, are the same for all people across the globe. On this definition, absolute poverty is rare in industrialised nations. What is poverty? Relative poverty: Operationalised in economic terms, people who live in a household that has less than 60% of the national median income per household: at-risk-of-poverty rate In the EU: at-risk-of-poverty is used as component of the at risk of poverty or social exclusion measure (AROPE), together with: Severe material deprivation rate (SMD): Proportion of the population that cannot afford at least 4 out of 9 predefined material items considered by most people to be desirable or even necessary to lead an adequate life Low work intensity indicator: People from 0-59 years living in households where the adults (those aged 18-59, but excluding students aged 18-24) worked a working time equal or less than 20 % of their total combined work-time potential during the previous year What is poverty? Source: EUROSTAT What is poverty? Source: Statistik Austria What is poverty? Severe material deprivation rate (SMD): 4 out of mortgage or rent payments, utility bills, hire purchase instalments or other loan payments; one week’s holiday away from home; a meal with meat, chicken, fish or a vegetarian equivalent every second day; unexpected financial expenses; a telephone (including mobile telephone); a colour television (TV); a washing machine; a car; and heating to keep the home adequately warm. Poverty and social exclusion Where do these items come from? Townsend, Peter. 1979. Poverty in the United Kingdom. London: Allen Lane and Penguin Books. Poverty and social exclusion How does it feel to be poor? How is poverty experienced? Townsend collected more than 2000 questionnaires that asked about people’s lifestyle. He then selected twelve items that were relevant across all groups in UK society (cf. Townsend 1979, 250). i. Has not had a week’s holiday away from home in last 12 months 53.6% ii. Adults only. Has not had a relative or friend to the home for a meal or snack in the last 4 weeks 33.4% iii. Adults only. Has not been out in the last 4 weeks to a relative or friend for a meal or snack 45.1% iv. Children only (under 15). Has not had a friend to play or to tea in the last 4 weeks 36.3% v. Children only. Did not have party on last birthday 56.6% vi. Has not had an afternoon or evening out for entertainment in the last two weeks 47.0% vii. Does not have fresh meat (including meals out) as many as four days a week 19.3% viii. Has gone through one or more days in the past fortnight without a cooked meal 7.0% ix. Has not had a cooked breakfast most days of the week 67.3% x. Household does not have a refrigerator 45.1% xi. Household does not usually have a Sunday joint 25.9% xii. Household does not have sole use of four amenities indoors (flush WC; sink or washbasin and cold-water tap; fixed bath or shower; and gas or electric cooker) 21.4% Poverty and social exclusion Items vii to xii led to the formulation of the SMD scale. Criticism of Townsend’s approach led to further specifications, esp. with regard to clarifying that the withdrawal is unwanted, e.g., children would have wanted to organise a birthday party. But of particular relevance: items i to vi, as they allow to explore how poverty is linked to a more genuine sociological concept: social exclusion. Poverty and social exclusion Social exclusion refers to the „ways in which individuals may become cut off from full participation in the wider society.” (GS11) Dimensions of social exclusion: I. exclusion from adequate income or resources (poverty) II. labour market exclusion (care duties, asylum seekers, etc.) III. service exclusion (power, water, public transport, banks etc.) IV. exclusion from social relations Poverty and social exclusion A central dimension of how poverty is experienced is social exclusion: people are forced to withdraw from activities that are considered “normal” within a society. They are not able to fully participate in society. The link is so strong that it is justified to merge the two dimensions into single measures, e.g., AROPE. The fear of social exclusion is used as a factor in marketing and advertisement. Poverty and social exclusion Three further important observations: (1) Dynamics: Over their lifetime, people move in and out and in again of the risk-of-poverty status (2) Working poor: The correlation between work intensity and risk of poverty is not as strong as we might think. (3) Effects of social structure: Particular groups in society are more likely to be affected by poverty than others. Groups with higher risks of poverty Children: Face higher risks of poverty while at the same time being particularly vulnerable to its negative consequences: For example, worse health, low birth weight, higher risk to be injured or killed in road accidents, to suffer abuse and self-harm, to attempt suicide, less likely to do well at school and thus, far more likely to become poor as adults. Source: EUROSTAT Groups with higher risks of poverty Women: Gendered career selection Gender pay-gap Glass-ceiling Traditional division of household responsibilities: part-time work Ethnic minorities: Discrimination in the job market Discrimination in the banking sector (credits) Discrimination in acknowledging foreign education and training Groups with higher risks of poverty Older people: Lower capacities in blue-collar jobs Unintended effects of social benefits: higher wages in older age are a factor in company’s decisions who to dismiss Demographic change: threat to pension systems in many EU countries Effects of intersectionality: How “varied aspects of an individual’s identity – such as class, ethnicity, gender, disability and location – interact to produce complex patterns of inequality, poverty and discrimination.” (GS11) Explaining poverty Both in political and in sociological debates, theories that attempt to explain poverty fall between two poles: Those that “see individuals as responsible for their own poor situation and theories that view poverty as produced and reproduced by structural forces in society.” (GS11) E.g., American political scientist Charles Murray (1984) purportedly showed that there was a causal relation between the improvement of welfare programs and the rising poverty rates. Explaining poverty An emerging underclass who did (1984) not take personal responsibility for their own poverty. This group formed part of a dependency culture of people who rely on welfare provision rather than Charles Murray entering the labour market. Critics claim Murray misread the data in order to provide a justifi- cation for cuts in spending. Explaining poverty Guy Standing (2011) The term precariat: mixture of proletariat and precarious, to underscore the increasing insecurity under which groups of workers find themselves under conditions of „flexible working“. Explaining poverty According the Standing, the precariat lacks several or all of the main aspects of security afforded by citizenship in the industrial economies: adequate labour market opportunities employment protections (including health and safety and regulations and protection against arbitrary dismissal) job security (as well as opportunities for advancement) opportunities to gain skills income security trade union representation Explaining poverty Standing‘s estimate was that in many countries, around 25% of the adult population belonged in this group. Yet, the precariat is a highly diverse group; therefore, joining forces to organize collective representation is difficult. That is a Marxian argument: The suppressed majority has the power to overthrow the system if they understand that they are working against the same suppressive forces and organize. The welfare state Most countries in the world are what can be called „welfare states,“ meaning that they offer systematic support in managing risks that their citizens may face over the course of their lifetimes. Sickness Job loss Disability Old age The welfare state Citizen? Citizenship developed over three phases (cf. Marshall 1950, Citizenship and Social Class): 1. Civil rights: In the 18th century, people obtained civil rights (freedom of speech, of thought, of religion; the right to own property and to a fair legal treatment) 2. Political rights: In the 19th century, people obtained the political rights to vote, to get voted for, to hold office and to participate in processes of polity decision-making. 3. Social rights: Earned in the 20th century, these social rights comprise right of citizens to economic and social security through education, healthcare, housing, pensions and other services. This shapes the welfare state! The welfare state Three different welfare regimes (cf. Gøsta Esping-Andersen. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism). Central concept: decommodification. Marx argued that in the capitalist system, the work of workers became to be treated as a commodity (labour market). Since then, the labour movements and trade unions have „worked for the decommodification of labour and the full recognition of workers as citizen.“ (GS11) The welfare state Welfare regimes: 1. Social democratic: highly decommodified. Welfare services are subsidized by the state and available to all citizens (universal benefits). 2. Conservative-corporatist: In conservative-corporatist states, such as France and Germany, welfare services may be highly decommodified, but they are not necessarily universal. The amount of benefit to which a citizen is entitled depends on their position in society. 3. Liberal: Welfare is highly commodified and sold through the market. State benefits are available to the very needy but become highly stigmatized. The welfare state These regimes are not necessarily stable, once in place. Example UK. Regardless of which regime, most elements of current welfare states have been created or developed in the decades after World War II. Since then, conditions have changed, and thus have the measures and regulations of welfare states. The welfare state Contemporary challenges for established welfare regimes in the EU: 1. Exogenous factors: intensified international competition 2. Endogenous factors: move from manufacturing to services, “feminization” of work, fragmentation of employment relations (flexibility), ageing population 3. Historical factors: restricted space for change due to commitments 4. Supranational factors: EU regulations take time to change 5. Political factors: decline in party loyalty, electoral volatility, negative views of continued EU integration, anti-immigration sentiment Hemerijck, Anton. 2012. Changing Welfare States. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. The welfare state While there is thus an increasing pressure to reform the current welfare state, it is 1. not certain which shape it will (or should) take; and 2. the way to its realization is marred by very complex socio-cultural situations and political movements using the resulting dissatisfaction for short-term gains. What‘s next? Chapter 17: Work and employment Introduction to Sociology VO 140.018 Winter term 2023/24 Mag. Dr. Christian Dayé Social interaction and daily life Chapter 12 in Giddens & Sutton (GS12) Microsociology, daily life and social identities „Civil inattention“, Erving Goffman (1922-1982) An important precondition of living in modern societies is the capability to not engage in direct, personal interaction with anonymous others. In many situations, it is impolite not to react to communication offers; in others, it is acceptable. Microsociology, daily life and social identities The study of daily life has sociological value for several reasons: 1. How we arrive to take things for granted is a way how society shapes us. We often learn about routines only when they are disrupted. 2. As human beings, our identity (our self) is based on the reaction of others to us and our behaviour. 3. We learn about how social facts and social institutions play out their forces at the individual level. 