Rev: TM 13 Modernity

Today, social theorists are trying to determine whether society, as well as theories about it, have undergone a transition from the modern era to a new & fundamentally different post modern era

Modernists such as Habermas, Giddens, et al, believe we continue to live in a society that is still best described as modern

Modernists believe we theorize & research in much the same way that social thinkers have always done

Post modernists, such as Jean Baudrillard, Jean Francois Lyotard, Fredric Jameson, et al, believe society has changed so dramatically that we now live in a qualitatively different world

Post modernists believe we theorize & research in new & different ways in the post modern world

Giddens uses terms like radical, high, or late modernity to describe society today & to indicate that it is not the same society as the one of the classical theorists, but it is continuous w/ that society

WHILE SOCIETY CONTINUES TO RATIONALIZE, SOME BELIEVE THIS IS AN OUT OF CONTROL RATIONALIZATION, & A LIMITED RATIONALIZATION

Giddens sees modernity today as a juggernaut that is, to some degree, out of control

Structuration theory best describes the processes & consequences of the juggernaut

In Modernity & Self Identity (1991) Giddens views the self as developing reflexively w/in the juggernaut of modernity

In The Transformation of Intimacy (1992) Giddens examines how intimate relations are affected by modernity, & how intimate relations may transform the structures of modernity itself

Ulrich Beck holds that classic modernity was an industrial society concerned w/ maximizing production / wealth & its distribution, while the new modernity is a "risk society" concerned w/ prevention, minimization, & channeling of risk

In Risk Society: Toward a New Modernity, (1992) Beck examines how modernity has generated both unprecedented risks & unprecedented reflexive capacities to deal w/ those risks

FOR HABERMAS THE PROBLEM IS LESS THE OUT OF CONTROL RATIONALIZATIONS, THAN THE REMNANTS OF TRADITIONALISM INCLUDING CORRUPTION, PATRIARCHY, RACISM, CRONYISM, ETC.

Habermas sees modernity as an unfinished project

For Habermas, the central phenomena of the modern world today continues to be rationality as it was in Weber's day

For Habermas, the utopian goal is still the maximization of rationality both in the system & in the life world

Ritzer examines the growth of formal rationality & the danger of an "iron cage of rationality"

While Weber focused on bureaucracy in general, Ritzer examines specific bureaucracies including McDonalds & American Express

In The McDonaldization of Society, (1993) & Expressing America: A Critique of the Global Credit Card Society, (1995) Ritzer examines operation & impact of hyperrationality in Modernity

Touraine, 1995; Wagner, 1994 see the world in modern terms & they use modernist techniques of standing apart from society, from a vantage point, rationally & systematically analyzing & describing & portraying using grand narratives

	Pre Enlightenment ideas had few glimpses of what modernity was about in terms of progress, science, rationality, etc.
	The Enlightenment thinkers developed & made popular the idea of modernity
	Marx viewed the development of the modern era as fraught w/ both immense problems & immense potentials
	Weber viewed the development of the modern era as dominated by the iron cage of rationality
	Durkheim viewed the development of the modern era as a difficult transition from traditional society to a new one characterized by isolation, the division of labor, etc.
	Simmel viewed the development of the modern era as allowing people to express potentialities that were repressed in pre modern society
	Rationality
	An example of globalization can be seen in the US & Japanese auto industries
	Fordism is an example of formal rationality
	Globalization requires the development of rationalization
	Americanization is a powerful quality of globalization

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Modernization & Escalating Social Change

External
Links

WHILE SOME PLACES & ERAS IN HIST HAVE SEEN GREAT STABILITY, TODAY WE ARE EXPERIENCING RAPID SOC CHANGE ACROSS THE GLOBE BY ALL MEASURES

Modernization, the transition from rural, traditional, ag societies to urban industrial, rationalistic societies, has brought both a degree of soc change & a rate of soc change unprecedented in human history

Rapid soc changes in the last 300 yrs include: (Deane, 1969)

1. the widespread application of science, starting during the ind rev & continuing to today, to the processes of production for the mkt, ie technology

2. the specialization of the econ activity, starting during the ind rev & continuing to today, directed to production for the mkt

3. the mvmt of pops, starting during the ind rev & continuing to today, from rural to urban communities

4. shifts in production, starting during the ind rev & continuing to today, to corp or public enterprises & away from the family

5. the mvmt of labor, starting during the ind rev & continuing to today, from raw materials, ie primary production, to mfr, ie secondary prod, to services, ie tertiary prod

6. the use of capital resources, starting during the ind rev & continuing to today, as a substitute for human labor

7. a 600% increase in global pop

8. a decline in birth rates & an even faster decline in death rates

9. an increase in the size & number of cities

10. changing econ roles for women, children, & the family

11. a major rise in literacy rates

12. a vast increase in per capita production & consumption of goods

13. sharp decreases in the cost & time for transport of bulk goods

14. the appearance of new econ & pol ideologies including capitalism, socialism, & representative democracy

15. the technical capability to destroy the human race ... & many more, too numerous to list

While many changes have occurred in the last 300 yrs, or less, it is informative to compare them to the relatively few changes of the 1000 yrs of the Mid Ages, or the 1000 yrs before that of ancient societies from Egypt to Rome, to the 5000 yrs before that of primitive ag societies

The transition from traditional society to modernity has been the most dramatic soc change in history

Habermas notes that the transition from traditional society to modernity is not complete

See Also: Stratification

4.1. Class, a.k.a. the economic dimension, is based on wealth & income

Weber updates Marx on class by adding the middle & professional classes

4.2. Power, a.k.a. the political dimension, is based on political power

4.3. Status, a.k.a. the social dimension, is based on prestige, honor, etc.

Weber is the first social theorist to make status important in social analysis

The addition of power & status to social analysis makes Weber similar to the neo Marxists

5. CULTURE, LIKE ECONOMICS, AFFECTS THE FUNDAMENTAL STRUCTURE OF SOCIETY

Weber, contrary to Marx, believes that the cultural system affects being as much as the economic system

Weber believed that all societal institutions were shaped by climate & geography as well as by the econ system

In the PESC, Weber finds that the economic & religious systems have mutual impacts on each other

The transition from ancient Judaism to Christianity enhanced the evolution of capitalism & rationality

China did not develop capitalism for many reasons

India did not develop capitalism for many reasons

6. HISTORY DEMONSTRATES THE DEVELOPMENT OF RATIONALITY

Weber adds cultural effects to economic effects to understand history

Early Empire Era aka Asiatic System 3 K - 200 BC

Empire Era: Ancient Slave Society:
The Transition to Feudalism 200 BC - 500 AD

Middle Ages: Transition to Capitalism 500 - 1300

Early industrial Age: Western Capitalism 1300 - 1700

7. WEBER AGREED W/ MARX ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE ECON SECTOR,
BUT SUPPLEMENTED HIS WORK W/ EXAMINATIONS OF RATIONALITY & CULTURE

Weber's "debate w/ ghost of Marx" was a sympathetic debate

Marx examines the development & impact of the economy

Weber examines the development & impact of rationality

8. WEBER BELIEVED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL SCIENCE METHODOLOGY WAS NEEDED

Weber & many other soc scientists believe that the soc sciences must distinguish themselves from phil & common knowledge by developing a methodology that allows for the creation of verifiable, objective knowledge

One of Weber's major discoveries was that science cannot be value free

Top

Max Weber
1864 - 1920
( pronounced vay ber )

Born and resided in: Germany, then Known as Prussia
Began as an historian, later converted to a full time sociologist.

Weber studied legal and economic history at several German universities.
After a brief period as a legal assistant and on completion of his doctoral dissertation, he was appointed professor first (1894) at the University of Freiburg and then (1897) at Heidelberg. Despite a severe nervous breakdown several years later, Weber produced a body of work that established him as the foremost figure in social thought of the twentieth century.

