University of Hong Kong Sociology Past Paper PDF 2023-2024
Document Details
Uploaded by TidyColumbus7402
The University of Hong Kong
2024
University of Hong Kong
Dr Travis Kong
Tags
Summary
This is a handout for a sociology lecture on the formation of modern societies. It covers key aspects of society, including different types of societies, and social change. The document includes key questions and concepts; topics include social theory and modernization.
Full Transcript
THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG Department of Sociology Introduction to Sociology (SOCI 1001) First Semester 2023-2024...
THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG Department of Sociology Introduction to Sociology (SOCI 1001) First Semester 2023-2024 Dr Travis Kong 19 Sept 2024 Lecture 3 The Formation of Modern Societies Key questions: What is society? How is society formed? What forces hold a society together and what forces divide it? Why do societies change? How have societies changed? Opening discussions (Macionis Ch.4): 1. Society refers to a group of people who share a culture and interact with each other within a defined territory. 2. Different types of society have resulted from the advancement of technology (Gerhard Lenski’s idea of ‘socio-cultural evolution’): Hunting and gathering societies: the use of primitive weapons to hunt animals and gather vegetation Horticultural and pastoral societies: the use of hand tools to raise crops and the domestication of animals Agrarian societies: animal-drawn plow Industrial societies: mechanized large-scale production of goods New form: Post-industrial societies: the use of computers that support an information- based economy Other forms depending on the way of conceptualization: Information societies, late-capitalist societies, consumer societies, post-colonial societies, post-materialist societies, media societies, digital societies, etc. 3. Enlightenment and the project of modernity (see appendix): A new form of society began to materialise in the 19th century. Early sociologists witnessed this newly-emerged social world and order, called modernity, and tried to make sense of it. The bright side of modernity: hope of progress, faith in knowledge, use of reason, freedom, equality and justice -> utopic society The dark side of modernity: struggle and large-scale social conflicts, disintegration of systems, normlessness and alienation -> dystopic society 1. Society as Progress: Comte, Evolution, Science and the Law of Development Glossary, Concepts and Ideas: positivism; evolutionism; progress; scientific method Auguste Comte (1798-1857): The first person to coin the term ‘sociology’ (from ‘positivistic philosophy’ to ‘social physics’ to ‘sociology’). (Giddens and Sutton, Ch. 1: 11-12) -1- The task of sociology: ‘to be able to predict is to be able to control’ Sociology can be scientific: A hierarchy of science (mathematics – astronomy – physics – chemistry – biology – sociology) Positivism and the scientific method Like biology: hence a biological analogy The classification of societies The laws of social change Comte postulates ‘law of the three stages of society’ Stage Time period Ruled or dominated by Dominant social unit Theological From the dawn of Priest Family humankind Military Metaphysical Middle Ages Churchmen State Renaissance Lawyers Scientific Industrialisation Industrial administrator Entire human race Scientific moral guide (Source: https://www.scribd.com/presentation/94233756/Auguste-Comte) 2. Society as Function: Durkheim, Organic and Mechanical Solidarity, and Collective Conscience ‘Human beings cannot live together without acknowledging and, consequently, making mutual sacrifices… every society is a moral society.’ Durkheim, Division of Labour. ‘When I fulfil my obligations as a brother, husband, or citizen, when I execute contracts, I perform duties that are defined externally to myself... Even if I conform in my own sentiments and feel their reality subjectively, such reality is still objective, for I did not create them; I merely inherited them.’ Durkheim, What is Social Fact? Glossary, Concepts and Ideas: structural functionalism; organic and mechanical solidarity; collective conscience; anomie; suicide; deviance; moral panic Emile Durkheim (1858-1917): The problem of solidarity (Macionis, Ch.4: 108-111) Key questions: How are individuals made to feel part of a larger social collective? How are their desires constrained in ways that allow them to participate in this collective? How are the activities of individuals and other social units co-ordinated and adjusted to one another? The nature of society and the importance of moral regulation: Society exists beyond us: patterns of human behaviour, e.g., cultural norms, values and beliefs, exist as established structures, or social facts, that have an objective reality beyond our lives. Once created by people, society takes on a life of its own and demands a measure of obedience from us (structure). Society is not just made up of social facts, but it also works as a social system. Different institutions work smoothly to the benefit of the whole society (function). We have to constrain and structure our desires and needs in order to live out our lives in a well-organised harmonious society (basis of solidarity). -2- Comparison of traditional and modern societies Traditional or pre-industrial Modern or