4. We learn how members of the society creatively interpret social norms and thus shape society. Impression management Social interaction can be unfocused (e.g., in situations where civil inattention is the norm) and focused (conversations, meetings etc.). Instances of focused social interaction (encounters) need „openings“ which indicate that the norm of civil inattention is discarded. Starting a communication in a situation of unfocused interaction is mainly achieved through making eye contact: If the overture is not accepted, the person looking to make eye contact can act as though they had made no direct move. Impression management A widely used metaphor to approach social interaction in a microsociological way is the theatre. Erving Goffman (1956): “dramaturgical approach” Impression management The behaviour of humans is analysed as if they were actors who try to play their role in a given situation in a way that convinces the audience, i.e. the people observing them. They do this by various techniques of impression management that involve the body (shape, mimics, gestures) as well as the considerate use of objects (clothes, artefacts etc.). Impression management People learn to play their roles through repetition and experience. Many places of non-private social interaction in modern societies provide for two types of settings for the actors, the front stage and the back stage. Impression management One precondition of a “successful” social interaction is that all persons participating share a similar definition of the situation. If a role is played convincingly, the actor can influence to some degree the shared definition of the situation. Impression management Yet, in many situations, the involved parties share the interest not to let the performance go amiss. A classic study by Henslin and Biggs (1971) explored the dramaturgical steps in a visit at a gynaecologist, arguing that these steps were necessary to define the situation as non-sexual (dramaturgical desexualisation). Impression management However, actors are at a constant risk of their presentation—and thus, their credibility and status—going amiss. One reason for this constant risk: multiplicity of communication channels and the lack of control over some. As concerns the individual, full control of information is impossible. Impression management This concerns both objects and the body. “Goffman distinguishes between the expressions individuals ‘give’ and those they ‘give off’. The first are the words and facial expressions people use to produce certain impressions on others. The second are the clues that others may spot while checking their sincerity or truthfulness.” (GS12) The body thus becomes a sociological topic! Non-verbal communication To some degree, facial expressions and other bodily movements are beyond our control. Some of them seem to be innate and similar across cultures, others in turn are learned and thus culture-specific. Building on earlier psychological research, Paul Ekman’s photographs of the facial expressions of a tribesman from a remote community in New Guinea tested the idea that there are basic modes of emotional expression. Non-verbal communication 1. 2. 3. 4. How would you look if: 1. your friend had come and you were happy 2. your child had died and you were sad 3. you were angry and about to fight 4. you saw a dead pig that had been lying there a long time: disgust. Non-verbal communication “Although the facial expression of emotion seems to be innate, individual and cultural factors influence the exact form that facial movements take and the contexts in which they are deemed appropriate. Exactly how people smile, the precise movement of the lips and other facial muscles, and how fleeting the smile is all vary between cultures.” (GS12) Further, there are no body postures nor gestures that denote the same thing in all cultures. Non-verbal communication Marcel Mauss (1872—1950): Techniques of the body Humans learn how to walk, to eat, to sit, to speak etc. through social imitation. What technique is considered “correct” is, however, socially structured. Bodily movement is patterned and shows differences across: Gender (“Throwing Like a Girl,” by Iris Marion Young) Social class Ethnicity Etc. Non-verbal communication Seemingly inconsequential, micro-level interactions reinforce wider macro-level inequalities. Men control more space when standing and sitting than women and also demonstrate control through more frequent physical contact. This has implications for the gender identity: According to Judith Butler, gender identities are performative, meaning “that gender identity is not a question of who you are, but what you do, and it therefore follows that gender identities are much more fluid and unstable than previously thought.” (GS12) Non-verbal communication Beyond gender, there are also other dimensions of the body that are socially relevant. Building on his analysis of the constant risk of the individual of being discredited through uncontrolled information, Goffman explored the role of physical (medical) impairments. Erving Goffman (1963): Stigma. Non-verbal communication Two forms: 1. observable physical impairments: “discredited stigma” 2. Impairments that are not readily observable: “discreditable stigma” Coping strategies Rules of social interaction Personal space Shared understandings Interactional vandalism Response cries What‘s next? Chapter 22: Crime and deviance Introduction to Sociology VO 140.018 Winter term 2023/24 Mag. Dr. Christian Dayé Work and employment Chapter 17 in Giddens & Sutton Definitions and types Whether paid or unpaid, work is “the carrying out of tasks requiring the expenditure of mental and physical effort, which has as its objective the production of goods and services that cater to human needs.” (GS17) An occupation, or job, is work that is done in exchange for a regular wage or salary (labour, wage labour, contract work). Definitions and types Work (not labour!) is the basis of our current economy, and the economic systems consists of institutions that regulate the production and distribution of goods and services. Beyond this function for the economic system, why is work important? Definitions and types Informal economy: economic transaction that takes place outside the sphere of (formal) occupation: Sex work Illicit work Exchange of goods amongst members of a friendship group, etc. Estimates of the International Labour Organisation (ILO): 2 billion people in total, but regional differences: 86% of employment in Africa, 68% in Asia and the Pacific, 68% in the Arab States 40% in the Americas 25% in Europe and Central Asia The social organisation of work Division of labour (Durkheim) Industrialized production leading to alienation (Marx) Consumerism: refers both to the increased consumer-orientation in organisations as well as to a culture in which an individual‘s identity is linked to the goods they purchase. In global comparison: Growth of third sector (services) in the West, diminishing size of first (agriculture) and second (industry) sectors. The social organisation of work The roots of the scientific management of work Adam Smith (1723-1790): Description of the increase in productivity through the dissection of a production process into small steps. Frederick Winslow Taylor (1865-1915): Used Smith idea as the basis of a comprehensive system of a detailed top-down regulation of work, including body movement (scientific management, Taylorism) Henry Ford (1863-1947): Adapted Taylor‘s principles in car factories, introduced the moving assembly line. Realized that mass production required mass consumption: raised wages, decreased working hours. The social organisation of work „Fordism“: Period from the early 20th century to the 1970s that was characterized by mass production and consumption, stable relations between employers and employees, high degrees of unionization, production oriented to the domestic market Reasons for the downfall of Fordism: cheaper conditions elsewhere, transnational shipping of goods, low-trust system (surveillance), quick replacement of models (consumerism) etc. The social organisation of work Post-Fordism: Term used both for describing changes in work life, but also changes in society more generally. First and foremost defined as a radical break with Fordist principles, mainly to foster „flexibilities“. (1) „Flexibility“ in product: „People can have the Model T in any colour – so long as it is black.“ (Henry Ford, GS17): Mass customization The social organisation of work (2) „Flexibility“ in place of production: E.g., in clothes industry, most labels or forms do not produce their own products, but instead contract other companies (in cheap regions) to make their products. (3) „Flexibility“ in organization of production Group production: management authority less visible, but constant supervision by team members One-person companies: precarious, contractors bogus self- employment → Weak position of workers The social organisation of work Analyses of post-Fordism have inspired a more radical line of thought that questions whether we are witnessing the downfall of industrial production and the replacement of the social structures that it fostered. Post-industrial society (Daniel Bell), knowledge economy: In particular regions of the world, most revenue is made not through the production of material goods, but through the provision of knowledge required for this production. Increasing relevance of R&D for economic growth, increasing valuation of knowledge in society (knowledge society). The feminization of wage labour Not of work!!! Ann Oakley (née Titmuss, 1947-) The Sociology of Housework and Housewife (both 1974). What is the relationship between paid and domestic work and why has the latter been seen as an exclusively female domain? The feminization of wage labour Ann Oakley Industrialization led to a widespread separation between the workplace and home. On the one hand, this separation was important for strengthening the division of public and private space, which is an crucial feature of modernity. On the other hand, money was not earned by the household anymore, but by the (predominantly) male members of the household who went to the factories. The feminization of wage labour Ann Oakley Home became a place of consumption, recreation, and leisure, and domestic work became invisible. Work that earns money became to be the dominant model of work at large, with non-paid work not counting as „real work“ anymore. Housework became to be seen as the „natural“ domain of women, while men took up the role of the „breadwinner.