Towards the end of his life, Weber became politically active and served on the committee that drafted the constitution of the Weimar Republic in 1918.

xrefer Who's Who in the Twentieth Century, Oxford University Press, © Market House Books Ltd 1999

WEBER, Max (1864-1920). 'The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism', Max Weber's most controversial and stimulating book, was published in 1904-05. In it he asserted that the stern doctrines of Calvinism bred in believers a relentless commitment to one's earthly calling and an avoidance of trivial pleasures. The result was, in Protestant nations, the rapid accumulation of capital that has made possible the enormous structure of modern economic life.
Weber was born in Erfurt, Germany, on April 21, 1864, to an authoritarian father and strongly Calvinist mother. He was educated at the universities of Heidelberg, Berlin, and Gottingen and served briefly in the army. In 1895 he became professor of political economy at Freiburg, and the next year he went to Heidelberg in the same post. He advocated German overseas expansion as a means to raise the political consciousness of the German people.
Following a nervous collapse in 1898, Weber was institutionalized periodically until 1903. It was after this period that he did his most significant research. During this time he influenced sociological theory and tried to gain respect for sociology as a discipline by defining a value free methodology for it. He also argued strongly against German aims in World War I. After the war Weber helped draft the constitution of the Weimar Republic and founded the German Democratic party (see Weimar Republic). He died in Munich on June 14, 1920.

---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia
Copyright © 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Top

Major Works of Weber

Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. 1904, trans., 1930
General Economic History.
Economy and Society. 1922; translated as Economy and Society, 1968
Methodology of the Social Sciences. (1949).

Internal
Links

Top

An Overview of Emile Durkheim 1858 - 1917

External
Links

- Project: Theory & Your Project

Link

- Biography & Major Works

INTRODUCTION: Durkheim, who is considered to be a 'father of sociology,' saw Rousseau as the father of sociology. Saint Simon, Comte, Tocqueville & Spencer all utilized sociological concepts & some form of the scientific method, but Durkheim was first to make sociology a scientific discipline

SUMMARY: For Durkheim, one of the main problem for the social sciences, which he answers w/ his theory, was 'What creates social order?'
During the modern era, there is a problem w/ maintaining social order
Durkheim makes SEVENTEEN major points
1. Society & social behavior could & should be studied scientifically
2. Social facts are observable 'phenomena' that allow the study of society
3. Social cohesion is the force that unites a society, creating congruity, consistency, etc.
4. Mechanical solidarity is the type of cohesion based on traditional relationships
5. Organic solidarity is the type of cohesion based on self determination
6. The division of labor is the basis of organic solidarity today, in that every member participates in it & every member benefits from it
7. Collective consciousness consists of the knowledge, beliefs, values & norms that we hold in common
8. The cult of the individual represents society's unprecedented hi level of individualism
9. Anomie is the social condition of a weakened or absent common morality
10. Integration is the process of bringing new individuals & social phenomena into society
11. Regulation is the process of controlling, directing, or ruling society
12. Common morality consists of the beliefs, values, & norms that we hold in common
13. Religion is a primary type of traditional cohesion
14. Durkheim opposed political socialism, but believed in a greater level of cohesion or cooperation in society
15. Occupational associations are optimal institutions for achieving social reform
16. Modern society was displacing traditional society & mech solidarity was dissolving, but organic solidarity is slow to develop
17. Organic solidarity is not totally in effect, therefore there is a great risk of anomie & social instability

	DURKHEIM IS A PROGRESSIVE FUNCTIONALIST: I.E. ADVOCATED CHANGE & FOCUSED ON REGULATORY & INTEGRATORY PROCESSES
	Saint Simon was the most influential social theorist on Durkheim's thinking
	Durkheim built on Saint Simon's work of sociology as a 'science,' social evolution, etc.
	Durkheim is usually categorized as a functionalist because many of his ideas have been utilized by that discipline
	Functionalism is usually considered to be conservative, especially when compared to conflict theory
	Durkheim is a progressive functionalist
	Durkheim believed that contemporary philosophy should be constructive & organizational, NOT critical
	Contrary to what is taught by many sociologists, Durkheim was not a conservative; Durkheim was a progressive thinker who had a deep interest in socialism & social change
	Durkheim is less interested in economics than Marx or Weber, but like Marx & Weber, Durkheim was very interested in the industrial revolution & urbanization
	For Durkheim, one of the main problem for the social sciences, which he answers w/ his theory, was 'What creates social order?'
	Many issues that Durkheim studied stem from his concern w/ the inevitable results of the development of modern society
	There are SEVENTEEN fundamental principles of Durkheim's theory
	1. SOCIETY COULD & SHOULD BE STUDIED SCIENTIFICALLY
	Society & social behavior can be studied scientifically
	Durkheim was first to make sociology a scientific discipline
	Durkheim believed that society made individuals not vice versa
	2. SOCIAL FACTS ARE OBSERVABLE 'PHENOMENA' THAT ALLOW THE STUDY OF SOCIETY
	Social facts include relationships, institutions, groups, statistical patterns, as well as more abstract concepts like culture & social structure
	Durkheim conceived the idea that there were such things as 'social facts' that were observable 'things' that enabled the study of society
	Durkheim's famous 1st principle of sociology was to 'study social facts as things'
	When Durkheim advocated study social facts as things he was advocating that social life can be analyzed as rigorously as object or events in nature
	3. SOCIAL COHESION IS THE FORCE THAT UNITES A SOCIETY, CREATING CONGRUITY, CONSISTENCY, ETC.
	Cohesion is necessary in both pre industrial & industrial society
	The social forces, the cohesion that holds pre industrial & industrial societies together are different
	4. MECHANICAL SOLIDARITY IS A TYPE OF COHESION BASED ON TRADITIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
	Mechanical solidarity is the type of cohesion in pre industrial society
	Cohesion is based on tradition culture
	Mechanical solidarity is based on a relatively narrow division of labor, which creates relatively high level of independence combined w/ nearly all relationships being primary
	5. ORGANIC SOLIDARITY IS A TYPE OF COHESION BASED ON SELF DETERMINATION
	Organic solidarity is the type of cohesion in industrial society
	Cohesion is based on mutual interdependence
	Organic Solidarity is based on a very broad division of labor, which creates relatively high level of mutual interdependence combined w/ nearly all relationships being secondary
	Durkheim considered organic solidarity to be the cement of a society
	Much of Durkheim's theory was based on his conception of organic solidarity
	6. THE DIVISION OF LABOR IS THE BASIS OF ORGANIC SOLIDARITY TODAY, IN THAT EVERY MEMBER PARTICIPATES IN IT & EVERY MEMBER BENEFITS FROM IT
	The division of labor is the primary type of mutual interdependence in society today
	Durkheim elaborated on Saint Simon's scheme of the new industrial class to develop his ideas on the division of labor
	The division of labor resulted in development of modern society ( see below )
	Durkheim perceive the ideas behind the industrial system as possessing an inherent unity
	7. THE COLLECTIVE CONSCIOUSNESS CONSISTS OF THE KNOWLEDGE, BELIEFS, VALUES & NORMS THAT WE HOLD IN COMMON
	Collective consciousness is our strongly held common morality
	8. THE CULT OF THE INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTS SOCIETY'S UNPRECEDENTED HIGH LEVEL OF INDIVIDUALISM
	The cult of the individual is strongly held individual morality
	Individualism is the opposite of collective consciousness
	Individualism increases chance of suicide
	The cult of the individual was a source of societal disorganization
	9. ANOMIE IS A WEAKENED OR ABSENT COMMON MORALITY
	Anomie is a condition of normlessness in society
	Durkheim coined term anomie
	Individuals are confronted w/ anomie when they are faced w/ insufficient moral constraints
	For Durkheim, anomie is the social condition of a weakened or absent common morality which leads to deviance, crime & possibly even social chaos / revolution
	Modern society has made old morality obsolete, but new morality is in flux & thus weak or absent
	Compared to the absolute power of "the old morality" people in modern era do not have a clear concept of what is & is not proper & acceptable behavior
	10. INTEGRATION IS THE PROCESS OF BRINGING NEW INDIVIDUALS & SOCIAL PHENOMENA INTO SOCIETY
	Society is becoming more integrated as it develops internalized social control
	Integration is the degree in which collective sentiments are shared; i.e. degree to which people feel part of social groups
	11. REGULATION IS THE PROCESS OF CONTROLLING, DIRECTING, OR RULING SOCIETY
	Regulation is externalized social control
	Regulation is the degree of external constraints on people
	W/o regulation, a person experiences anomie
	12. COMMON MORALITY CONSISTS OF THE BELIEFS, VALUES, & NORMS THAT WE HOLD IN COMMON
	Common morality decreased during the modern era
	There is a problem w/ maintaining social order
	Disorder was viewed, generally, as an automatic consequence of an economic system in which every individual pursues his/her own interest unless such a system had a common morality of organic solidarity, the division of labor, etc.
	See Also: Durkheim on Crime
	13. RELIGION IS A PRIMARY TYPE OF TRADITIONAL COHESION
	The source of religion is society's shared sentiments
	The nature of society's religions were also affected by the transition from mechanical solidarity to [ traditional solidarity ] organic solidarity [ rational solidarity ]
	14. DURKHEIM OPPOSED POLITICAL SOCIALISM, BUT BELIEVED IN A GREATER LEVEL OF COHESION OR COOPERATION IN SOCIETY
	Durkheim's studies of socialism were to be an "analysis of the causes of an idea."
	Durkheim used the concept of socialism to emphasize or highlight his theoretical scheme
	While Durkheim was not a socialist in Marxist sense, he, like Weber, is having a debate w/ 'the ghost of Marx'
	One cannot say merely that Durkheim opposed Marxism because he accepted many basics & rejected many others
	Durkheim especially opposed any revolutionary doctrine, which he feared would only result in anarchy & moral disruption
	Durkheim also refused to recognize the class character of society as being center of conflict in society, but did recognize that equalization of classes was necessary
	In essence, Durkheim synthesized works of St. Simon & Marx
	15. OCCUPATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ARE OPTIMAL INSTITUTIONS FOR ACHIEVING SOCIAL REFORM
	Occupation associations (OAs) are similar to business unions, but have much more authority in the workplace & in society
	OAs are organizations of professionals in a particular field who organize to advance their own interests & the interests of society
	Today one of our most powerful OAs is the American Medical Assoc (AMA) which regulates doctors, the healthcare field for the benefit of themselves, the patient, & society as a whole
	16. MODERN SOCIETY WAS DISPLACING TRADITIONAL SOCIETY & MECH SOLIDARITY WAS DISSOLVING, BUT ORGANIC SOLIDARITY IS SLOW TO DEVELOP
	Durkheim viewed the development of the modern era with hope, but later became disillusioned
	The development of modernity was especially dangerous because it broke down traditional society, which was held together by mechanical solidarity
	Durkheim believes that modern society is not fully developed, which is a position which Habermas now embraces
	17. ORGANIC SOLIDARITY IS NOT TOTALLY IN EFFECT, THEREFORE THERE IS A GREAT RISK OF ANOMIE & SOCIAL INSTABILITY
	Because of the transition from tradl soc to mod soc, i.e. the trans from mechanical to organic solidarity, & because societies change at different rates, & because some societies have lost tradl soc but have not adopted mod soc values, we are experiencing a crisis or breakdown
	At the personal & social level the crisis of the transition from tradl to mod society is experienced as anomie, i.e. an absence of a common morality
	For the most part Durkheim did support the development of modernity, but after "the Great War" his son was killed & he had great doubts that modern society could ever function as well as traditional society

