scholarly journals Street Names through Sociological Lenses. Part I: Functionalism and Conflict Theory

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihai Stelian Rusu
Keyword(s):  
Sociological Theory ◽  
Social Geography ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Conflict Theory ◽  
Social Constructions ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
Urban Street ◽  
Utilitarian Value ◽  
Important Object ◽  
Street Naming

AbstractStreet names are mundane spatial markers that besides providing a sense of orientation inscribe onto the landscape the ideological ethos and political symbols of hegemonic discourses. This review article takes stock of the existing scholarship done on the politics of street naming practices in human (political, cultural, and social) geography and rethinks these insights from sociological perspectives. Drawing on Randall Collins’ taxonomy of sociological theory, the paper interprets urban street nomenclatures along functionalist, conflictualist, constructionist, and utilitarian lines. The analysis is delivered in two installments: Part I addresses urban nomenclatures from functionalist and conflictualist perspectives, while Part II (published in the next issue of this journal) approaches street names as social constructions and examines their utilitarian value. In doing so, the paper advances the argument that urban namescapes in general and street names in particular should make an important object of sociological reflection and empirical analysis. It is one of the key arguments developed in this paper that toponymy encapsulates broader and intersecting issues of power, memory, identity, language, and space which can be rendered visible through sociological analysis.

scholarly journals Sociological Work on Violence: Gender, Theory and Research

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda McKie
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Sociological Theory ◽  
Gender Theory ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
Central Concern ◽  
Holding Power ◽  
Sociological Work ◽  
Analysis Of The Images ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Theoretical Pluralism

The suffering caused by violence is senseless, persistent and demoralizing (Gordimer, 2003). For perpetrators there is the hollowness of holding power over others, a power that illustrates the fragility of their situation (Card, 2002; Mason, 2002). Yet despite the obvious relevance to sociology, violence in everyday and intimate practices has not been a central concern for sociological theory (Hearn, 1998; Ray, 2000). This may reflect the ‘taken for grantedness of violence’, the hierarchical and gendered nature of sociological work, especially on theory, combined with an earlier marginalization of gender, ethnicity and age. In this paper I draw upon the work of Midgley (2003) and her definition of ‘myths’ to offer an over-arching analysis of the images and ideas that surround and imbue sociological work on violence. Highlighting the barriers evident in, and recreated through, the sociological analysis of violence, the paper explores the challenges for sociology. A review of the tendency to atomistic approaches in sociological analysis and explanation reaffirms the need for theoretical pluralism in social sciences on the topic of violence (Eagleton, 2003).

scholarly journals ‘Counterfinality’ in sociological theory: Reconceptualization of the concept

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 697-710
Author(s):  
I. A. Latypov
Keyword(s):  
Social Action ◽  
Sociological Theory ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Sociological Research ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
Sociological Study ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Intentional Actions ◽  
Main Ideas ◽  
Classic Papers

Counterfinality is defined as unintended consequences of the uncoordinated actions of rationally acting individuals. Even before the concept was introduced by Sartre and developed by Elster, counterfinality was considered by many scholars. Some defined counterfinality as a type of social paradoxes and dilemmas, others - as an outcome of social interaction. Description and analysis of such social contradictions and paradoxes can be found in the works of Hobbes, Mandeville, Smith, Marx and Hegel. In the 20th century, sociologists also considered the issue of unintended consequences. Many classic papers of Merton contributed to the sociological analysis of the unintended consequences of intentional actions. Subsequent works focused on their classifications, and the phenomenon of counterfinality was highlighted in almost every classification. The term counterfinality was introduced by Sartre as an appendage of history, an unforeseen consequence of many interactions. The sociological study of counterfinality was initiated by Elster. He analyzes counterfinality not within the functionalist paradigm, but in the methodological individualism perspective, and for him, counterfinality acts as a basis for social change. The authors analysis of the main ideas of Sartre, Elster and other authors on counterfinality reveals its distinctive features in general and in the sociological analysis of social action in particular. The author argues that today the counterfinality theory consists mainly of responses and criticism of the ideas of Sartre and Elster, and that further sociological research should focus on conditions, features and consequences of counterfinality, and on its empirical indicators.