“ Domestic tasks, Oakley shows, can be isolating, alienating and lacking in intrinsic satisfaction. Some women gain psychological rewards from meeting standards of cleanliness and order. The feminization of wage labour Ann Oakley Women do not have the two+ places life of men. The lack of financial resources at their command further binds them to the home. There is no time measurement of housework, so it is temporally without boundaries. They have no dedicated leisure time. Unpaid domestic labour is a crucial element of the economy. This cause for this situation, Oakley argued, was patriarchy, an ideological and cultural system that could be observed across social classes. The feminization of wage labour Unpaid domestic labour as crucial element of the economy: In industrialized countries, the share of the wealth created by housework is estimated to be between 25% and 40%. A study from the early 2000s calculated that if housework were paid, it would be worth £700 billion annually to the UK economy (GS17). The feminization of wage labour therefore allows for understanding the effects of changes in the economy on changes in society (and vice versa). The feminization of wage labour Source: US Dep of Labor The feminization of wage labour Source: US Dep of Labor Source: Eurostat The feminization of wage labour Gendered occupational segregation When women entered the workforce (before and after the war efforts), they tended to be segregated into categories of occupation that were low paying, involved routine work and did not provide opportunities for promotion. Cultural ideas of a female „nature“ dominated job selection, while this „natural“ capacities merely continued the household activities described by Oakley for which women were deemed gifted. The feminization of wage labour Gendered occupational segregation Occupational segregation occurs on two dimensions: a. Vertical segregation: within an occupation, women are more likely to have jobs at the lower bottom of the status ladder. b. Horizontal segregation: Women and men tend to pursue careers in different fields of occupation, with those of women generally being lower paid. The feminization of wage labour Vertical and horizontal segregation are two causes for the gender pay gap. In addition, we find that women even get paid less for doing the same jobs as men. The feminization of wage labour As regards the consequences for domestic work, we find „that the renegotiation of domestic tasks has clearly not changed as quickly as the entry of women into the labour market. […] Even in dual-earner, mixed-sex couples that actively aim for a more equitable arrangement, men take on only those tasks that can be performed quickly, leaving the more time-consuming domestic labour to their partner or outsourcing it to the service sector to be performed by working-class women.“ (GS17) What‘s next? Chapter 18: Religion Introduction to Sociology VO 140.018 Winter term 2023/24 Mag. Dr. Christian Dayé Religion Chapter 18 in Giddens & Sutton Sociology and religion: Two sets of ideas Sociology and religion both are sets of ideas that put forth knowledge claims. In many ways, the knowledge claims from both camps are contradictory and mutually exclusive. Sociologists studying religion are well advised to be „agnostic“ a) With regard to whether religious beliefs are true or not; and b) With regard to a correct definition: rather, they can define the term religion „by looking for how its meaning arises in a network of relations” (Becker 1998, p. 11). Sociology of religion Research topics: (1) Which organizational forms do religions have? (2) What is the relevance of religions in contemporary society? (3) Are there fundamental inter-relations between religion and other systems in society? The social organization of religion Basic concepts: Church: a large, well established religious body that shows a formal, bureaucratic structure with a hierarchy of officials. As churches are integrated into the existing institutional order of society, they tend to represent the conservative face of a religion. Sect: a smaller, less well organized group of committed believers who often protest against better established formations like churches. Also, they tend to withdraw themselves from society, as the latter is often seen as keeping—jointly with well established churches—sect members from finding the „true way“. The social organization of religion Basic concepts: Denomination: a sect that has cooled down and rather resembles a stable organization than a rebellous group. Cult: cults resemble sects with regard to the looseness of their social organization, but instead of seeking a „true way“ for the collective, their focus is more on individual experience and bringing like- minded people together. Also, they are not openly criticizing what they perceive to be distorted views of a church, but rather reject the norms of society in general. They often assemble around a charismatic leader. The societal relevance of religion Durkheim argued that despite organic solidarity was a major cornerstone of integration in modern society, some additional sources of mechanical solidarity were needed and religion was not capable to deliver anymore. Process of secularization: religion gradually looses its influence over all of the various spheres of life The societal relevance of religion Source: Pew Research, 2008 to 2017 The societal relevance of religion But: Is the frequency of attending worship a good indicator for secularization? One indicator of a decreased relevance of religion is the emergence of new forms of collectives. Michel Maffesoli (1996): Neo-tribes facilitate the need of individuals for sociability. The societal relevance of religion An argument against the secularization thesis relies on the concept of „privatized religion.“ Robert N. Bellah, Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, Ann Swidler, and Steven M. Tipton (1985) Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. “a long-term movement away from a unified public form of religion, which helped bind people together, towards extraordinarily diverse and private forms of religion” (GS17) Religion and other parts of society Once more: the classics! They all were convinced of what was happening was a constant „disenchantment“ of the world: a decrease in believe in supernatural forces. Remember Comte‘s law of three stages: theological – metaphysical – positive Religion and other parts of society Karl Marx (1818-1883) Started from the idea (found in L. Feuerbach) that religion consists of ideas and values produced by people, which they mistakenly project onto divine forces or gods. For Marx, religion was the “heart in a heartless world.” Yet, given his notion of the relation between power and knowledge—”the ruling ideas are always the ideas of the ruling class”—he went on to see the function of religion in hiding the stark inequalities in the world. As most religions defer happiness and rewards to the afterlife, believers are told to accept the existing conditions of exploitation. Religion and other parts of society Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) Was the first to produce a comprehensive sociological study of religion. The elementary forms of religious life (1912) Empirical focus: Australian totemism Totems: animals or plants which have a sym- bolic significance for the group Religion and other parts of society Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) Totems, as sacred objects, are regarded with veneration and surrounded by rituals which all contribute to establishing and maintaining the boundary between the sacred and the profane. But how come that the totem is sacred ? For Durkheim, the sacred character comes from the totem representing the social group itself, and their values. In religions, Durkheim concludes, „the real object of worship is society itself.“ (GS18) Religion and other parts of society Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) The ceremonies and rituals of a religion (which in totemism evolve around the totems) are events where believers come together. Collective effervescence: heightened feeling of energy that comes from participating in religious gatherings. „Ceremonials take individuals away from the concerns of their profane social lives and into an elevated sphere in which they feel in contact with higher forces.“ (GS18) Religion and other parts of society Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) Apart from festivities, religion / society offer ceremonials and rituals for various crises that individuals may encounter in their lives. All these rituals reaffirm (mechanical) solidarity in society. Rituals surrounding the death of a family member offer a pre- decided course of action; yet, forms and intensity of mourning is also a duty imposed by the group (feeling rules). Religion and other parts of society Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) While Durkheim thought that „the old gods are dead“ (GS18), he also was convinced that these basic function of religion (if not religion as we know today) will certainly continue. Religion and other parts of society Max Weber (1858-1917) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, 1905 Studied the norms and values cherished by early protestant groups in Europe. Religion and other parts of society Max Weber (1858-1917) Predestination doctrine (esp. in Calvinism): God had already chosen who would receive salvation and who wouldn‘t. It became some form of a duty to believe you were amongst the chosen ones—self-confidence. The only way to show to oneself and others that one belonged to those that were to see salvation was success in life: a calling! Religion and other parts of society Max Weber (1858-1917) An idle life was against God‘s will, so people were encouraged to work hard. Success in life meant monetary gain. However, hoarding money was also against the rules (idle money). They only reasonable way was to have money work, meaning (re-) investing it. Religion and other parts of society Max Weber (1858-1917) Weber thus investigates an elective affinity between a particular form of religion—protestant sects, not yet the church—and the spirit that in his view permeates capitalism. Accordingly, he argued that capitalism developed crucially in regions with high influence of these protestant sects and more reluctantly in other areas. Religion and other parts of society Max Weber (1858-1917) “The Puritan wanted to work in a calling; we are forced to do so. […] This order is now bound to the technical and economic conditions of machine production which to-day determine the lives of all the individuals who are born into this mechanism […] with irresistible force. Perhaps it will so determine them until the last ton of fossilized coal is burnt. In Baxter’s view the care for external goods should only lie on the shoulders of the “saint like a light cloak, which can be thrown aside at any moment”. But fate decreed that the cloak should become an iron cage.” Weber, Max. 2001. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. With an Introduction by Anthony Giddens. London, New York: Routledge, p. 123. Religion and other parts of society Summary: Marx thought that religion contributed to the stability of the system of economic exploitation by telling people to wait for happiness in the next world. Durkheim suggested that the true sacred of religion is society itself and that ceremonies, rituals, and other means through which the boundary between the sacred and the profane is maintained will continue to be important sources of solidarity in modern society. Weber thought that the worldview of a few protestant sects paved the way for capitalism and that the resulting global economic structures are now imposed on all of us, regardless of beliefs. Thank you for your attention and active participation! Introduction to Sociology VO 140.018 Winter term 2023/24 Mag. Dr. Christian Dayé Crime and deviance Chapter 22 in Giddens & Sutton (GS22) Deviance as sociological topic “Biological and individualistic psychological approaches presume that crime and deviance are signs of something ‘wrong’ within the individual person. By contrast, sociologists begin from the premise that any satisfactory account of the nature of crime must take account of how some actions come to be categorized as ‘crimes’ in the first place.” (GS22) Deviance as sociological topic Basic concepts: Deviance: non-conformity to a given set of norms that are accepted by a significant number in a community or society. Social norms are enforced through various sanctions. Sanctions are reactions from others to the behavior of an individual intended to ensure compliance with the norm. Sanctions can be positive or negative, formal or informal. Crime: actions (or omissions) that break the law. Deviance as sociological topic Basic concepts: Criminalization: Activities (or social groups) that come into increased scrutiny, monitoring, and ultimately legal (re-) definition as being against the law. E.g., stalking, internet piracy, knowingly infecting people with diseases etc. Criminology vs. sociology of deviance: How come that some actions are regarded as deviant in the first place? “The study of deviance directs our attention to issues of power, the influence of social class, and divisions between rich and poor and always raises the question ‘who makes the rules?’“ (GS22) Deviance as sociological topic In explaining deviance and crime in sociology, no dominance of a single theory. Four sociological approaches have been particularly influential: Functionalist theories Interactionist theories Conflict theories Control theories Functions and dysfunctions of deviance Émile Durkheim argued that modern societies had less clear standards to guide behaviour and, because there is more room for individual choice, it is inevitable there will be non-conformity or deviance. In extreme cases, however, the lack of moral standards can lead to anomie, which causes deep feelings of disorientation and anxiety among the individual. Functions and dysfunctions of deviance But in parallel to these negative effects on the mental state of individuals, deviance also can have positive functions for society. (1) Adaptive function: Deviant behaviour can innovate. It can provide ideas for how to adapt to new situations. (2) Boundary maintenance: A deviant act can provoke a collective response that heightens in-group solidarity and clarifies social norms. Functions and dysfunctions of deviance Robert K. Merton (1910—2003) Merton. 1957. “Social structure and anomie”, in Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe (IL): The Free Press, pp. 185-214. Functions and dysfunctions of deviance In US society, Merton argued, anomie results mainly from the experience that there is a cleavage between what a society claims to be a successful life and the legitimate means it offers to the individual to reach such a life. Merton op.cit, p. 194 Functions and dysfunctions of deviance The scheme by Merton also helped to understand why the fact that a society gets richer (in average) does not necessarily lead to a similar reduction in acquisitive crime. Relative deprivation: Not the absolute economic resources available to the individual are causing money criminality, but the felt difference between one’s own finances and those of relevant others (or the society at large). Interactionist perspectives Interactionists ask how a certain type of behaviour comes to be defined as a crime. Labelling theory: Explores the dynamics through which a) Actions; and/or b) People and groups of people become defined as deviant. Howard S. Becker Interactionist perspectives „Labelling processes tend to express the power structure of society. By and large, the rules in terms of which deviance is defined are framed by the wealthy for the poor, by men for women, by older people for younger people, and by ethnic majorities for minority ethnic groups.” (GS22) Becker has also described deviance as a stepwise learning process (“Becoming a Marihuana User”, 1953) which he presumes to be at work in crime, too. Being labelled by others as a criminal becomes integrated into the individual’s identity. Conflict theories of crime Inspired by Marx, sociologists have argued that the inequalities produced by the capitalist economy and its distribution of power (accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few) are systematically producing crime. Laws have been analysed as „tools used by the powerful to maintain their own privileged position.” (GS22) E.g., punishment for low-level vs. high-level crimes Conflict theories of crime Movement of Left Realists in criminology: Focus not on those committing, but on those people suffering the crimes. It turns out that those groups that are widely deemed to be likely aggressors (in the UK context, young black men in particular) are (also) more likely to become victims of a crime. „[R]ates of crime and victimization were concentrated in margina- lized neighbourhoods and […] poorer social groups were at a much greater risk of becoming victims of crime than the wealthy.” (GS22) Control theories: Factors influencing crime Inspired by Durkheim‘s interest in the effects of social integration, Travis Hirschi argued that what „immunizes“ people against becoming a criminal was the strength of social bonds: (1) attachment (to parents, peers and institutions), (2) commitment (to conventional lifestyles), (3) involvement (in mainstream activities) and (4) beliefs (respect for the law and authority). Criticisms: The role of imitation in peer groups, the social value of transgression, the sliding into a delinquent/criminal career. Control theories: Factors influencing crime Broken windows theory “[O]ne un-repaired broken window is a signal that no one cares, and so breaking more windows costs nothing.” Wilson, James Q., George L. Kelling. 1982. "Broken Windows". The Atlantic. March. Control theories: Factors influencing crime Criticisms: Defining social order is completely left to the police, it legitimises hard forms of social control by the authorities of even minor crimes, and incidentally may justify also police violence as a means of prevention Other forms of crime White collar crime: Crimes that are committed by people who are already relatively well off by using their occupational status (yet often against the interests of the companies for which they work): Tax fraud Illegal sales practices Securities and land frauds Embezzlement Theft Manufacture / sale of off-grade or dangerous goods Other forms of crime Company crime: While white-collar crime is carried out for personal gain, company crimes are committed by large corporations. Illegal pollution Mislabelling of products Violations of health and safety regulations “[I]n many cases the victims of corporate crime do not see themselves as victims at all. […] [G]reater distances in time and space mean that people may not realize they have been victimized or may not know how to seek redress.“ (GS22) Other forms of crime Organized crime: social forms of illegal activity that share characteristics of orthodox business, or enterprises: clear hierarchies, rational (and sometimes even project-like) organization of work, budget calculation and income projections etc. The organizations are stabilized through offering services or goods which are in high demand, but also through the use of force, credible threats, monopoly-like status, or the corruption of public officials. Other forms of crime Organised crime: Classical groups include the Mafia (Cosa Nostra, Camorra, ’Ndrangheta etc.), the Triads in Hong Kong, the Yakuza in Japan, Mexican drug cartels. Smuggling, drug trade, human trafficking, prostitution, money laundering etc. Other forms of crime Organised crime: Over the last decades, organised crime has increasingly become transnational. Spanish sociologist Manuel Castells (1942—) argues that in the age of the network society, the activities of organized crime and the coordination of their activities across borders – using new information technologies – have become central features of the global economy. International collaboration between groups can be observed. Other forms of crime Cybercrime: „[C]omputer-mediated activities which are either illegal or considered illicit by certain parties and which can be conducted through global electronic networks.“ (GS22) Three consecutive phases of cybercrime (cf. Wall 2007): (1) First-generation cybercrimes are those that make use of computers to assist traditional types of offending. (2) Second-generation cybercrimes are those where the internet has opened up new global opportunities for fairly conventional crimes. (3) Third-generation cybercrimes can take place only within cyberspace and thus are new forms of crime. Other forms of crime Cybercrime: “Globalization and the ongoing digital revolution continue to transform the landscape of crime, making new demands on policing and regulatory bodies, most of which have developed in local or national contexts. […] Monitoring and policing the Darknet is just one of the new challenges for authorities today, alongside organized crime, terrorist networks and state-sponsored international crime.“ (GS22) What‘s next? Chapter 11: Poverty, social exclusion and welfare CONTENTS An introduction to sociology The sociological imagination Studying people and societies The development of sociological thinking Theories and theoretical perspectives Founders of sociology Three theoretical traditions Levels of analysis: microsociology and macrosociology The uses of sociology Public and professional sociology Summary Chapter review Research in practice Thinking it through Society in the arts Further reading Internet links As the Covid-19 pandemic spread around the world in 2020, many national governments closed their borders or imposed entry restrictions. This had a dramatic effect on global aviation. A majority of the world’s aircraft were grounded and many of the best-known airlines effectively closed down. Flying is one of the more visible examples of globalization and the fabulous opportunities it offers, but the aviation industry also helped to spread the virus and its health risks rapidly across the globe. This example illustrates something of the character of today’s high-opportunity, high-risk world. Today’s social world offers exciting opportunities for travel, work and leisure that heighten perceptions of individual freedom and choice. Yet, at the same time, many people have anxieties and concerns about the risks inherent in our modern way of life. With widespread use of the internet and social media, communicating and maintaining contact across continents is more immediate and routine than ever before, but there are also violent crime, global terrorism, national conlicts and wars, along with persistent economic and social inequalities. The modern world has many opportunities and possibilities but it is also fraught with high-consequence risks such as global pandemics, rising air pollution, climate change, and the threat posed by nuclear and chemical weapons. We live in ‘high-risk, high reward’ societies which appear to luctuat e wildly between extremes without any overall authority or control. Most people within the relatively rich nations of the Global North are materially better off than ever before, but in other parts of the world, notably the Global South, many millions live in poverty where children die for the lack of fundamental necessities such as nutritious food, safe water and basic healthcare. How can this be, when humanity as a whole has the capability to control its own destiny to an extent that would have been unimaginable to previous generations? How did this world come about? Why is the human world riven with huge inequalities of wealth and income? Where are today’s societies heading in the future? These large questions are among the central concerns of sociology, a ield of stud y that has a fundamental role to play in modern life. Sociology can be simply deined as the scientiic stud y of social groups, whole societies and the human world as such. The scope of sociology is extremely broad, ranging from the analysis of passing encounters between individuals in the street to changes in family life, new forms of personal and social identity, and relationships between nation-states. Most of us see the world in terms of the familiar features of our own lives – our families, friendships and working lives, for example. Sociology insists that we take a broader and longer view in order to understand why we act in the ways we do. It teaches us that much of what appears to us as natural, inevitable, good and true may not be so, and that things we take for granted are shaped by historical events and social processes. Understanding the quite subtle but complex and profound ways in which our individual lives relect the cont exts of our social experience is fundamental to the sociologist’s way of seeing. An introduction to sociology This chapter is the irst of a block of thr ee which, taken together, provide a broad introduction to the discipline of sociology: what it is, how it developed over time, how sociologists go about their work, and what kinds of explanations they use. It provides a brief introduction to what sociology is, how and why it came into existence and what it is used for. Chapter 2 then looks at the practice of sociology: how sociologists actually study their subject. It describes the questions they ask, the wide range of research methods they use to address those questions, and how they evaluate their indings. It also tackles the thorny issue of whether sociology can or should be considered ‘scientiic’. Chapter 3 looks at sociological theories. Theories are an essential part of all scientiic subjects because the y provide explanations rather than descriptions that simply list relevant facts. For example, we might ind that the proportion of married women in Australia who are in work today is higher than it was in the 1950s. Such bald statistics are certainly useful, but they are crying out for an explanation – why are more married women working today than in the past? Good theories provide explanations. They tell us why something has happened or changed and in that way they broaden our knowledge. In chapter 3 we introduce some important sociological theories including Marxism, feminism, functionalism, structuration theory, postcolonialism, postmodernism and more. You should not be put off by these labels, which are just shorthand ways of describing different groups of sociologists who interpret and aim to understand the social world. In the rest of this chapter we irst discuss sociology as a way of thinking about the world which, once you have mastered it, becomes very dificult t o avoid. In short, once a sociologist, always a sociologist! World events, political debates, personal relationships, family life: you will see all of these and many more in a different light once you have developed a sociological way of seeing and thinking. Second, we introduce the ideas of some of the sociological thinkers of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries who established the subject as an academic discipline. We connect these thinkers to the times they lived through to illustrate the emerging social problems they tried to solve and how they went about it. We then discuss some of the approaches to sociology that came afterwards. However, this is not a comprehensive list, and you will need to read chapter 3, on ‘Theories and Perspectives’, for more recent theories. Third, we look at some of the uses of sociology. Many students are attracted to sociology because they have a desire to help others and want a suitable ‘people-centred’ career. Some sociology graduates ind careers in the caring professions, social work, teaching or the criminal justice system. Others use their research skills and knowledge to good effect in business management, market research, local and national government administration or research consultancy. Still others (after more study) become professional sociologists themselves working in universities and colleges. While studying sociology can be the irst st ep on the path to a rewarding and satisfying career, some individuals study sociology simply because they want to understand better the world we live in. This is sociology as personal enlightenment relatively unconnected to a speciic car eer path. Some sociologists use their training and skills in very practical ways to try and improve the conditions of life for people by intervening to change an existing situation. This branch of the discipline is known as ‘applied sociology’, where many studies of homelessness, poverty, unemployment, drug addiction, self-harm, and so on, lead to interventions. Based on their research indings, applied r esearchers may try out potential solutions on a small scale or make recommendations for changes to government policy or service provision. The chapter ends with recent ideas of the need for sociologists to engage more with the general public and the media if sociology is to have a greater impact on society. We have become used to seeing psychologists, historians and political scientists as experts on radio, on television news and in documentaries, but rarely do we see sociologists. This section discusses why this is so and what sociologists can and should do about it. However, we begin by outlining what it means to ‘think sociologically’ – a basic prerequisite to the practice of ‘doing sociology’. The sociological imagination Studying sociology is not just a routine process of acquiring knowledge from books like this one. Learning to think sociologically means cultivating our imagination in a speciic w ay. The sociologist must be able to break free from the immediacy of their own personal circumstances to see things in a wider social context. Practising sociology depends on developing what the American sociologist C. Wright Mills (1970), in a famous phrase, called a sociological imagination. The sociological imagination demands that we ‘think ourselves away’ from the familiar routines of our daily life in order that we may look at them from a new point of view which may appear strange, at least at irst. The best way to illustrate this is with something so ordinary it usually passes without comment: the act of drinking a cup of coffee. What could sociology possibly ind t o say about such a commonplace and uninteresting act? First, coffee may be a pleasant drink, but it also has symbolic value as part of our day-to-day social activity, and the rituals associated with coffee drinking can be more signiicant than consuming the actual drink. For many people, a cup of coffee in the morning is the centrepiece of a personal routine and an essential start to the day. Morning coffee is then followed later in the day by coffee with others – the basis of a group, not just an individual ritual. People who arrange to meet for coffee are probably more interested in socializing and chatting than drinking, and, in all societies, drinking and eating provide occasions for social interaction – a rich subject matter for sociologists to study. Second, coffee contains caffeine, a drug which has a stimulating effect on the brain. Many people drink coffee for the ‘extra lift’ this active substance provides. Long days at the ofice or lat e nights studying in the library are made more tolerable by regular coffee breaks. And though coffee is a habit-forming substance, coffee ‘addicts’ are not regarded as drug users. This is because, like alcohol, caffeine is a socially acceptable and legal drug, whereas cocaine and heroin, for example, are not. Yet some societies tolerate the consumption of cocaine but frown on both coffee and alcohol. Sociologists are interested in why these differences exist, how they developed and whether they are changing. Meeting friends for coffee retains its place as part of a widespread social ritual. Yet today’s specialist coffee shops cater to younger consumers, offering a much wider range of caffeine drinks in fashionable environments that look and feel closer to bars and nightclubs than traditional cafés and teashops. Third, when we drink a cup of coffee we are unwittingly caught up in a complex set of social and economic relationships stretching right across the planet. Coffee links people in the wealthiest and the most impoverished parts of the world, as it is consumed mainly in the relatively rich countries but grown primarily in relatively poor ones. Around 125 million workers depend on the coffee trade to earn a living (Fairtrade Foundation 2020), but many labourers are poorly paid and live in poverty. Around half of coffee workers in Brazil have no formal contract of employment, and inspectors have found that many workers earn less than the legal minimum. Most workers are paid around R$14 (US$3.43) per 60 litre sack they pick, which can take a whole day’s labour for some women (Teixeira 2019). Some of the largest coffee companies, including Nestlé, Jacobs Douwe Egberts and Starbucks, have admitted that some of their coffee beans have been sourced from Brazilian plantations that use child and slave labour (Hodal 2016; Canning 2019). Coffee is one of the most traded agricultural commodities globally, providing many countries in South and Central America, Mexico, Africa, Asia and Oceania with their largest source of foreign exchange (ICO 2018). The production, transportation and distribution of coffee require continual transactions between people thousands of miles away from the individual coffee drinker. Studying such global connections is an important task for sociologists. Fourth, sipping coffee is not a ‘natural’ act but presumes a long process of social, political and economic development. Along with other familiar items of Western diets – such as tea, bananas, potatoes and white sugar – coffee became widely consumed only from the late 1800s, though it was fashionable among social elites well before then. The drink originated in the Middle East, but mass consumption dates from the period of Western colonial expansion more than 200 years ago. Virtually all the coffee we drink today comes from areas such as South America and Africa that were colonized by Europeans. The drink is not a ‘natural’ part of the Western diet, however normal buying and consuming coffee appears to people today. Finally, coffee has been ‘branded’ and politicized within debates about international fair trade, human rights and environmental damage. For instance, some people drink only organic coffee, decaffeinated coffee or coffee that is ‘fairly traded’ through schemes that pay the full market price to small producers in developing countries. Others patronize ‘independent’ coffee houses rather than ‘corporate’ chains such as Starbucks and Costa. Choosing a coffee is not only a lifestyle decision, it also has political signiicance. When we begin to develop a sociological imagination, the morning coffee becomes a thing of great fascination which we approach with a new understanding. Indeed, as we will see throughout the book, the best sociological studies always tell us something we did not know before or make us see the familiar routines and patterns of life in new ways. Coffee is much more than a pleasant drink for these workers, whose livelihoods depend on the coffee plant. THINKING CRITICALLY Take a jar of coffee from your home or workplace and search the company website for information on where its coffee plants are grown, what the production process entails and how many workers are involved. What social, economic or political factors would make you or your friends reconsider your coffee choices? Studying people and societies It is often said that sociology is simply the ‘science of society’. But what do we mean by ‘society’? When sociologists speak of a society, they generally mean a group of people living in a bounded territory who share common cultural features such as language, values and basic norms of behaviour. Hence we can discuss South Korean society, Nigerian society or Spanish society. However, ‘society’ also includes institutions – such as particular types of government, education systems and family forms – and the relatively stable relationships between them. The enduring patterns formed by relationships among people, groups and institutions form the basic social structure of a society. When we start thinking about social life through the concepts of society, institutions and social structures, we are beginning to use a sociological imagination and to ‘think sociologically’. Adopting a sociological imagination allows us to see that events that affect the individual person actually relect lar ger social issues. Divorce, for instance, may be emotionally traumatic for individuals who go through it – what Mills calls a ‘personal trouble’. But the level of divorce is also a signiicant ‘public issue’ that has an impact on pension provision, welfare beneits and housing needs. Similar ly, losing a job and being unable to ind