Top

Emile Durkheim
1858 - 1917
Born in France
Resided in Germany
Son died in The Great War
( known today as WW I )
Deeply hurt Durkheim,
Became cynical about society & died soon after

DURKHEIM, Emile (1858-1917). A pioneer social scientist, Emile Durkheim established sociology as a separate discipline, or field of study. He was the first to subject the specific events of everyday life to close sociological study and to determine specific scientific methods of examination.
   Emile Durkheim was born on April 15, 1858, in Epinal, France. He studied philosophy at the prestigious Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris. Upon graduation in 1882 he taught in secondary schools until 1887, when he was appointed to a lectureship especially founded for him at the University of Bordeaux. This was the first course of social science officially provided in a French university.
   Durkheim's first book, 'The Division of Labor in Society', published in 1893, focused on the problems of new technology and the mechanization of work. This division of labor, according to Durkheim, made workers both more alien to one another, as their jobs were different, and more dependent on one another, as none any longer built the whole of a product. The methods to be used to examine society in this new discipline Durkheim laid out in 'The Rules of Sociological Method' (1895).
   His classic 'Suicide' (1897) examines the ties that bind individuals to the society in which they live, and their breakdown. Suicide appeared to be more frequent in societies where individuals are less a part of the life around them, as in modern industrial societies. He distinguished three types of suicide: In egoistic suicide the individual shuts himself off from other human beings. Anomic suicide comes from the belief that the world has fallen apart around one. Altruistic suicide springs from great loyalty to a cause.
   In 1902 Durkheim was appointed to the University of Paris, becoming a full professor in 1906. He taught there until his death on Nov. 15, 1917.

---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia
Copyright © 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Top

Major Works of Durkheim
Suicide
The Division of Labor in Society
The Rules of Sociological Method
The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 1915

Top

Internal
Links

An Overview of Georg Simmel 1858 - 1918

External
Links

Link

- Biography & Major Works

Simmel used history to illustrate social interaction, e.g., competition & conflict

Simmel may be viewed as both a Modernist & a Post Modernist

Simmel has FOUR views on Modernity (3 from The Philosophy of Money )

1. Modernization brings advantages to humans, especially in that they can express potentialities that were unexpressed, concealed or repressed in pre modern society

Modernity is an 'epiphany' in that we may express intrinsic human powers that were previously unrevealed

2. Money has powerful effects on modern society

3. Adverse consequences of modernity, especially money, include alienation, & the "tragedy of culture"

The tragedy of culture is seen in the growing gap between objective & subjective culture, i.e. "the atrophy of individual culture & the hypertrophy of objective culture"

4. The development of the city as a powerful & unique feature of modern society

SIMMEL & THE SCIENCE OF SOCIOLOGY

The organicist approach stressed the fundamental continuity between nature & society

For the organicist, social processes are conceived as qualitatively similar to, although more complex than, biological processes

Life was seen as a great chain of being, stretching from the simplest natural phenomenon to the most highly differentiated social organism

Simmel did not see society as a thing or an organism in the manner of Comte or Spencer, nor merely as a convenient label for something that did not have "real" existence

In his view, society consists of an intricate web of multiple relations between individuals who are in constant interaction with one another: "Society is merely the name for a number of individuals, connected by interaction."

Society consists of a web of patterned interactions, & it is the task of sociology to study the forms of these interactions as they occur & reoccur in diverse historical periods & cultural settings

The larger superindividual structures: the state, the clan, the family, the city, or the trade union, are only crystallizations of this interaction

The superindividual modern structures may attain autonomy & permanency & confront the individual as if they were alien powers

The study of society is, therefore, sociation, that is, the particular patterns & forms in which men associate & interact w/ one another

Simmel argued that the grandiose claims of those, such as Comte & St Simone, who wished to make sociology the master science of everything human are self defeating

The legitimate subject matter of sociology lies in the description & analysis of particular forms of human interaction & their crystallization in group characteristics

"Sociology asks what happens to men and by what rules they behave, not insofar as they unfold their understandable individual existences in their totalities, but insofar as they form groups and are determined by their group existence because of interaction."

Simmel, The Philosophy of Money.

Although all human behavior is the behavior of individuals, much of it can be explained in terms of the individual's group affiliation, as well as the constraints imposed upon him by particular forms of interaction

Although Simmel considered the larger institutionalized structures a legitimate field of sociological inquiry, he preferred to restrict most of his work to an investigation of what he called "interactions among the atoms of society."

He limited his concern, in the main, to those fundamental patterns of interaction among individuals that underlie the larger social formations (what is today described as micro sociology)

The method he advocated & practiced was to focus attention upon the perennial & limited number of forms such interaction might take

Top

Georg Simmel
1858 - 1918
Simmel was a German, mainstream sociologist. He helped establish sociology as an independent discipline in Germany.