scholarly journals Marx and Weber’s Polar Opposing Theorical Concepts of Capitalism and Christianity: A Tribute to The Depth of Sociological Theory in the 21 Century

2021 ◽  
pp. 56
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
Sociological Theory ◽  
Conflict Theory ◽  
Power Elite ◽  
Creative Activity ◽  
Productive Force ◽  
Surplus Value ◽  
Human Needs ◽  
Religious Dogma ◽  
Species Being

Abstract: Marx and Weber two German Sociologists with opposite social theories centered around Capitalism and Religion in Western Civilization. Context: This effort is the first in a series of articles designed to expose Sociology’s depth in theorical free social thought. The second article in this series will contrast “Conflict Theory” with “Functionalism”. Marx viewed modern capitalist society as an historical process of oppression and alienation. Indeed, labor is viewed as a commodity, Marx refers to this social conditions as Alienated or Estrange labor. Found in this social position humanity cannot experience a creative function; rather experiences oneself passively as the subject separated from the object. Therefore, the perversion of labor into a meaningless crippling productive force. Furthermore, Marx argued the nature of humanity is to transform, and change nature to fit human needs or “Species-Being”. Therefore, Humanity is the past, present and the future. As opposed to the species-nature of animal. Animal behavior is rooted in the internal repetition of activities, accepting what nature has to offer. However, alienated labor perverts’ human character as “species-being” into a means of existence, rather than a free, conscious creative activity. Moreover, humanity feels free only to act in a most animal function (rather than as a free creative activity decreasing humanities advantage over animals). Thus, productive life is species-life where humanity consciously transforms the outside world into ones’ self-identity. Lastly, private property is the all-summarized expression of alienated labor for humanity is transformed into a commodity, to be owned and used by the Power-elite. Marx labels this “The Theory of Surplus Value”. The equation located in “Surplus value” is as the value of “things” increase there is a direct decrease in the value of humanity. The end-product is always more valuable than the sum of its parts, which by logically includes the devaluation Humanity. Christianity: Marx argued that embedded in the religious dogma of Christianity is the justification of slavery, negative self-contempt, submissiveness, life-long poverty, and the objectification of humanity, all for the benefit power-elite (Capitalist). Thus” RELIGION IS THE OPIUM OF THE PEOPLE”, man (capitalist) create religion for their purposes of exploitation; thus religion “does not make man”, man makes region.

The Internalization of Autonomous Nature into Society

2002 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Social Practices ◽  
Social Constructions ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
Socially Constructed ◽  
Wilderness Areas

There is presently much theoretical discourse claiming that nature is being socially constructed or even abolished. Some authors celebrate this development and others lament it. Still others bracket nature's dynamics out of the analysis. The present paper critically assesses these theories and methodologies concerning relations between social practices and processes of nature. It then develops an alternative argument. The expansion of society into wilderness areas has brought new disturbances of nature into society. Pristine nature has been replaced by socially encompassed primal nature, which retains its capacity for independent dynamics that affect social constructions. Moreover, nature remains embedded in technology and so does its potential to escape control. These hybrids constructed by humans and nonhumans recombine processes and materials of nature. Now that this recombi-nant nature has been integrated into society and new primal dynamics of nature have been internalised, there is increasing reason to incorporate the forces of nature into sociological analysis.

Architectural Modes of Collective Existence: Architectural Sociology as a Comparative Social Theory

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heike Delitz
Keyword(s):  
Social Theory ◽  
Sociological Theory ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Broad Sense ◽  
Social Effects ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
Short Overview ◽  
The Social ◽  
Constitutive Mode

This article proposes a cross-cultural, comparative architectural sociology as a means of sociological analysis. It also emphasizes the social positivity of architecture. After a short overview of architectural sociology and its history, the article outlines a sociological theory which sees architecture and related practices as a constitutive ‘mode of collective existence’. The article argues that architecture (in a broad sense) is not a mere ‘reflection’ or ‘mirror’ of society, but rather a constitutive and transformative medium of the imaginary institution of society (Castoriadis), its assemblages (Deleuze), as well as its subjects (Foucault). In other words, it claims that architecture is a material and symbolic ‘mode’ through which societies and individuals are constituted and transformed. As architecture is a cultural technique, which is primarily enacted in relation to bodies, perceptions and affects (rather than in a discursive, reflective way), the social effects of architecture can best be understood and analysed through a comparative lens. Finally, therefore, the article unfolds a tableau of diverse architectural modes of collective existence, thus providing an overview of different socio-architectural constellations. Such a comparative and synchronical view of different societies allows for a sociology of architecture which analyses architectural transformations – both historical and contemporary.

scholarly journals Do the Differences in Ideas about Social Action Influence Sociological Analysis? A Review Article

2021 ◽  
pp. 193-199
Keyword(s):  
Social Action ◽  
Max Weber ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
Sociological Study ◽  
Important Concept ◽  
Central Focus ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Research Questions

This article reviews different thoughts of modern sociologists about social action to examine how the differences in the meaning of social action influence sociological analysis. This article also discusses the implication of these differences in the meaning of social action to sociological analysis. Four articles and two books of selected modern sociologists have been reviewed to explore the research questions of this article. This article finds that modern sociologists take social action as an important concept in sociological analysis. Classical sociologists, such as Max Weber, also suggest taking social action as a central focus in sociological study. This article observes that whether action is exerted based on structure or the actor’s self-interpreting power is one of the key issues in the ideas of modern sociologists.

Sociology, Critique and Modernity: Views Across the European Divide

2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-461
Author(s):  
Johann P. Arnason
Keyword(s):  
Sociological Theory ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
East Central ◽  
Central European ◽  
Historical Perspectives ◽  
Sociological Tradition ◽  
Sociological Inquiry ◽  
East Central European

Questions raised by the collapse of Communist power and ideology have major implications for the self-understanding of sociology as a mode of inquiry. These questions are linked to unresolved disputes and incomplete projects, inherited from earlier phases of the sociological tradition but still relevant to the central issues of theoretical and substantive debates. In that context, the idea of comparative analysis is a defining characteristic of sociological inquiry rather than one research strategy among others. Social theory and comparative history need each other for mutual information, as well as for protection against the danger of disciplinary closure. The idea of sociology as a critique of modernity – or at least a possible foundation for such a critique – should be reconsidered in light of comparative and historical perspectives. Both the predicament of Marxian critique and the question of alternatives to it should be considered from the East Central European angle. It provides a compelling case for re-examining the very idea of critique, the arguments on behalf of rival versions, and the role of critical perspectives in sociological analysis. A civilizational frame of reference will broaden our perspectives on the antinomies of modernity beyond the partial views of earlier sociological theory.

Individualisation, Choice and Structure: A Discussion of Current Trends in Sociological Analysis

2005 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Brannen ◽  
Ann Nilsen
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Young People ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Sociological Theory ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Sociological Thought ◽  
Structural Aspects

In this paper we seek to explore a tendency in current sociological thought to highlight notions of choice and autonomy in writings about contemporary Western societies. We wish to draw attention to some of the consequences of leaving out discussions of the structural aspects of societies and people's lives, for individuals as well as for the development and application of sociological theory and its ability to understand the connection between history and individual biography. Our discussion is based on qualitative research that we have conducted in recent years, and draws on focus groups with young people in Norway and Britain. From this critique we seek to demonstrate how concepts that take account of context and structure as well individual subjectivities can create a better ‘fit’ with complex and diverse realties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document