another one quickl y may be a personal tragedy for the individual, but it is far more than a matter of private despair when millions of people ind themsel ves in the same situation. It is a public issue expressing broad economic and social trends. Try to apply a sociological imagination to your own life. It is not necessary to think only of troubling events. Consider why you are turning the pages of this book – why did you decide to study sociology? You could be a reluctant student (surely not?) taking a course to fulil the degree requirement for a career in law, teaching, journalism or management. Or you might just be enthusiastic to understand better the world you live in. Whatever your motivation, you are likely to have a good deal in common with other sociology students. This is because your private decision also relects y our location within the wider society. Do any of the following characteristics apply to you? Are you young and white? From a professional or white-collar background? Have you done, or do you still do, some part-time work to boost your income? Do you want to ind a good job but ar e not especially dedicated to studying? More than three-quarters of readers in the UK will answer ‘yes’ to all of these questions, because university students are not typical of the general population; they tend to be drawn from more privileged social groups and their attitudes relect those of their friends and acquaintances. Our social background has a great deal to do with the lifestyle choices we make. On the other hand, none of the characteristics above may apply to you. You might come from a minority ethnic group, from a working-class family or from a background of relative poverty. You may be in mid-life or older. All the same, we can make some tentative assumptions about you. You are likely to have had to struggle to get where you are; you probably had to overcome negative reactions from friends who thought you were quite mad to give up a decent job, take on a large debt or risk failing, and you may well be combining your studies with full-time parenthood. For sociologists there is no such thing as the ‘isolated individual’ who makes choices without reference to anyone else. We are all inluenced b y social contexts, but our behaviour is never determined entirely by that context. Sociology investigates the connections between what society makes of us and what we make of society and ourselves. Our activities both structure – or give shape to – the social world around us and, at the same time, are structured by that world. The social contexts of our lives are not a mass of completely random events but are structured, or patterned, in distinct ways. There are certain regularities in the ways we behave and in the relationships we have with one another. Although the idea of a ‘structure’ reminds us of a building, social structures are not really like physical structures, which, once built, exist independently of our actions. Human societies are always in the process of structuration (Giddens 1984). That is, they are reconstructed at every moment by the very ‘building blocks’ that compose them – human beings like us. Consider again the case of coffee. A cup of coffee does not drop into your hands. You choose to go to a particular coffee shop, you choose whether to drink a latte, a cappuccino or an espresso. As you make those decisions, along with millions of other people, you help to shape the world market for coffee, and that affects the lives of coffee producers in distant countries whom you will never meet. In recent decades, the malleable character of social structures has been dramatically demonstrated. The communist regimes of Eastern Europe, including the former Soviet Union, collapsed rapidly in the late 1980s and the 1990s as ordinary people took to the streets to protest at the lack of freedom and economic development. No one foresaw that the apparently solid and unyielding social structures of communism would wilt as people withdrew their legitimacy from the regimes and their leaders. In 2011, countries of the Middle East and North Africa saw numerous uprisings against authoritarian governments in the region as people expressed their dissatisfaction and called for change. In Libya, the 42-year regime of Colonel Muammar Gaddai w as ended and, in Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak was forced from ofice aft er protesters took over Tahrir Square in the capital city, Cairo. Events such as these, even though not always successful, show us that social structures are always ‘in process’, however solid or ‘natural’ they may feel. Recent political developments, including those noted here, are further discussed in chapter 20, ‘Politics, Government and Social Movements’, and chapter 21, ‘Nations, War and Terrorism’. The development of sociological thinking Many students ind sociological theory dificult , not least because they do not understand why the subject has so many different theories. Sociology has never been a discipline where a single body of ideas is accepted as valid by everyone. Sociologists often disagree about how to study human behaviour and how research indings should be interpreted. This is quite normal and is an aspect of all scientiic subjects. However, unlike physics or chemistry, sociology involves studying ourselves, and this can severely challenge long-held views and attitudes. Sociology can be unsettling and disturbing. Nonetheless, we must make every effort to set aside our emotional and political commitments, at least while we are in the process of ‘doing sociology’. If we do not, then there is a risk that we will be misled and that our conclusions will not be valid. Theories and theoretical perspectives It is a fact that I bought a cup of coffee this morning, that it cost a certain amount of money and that the coffee beans used to make it were grown in Brazil. But in sociology we also want to know why things happen, and that means we have to construct theories which explain the bare facts. We know that many millions of people use the internet and social media to stay in touch with friends. But this is a very recent development which raises some questions. Why did internet use spread so rapidly? How did online social media come about and why do so many people get involved with them? Why are younger people more likely to use social media than older people? What impact are social media sites having on earlier forms of communication? To address questions such as these, we need to collect and assemble the evidence and engage in theorizing. In this painting by Bruegel, random, often bizarre activities can be seen which collectively make little sense. The title – Netherlandish Proverbs – provides the key to interpreting the painting, which contains over a hundred proverbs that were common in the sixteenth century. For example, at the bottom left someone is ‘banging their head against a brick wall’, on which sits a man who is ‘armed to the teeth’. Evidence collected by sociologists can appear similarly random unless it is set within a general theory which guides our interpretation of the facts. Theorizing means constructing abstract interpretations of events using a series of logically related statements that explain a wide variety of empirical or ‘factual’ situations. A theory about social media, for example, would be concerned with identifying how information and communications technology (ICT or just IT) has developed over time and what were the prerequisites for their success. In the best sociology, factual research and explanatory theories are closely related. We can only develop valid theoretical explanations if we can test them through empirical research; sociological theories should not be mere speculation. Contrary to popular belief, the facts do not speak for themselves; they need to be interpreted, and interpretation takes place within a set of underlying theoretical assumptions. Many sociologists work primarily on factual research projects, but unless they are guided by some knowledge of theory their work is unlikely to explain satisfactorily the complexity they ind. This is true e ven of research carried out with strictly practical objectives. Many people see themselves as essentially practical, ‘down to earth’ folks and are suspicious of theorists and theories which appear far removed from their daily life. Yet all practical decisions make some theoretical assumptions. The manager of a business may have no regard for ‘theory’, but she might also believe that her employees are motivated by monetary reward and that the promise of this leads them to work hard. This is a simple underlying theoretical interpretation of human behaviour which the manager takes for granted without realizing or acknowledging it. An alternative view is that most people work in order to make a decent life for their families and monetary reward is merely a means to that less individualistic end. Once we begin to look for satisfactory interpretations of human actions we have to become interested in theories. Without some kind of theoretical approach, we do not even know what to look for when beginning a study or when interpreting our results at the end of the research process. Theoretical thinking must also tackle general problems of how social life can and should be studied in the irst place. Should sociological methods be modelled on the natur al sciences? How should we think of human consciousness, social action and social institutions? How can sociologists avoid introducing personal bias into their research? Should they even try? There are no easy answers to such questions, which have been answered in different ways since the emergence of sociology in the nineteenth century. Founders of sociology For thousands of years, attempts to understand human behaviour relied on ways of thinking passed down from generation to generation. Before the rise of modern sciences, ‘folkways’ – traditional knowledge and practices passed down through generations – held sway in most communities, and these persisted well into the twentieth century. One example is people’s understanding of their health or illness. Older people, with a good knowledge of a community’s folkways, provided advice on how to prevent illness and cure diseases. Relecting on his American childhood in Lawrence County, Kentucky, Cratis Williams gives us a la vour of the Appalachian culture of the time (Williams 2003: 397–8): A plaque of lead suspended on a string around a child’s neck warded off colds and kept witches away while the child was sleeping. Children plagued by nightmares could wear these lead charms to assure themselves of sweet sleep and pleasant dreams, for nightmares were caused by witches and evil creatures that could not operate in the presence of lead. Adults given to snoring and nightmares sought relief by smelling a dirty sock as they went to sleep. Today very few people advocate such measures or hold similar beliefs. Instead, a more scientiic appr oach to health and illness means that children are vaccinated against previously common diseases and taught that nightmares are normal and generally harmless. Pharmacies do not routinely sell smelly socks to cure snoring either. The origins of systematic studies of social life lie in a series of sweeping changes ushered in by the French Revolution of 1789 and the mid-eighteenth- century Industrial Revolution in Europe. These events shattered older, traditional ways of life, and the founders of sociology sought to understand how such radical changes had come about. But, in doing so, they also developed more systematic, scientiic w ays of looking at the social and natural worlds which challenged conventional religious beliefs. The next section looks at the key ideas of some early thinkers, who, until quite recently, went unchallenged as the key ‘founders’ of sociology. There is no doubt that these early sociologists played an important part in