In 1914 Simmel received an ordinary professorship with chair, at the then German University of Strasbourg. Because of the outbreak of World War I, all academic activities & lectures were halted as lecture halls were converted to military hospitals. In 1915 he applied - without success - for a chair at the Un of Heidelberg.

Shortly before the end of the war in 1918, he died from liver cancer

Top

Major Works of Simmel

On Social Differentiation. 1890
Introduction to the Science of Ethics. 1892-3
The Problems of the Philosophy of History. 1892, 2nd ed. 1905
Philosophy of Money, 1900, 2nd ed. 1907
Sociology: Investigations on the Forms of Sociation. 1908
Fundamental Questions of Sociology. 1917
Philosophy of Life, 1918

Top

Internal
Links

An Overview of Anthony Giddens 1938 -

External
Links

- Project: Modernist Institutions

Link

- Biography & Major Works

FOR GIDDENS, MODERNITY HAS FOUR STAGES, INCLUDING THE EARLY, INDL, HIGH, & POST STAGES

How are these four eras different?

The modern era in which we live is very different than that of the classical theorists, who also lived in the early modern era

And both of those stages are different than the industrial era of the the 1800s & early 1900s

Modernity is not taking one path

Modernity has conflicting & contradictory parts & thus theories of modernity are not old fashioned, unidirectional grand theories

1. THE EARLY STAGE OF MODERNITY EXPERIENCED THE RATIONALIZATION OF PRODUCTION THE EARLIEST CONFLICT BTWN TRADL RELIGIOUS BELIEFS & SCIENCE

The Early Stage of Modernity runs from the 1600s to after Industrial Revolution gained a head of steam circa 1800s

The first 'factories' were essentially craft wkrs on an assembly line

The cultural development which paralleled the rationalization of the econ, saw the devl of religious freedom, conflict btwn religious & scientific paradigms, etc.

2. THE INDL STAGE OF MODERNITY EXPERIENCED THE INDL REV & THE STRUGGLE FOR 'MIDDLE CLASS RIGHTS'

The Industrial Stage of Modernity runs from the 1800s to circa 1950

The indl stage resulted in the earliest devl of a middle class which sought the freedoms & rights which we commonly accept today as our birth right such as a living wage, a safe wkplace, ed, freedom, etc.

The indl stage saw the end slavery, the development of unions & the labor mvmt, increased rights for women, including suffrage, & the devl of democracy as we recognize it today

3. HIGH MODERNITY REPRESENTS THE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT / RATIONALIZATION OF THE INDL ECON TO POST INDL, & THE DEVL OF CULTURE IN PARALLEL TO THIS, MOVING TOWARD GREATER FREEDOM

The Era of High Modernity runs from the circa 1950 to the present

High modernity is also know as radical modernity, late modernity, the high tech era, or even the post industrial era

For Giddens, High Modernity is unique because
- it is a post scarcity system ( for the West only)
- there is multilayered democratization
- there is demilitarization
- there is the humanization of technology
- many of its relationships & characteristics are reflexive

For Giddens, there is no guarantee that the world will continue to move toward modernity

For Giddens, reflexivity means that a person or a social system can help things, i.e. modernity & other goals, come to pass

The modern world may be thought of as a "juggernaut," that is, a runaway engine

For Giddens the juggernaut:
- is a runaway engine of enormous power
- is capable of being driven or steered only to a limited extent
- is threatening to rush out of control
- crushes those who resist
- sometimes seems to have a steady course
- sometimes seems to veer erratically
- has a ride that can be rewarding & even exhilarating

But we can never feel secure because of the qualities of modernity

4. GIDDENS DOES NOT BELIEVE WE ARE YET IN A POST MODERN STAGE

While Giddens does not directly embrace the concept of the post modernism, his schema of modernity implies that such an era could exist

Giddens is unsure as to whether we are entering a new, "post modern" stage or not

Giddens does not agree w/ the tenet of post modernity that systematic knowledge is impossible

The denial of systematic knowledge would lead us "...to repudiate intellectual activity altogether."

STRUCTURATION THEORY HOLDS THAT AGENCY & STRUCTURE ARE RECIPROCAL, DYNAMIC SOCIAL FORCES & THAT AGENTS HAVE SOME FREEDOM TO ACT & ARE SOMEWHAT CONSTRAINED BY STRUCTURE

In Giddens' Structuration theory, there is a disjunction between agency & historical analysis, btwn individualism & the power of society, btwn the micro & macro aspects of society

Giddens emphasizes our ability to be active change agents but yet emphasizes the juggernaut & the dominance of system tendencies

Review: Many other social theorists have recognized the tension btwn agency & structure, including Marx, Weber, Durkheim, Parsons, esp C Wright Mills & the Sociological Imagination

Top

Anthony Giddens
1938 -
Great Britain's most important contemporary social theorist
Now at Cambridge University
Began as an empirical sociologist
Then focused on cross cultural society
Now a grand theorist
Involved in several publishing firms:
Macmillan & Hutchinson, Polity Press

Ritz 0411

Top

Major Works of Giddens

The Class Structure of Advanced Societies, 1975
The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, 1985
Sociology, 1987
Modernity and Self Identity, 1991
Transformation of Intimacy, 1992
The Consequences of Modernity

Ritz 0411

Top

Internal
Links

Outline on Giddens on the Nature of Modernity

External
Links

- Supplement: Your Data For Sale. Joel Stein. Time Mag, March 21, 2011

Link

- Project: Giddens & Modernity

Link

Modernity is constituted by FOUR modernist institutions

1. Capitalism
For Giddens in modernity, capitalism is characterized by
- commodity production
- private ownership of capital
- propertyless wage labor
- a class system

2. Industrialism
For Giddens in modernity, industrialism is characterized by
- the use of inanimate power sources & machinery
- its pervasiveness, i.e. it affects all spheres of life

For Giddens the industrialism of modernity includes all types of modern economic systems including the high tech industry, biotech, robotics, the service industry, etc.

3. Surveillance
For Giddens in modernity, surveillance is characterized by
- the supervision of the activities of subject population
- operation mainly, but not exclusively, in the political sphere

Note that since 9-11 & the rise of terrorism , many social theorists have noted that surveillance is dramatically increasing both in the public or govt spheres of life as well as in other sectors of life

An increase in surveillance can be seen in submission to voluntary background checks in exchange for rapid airlines boarding

4. Military power
For Giddens in modernity, military power is characterized by
- the absolute control of the means of violence
- the industrialization of war
- the nation state as the unit of analysis (not society)
- voluntarism

Note that since 9-11 & the rise of terrorism, many social theorists have noted that the nation state is not as useful of a unit of analysis

Since 9-11, the war on terror is btwn the western nations & 'an ideological network,' a movement that is not located in any one nation which may alternatively be called a jihad or a crusade

Modernity is composed of THREE Dynamic Functions, including distanciation, disembedding, & reflexivity
1. Distanciation which in social relationships is the separation of time & space
2. Disembedding which is the of lifting social relations out of local contexts
3. Reflexivity which is social actors [people, orgs...] examining social practices in order to alter [ improve ] them

1. Distanciation:
Under modernity, distanciation is the separation of time & space in social relationships so that "place" becomes increasingly "phantasmagoric" because of improved communications & transportation

In modernity, increasingly we are not in one place for very long; we live in a transportation society

Many people do not have a home town in the sense that was true in the 1950s; How would you answer the question, "Where are you from?"

Many people do not have a home in the sense that was true in the 1950s

In Modernity,
- time is standardized & a pervasive part of each hour, day...
- the connection between time & space is broken
- physical presence is disconnected from place through TV, phones, etc.

"Locales are thoroughly penetrated by & shaped in terms of social influences quite distant from them...."

Pre modern society's relationship w/ time & space was different than modernity's relationship or understanding of time & space & was not affected by technology

EP Thompson chronicles how early workers had to be socialized to punch the clock

In the past,
- time was always linked w/ space
- time measurement was imprecise
- space was defined largely by physical presence & therefore by localized spaces

There are THREE effects of distanciation

a. Distanciation makes increased rationalization possible as globalized bureaucracies link local & global domains

b. Distanciation gives modern people a 'radical' sense of world history, allowing them to use that view to shape the present

Distanciation gives people a radical sense of history in that we know more history; but history is bent to our own ideology it is a tool of hegemony, i.e. rule through ideological control

c. Distanciation makes disembedding possible

In that we learn to distance our relationships, they get lifted out of local contexts & put in the phastasmagorical context

2. Disembedding is the lifting social relations out of local contexts

For Giddens, disembedding is "the lifting out of social relations from local contexts of interaction & their restructuring across indefinite spans of time space"

Disembedding can be seen in the similarity of globalized of economic relations, the Americanization of culture, the Englishification of language, etc.

There are TWO types of disembedding

a. Symbolic tokens are symbols of power, status, class, race, etc. that are disembedded from their origin

The best known symbolic token is money
Money allows for time space distanciation of transactions

b. Expert systems are technical & professional systems [ & their actors ] which remove us from personal social relations & relegate those to the expert systems

Expert systems are 'systems of technical accomplishment or professional expertise that organize large areas of the & social environments in which we live today'

Expert systems have expanded to all spheres of life as seen in the pervasiveness of lawyers, mechanics, computer assistance, shopping....

Most common expert systems such as the legal & medical systems rely on experts & professionals, but so do everyday phenomena like cars, homes, computers all depend on experts & expert systems

Expert systems provide guarantees of performance across time & space, but there is risk involved

Expert systems are based on trust & surveillance

Trust is important in modern societies because to a great extent, expert systems are based on trust

Trust becomes necessary when we do not have full info about a phenomena

Symbolic tokens (e.g. money) & expert systems require trust

Surveillance is a substitute for trust

The less we trust, the more we surveil

3. Reflexivity: actors [people, orgs...] examining social practices in order to alter [ improve ] them

"Social practices are constantly examined & reformed in the light of incoming information about those very practices, thus constitutively altering their character."

Everything in modern society is open to reflexivity which can cause a pervasive sense of uncertainty

Socialization "inoculates" children w/ ontological security

Children are "inoculated" with a dose of trust during childhood socialization. This provides people w/ a "protective cocoon" which gives them a measure of ontological security as adults"

Socialization is a reflexive system today that is becoming increasing dominated by expert systems from educated parents to schools....

Reflexivity is how we deal with risk

There are new & dangerous risks associated w/ modernity that threaten our trust & may to lead to a pervasive ontological insecurity

In modernist systems, the operation of dialectics can be seen as every system attempts to solve its past problems system, but inevitably develops its own problems

Ontological security is threatened by a particular modern risk profile

Modern society has created a distinctive risk profile which threatens security

A wide range of people are now likely to know the risks we face, including
- nuclear war
- nuclear accidents
- environmental risks
- global investment risks
- events that affect large numbers of people such as the worldwide division of labor

Expert systems are limited in their ability to deal w/ these risks

It is these risks that give modernity the feeling of a runaway juggernaut & instills us w/ ontological insecurity

There are FOUR causes of the negative consequences of the juggernaut of modernity, including design faults, operator failure, unintended consequences, & reflexivity

1. In modernity, design faults are system wide conditions or qualities that were built in to the system which cause error or catastrophe

2. In modernity, operator failure occurs when those who run the complex systems of the modern world make mistakes

3. In modernity, unintended consequences occur as the result of design faults or of the interaction of multiple variables creating unknown, unforeseeable effects

4. In modernity, reflexivity can create negative consequence because as the different actors & sectors of society reflect on changes & adapt to it, the situation rapidly changes from what designers originally planned making making mistakes & unintended consequences more likely

Giddens believes that utopian realism is the solution to the problems of modernity

Utopian realism is the attitude, the ideology of the vision of a modern world that is constituted by what actors bring to it, i.e. utopian realism holds that reflexive actors can construct modernity to suit their vision

Giddens' utopian realism call us to hang onto our dreams but don't wear rose colored glasses.
Hold the vision of the world that Modernity [ or whatever ] brings you, & work for it [ reflexivity ]

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Electronic Surveillance

External
Links

- Supplement: Your Data For Sale. Joel Stein. Time Mag, March 21, 2011

Link

For Giddens, modernity is constituted by FOUR modernist institutions, including capitalism, industrialism, surveillance, & military power

For Giddens in modernity, surveillance is characterized by:
- the supervision of the activities of subject population
- the operation mainly, but not exclusively, in the political sphere

Advances in tech create the possibility of electronic, computerized, video & other types of esurveillance

In the workplace, anything that is done on a computer can be monitored, from number of keystrokes per hr, length of breaks, websites visited, email, files, all of it

Info collected on wkrs is used to micro manage wkrs in a manner that causes stress

Regular computer printouts of, for example, clerical wkrs, allows mgt to monitor typing rates, error rates, break times, use of computer, etc.

Grocery checkout clerks have their numbers of items & numbers of customers checked out monitored

Firms use electronic time cards that track wkrs' locations & activities, creating reports for the wkr's activities by the day, week, or month

Video is becoming very common & abuses of such practices is common, such as the videoing of men or women in changing rooms

Firms monitor wkrs by video, tap their phones, & copy all communications by email & network communications w/ or w/o consent 24 hrs a day

Studies show that this level of surveillance contributes to wkrs' tension, anxiety, depression, & other stress related illnesses

Because of a loophole in the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act, firms have unlimited right to monitor wkrs

Sen Paul Simon introduced the Privacy for consumers & Wkrs Act which would require wkrs to alert wkrs about monitoring & how the info would be used, but this law nor any similar law has ever passed

Canada has passed the Canadian Charter of Rights because they regard close monitoring of work as a practice based on mistrust & lack of respect for human dignity, an infringement on the rights of the individual, & an undesirable precedent which might be extended to other environments

Even more stringent restrictions on the electronic monitoring of individual wkrs have been implemented in Euro nations, but all efforts to protect the rights of wkrs, consumers, & the public from esurveillance have been defeated

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Modernity & Self Identity (1991) Anthony Giddens

External
Links

In Modernity & Self Identity (1991) Giddens views the self as developing reflexively w/in the juggernaut of Modernity

Giddens sees the self as able to impact its own world & the larger world

Giddens sees the self as dialectically related to the institutions of modern society

Thus the active actor is an important part of Giddens' theory

For Giddens, there is still the impact of society on the self

But we should not lose sight of the larger dialectic btwn the self, & local & global forces:

"Transformations in self identity & globalization... are the two poles of the dialectic of the local & the global in conditions of high modernity. Changes in intimate aspects of personal life... are directly tied to the establishment of social connections of very wide scope... for the first time in human history, 'self' and 'society' are interrelated in a global milieu."

Giddens, 1991: 32

The self becomes a reflexive project

The self become something to be reflected upon, altered, even molded

The self becomes responsible for the creation & maintenance of self

The self is a product both of self exploration & of development of intimate social relationships

We "design" our self & our body

For Giddens, we are responsible for the design not only of our selves, but also our bodies, which are an integral part of our self identity

The body is subject to "regimes" (diet, exercise, yoga/religion) w/ the result of an obsession w/ our bodies, & our selves w/in the modern world

For Giddens, sequestration is a feature of modernity where we see a setting apart of life from the routines of everyday life

To sequester means to seclude; to remove property from the control of the owner while a claim is adjusted or a point of law decided

Sequesterization means to compartmentalization, repression, denial, alienation

Sequesterization is similar to what we may call "compartmentalization" in everyday language

In modernity, there is often a sequestration of experience where we are "Connected processes of concealment which set apart the routines of ordinary life from phenomena such as madness, criminality, sickness, death, sexuality, nature, etc."

Sequestration makes us feel secure, but we do not confront life's 'big questions'

Sequestration brings greater ontological security at the cost of the exclusion of social life from fundamental existential issues

Sequestration raises central moral dilemmas such as:
Am I happy?
What do I want from life?
Why am I here?
Am I doing God's will?

For Giddens, sequestration is the positive side of what we have examined before as fragmentation, incidentalism, alienation

Sequestering did liberate the control of intimacy from traditional society

Like Durkheim, Giddens recognizes that modernity gives the individual much freedom, experience, etc. as compared to the traditional or pre-modern lifestyle of the village or tribe

Gidden recognizes that for Habermas, personal meaninglessness is an underlying looming threat of modernity

Gidden recognizes that for Habermas, personal meaninglessness exists because many meaningful things have been sequestered, repressed, denied

Even in a social env where the meaningfulness of life is sequestered, like in Freudian theory, denial is actually impossible, & thus the feeling/thought will manifest itself somehow

In modernity, the world is characterized by remoralization where moral/existential questions thrust themselves back to center stage

Dialectically, increasing self reflexivity leads to likelihood that "on a collective level and in day to day life, moral/existential questions thrust themselves back to center stage."

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on the Transformation of Intimacy
1992, Anthony Giddens

External
Links

The Transformation of Intimacy, 1992, concerned w/ feminist issues, the constitution of the self & intimate relations in high modernity

For Giddens, pure relationship are relationship established freely by consenting adults

Pure relationships are usually primary, as opposed to secondary relationships

For Giddens, pure relationships develop in a "situation where a social relation is entered into for its own sake, for what can be derived by each person from a sustained association w/ another; and which is continued only so far as it is thought by both parties to deliver enough satisfactions for each individual to stay w/in it"

There is a strong implicit acceptance of the tenets of exchange theory in Giddens' concept of a pure relationship

See Also: Rationality

The system ultimately develops it's own structural characteristics

The system is similar to the Marxist conception of economic structure

The system is similar to the Parsonian structural functionalist point of view of culture

The system is an external perspective where action is taken, decisions are made from a subject outside society

The world is conceived from perspective of the acted upon object, or witnessing the system acting upon others

ALL SOCIAL STRUCTURES ARE CREATED BY MICRO LEVEL RELATIONSHIPS

Habermas, like the symbolic interactionists, believes the system has roots in the life world: all structure is created by micro level relationships

The life world is an internal perspective where action is taken, decisions are made from a subject inside society

The life world is the world as conceived from perspective of acting subject

The life world is a micro world where people interact & communicate

Habermas derives this concept from the works of

- Schutz's Phenomenology

- Social Psychology of Mead

- Exchange Theory of Blau

The life world is where speakers & listeners meet &:
- make claims
- establish regular patterns of behavior
- construct culture & structure

In this way, the life world is dialectically related to the system, in that the life world constitutes the system

The speaker & listener criticize & confirm each other's validity claims

The speaker & listener settle disagreements & arrive at agreements

The life world is where context is formed which gives the life world a taken for grantedness of the world

The life world involves a wide range of unspoken presuppositions about mutual understanding that must exist & be mutually understood for communication to take place

THE RATIONALIZATION OF THE SYSTEM IS EXPANDING INTO THE LIFE WORLD

It is a well established conclusion of nearly all social sciences that the system is becoming more rational as seen in the works of:
    - Durkheim
    - Marx
    - Weber
    - Parsons, etc.

Determining what is rational & what is not is a "philosophical chestnut" in that w/ rationality, there is definitely more:
      - differentiation
      - complexity
      - effectiveness

Post modernists, anti globalizationists, et al are witnesses to the negative effects of expanding rationality

There is no consensus on the assessment of the rationalization of the life world or the micro-structures of everyday life

Habermas believes we see some rationality emerging in the life world &:
- we need more
- the life world should be as rationalized as the System

The more rational the life world becomes, the more likely interaction will be controlled by rationally motivated mutual understanding

Habermas is contending that even w/ psychology, social psychology, & the other social sciences which deal w/ personal relationships, & the humanities that examine life, we simply do not understand each other, or ourselves, academically or pragmatically in everyday life

Rational communication is based on the authority of the better argument

Rational communication involves progressive differentiation of its environments of
- personality
- culture
- society

Each environment of rational communication is a set of interpretive patterns, or background assumptions

These environments are closely intertwined in archaic societies, the rationality of the Life World means growing differentiation of these three environments

The rationalization of the system & the life world is seen in a society where both the system & the life world were permitted to rationalize in their own way, following their own logic

The rationalization of the system leads to material abundance & control over the physical & social environment

The rationalization of the life world leads to truth, goodness, beauty

The discussion of agency & structure is the discussion of how the individual & society interact

There is only one society & thus for Habermas the life world & the system are two ways of looking at it

We engage in communicative action & achieve understanding in each sphere

We produce & reproduce our life world through communicative action

Through communicative action, we reinforce
- culture
- society
- personality

The life world is where the speaker & hearer meet,
- & both make claims
- & both establish regular patterns of behavior
- make claims, establish patters which become culture & structure

Agency is created in the life world

Patterns of behavior, beliefs, values, etc. create the system

Patterns of behavior that create the System, influence or create the life world & agency

The relationship btwn patterns of behavior, agency, the life world, & the system is dialectical as well as one of mutual interaction

THE COLONIZATION OF THE LIFE WORLD IS THE DESCRIPTION OF HOW TECHNICAL RATIONALITY IS EXPANDING INTO ALL SPHERES OF SOCIETY

The colonization of life world is a metaphor based on how imperialistic capitalism establish colonies in primitive tribal societies

The "hallmark of modernity" is the colonization of the life world by the system

As the system grows, it is exerting more power over the life world

Thus, the system "colonizes" the life world; i.e., controls it

Formal rationality is triumphing over substantive rationality

Formal rationality dominates areas that were formerly defined by substantive rationality

Habermas' belief that formal rat is triumphing over substantive rat is similar to Marx who believed that economic relationships were coming to dominate all social relationships

The system is currently dominated by capitalism

In essence our personal world is focused not on real relationships of love, companionship, community or society

Instead of a focus on real relationships, life becomes increasing focused on money, status, & power

Capitalism has its own rat/logic of econ competition & bur power structures

Capitalism is reified as an alien force intruding upon individual communicative action

We feel increasingly unfree: pushed around by impersonal forces of the economy, rules & regulations

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Habermas & Communicative Action

External
Links

- Project: The Knowledge Interest Matrix & Communicative Action

Link

OUR KNOWLEDGE BASE OF ANALYTIC, HUMANISTIC, & CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE IS SUCH THAT THESE FRAGMENTS DO NOT OVERLAP OR COMMUNICATE

In the evolution of the THREE branches of human knowledge, there is specialization, & each pursues it's own interests to such an extent that they cannot communicate w/ each other

In his early work, such as Knowledge & Human Interests (1968), Habermas reconstructed the genealogy of the modern natural & human sciences by inquiring back into their social, historical, & epistemological conditions of emergence

According to Habermas, there is a process of increasing specialization in the various spheres of knowledge, each which promotes its own constitutive interest

The development of specialized spheres of knowledge, each w/ it's own interests, is leading to a point where there appears little prospect of an informed critical dialogue btwn them

Knowledge is not neutral but rather both a terrain for struggle as well as an instrument of struggle

Habermas examines the conflict in knowledge systems & the relationship btwn knowledge systems & human interests

Link

Chart 1: A Summary of Habermas' Knowledge Interest Action Matrix

Link

Chart 2: Habermas' Knowledge Interest Action Matrix

There are THREE types of knowledge systems

a. Analytic knowledge includes the physical & natural sciences

b. Humanistic knowledge includes a liberal arts education focusing on literature, history, arts, etc. & creates knowledge through the humanities

c. Critical knowledge includes the social sciences, which aim to uncover in whose interest analytic & humanistic knowledge lies

TECH CONTROL, UNDERSTANDING, & HUMAN EMANCIPATION ARE THE TYPES OF HUMAN INTERESTS THAT ARE DIALECTICALLY RELATED TO EACH OF THE TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE

a.. Technical control is physical & social control over the material world

b. Understanding is having regard for the interests of humanity & thus one is "broadly philanthropic"

c. Human Emancipation is the realization of fundamental human needs in:
i. Creativity (work)
ii. Social interaction, including socializing & communication

INSTRUMENTAL, INTERPRETIVE, & COMMUNICATIVE ACTION ARE THE TYPES OF HUMAN ACTIONS THAT ARE DIALECTICALLY RELATED TO EACH OF THE TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE

a. Instrumental action is the calculating of means to ends & generally includes work & purposeful rational Action (PRA)

b. Interpretive action is the rational, nonjudgmental exploration of the past & the human condition

c. Communicative action is "open" communication directed at uncovering whose interest are being served in order to further emancipation

The dialectic of knowledge systems & human interests is that the mutual interaction btwn their subjective & objective factors functions in such a way that each knowledge system & human interest constitutes or creates the other

Habermas sees a dialectic in how mutual interaction btwn subjective & objective factors results in each constituting the other

Knowledge systems exist at an objective level

Human interests exist at a subjective level

Human Interests lie behind each knowledge system & guide them & are generally unrecognized

Habermas' neo Marxist position can be seen in his contention that human interests ( species being ) lie behind each knowledge system ( culture )

It is the task of critical theorist to uncover the relationship btwn human interests & knowledge systems that are unrecognized

Marx / conflict theorists asked, "In whose interest is this economic relationship or deal?"

Critical theorists & neo Marxists asked "In whose interest is this belief?"

Habermas asks, "In whose interest is this knowledge & how it is used?"

COMMUNICATIVE ACTION IS THE MOST HUMAN ACTIVITY, & IT SHAPES BOTH THE CULTURAL & ECON SPHERES OF SOCIETY

Marx held that work shapes the cultural / communication sphere: 'You are what you do'

Habermas held that communication shapes the cultural & work spheres: 'You are how you communicate'

Communicative action is the most pervasive, distinctive & "fully human" activity that we engage in

Contrary to Marx, Habermas holds that communicative action is more central to human life than work ( purposeful rational action)

Communicative action, not purposeful rational action ( PRA ) ( work ) is the foundation of all socio cultural life as well as all human sciences

The purpose of communicative action is understanding & emancipation

Rationality means the removal of the barriers to communication

Freedom is based in free communication

As rationality has increased, the norm of repression has decreased

Communicative action occurs every day in our life world

The development of communicative action occurs just like biochemical structures in that there are random mutations

The more effective random mutations in communication are selected for survival

Like Parsons, Habermas believes that more abstract, generalized, & universal forms of communicative action & morality are evolutionarily more adaptive

More adaptive communicative actions lead to more advanced forms of society, displacing older forms

Language intends to communicate

The very structure of discourse aims at truth & social consensus

SOCIAL PROBLEMS WILL NOT BE SOLVED THROUGH THE SYSTEM LEARNING TO FUNCTION BETTER; THEY WILL BE SOLVED BY THE UTILIZATION OF CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE THROUGH COMMUNICATIVE ACTION

In eliminating social problems, Habermas recognizes that major problems lie in the modern, bureaucratic social welfare state

Society's problems cannot be solved by the system learning to function better

Rather, to solve society's problems, the impulses of the life world must enter the system

There must be colonization of the system by the life world

See Also: The System, life world, & Rationalization

The state's solution is to deal w/ social problems at the system level by adding new subsystems

Habermas believes that social problems must be resolved by addressing the relationship btwn the system & the life world

a. Restraining barriers are put in place to reduce impact of the system on the life world

b. Sensors are created to detect the impact of the life world on the system

How? Social movements are sensors in that they give voice to all social groups & monitor impacts on their constituency

A full partnership btwn the system & the life world would constitute the completion of modernity's project

For Habermas, a major problem in society is fragmentation which raises the question of whether there are too many voices to reach consensus in society

Habermas recognizes that many say that there are too many voices is society as seen in the sloganeering around war, such as
- America, love it or leave it!
- Which side are you on?
- My country, right or wrong!
- Solidarity!

SOCIAL MOVEMENTS ARE, FOR HABERMAS, THE MAJOR FORM IN THE LIFE WORLD WHICH CAN DEVELOP & BALANCE THE SYSTEM

For Habermas, social movements are a major formation in the life world which can develop & balance the system because they give voice to all social groups

Habermas believes that we should try & hold onto the intentions of Enlightenment, & not, as the post modernist hold, declare the entire project of modernity a lost cause

For Habermas it is obvious that modernity is not a lost cause

Top

Chart 1: A Summary of Habermas' Knowledge Interest Action Matrix

Knowledge System

Human Interest

Action Type

Everyday Life
of Work & Leisure

Analytic Knowledge

Technical Control

Instrumental & Strategic

Scholarly Life
of Humanistic & Artistic
Development

Humanistic Knowledge

Understanding

Interpretive / Critique

Activist Life
of Advocating Social Change

Critical Knowledge

Human Emancipation

Communicative Action

Top	Chart 2: Habermas' Knowledge Interest Action Matrix
	Knowledge System	Human Interest	Action Type
E v e r y d a y L i f e	Analytic Knowledge: Positivism: Science: Formal rationality: Easily becomes oppressive Modernity sees freedom in PRA	Technical control: Both physical & social control over the material world	Instrumental Action: Tech control is the calculating of means to ends: work: applied to environment, other societies, & people Strategic Action: group calculating means to ends: work; but also increase mutual & self understanding
	Knowledge System	Human Interest	Action Type
S c h o l a r l y L i f e	Humanistic Knowledge: Liberal Arts Education: literature, history, arts, etc. Understanding past generations helps understand the present In pure form, neither oppressing nor liberating Often combined w/ Analytic Knowledge	Understanding: Having regard to the interests of humanity; "broadly philanthropic" - Individual level - Group level - Societal level	Interpretive / Critique: Rational exploration of the past: & the human condition Nonjudgmental Mostly factual
	Knowledge System	Human Interest	Action Type
A c t i v i s t L i f e	Critical Knowledge: Uncovers in whose interest Analytic Knowledge & Humanistic Knowledge lies	Top Human Emancipation: Realization of fundamental human needs: 1. Creativity (work) 2. Social interaction (socializing)	Communicative Action: "Open" communication directed at uncovering whose interests are being served in order to further emancipation No egocentric calculations focused on ends Communicative Action's goals: - reach understanding - harmonize plans based on common definitions of situation via discourse Habermas sees freedom in CA

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Habermas on Discourse & Ideology

External
Links

- Project: Establishing Validity Claims

Link

FOR HABERMAS, DISCOURSE IS COMMUNICATION REMOVED FROM CONTEXTS

During discourse, the participants should bracket or suspend validity claims, & thus have no restrictions upon the communications

For Habermas, the goal of communication is to test claims in an open context so that a cooperative search for the truth may succeed

Discourse is communications free from domination

During discourse, all motives except that of the cooperative search for the truth are excluded

DISCOURSE DECREASES REPRESSIVENESS & NORMATIVE REPRESSIVENESS

The rationalization of discourse should produce a non distorted normative system

For Habermas, w/ discourse ideas are openly presented & defended against criticism

In discourse, people are able to reach unconstrained agreement

DISCOURSE IS AN EMANCIPATORY TOOL

Free & open discourse is the tool for highlighting the ambiguous developmental tendencies in modern society & the colonization of the life world by the system

Habermas & Anthony Giddens speculate that society is in fact constituted by language or any medium through which people communicate

The rules by which societies are constructed may simply be applications of properties of language itself

Habermas believes that the world is developing toward emancipation

For Habermas, humans become emancipated by becoming self reflective

Habermas believes we have made great advances in the realm of self reflectiveness

Hegel also felt world history was a trend to freedom through self recognition

Consensus arises in discourse when four types of validity claims are raised & recognized by interactants

TO ESTB VALIDITY CLAIMS, THE SPEAKER MUST BE UNDERSTOOD, TELL THE TRUTH, VOICE AN OPINION, & HAVE AN INTEREST / RIGHT TO SPEAK