industrial society society Basis of Social ‘Mechanical solidarity’: social ‘Organic solidarity’: social bonds Solidarity bonds based on common based on expanding division of sentiments and shared moral labour - specialisation and values (tradition) functional interdependence Collective conscience (likeness) Moral individualism (difference) Main features Social Life Segmental Complex Dimension Small Larger space, size and density Differentiation Little: Kinship, religion and High: Interdependence of sub-units locality often overlap Social control Close and demanding Moral norms are secular, less narrow but more abstract Legal system Laws are ‘repressive’, not Legal norms independent distinctive from morality and religion Mobility Limited, based on ascription Expanded, based on achievement On social change: The increasing division of labour characterised by modern urban societies undermines traditional social integration (the very cause of social change) but creates a new form of social cohesion based on mutual interdependence. In this complex division of labour, it gives rise to greater freedom and choice for all society’s inhabitants. It is not simply industrialisation in particular, but instead modernity in general that represents a more sophisticated social order. Dark side of modernity - pathology Specialised division of labour and rapid expansion of industrial society threatens social solidarity. Cities might create problems – impersonality, alienation, disagreement, and conflict. Rise of anomie (normlessness): an absence, breakdown, confusion and conflict of the norms of a society, e.g., suicide, marital break-down and industrial conflict. The famous case of suicide (Giddens and Sutton, Ch.1: 13-14): Probably the most famous case study in all sociology The most individualistic of acts can be explained by social forces Durkheim’s mode of analysis: suicide as a social fact Rates of suicide occur in different patterns: highest among Protestant societies. Why? Links religion to social integration and then to suicide. And deductively, found to be highest among adults, men, the unmarried and those living in cities. Four types of suicide: egoistic, altruistic, anomic, fatalistic - links to integration and regulation Strong integration (altruistic) Excessive regulation Weak regulation (fatalistic) (anomic) Weak integration (egoistic) -3- Questions to think about: Is it true that the freedom of individuals can only be found in relation to their dependence on society? As societies get bigger and more complex and (often) more individualistic, why don’t they fall apart? Are things getting worse in the modern world? Consider soaring crime rates, sexual anarchy, drugs, youth problem, the increasing rate of teenage suicide, etc. 3. Society as Conflict: Marx, Class and Social Inequality ‘Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please, they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past.’ Marx, 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte ‘The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.’ Marx, Communist Manifesto Glossary, Concepts and Ideas: economic determinism; mode of production; surplus value; feudalism, capitalism, and socialism; ideology; class; class consciousness; dialectic; base-superstructure; alienation Karl Marx (1818-1883): The problem of social conflict (Macionis, Ch.4: 100-105) Key questions: If a society is so rich, how could so many be so poor? How can this situation be changed? On class, social inequality and exploitation In early capitalist society, there were basically two groups of people (or in Marxist terms, two classes): Ruling class: Owners of the means of production (capitalists) Subject class: Non-owners of the means of production (proletariat) Residual class: Peasants, civil servants, middle class, etc. One of the key characteristics of capitalism is the nature of wage labour (i.e., the subject class, the proletariat). Due to their lack of ownership of the means of production, wage labourers have no way to work independently but instead enter an exchange relationship with the owners of the means of production (i.e., the ruling class, the capitalist). Wage labourers must sell their labour power to these owners in return for money (wages or income) in order to survive. The relationship between owners and non-owners thus generates the essence of capitalism - exploitation and coercion: All capitalists must try to accumulate as much capital as they can and produce at as low a cost as they are able to, by paying the lowest possible wages, increasing the efficiency of production and selling at the highest price they can attain. All workers, the non-owners of the means of production, must sell their labour power to the labour market in order to survive, and thereby contribute to the growth and wealth of the capitalist class, their oppressors. In the social structure of a capitalist society there exists a mutually dependent relationship between capitalists and workers. The relationship is not equal but exploitative, i.e., the wage of workers paid for their labour is far below the value of the goods that they have produced (surplus value). Economic power is primary (economic determinism). Other social institutions (superstructure) such as the family, the school, the political system and the religion, are -4- built on the economic system (infrastructure). For example, social institutions maintain capitalists’ dominant position by protecting wealth and transmitting property lawfully from one generation to another through the family and the school. On class and social change: The development of the mass production system leads to a rapid increase in the employment of workers subject to the control of capitalists. Workers are alienated from their work at four different levels: Alienation from the act of working Alienation from the products of work Alienation from other workers Alienation from human potential Workers who work under similar conditions will gradually develop an awareness that they belong to the same class and realise that they do not get what they deserve (the development of class consciousness) and such awareness of grievance leads to class solidarity. Class consciousness and solidarity are more likely to emerge when the economy is under crisis. Petite capitalists (i.e., the petite bourgeoisie or owners of small-scale enterprises) are also affected as they are unable to generate sufficient wealth to absorb losses and to get bank credit. They would thus wind up or sell their businesses to large-scale industrial undertakings and are forced to join the working class (polarisation of classes). Class polarisation results in the disappearance of the residual class and there are only two major classes in the capitalist system - the proletariat and the capitalist. The struggle between these two classes will eventually lead to a change in the social structure and the working class win finally win, overthrowing the capitalist system (the march to socialism/communism). Class Class Class Change in class position consciousness struggle struggle Social class Social conflict Social change A modern case: Chan, J. (2013), ‘A Suicide Survivor: The Life of a Chinese Worker’, in New Technology, Work and Employment 28(2): 100-15. Tian Yu’s story: From farm to factory, entering Foxconn A harsh production regime: Taylorism Discipline and punishment ‘A massive place of strangers’ The accumulation of despair Rebuilding life The responses from different parties: the company, the enterprise union, the government Life and labor of a new generation: Is it possible to resist the modern production regime? Questions to think about: Is class dead? Why has the class revolution of capitalism not yet arrived? Do you think that class is still important in determining your life (chance)? What is the class structure of modern Hong Kong society? -5- 4. Society as Disenchantment: Weber, Rationalisation and the Iron Cage of Bureaucracy ‘The world exists to serve the glorification of God and for that purpose alone. The elected Christian is in the world only to increase this glory of God by fulfilling His commandments to the best of his ability. But God requires social achievement of the Christian because He wills that social life shall be organised according to His commandments, in accordance with that purpose.’ Max Weber, The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism ‘… more and more the material fate of the masses depends upon the steady and correct functioning of the increasingly bureaucratic organisation of private capitalism. The idea of eliminating these organisations becomes more and more utopian.’ Max Weber, Essays in Sociology Glossary, Concepts and Ideas: verstehen; ideal type; Protestant ethic; hermeneutics; rationalisation, iron cage of bureaucracy Max Weber (1864-1920): The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (Macionis, Ch.4: 105-108) Weber’s puzzle: there were many patterns of capitalist society, but rational capitalism was the most distinctive development of the 18th and the 19th century. How and why did it emerge? The key actors of capitalist systems (e.g., businessmen, owners of capital and high-skilled workers) were overwhelmingly Protestants. But religious devotion was usually associated with a rejection of worldly affairs, especially the pursuit of wealth and possessions. So why were there so many businessmen who were Protestants? Spirit of capitalism: Ideas and habits that favour the rational pursuit of economic gain. Protestant ethic: The calling of the individual - to fulfil his duty to God through the moral conduct of his day-to-day life. Weber’s thesis: Calvinism, as the most consequential denomination among Protestantism, favours the rational pursuit of economic gain. Although not the goal of religious beliefs but rather a by-product, the inherent logic of its doctrine gives worldly activities a positive spiritual and moral meaning. Under the Roman Catholic Church, an individual could be assured salvation by belief in the church’s sacraments and the authority of its hierarchy. However, the Reformation movement had effectively removed such assurances. So how could an individual be assured that he is saved? Protestants began to look for other ‘signs’ that they were saved. Worldly success became one measure of salvation. According to Weber’s reading of Luther, a ‘vocation’ from God was no longer limited to the clergy or church, but applied to any occupation or trade. The result of this paradox, according to Weber, was the investment of money which gave an extreme boost to nascent capitalism. Weber thus demonstrated that there is an ‘elective affinity’ between Calvinism, or more accurately, certain sorts of Calvinist beliefs, and the economic ethics of modern capitalist activity. Later