developing a sociological perspective and in establishing sociology as a legitimate academic discipline. However, their focus was on the development of the modern world, what sociologists call modernity, insofar as this refers primarily to Europe and North America. Over the last twenty-i ve years or so, a movement known as postcolonialism has challenged the accepted account of modernity and the origins of sociology (Bhambra 2014). There are numerous elements in this challenge, which are discussed in chapter 3, ‘Theories and Perspectives’, but two in particular should be borne in mind as you read through the rest of this section. First, postcolonial scholars argue that sociology has generally not taken enough account of the devastating impact of colonialism on countries in the Global South. Not only did this involve exploitation at the time, but the legacy of colonialism continues to blight these countries long after they achieved independence. Second, the lack of Global South perspectives in the formation and development of sociology led to the discipline adopting a fundamentally Eurocentric position that was, and still is, focused primarily on the industrialized countries of the Global North (Connell 2018). Opening up sociology to more studies by scholars in the Global South is one way in which this situation can begin to be addressed. We have included something of the continuing engagement between sociology and postcolonialism at various points throughout this volume. The book’s chapters also introduce ‘classic studies’ in speciic ar eas of sociology. These are pieces of research, theories or novel methods that have had a large inluence on the subject. However, these are our selections, and there are many more that could have been chosen. Classic studies boxes incorporate a brief critical commentary which points readers towards the limitations of these studies. With these necessary qualiications, w e now turn to the established West European founders of sociology. The process of industrialization is discussed in chapter 4, ‘Globalization and Social Change’, and chapter 13, ‘Cities and Urban Life’. Some of the damaging consequences of industrialization are outlined in chapter 5, ‘The Environment’. Auguste Comte No single individual can found a whole ield of stud y, and there were many contributors to early sociological thinking. However, particular prominence is usually given to Auguste Comte (1798–1857), who invented the word ‘sociology’ around 1840. Comte had originally used the term ‘social physics’ to describe the new subject, but some of his intellectual rivals were also using that term. To distinguish his own approach from theirs he coined the term ‘sociology’ – the systematic study of the social world. Comte’s thinking relect ed the turbulent events of his age. He wanted to create a science of society that would discover the ‘laws’ of the social world, just as natural science had discovered laws in the natural world. He recognized that each scientiic discipline has its o wn subject matter, but Comte thought that a similar logic and scientiic method w ould apply to them all. Uncovering the laws that govern human societies could help us to shape our own destiny and improve the welfare of everyone. Comte wanted sociology to become a ‘positive science’ that would use the same rigorous methods as astronomy, physics and chemistry. Positivism is a doctrine which says that science should be concerned only with observable entities that are known directly to experience. On the basis of careful observation, laws can then be inferred that explain the relationships between those observed phenomena. By understanding the causal relationships between events, scientists can then predict how future events will occur. A positivist approach in sociology aims to produce knowledge about society based on evidence drawn from observation, comparison and experimentation. Comte argued that human efforts to understand the world have passed through three broad stages: the theological, the metaphysical and the positive. In the theological stage, thinking was guided by religious ideas and a belief that society was an expression of God’s will. In the metaphysical stage, society came to be seen in natural rather than supernatural terms, with events being explained by reference to natural laws. The positive stage, ushered in by the discoveries of Copernicus, Galileo and Newton, encouraged the application of scientiic methods. Comte regarded sociology as the last of the sciences to develop, but he argued that it was also the most signiicant and comple x. In the latter part of his career, Comte was keenly aware of the state of the society in which he lived and was concerned with the inequalities produced by industrialization and the threat they posed to social cohesion. The long-term solution, in his view, was the production of moral consensus through a new ‘religion of humanity’ to hold society together despite the new patterns of inequality. Although Comte’s vision was never realized, his contribution in founding a science of society was important to the later professionalization of sociology as a legitimate academic discipline. Emile Durkheim Another French sociologist, Emile Durkheim (1858–1917), had a more lasting impact on sociology than Comte. Durkheim saw sociology as a new science that turned traditional philosophical questions into sociological ones demanding real-world – empirical – research studies. He argued that we must study social life with the same objectivity as scientists study the natural world, summed up in his famous injunction to ‘study social facts as things’. By this he meant that social institutions have a hard, objective reality that enables them to be analysed as rigorously as objects in the natural world. But what is a social fact? Durkheim explains that social facts are all those institutions and rules of action which constrain or channel human behaviour. For the individual, social facts can feel rather like an external pressure, though most of the time they are simply taken for granted as ‘natural’ or ‘normal’ parts of life. For instance, the monetary system is a social fact we rarely think about. We are paid in money, we borrow money from banks to buy a car or a house, and if we have not been good at managing money we will be considered a high risk and may not be allowed to borrow. But the monetary system was already in place before we were born and, as we are forced to use it if we want to take part in our society, we are subject to its rules. In that sense, the system constrains or shapes our actions. This is typical of all social facts; they exist independently of the individual and shape their choices and actions. In his analysis of suicide rates, Durkheim used the concept of social facts to explain why some countries have higher suicide rates than others (see the ‘Classic study’ below). Suicide seems to be a purely individual act, the outcome of extreme unhappiness or perhaps deep depression. Yet Durkheim showed that social facts such as religion, marriage, divorce and social class all exert an inluence on suicide r ates. And, as there are regular patterns across different countries, these patterns must be explained in a sociological not a psychological way. Durkheim was preoccupied with the changes transforming society in his own lifetime and was particularly interested in social and moral solidarity – what it is that binds society together. Solidarity is maintained when individuals are integrated into social groups and regulated by a set of shared values and customs. In The Division of Labour in Society, Durkheim (1984 ) argued that the advent of the industrial age also led to a new type of solidarity. According to Durkheim, older cultures with a low division of labour (specialized roles such as work occupations) are characterized by mechanical solidarity. Most people are involved in similar occupations and bound together by common experiences and shared beliefs. But the development of modern industry and the enlargement of cities produced an expanding division of labour which broke down mechanical forms of solidarity. With the increasing specialization of tasks and roles, a new type of organic solidarity was created. As the division of labour expands, people become increasingly dependent upon one another, because each person needs goods and services that those in other occupations supply. Like the human ‘organic’ body, each part or organ depends on all the others if the whole society or body is to function properly. Nonetheless, Durkheim thought that social change in the modern world was so rapid and intense that major dificulties could arise. As societies change, so do lifestyles, morals, beliefs and accepted patterns of behaviour. But, when change is rapid and continuous, the old values lose their grip on people without any new ones becoming established. Durkheim called such an unsettling condition anomie – deep feelings of aimlessness, dread and despair, as many people are left perceiving that their lives lack meaning and structure without clear guidelines for action. The big question is whether people can ever get used to continuous rapid change as the ‘normal’ condition of living in conditions of modernity. Classic studies 1.1 Emile Durkheim’s study of suicide The research problem One of the more emotionally unsettling aspects of our lives is the phenomenon of suicide, which often leaves those left behind with more questions than answers. Why do some people decide to take their own lives? Where do the pressures they experience actually come from? One of the early sociological classics which explores the relationship between the individual and society is Emile Durkheim’s analysis of suicide rates, Suicide: A Study in Sociology (Durkheim 1952 ). Even though people see themselves as individuals exercising free will and choice, Durkheim’s study showed that even a highly personal act such as suicide is inluenced b y what happens in the wider social world. Research had been conducted on suicide before Durkheim’s study, but he was the irst t o insist on a sociological explanation. Previous writers had acknowledged the inluence of ‘r acial type’, climate or mental disorder to explain an individual’s likelihood of committing suicide. But Durkheim argued that the suicide rate – the percentage of suicides per 100,000 of the population – was a social fact that could only be explained by other social facts and that suicide rates vary widely across the world’s societies (see igur e 1.1). By examining oficial statistics in F rance, Durkheim found that certain social groups were more likely to commit suicide than others. He discovered that more men committed suicide than women, more Protestants than Catholics, the wealthy more than the poor, and single people more than those who were married. The question was, why? Durkheim’s explanation These indings led Dur kheim to conclude that there are social forces external to the individual which inluence suicide r ates. He related his explanation to the idea of social solidarity and to two types of bonds within society – social integration and social regulation. Durkheim argued that people who were strongly integrated into social groups, and whose desires and aspirations were regulated by social norms, were less likely to commit suicide. From this he deduced four types of suicide, in accordance with the relative presence or absence of integration and regulation. 1. Egoistic suicides are marked by low integration and occur when an individual becomes isolated or when their ties to a social group are weakened or broken. For example, the low rates of suicide among Catholics could be explained by their strong community, while the personal and moral freedom of Protestants meant that they ‘stand alone’ before God. Marriage protects against suicide by integrating the individual into a stable social relationship, while single people remain more isolated. 2. Anomic suicide is caused by a lack of social regulation. By this, Durkheim referred to the condition of anomie, when people are rendered ‘normless’ as a result of rapid change or economic instability. The loss of a ix ed point of reference for norms and desires – such as in times of economic upheaval or in personal troubles such as divorce – can upset the balance between people’s circumstances and their desires such that they no longer know how to carry on. 3. Altruistic suicide occurs when an individual is ‘over-integrated’ – social bonds are too strong – and comes to value the group more than him- or herself. In such a case, suicide becomes a sacriice f or the ‘greater good’. Japanese kamikaze pilots or Islamist suicide bombers are examples. Durkheim saw these as more common in traditional societies where mechanical solidarity prevails. 4. The inal type is fatalistic suicide. Although Durkheim saw this as of little contemporary relevance, it occurs when an individual is overregulated by society. The oppression of the individual in dictatorial regimes can result in feelings of powerlessness and hopelessness. Figure 1.1 Age-standardized suicide rates, both sexes, 2016 Source: WHO (2018a). Suicide rates vary across societies but are also quite stable within particular societies over time. Durkheim took this as evidence that there are consistent social forces that inluence suicide r ates, and therefore we can see that general social patterns can be detected even within individual actions. Critical points Since its publication, many objections have been raised to Durkheim’s study, particularly in relation to his uncritical use of oficial statistics, his dismissal of non-social inluences and his insistence in classifying all types of suicide together. Some critics have shown that it is vitally important to understand the social process involved in collecting data on suicides, as coroners’ deinitions and crit eria inluence the number of deaths that ar e recorded as ‘suicides’ in the irst place. Because of this, suicide statistics may be highly variable across societies, as Durkheim suggests, but this is not necessarily because of differences in suicidal behaviour; rather, it is due to divergent practices adopted by coroners in recording ‘unexplained deaths’. Suicide statistics may not give us a valid or reliable picture of the extent of suicide in a given society.  Contemporary significance The arguments of his critics are legitimate, yet Durkheim’s study remains a sociological classic. It helped to establish sociology as a discipline with its own subject – the study of social facts – and his fundamental argument retains much of its force: that to grasp fully even the most personal actions of individuals demands a sociological explanation rather than one rooted in the exploration of personal motivation. Durkheim’s identiication of suicide rates as a subject for study is today widely accepted, and the study is also important for its demonstration that social phenomena are amenable to systematic, scientiic anal ysis using a rigorous methodology. THINKING CRITICALLY Monitor your local news for three reports of possible suicide cases. From the information provided, are any of the details presented as factors that would contribute to explaining the death as a ‘suicide’? Why might coroners lean away from a suicide verdict, and would that practice affect Durkheim’s argument that there are suicide rates in particular societies? Should we accept the WHO statistics in igur e 1.1 above as ‘social facts’? Karl Marx The ideas of Karl Marx (1818–83) contrast sharply with those of Comte and Durkheim, though he too sought to explain the changes associated with the Industrial Revolution. As a young man, Marx found that his political activities brought him into conlict with the German authorities, and after a brief stay in France he settled permanently in exile in Britain, where he saw the growth of factories and industrial production as well as growing inequality. His interest in the European labour movement and socialist ideas was relect ed in his writings, and much of his work concentrated on political and economic issues. Yet, since he connected economic problems to social institutions, his work was rich in sociological insights. Marx wrote about the broad sweep of human history, but his primary focus was on the development of capitalism: a system of production that contrasts radically with all previous economies. Marx identiied two main elements of capitalism. The irst is capital – that is, an y asset, including money, machines or even factories, that can be used or invested to make future assets. The accumulation of capital goes hand in hand with the second element, wage-labour. Wage-labour refers to the pool of workers who do not own any means of production themselves but must ind emplo yment provided by the owners of capital. Some ‘Occupy’ protests around the world targeted ‘greedy’ forms of capitalism in which vast wealth accumulates among a tiny percentage of the population while ‘the 99 per cent’ majority struggle to make a living. Twenty-irst-century anti-capitalist movements continue to take their inspiration from the analyses of Marx and Engels, though they rarely advocate communism as their preferred alternative. Marx argued that those who own capital – capitalists – form a ruling class, while the mass of the population make up a class of waged workers – the working class. As industrialization spread, large numbers of peasants, who used to support themselves by working the land, moved to the expanding cities and helped to form an urban industrial working class, which Marx also called the proletariat. For Marx, this means that capitalism is a class system in which relations between the two main classes are characterized by an underlying conlict. Although owners of capital and workers are dependent on each other – capitalists need labour, workers need wages – this dependency is unbalanced. Workers have little or no control over their labour, and employers are able to generate proit b y appropriating the products of the workers’ labour – paying them less than their labour is worth. Marx saw conlicts betw een classes as the motivation for historical development; they are the ‘motor of history’. Marx and Engels (2008 ) wrote at the beginning of The Communist Manifesto, ‘The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.’ According to Marx, there have been a series of historical stages, beginning with ‘primitive communist’ societies of hunters and gatherers and passing through ancient slave-owning systems and feudal systems with landowners and peasant farmers. The emergence of a new commercial or capitalist class displaced the landed nobility, and, just as capitalists had overthrown the feudal order, so too would the capitalists be overthrown by the proletariat. Marx theorized that a workers’ revolution would bring about a new society in which there would be no large-scale division between owners and workers. He called this historical stage communism. This does not mean that all inequalities would magically disappear, but that society would no longer be split into a small class that monopolizes economic and political power and a mass of people who beneit little from their labour. The economic system would be under communal ownership, and a more humane, egalitarian society would slowly emerge. Marx’s ideas had a far-reaching effect on the twentieth century. Until only a generation ago, more than a third of the Earth’s population lived in societies whose governments derived inspiration from Marx’s ideas. However, a revolutionary wave that began in Poland in 1989 swept aside communist regimes across Eastern Europe, ending with the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union – its stronghold – in 1991. Even in China, where a communist party still holds political power, capitalist economic development has taken a irm hold. In spit e of the spread of capitalism around the world, the working-class revolution to which Marx looked forward seems no closer today than it did in Marx’s own time. Max Weber Like Marx, Max Weber (1864–1920) was not just a sociologist; his interests ranged across many areas. He was born in Germany, where he spent most of his academic career, and his work covered economics, law, philosophy and comparative history as well as sociology. He was also concerned with the development of capitalism and how modern societies differed from earlier types. In a series of studies, Weber set out some of the basic characteristics of modern industrial societies and identiied k ey issues that remain central to sociology today. Weber recognized class conlict but sa w it as less signiicant than Marx. In Weber’s view, economic factors are important, but ideas and values can also bring about social change. His celebrated and much discussed work The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1992 [1904–5]) proposed that religious values – especially those associated with Puritanism – were of fundamental importance in creating a capitalistic outlook. Unlike the other early sociologists, Weber argued that sociologists should study social action – the subjectively meaningful actions of people that are oriented towards others. It is the job of sociology to understand the meanings behind all of those individual actions. An important element in Weber’s sociological perspective is the ideal type. Ideal types are models that are created to alert us to some social phenomenon and to help us to make sense of it. These hypothetical constructions can be very useful in pointing researchers towards a subject. For example, we could construct a simple idealtypical ‘terrorist group’, based on the most striking aspects that have been observed in the cases of the IRA in Northern Ireland, ETA in Spain, the Red Brigades in Italy and the global networks of ISIS/Daesh. We might note that all these groups operate outside mainstream politics; they use violence against the state and they often target civilians to demonstrate their power. We can then use this ideal type to analyse other real-world instances of political violence. Of course, in reality there are many differences between our four groups. The Red Brigades were communist, the IRA was an Irish nationalist group, ETA was a Basque separatist organization and ISIS/Daesh is a global Islamist network. Nonetheless, using our ideal type we can accommodate these differences while also recognizing that they share enough features to be described collectively as ‘terrorist groups’. It is important to note that, by ‘ideal’ type, Weber did not mean that the conception was perfect or desirable. Ideal types are ‘pure’ or ‘one-sided’ forms of real social phenomena. But constructing an ideal type of terrorism (or anything else) from common aspects of many observed cases is more effective and useful than using one real terrorist group as a template for others. Weber saw the emergence of modern society as accompanied by important shifts in patterns of social action. People were moving away from traditional beliefs grounded in superstition, religion, custom and longstanding habit. Instead, they engaged increasingly in rational, instrumental calculation that took into account eficiency and the future consequences of the action. In industrial society, there was little room for sentiment or doing things just because they had ‘always been done that way’. The emergence of science, modern technology and bureaucracy was described by Weber as rationalization – the organization of social life according to principles of eficiency and on the basis of technical knowledge. If religion and longstanding customs previously guided people’s attitudes and values, modern society was marked by the rationalization of politics, religion, economic activity and even music. Weber had major concerns about the outcome of the rationalization process. He feared that the spr