There are FOUR requirements to establish validity claims, including that

1. the speaker is understood

2. the propositions offered are true

3. the speaker is honestly voicing an opinion

4. the speaker has a right to offer propositions

Consensus arises when all validity claims are raised & accepted

Consensus breaks down when validity claims are questioned

In an ideal speech situation, force or power do not determine which argument wins

In an ideal speech situation, the better argument emerges

Habermas adopts a consensus theory of truth rather than a copy/ reality theory of truth

Truth is found in open & free communications

In an ideal speech situation, force or power do not determine which argument wins

The better argument emerges

HABERMAS ADOPTS A CONSENSUS THEORY OF TRUTH RATHER THAN A COPY / REALITY THEORY OF TRUTH

Truth is found in open & free communications

There are two major blockages or restriction on discourse:

a. Ideology

b. Legitimations

For Habermas, the solution to the restriction on discourse is the rationalization of discourse

IDEOLOGY MAY BLOCK DISCOURSE BECAUSE IT MAY MYSTIFY POLITICAL RELATIONSHIPS

For Habermas, ideology is the knowledge systems at the political level ( including values & norms ) generated by political systems to support existence of the system

For Habermas, ideology, the knowledge system generated by political systems mystifies political relationships

An example of the blockage of ideology is seen when blind allegiance to a country or an economic system, business subsidies, etc. prevents discourse

LEGITIMATIONS MAY BLOCK DISCOURSE BECAUSE THEY MAY ONLY SUPPORT THE STATUS QUO

Legitimations are knowledge systems at the cultural level ( including values & norms ) generated by society to support existence of the system

For Habermas, legitimations, the knowledge system generated by cultural systems, mystifies social relationships

An example of the blockage of ideology is seen when racism, religious intolerance, etc. prevent discourse

There are parallels between what psychoanalysts do at individual level & what Habermas believes should be done at societal level via critical theory

Psychoanalysis is an example of a theory that seeks to understand distorted communications

Encounter groups & other forms of group therapy are an even more social form of self reflection & insight than psychoanalysis

Psychology is preoccupied w/ finding individual undistorted communication

Psychology must find blocks to undistorted communication

Psychology attempts to uncover distorted communications in internal dialogue or external dialogue

Critical theory must find blocks, i.e. social barriers, & help oppressed groups overcome them

Psychology is to psychoanalysis as critical theory is to therapeutic critique or social therapy

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on the Critiques of Habermas

External
Links

- Project: Critiques of Habermas

Link

1. Critique of Habermas by the Marxists

Marxists critique Habermas in that they believe he goes too far in assuming that mental processes, especially speech & language, determine material processes

The Marxist critique of Habermas is a reflection of the old idealism & materialism debate

For Marxists, Habermas is utopian in believing that the upper class will give up power because of discourse & open communications

Classic Marxists believe that Habermas have the same weakness as the neo Marxists in their belief that culture is predominate in determining cultural relations as opposed to economic relations

For classic Marxists, neo Marxists & Habermas ignore the power of economic relations in everyday life as seen in income, the quality of work life, workplace culture etc.

See Also: Economic vs. Cultural Determinism

Marxist critics of Habermas maintain that Habermas is correct in his quest for emancipation through undistorted communication, but undistorted communication can only occur when economic relations are relatively undistorted by capitalism

Marxists critique Habermas by noting that little can be done to improve communications if one is hungry, living in poverty, exploited etc. & that communications btwn classes is structurally distorted

Neo Marxists embrace many of Habermas' ideas in their search for the empowerment of the working & middle classes; i.e., undistorted communication is necessary to move people from being a pawn of the system to a reflexive being who strives for social change

2. Critique of Habermas by Garfinkel

Habermas proposes an ideal speech community where all hidden assumptions are brought into the open & criticized until full agreement is reached

For Garfinkel, Habermas proposes an infinite regress in indexicalities which commonsense people strenuously avoid

3. Critics of Habermas argue that the ideal speech situation is impossible & utopian

Critics of Habermas argue that even encounter groups & psychoanalytic sessions cannot overcome conflicts of real opposing interests just by endless discussion

Habermas might respond to the critics of psychology that while this is true, new & powerful techniques for conflict resolution are, rationally, being developed everyday & we continue to make progress

Many social theorists already argue that therapy at the individual level cannot succeed while larger societal structures stay the same, implying that for emancipation to ensue, 'therapy' but occur jointly at the individual, group, & social levels

4. The concepts of bounded rationality, or cognitive limitations imply severe limits on the utopia to which Habermas believes we are evolving

Habermas might respond to the bounded rationality critique by pointing out that indeed individuals have a finite level of intelligence, ability to learn, etc. & thus in a sense, individuals do exhibit bounded rationality, but in no way have those limits been reached as people continue to become more educated, sensitive, & wise

Habermas might respond to the bounded rationality critique by pointing out that new learning techniques, computer assisted decision making & other innovations continue to expand the rationality of the individual

Habermas might respond to the bounded rationality critique by pointing out that we have only begun to rationalize the organizational, systemic, social structural, & societal levels & thus it is pre-mature to claim that the limits of bounded rationality are impacting here

Post modernists might respond to Habermas' critique of bounded rationality by pointing out that organizational through societal modernist chaos is becoming ever more pervasive, violent, & destructive visa vie WW 2, genocide, weapons of mass destruction, ecological ruin, etc.

Habermas might respond to the post modernists by stating that the problems of modernity are more the result of pre-modern, non rationalized systems than of modernity

5. Critique of Habermas by Feminists

Flax, like the Marxists, critiques Habermas because she does not believe that power can be overcome by reason

"A central promise of the Enlightenment and Western modernity is that conflicts between knowledge and power can be overcome by grounding claims to and the exercise of authority in reason. "

Jane Flax: "The End of Innocence," Feminists Theorize the Political. p. 447

Flax does not believe in the "universality" of reason, truth, etc. as does Habermas

Universality is Habermas' concept that reason, truth, etc. operate identically in each subject & subjects can grasp laws that are objectively true; that is, are equally knowable and binding on every person

Feminist, like post modernists, believe that reason & truth are circumscribed in that the position of the subject impacts their view of the truth & since woman & man are in different socio historical positions, they have different reason & truths

Habermas might respond to feminists by agreeing w/ them that women & men are currently in different socio historical contexts, but that as humans we have the ability to reach a common place & find common truth

Internal
Links

Top

Outline on Habermas' Critique of Post Modernism

External
Links

- Supplement: Habermas v. Foucault

Link

- Supplement: Feminists & Habermas

Link

1. Habermas believes that, contrary to what the post modernists say, that they do have normative sentiments in their theory/literature

But what post modernists do is conceal or refuse to recognize their goals/norm set

Habermas' normative sentiment is emancipation via open discourse

Post modernists never develop any self conscious praxis other than criticism

Habermas believes that post modernists normative sentiment / goal is the same as his, but they refuse to admit it because that would be too limiting, bracketing, etc.

For Habermas, it is the post modernists' methodology that is the problem

Habermas believes that the post modernists are doing some free & open discourse in that they are critiquing society & social theory

For Habermas, an important part of communicative action is to establish validity claims, & he believes that post modernists refuse to do so because for them, there are none

Habermas believes that the post modernists fail to establish validity claims, seeming to claim that there are none

2. Habermas' second critique of post modernists is that their discourse is anarchic

One cannot analyze the post modernists' work because as soon as one does, they claim that we do not understand their words or literary endeavors

Post modernists are equivocal about whether they are producing theory or literature

Post modernists are not producing theory because they refuse to engage in institutionally establish vocabularies

If post modernists are doing literature, then they forfeit the power of science & logic

In any case, Habermas notes that social scientists cannot analyze the post modernists' work, or if they do, the post modernists claim that the social scientists do not understand their words or literary endeavors

3. Post modernism is too vague & totalizing

Post moderism's major concepts are power & surveillance, but they have failed to move beyond these & this is too simplistic

4. Post modernism ignores everyday life & practices

Ignoring the practices of everyday life makes post modernists ignorant of everyday norms & practices, which are important sources of ideas, power, structure, & many other core social phenomenon

The End

Top