Sociological Theory 3: Key Concepts
Week 1: Naturalism, Constructivism, & the Definitions of Theory:
Naturalism:
The core assumptions of naturalism are: (1) there is a real world out there
that exists independent of our experiences, (2) we can get access to that
world by observing and recording our experiences, and (3) the observable
world has regularities which are structured and imply causality.
Constructivism:
The core assumption of constructivism is that social realities are constructed
and maintained by social actors.
Scientific laws:
A scientific law / principle is a descriptive generalisation (pattern) about how
some aspects of the natural world behave under stated circumstances.
The word ‘descriptive’ implies that a scientific law does not
necessarily explain.
A scientific law must be based on facts and always has to be testable.
The difference between a theory and a law is that a law describes the
observable pattern, while a theory provides a possible explanation for why the
pattern occurs.
The ontological question:
The ontological question asks about the nature of reality and how we can
know it, and it has implications for how we approach sociological theory.
In Gabriel Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “What is theory?”.
The evaluative question:
The evaluative question asks about how we can evaluate the quality of
sociological theory and what criteria we should use.
In Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “What is a good theory?”.
The teleological question:
The teleological question asks about the purpose or goals of sociological
theory, and what sociological theory is trying to achieve.
In Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “What is theory for?”.
Semantic definition (Chat GPT):
, “Semantic relates to the meaning of words, phrases, or symbols within a
language. It deals with the interpretation of meaning in language and how
words or symbols convey information.”
The Semantic question:
The Semantic question asks about the meaning of concepts and how these
concepts are used in sociological theory.
In Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “What does ‘theory’ mean?”.
Semantic therapy:
Semantic therapy refers to a strategy to first clarify the meaning of a term
before engaging in a conversation about it, to solve the Semantic
predicament.
Semantic therapy involves community-wide engagement, but will facilitate
better communication and reduce miscommunications at the practical level.
The Semantic predicament:
The Semantic predicament refers to the challenges of dealing with multiple,
conflicting meanings of concepts in sociological theory.
In Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “How ought sociologists use the word
‘theory’?”.
The Socratic error:
The false belief that theory is an object out there that our concepts or
language can track down.
“My argument is that in the case of 'theory' the problems stem from the
erroneous belief that there is something-indeed, one thing-out there for the
word 'theory’ to really correspond to. Then, if one used the word to refer to
anything but that object, whatever it turned out to be, one would be mistaken.
I want to call this the 'Socratic error.” (Abend, 2008, p. 182)
Abend’s meaning of theory 1 to 7:
Theory 1:
A general series of logically connected propositions about the
relationship between two or more variables.
Theory 1 establishes a relationship between variables in general,
regardless of time or space.
Theory 1 is modelled after the natural sciences, often includes
naturalistic or positivist theories, and aligns with thinkers such as
Robert K. Merton and Ernest Nagel.
,Theory 2:
Explanations of specific, unique social phenomena, such as war or
revolution.
Theory 2 is more historical and reframes from making generalising
claims.
Theory 2 has a different way of looking at causal claims, events (for
example, the Second World War) can be causally explained, but not in
the sense that if X and Y occur, than Z will occur as well.
Theory 2 resonates with naturalism because of its reliance on empirical
and observable facts.
Theory 3:
Explanations of social phenomena from an interpretative approach
aimed at understanding lived experiences.
Theory 3 falls within the constructivist tradition.
Theory 3 does not revolve around causal relationships, but rather
understanding meaning-making processes (e.g., “What does it mean
that P?” or “How can we make sense of P?”).
Theory 4:
The study of the theory itself, examining the origins and underlying
assumptions of certain theories or schools of thought.
Theory 4 falls under the umbrella of the Sociology of Sociology or
Reflective Sociology.
Theory 4 is often an analysis of work by previous ‘classic’ authors
(somewhat similar to what the lecturer does in this course).
Theory 5:
This meaning of theory refers to Weltanschauung and the underlying
ontological and epistemological assumptions.
Theory 5 raises questions about the perspectives we adopt to
understand social phenomena, the nature of knowledge, whether
knowledge is legitimate, and it addresses the nature of the social
reality, questioning whether our knowledge of the world is constructed
or directly observed (thus, it examines the debate between naturalism
and constructivism).
Theory 6:
, Theory 6 is a sub-type of Theory 5 that has a fundamentally normative
component.
Theory 6 usually rejects the fact-value dichotomy and thus rejects the
value-neutral sociological theory.
Think of Marxist theories, feminist theory, postcolonial theory, etc.
Theory 7:
This approach addresses the empirical issues that sociologists
encounter.
Theory 7 is more about topics like the relationship between agency
and structure, or the individual versus the society.
Abend’s (2008) article could be a Theory 7.
Week 2: The Sociology of Max Weber & Max Weber on
Rationalisation:
Verstehen:
Verstehen is a concept that emphasises the importance of understanding
social phenomena from the perspectives of those who participate in them.
The humanities are characterised by the approach of Verstehen.
Verstehen is (1) a subjective understanding, (2) a methodology, (3) an
interpretative analysis, and (4) a rational procedure.
Ideal types:
Ideal types are mental (logical) constructs, where specific assumed key
elements from a phenomenon are combined in a systematic and rational
matter, and other assumed less important elements are left out.
Ideal types are a heuristic tool (derived inductively) to understand social
reality by simplifying and generalising complex phenomena.
You can never find ideal types empirically.
In Weber’s work, examples of ideal types are: bureaucracy, charismatic
authority, the Protestant ethic, and the means-end rationality.
Other thinkers, such as Karl Marx, also used ideal types (e.g., capitalism).
Naturalism, constructivism, substantialism, and relational thinking are also
ideal types.