generations of Calvinists, though having lost much of their early ascendants’ religious enthusiasm, sustained the drive for success and personal discipline. A religious ethic was slowly transformed into work ethics. -6- The problem of rationalisation Rationalisation of society Members of pre-industrial society are bound by tradition (i.e., values and beliefs passed on from one generation to another) whilst members of industrial society are bound by rationality (a way of thinking that emphasizes means-to-ends calculation in order to accomplish a particular task in the most efficient way). Weber identifies seven characteristics of rational social organization (Macionis 2007: 107): Distinctive social institutions Large-scale organizations Specialised tasks Personal discipline Awareness of time Technical competence Impersonality The rise of modern societies can be viewed as a process of rationalisation. The growth of industry and the rise of modern state come in association with the twin disciplines of market rationality and bureaucracy (the ideal type of rationality). There are few social spheres that are immune to the rationalisation process. Economic, legal, religious, and political domains, and even our private lives, are all infected. Dark side of modernity Rationalisation leads to nothing but a pessimistic scenario. This process cannot be reversed. It simply does away with humanitarian goals with bureaucratic administration. Instrumental calculation dominates all social life and the individual would be stifled by the constraints of one’s role within the iron cage of bureaucracy. Questions to think about: What are the relationships between modern capitalism and Christianity? What is the role of religion in the modern world? Is it possible to escape bureaucracy? 5. Later Developments Macro-sociology Micro-sociology Auguste Comte (1798-1857) Karl Marx (1818-1883) Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) Max Weber George Herbert Mead (1864-1920) (1863-1931) Functionalism Marxism Symbolic Interactionism -7- Key references Giddens & Sutton, Ch. 3; Croteau & Hoynes, Ch. 1 & 4; Schaefer, Ch. 1 & 5; Haralabmos & Holborn, Ch.1; Henslin, Ch. 1 & 6; Macionis, Ch. 4 Other suggested readings: Ritzer, George. 1996. Classical Sociological Theory, 2nd ed. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Chapters 4-7. Calhoun, Craig et al. (eds.) 2002. Classical Sociological Theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, Parts 1-3. Hamilton, P. 1992. The Enlightenment and the birth of social science’, in Formations of Modernity, ed. S. Hall and B. Gieben. Cambridge: Polity Press. Appendix - Modernity, Enlightenment and the Development of Modern Societies – Origins of Sociology (Hamilton 1992) Modernity can be seen as the outcome, not a single process, of a number of different changes and histories, triggered mainly by two revolutions, the French Revolution (1789) and the Industrial Revolution (1780-1840). We usually talk about modernity in terms of the following features: The dominance of secular forms of political power and authority, and conceptions of sovereignty and legitimacy, characterised as the emergence of liberal democracy and the rise of nation-states. The growth of a monetarised exchange economy, based on the large-scale production and consumption of commodities for the market, extensive ownership of private property, new division of labour and the accumulation of capital on a systematic, long-term basis. The decline of the traditional social order and a profound shift between the public and the private, between work and the household, resulted in a new social and sexual division of labour. The decline of the religious worldview typical of traditional societies and the rise of a secular and materialist culture, exhibiting individualistic, rationalist, and instrumental impulses now so familiar to us. The Enlightenment: The project of modernity The Enlightenment can be seen as the new way of producing and classifying knowledge through the birth of a new intellectual and cognitive world, which gradually emerged with the Reformation, the Renaissance and the scientific revolution of the 17th century, and was finally consolidated in the 18th century. This explosion of intellectual energy in 18th century Western Europe challenged existing conceptions rooted in a traditional worldview, dominated by Christianity, and sought to create a new framework of ideas about man, society and nature. This movement gave definition to the very idea of ‘modernity’ and is often described as the original matrix of the modern social sciences. Study of society is not new, what is new is the idea of ‘the social’ as a separate and distinct form of reality, which could be analysed in entirely ‘this-worldly’, material terms and laid out for rational investigation and explanation. This distinctly modern idea only finally crystallised in the discourses of the Enlightenment. The ‘ethos’ of Enlightenment: The notion of individual (rather than God) as an autonomous being and a creative force of society and history The idea of progress by a critique of reason (rather than by traditional authority) The idea of science (rather than religion) as truth The unity of humanity The ‘birth of the social’ as an object of knowledge thus made possible for the first time the systematic analysis and the practices of investigation we call ‘social sciences’. -8-