Weber’s take on causality in the social sciences:
Week 1: Naturalism, Constructivism, & the Definitions of Theory:
Naturalism:
The core assumptions of naturalism are: (1) there is a real world out there
that exists independent of our experiences, (2) we can get access to that
world by observing and recording our experiences, and (3) the observable
world has regularities which are structured and imply causality.
Constructivism:
The core assumption of constructivism is that social realities are constructed
and maintained by social actors.
Scientific laws:
A scientific law / principle is a descriptive generalisation (pattern) about how
some aspects of the natural world behave under stated circumstances.
The word ‘descriptive’ implies that a scientific law does not
necessarily explain.
A scientific law must be based on facts and always has to be testable.
The difference between a theory and a law is that a law describes the
observable pattern, while a theory provides a possible explanation for why the
pattern occurs.
The ontological question:
The ontological question asks about the nature of reality and how we can
know it, and it has implications for how we approach sociological theory.
In Gabriel Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “What is theory?”.
The evaluative question:
The evaluative question asks about how we can evaluate the quality of
sociological theory and what criteria we should use.
In Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “What is a good theory?”.
The teleological question:
The teleological question asks about the purpose or goals of sociological
theory, and what sociological theory is trying to achieve.
In Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “What is theory for?”.
Semantic definition (Chat GPT):
, “Semantic relates to the meaning of words, phrases, or symbols within a
language. It deals with the interpretation of meaning in language and how
words or symbols convey information.”
The Semantic question:
The Semantic question asks about the meaning of concepts and how these
concepts are used in sociological theory.
In Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “What does ‘theory’ mean?”.
Semantic therapy:
Semantic therapy refers to a strategy to first clarify the meaning of a term
before engaging in a conversation about it, to solve the Semantic
predicament.
Semantic therapy involves community-wide engagement, but will facilitate
better communication and reduce miscommunications at the practical level.
The Semantic predicament:
The Semantic predicament refers to the challenges of dealing with multiple,
conflicting meanings of concepts in sociological theory.
In Abend’s (2008) article, it refers to “How ought sociologists use the word
‘theory’?”.
The Socratic error:
The false belief that theory is an object out there that our concepts or
language can track down.
“My argument is that in the case of 'theory' the problems stem from the
erroneous belief that there is something-indeed, one thing-out there for the
word 'theory’ to really correspond to. Then, if one used the word to refer to
anything but that object, whatever it turned out to be, one would be mistaken.
I want to call this the 'Socratic error.” (Abend, 2008, p. 182)
Abend’s meaning of theory 1 to 7:
Theory 1:
A general series of logically connected propositions about the
relationship between two or more variables.
Theory 1 establishes a relationship between variables in general,
regardless of time or space.
Theory 1 is modelled after the natural sciences, often includes
naturalistic or positivist theories, and aligns with thinkers such as
Robert K. Merton and Ernest Nagel.
,Theory 2:
Explanations of specific, unique social phenomena, such as war or
revolution.
Theory 2 is more historical and reframes from making generalising
claims.
Theory 2 has a different way of looking at causal claims, events (for
example, the Second World War) can be causally explained, but not in
the sense that if X and Y occur, than Z will occur as well.
Theory 2 resonates with naturalism because of its reliance on empirical
and observable facts.
Theory 3:
Explanations of social phenomena from an interpretative approach
aimed at understanding lived experiences.
Theory 3 falls within the constructivist tradition.
Theory 3 does not revolve around causal relationships, but rather
understanding meaning-making processes (e.g., “What does it mean
that P?” or “How can we make sense of P?”).
Theory 4:
The study of the theory itself, examining the origins and underlying
assumptions of certain theories or schools of thought.
Theory 4 falls under the umbrella of the Sociology of Sociology or
Reflective Sociology.
Theory 4 is often an analysis of work by previous ‘classic’ authors
(somewhat similar to what the lecturer does in this course).
Theory 5:
This meaning of theory refers to Weltanschauung and the underlying
ontological and epistemological assumptions.
Theory 5 raises questions about the perspectives we adopt to
understand social phenomena, the nature of knowledge, whether
knowledge is legitimate, and it addresses the nature of the social
reality, questioning whether our knowledge of the world is constructed
or directly observed (thus, it examines the debate between naturalism
and constructivism).
Theory 6:
, Theory 6 is a sub-type of Theory 5 that has a fundamentally normative
component.
Theory 6 usually rejects the fact-value dichotomy and thus rejects the
value-neutral sociological theory.
Think of Marxist theories, feminist theory, postcolonial theory, etc.
Theory 7:
This approach addresses the empirical issues that sociologists
encounter.
Theory 7 is more about topics like the relationship between agency
and structure, or the individual versus the society.
Abend’s (2008) article could be a Theory 7.
Week 2: The Sociology of Max Weber & Max Weber on
Rationalisation:
Verstehen:
Verstehen is a concept that emphasises the importance of understanding
social phenomena from the perspectives of those who participate in them.
The humanities are characterised by the approach of Verstehen.
Verstehen is (1) a subjective understanding, (2) a methodology, (3) an
interpretative analysis, and (4) a rational procedure.
Ideal types:
Ideal types are mental (logical) constructs, where specific assumed key
elements from a phenomenon are combined in a systematic and rational
matter, and other assumed less important elements are left out.
Ideal types are a heuristic tool (derived inductively) to understand social
reality by simplifying and generalising complex phenomena.
You can never find ideal types empirically.
In Weber’s work, examples of ideal types are: bureaucracy, charismatic
authority, the Protestant ethic, and the means-end rationality.
Other thinkers, such as Karl Marx, also used ideal types (e.g., capitalism).
Naturalism, constructivism, substantialism, and relational thinking are also
ideal types.
Weber’s take on causality in the social sciences:
