DOWNLOAD PDF EMERGENCE OF SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

Transcription

1 Chapter 1 : Emergence - Wikipedia The Emergence of Somatic Psychology and Bodymind Therapy (Critical Theory and Practice in Psychology and the Human Sciences) Jan 10, This article provides information about the emergence and development of sociology! Sociology is one of the newer of the academic disciplines, tracing its origins no further back than the middle of the nineteenth century. It has a short history. Sociology, the science of society, is the youngest and it came to be established only in the nineteenth century. The French philosopher, August Comte gave sociology and a programme for its development. For thousands of years, society has been a subject for speculation and enquiry. Yet sociology is a modern science which originated only within last hundred fifty years or so. The study of society, however, can be traced to the Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle. The philosophical basis of Plat o and Aristotle characterised the observations of man for a very long period of time. The literature concerning society and its problems found place in the Republic of Plato B. Plato was the first Western philosopher who attempted a systematic study of society. In the Ethics and Politics of Aristotle we find the first major attempts of systematic dealing of law, the society and State. In his book Cicero, the Roman thinker, brought the great Greek ideas in philosophy, politics and law in the West. In the sixteenth century, a precise distinction was made between State and society. Thomas Hobbes and Machiavelli were the outstanding contributors of the realistic approach to social problems. Hobbes in his Levithan and Machiavelli in his Prince analyses the system of statecraft and also put forward conditions for success of State. Notable among those who made contribution towards the specific investigation of social phenomena are the Italian writer Vico and French writer Baron de Montesquieu. Montesquieu explained in his The Spirit of Laws that many external factors, particularly climate, play significant role in the life of society. These writings were still in the philosophical tradition, but they contained sufficient analysis to lay foundation for a separate social science. Various social sciences gradually evolved in response to the varied needs of human living. The writings in philosophical tradition laid foundation for development of social sciences. With the passage of time various social sciences developed one after another and began to pursue separate and independent path of their own. Political philosophers inquired into the evolution of State, the growth and nature of State authority and various other problems of political nature. Similarly, economics as separate and independent science inquired into the problems concerning production and distribution of commodities as well as the larger question of economic growth. Thus, study carried on by man about different aspects of society gave rise to different social sciences like History, Political Science, Economics, Anthropology and Psychology etc. August Comte created the new science of society and coined the name sociology in Sociology has a long past, but only a short history. The study of human society in scientific way is said to have begun with August Comte. The emergence of sociology as a discipline of academic interest is of recent origin. Its emergence as a discipline can be attributed to the vast changes that took place in the nineteenth century. Various strains and tendencies, some intellectual and some social, combined to-form the science of sociology. The chief intellectual antecedents of sociology are summed up by Ginsberg in the following words: Broadly it may be said that sociology has had a fourfold origin in political philosophy, the philosophy of history, biological theories of evolution and the movements for social and political reform which found it necessary to undertake survey of social conditions. Over the time, there had grown the intellectual tradition described as the historical tradition or the philosophy of history, which believed the general idea of progress. To combat the influence of theology on history, the thinkers of the Enlightenments introduced the idea of causality into history of philosophy, elaborated the theory of progress. But philosophy of history as a distinct branch of speculation is a creation eighteenth century. They were concerned with discussions of the nature of society, classification of societies into types, population, family, Government, morality and law etc. In the early part of the nineteenth century the philosophy of history became an important intellectual influence through the writings of Hegel and Saint-Simon. The features of writings of philosophical historian reappeared in the nineteenth century, in the works of Comte and Spencer. The first was the growing conviction of the applicability of the methods of Page 1

2 natural sciences to the study of human affairs. The second was the movement for social and political reforms which made it necessary to undertake surveys of social problems like poverty which arose in the industrial societies of Western Europe. The social survey came to occupy an important place in the new science of society and it was one of the principal methods of sociological enquiry. These intellectual movements, the philosophy of history, and the social survey were themselves the product of social settings of the eighteenth and nineteenth-century Western Europe. The Philosophy of history was not merely a child of thought. Similarly, the social survey emerged from a new conception of evils of industrial society. All intellectual fields are profoundly shaped by their social setting. This is particularly true of sociology, which is not only derived from that setting but takes the social setting as its basic subject matter. We will focus briefly on few of the most important social conditions of nineteenth and early twentieth century that were of type utmost significant in the development of sociology. The long series of revolutions ushered in by French Revolution in and carrying over through the nineteenth century, and the Industrial Revolution were the important factors in the development of sociology. The upheaval of French revolution was a turning point in the history of thinking about society. It was also largely responsible for the development of Sociology. The impact of these revolutions on many societies was enormous and many changes were resulted which were positive in nature. But these revolutions have also brought about social changes which had negative effects. The negative effects of social change brought by French Revolution manifested in forms of chaos and disorder. Similarly, Industrial Revolution brought many social problems and evils such as labour-capital dispute, the problem of housing, increasing concentrations of people in urban areas etc. The chaos and disorder resulted by political revolutions in France and the problems unleashed by tremendous changes brought by the industrialisation led to the study of social problems and to find new bases of order in societies. The interest in the issue of social order was one of the major concern of August Comte who created sociology as a separate science. He felt a need for a social science which is concerned with society as a whole or with total social structure because all other social sciences deal with particular aspect of the society. He was the first man to create a new science of society and to distinguish the subject-matter of sociology from all other social sciences. Comte developed -the first complete approach to the scientific study of society. Other social sciences may give a snapshot view of society from various angles but never a view of society in its comprehensive totality. Comte decided to study the whole series of theoretical sciences which he identified with positive philosophy. From the result of such study Comte sought to formulate a system of laws governing society so that he could postulate a cure for society on the basis of these laws. In when he with Saint -Simon conceived the necessity of the new science, he intended to name the new science social physics. Thus, the programme of a new science latter to be renamed sociology was clearly stated. Soon after the publication of their work, Comte and Saint â Simon dissolved their partnership and began bitterly to attack each other. Very reluctantly Comte changed the name of the new science from social physics to sociology. In the latter part of his Positive Philosophy he explained that he had invented a new name because the old one had been usurped by Belgian scientist who chose it as the title for a work. In Positive Politics, Comte attempted to give more flesh and blood to rather formal definition of sociology implied in Positive Philosophy. Between the years and, he wrote a treaties entitled System of Positive Politics in which he applied the findings of theoretical sociology to the solution of social problems of his time. Thus, accomplished his initial goal, the improvement of society. Sociology as a science of society originated with August Comte in the nineteenth century. He worked out a general approach to the study of society. Sociology as a separate discipline originated with Comte in the middle of nineteenth century. Since then a galaxy of thinkers and scholars have contributed for the development of sociology. There are four men, however, whom everyone in sociology regardless of his special emphasis, bias, or bent will probably accept as the central figures in the development of modern sociology. Together, they span the whole of the nineteenth and early twentieth century, during which modern sociology was formed. They represent the main national centres France, England and Germany in which sociology first flourished and in which the modern tradition began. Each exerted a profound personal influence on the conception of sociology as an intellectual discipline. The theory of scientific evolution was brought into sociology by Herbert Spencer in his book Principles of Sociology The nineteenth century sociology was evolutionary because it attempted to identify Page 2

3 and account for the principal stages in the social evolution. At the same time that evolutionism blossomed, a new analytical approach to sociology emerged. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, four men made outstanding contributions to this trend. Durkheim was one among them. Each of them has contributed significantly to modern sociological theory. Tonnies inaugurated the study of basic types of social groups and suggested a system for their classification. Simmel initiated the study of types of social processes. Trade was the first to provide what, according to many thinkers, is a sound basis for a theory of social and cultural change. Efforts of these pioneers prepared the way for systematic sociological theory based on empirical investigation. The writings of Herbert Spencer had a remarkable impact on the psychologists who had displaced his biological interpretation of social phenomenon to psychological interpretation. His theory was fairly systematic and has been highly suggestive for his successor in France and elsewhere. Durkheim was aware that most of the earlier social theorists had neglected the problems of the appropriate method to be used in analysing social phenomena. Further, sociology was enriched by the contribution of Max Weber. Weber gave a new start with his work on important subjects such as bureaucracy, sociology of law and religion. It is a fact that the European classical scientists, particularly Marx, Max Weber and Durkheim sought to establish the scope and methods of sociology to show its value by investigation and explanation of major social phenomena. Karl Marx sought to discover the objective laws of history and society and attempted to show that the development of society is natural historical process in which various social systems succeed each other. But Marx introduced an entirely new attitude and orientation in the study of society. It is this attitude and orientation that has made significant contribution to the development of sociology, for it has compelled thinkers to give their attention on social including economic relationships than the social thought. In the early twentieth century, important contributions have been made by the giants-cooley, Thomas and Pareto. Page 3

4 Chapter 2 : 11 Causes for the Emergence of Postmodern Social Theory This scholarly text covers the first one hundred years of sociological theorizing, from to, focusing primarily on Comte, Spencer, Marx, Weber, Simmel, Durkheim, and Mead. Ancient times[ edit ] The sociological reasoning may be traced back at least as far as the ancient Greeks cf. Proto-sociological observations are to be found in the founding texts of Western philosophy Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, Polybius and so on, as well as in the non-european thought of figures such as Confucius. Because there was rarely any extensive or highly centralized political organization within states this allowed the tribal spirit of localism and provincialism to have free play. This tribal spirit of localism and provincialism pervaded most of the Greek thinking upon social phenomena. Some consider Ibn Khaldun, a 14th-century Tunisian, Arab, Islamic scholar from North Africa, to have been the first sociologist and father of sociology; his Muqaddimah was perhaps the first work to advance social-scientific reasoning on social cohesion and social conflict. He is thus considered by some to be the forerunner of sociology. He developed the dichotomy of sedentary life versus nomadic life as well as the concept of a "generation", and the inevitable loss of power that occurs when desert warriors conquer a city. Topics dealt with in this work include politics, urban life, economics, and knowledge. This social cohesion arises spontaneously in tribes and other small kinship groups; it can be intensified and enlarged by a religious ideology. The Enlightenment and positivism[ edit ] The Positivist temple in Porto Alegre Henri de Saint-Simon[ edit ] Saint-Simon published Physiologie sociale in and devoted much of his time to the prospect that human society could be steered toward progress if scientists would form an international assembly to influence its course. He argued that scientists could distract groups from war and strife, by focusing their attention to generally improving their societies living conditions. In turn, this would bring multiple cultures and societies together and prevent conflict. Saint-Simon took the idea that everyone had encouraged from the Enlightenment, which was the belief in science, and spun it to be more practical and hands-on for the society. He saw that people had been seeing progress as an approach for science, but he wanted them to see it as an approach to all aspects of life. Society was making a crucial change at the time since it was growing out of a declining feudalism. This new path could provide the basis for solving all the old problems society had previously encountered. He was more concerned with the participation of man in the workforce instead of which workforce man choose. His own sociological scheme was typical of the 19th-century humanists; he believed all human life passed through distinct historical stages and that, if one could grasp this progress, one could prescribe the remedies for social ills. Auguste Comte was so impressed with his theory of positivism that he referred to it as "the great discovery of the year This law states any kind of knowledge always begins in theological form. Here the knowledge can be explained by a superior supernatural power such as animism, spirits, or gods. It then passes to the metaphysical form where the knowledge is explained by abstract philosophical speculation. Finally, the knowledge becomes positive after being explained scientifically through observation, experiment, and comparison. The order of the laws was created in order of increasing difficulty. They both were influenced by various Utopian-socialist thinkers of the day and agreed that some form of communism would be the climax of societal development. In this new "religion" he referred to society as the "Great Being. Karl Marx rejected the positivist sociology of Comte but was of central influence in founding structural social science. Industrial revolution and the Darwinian revolution[ edit ] Historical materialism[ edit ] Both Comte and Marx intended to develop a new scientific ideology in the wake of European secularization. Marx, in the tradition of Hegelianism, rejected the positivist method and was in turn rejected by the self-proclaimed sociologists of his day. However, in attempting to develop a comprehensive science of society Marx nevertheless became recognized as a founder of sociology by the mid 20th century. Isaiah Berlin described Marx as the "true father" of modern sociology, "in so far as anyone can claim the title. The sociological treatment of historical and moral problems, which Comte and after him, Spencer and Taine, had discussed and mapped, became a precise and concrete study only when the attack of militant Marxism made its conclusions a burning issue, and so made the search for evidence more zealous and the attention to method more intense. Although, at first sympathetic with the groups strategy of Page 4

5 attacking Christianity to undermine the Prussian establishment, he later formed divergent ideas and broke with the Young Hegelians, attacking their views in works such as The German Ideology. This "stood Hegel on his head" as he theorized that, at its core, the engine of history and the structure of society was fundamentally material rather than ideal. He theorized that both the realm of cultural production and political power created ideologies that perpetuated the oppression of the working class and the concentration of wealth within the capitalist class: Marx predicted that the capitalist class would feel compelled to reduce wages or replace laborers with technology, which would ultimately increase wealth among the capitalists. However, as the workers were also the primary consumers of the goods produced, reducing their wages would result in an inevitable collapse in capitalism as a mode of economic production. The early sociology of Spencer came about broadly as a reaction to Comte and Marx; writing before and after the Darwinian revolution in biology, Spencer attempted to reformulate the discipline in what we might now describe as socially Darwinistic terms. In fact, his early writings show a coherent theory of general evolution several years before Darwin published anything on the subject. Youmans, [23] [24] Spencer published The Study of Sociology in, which was the first book with the term "sociology" in the title. In the edition of the journal International Monthly, [22] Franklin H. Giddings â, the first professor of sociology at Columbia University, described it as the book that "first awakened in England, America, France, Italy and Russia a wide interest general interest" [23] in the then fledgling discipline of sociology. In the United States, Charles Horton Cooley, stated in a article that The Study of Sociology "probably did more to arouse interest in the subject than any other publication before or since. Whilst many intellectuals of his day were proponents of socialism as a scientifically informed manner of steering society, Spencer was a critic of socialism and an advocate for a laissez-faire style of government. His ideas were highly observed by conservative political circles, especially in the United States and England. Also in, at the age of 65 he was appointed to professor of sociology at Brown University. He also held the first professorship of sociology at Yale College, and in, Sumner became the first to teach a course entitled "sociology" in the English-speaking world. His course focused predominantly on the work of Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer. He was ideologically opposed to the sociology of Ward as he felt that society could not be steered by scientific intervention, and famously stated the alternative to "survival of the fittest" was the "survival of the unfittest. During the Progressive Era in the United States, social Darwinism became a contentious topic and Sumner and his course at Yale College was criticized for including Spencerian ideas. Other precursors[ edit ] Many other philosophers and academics were influential in the development of sociology, not least the Enlightenment theorists of social contract, and historians such as Adam Ferguson â Both books were published in, in the context of the debate over slavery in the antebellum US. Various other early social historians and economists have gained recognition as classical sociologists, including Robert Michels â, Alexis de Tocqueville â, Vilfredo Pareto â and Thorstein Veblen â The classical sociological texts broadly differ from political philosophy in the attempt to remain scientific, systematic, structural, or dialectical, rather than purely moral, normative or subjective. The new class relations associated with the development of Capitalism are also key, further distinguishing sociological texts from the political philosophy of the Renaissance and Enlightenment eras. Foundation of the academic discipline[ edit ] Formal institutionalization of sociology as an academic discipline began when Emile Durkheim founded the first French department of sociology at the University of Bordeaux in A course entitled "sociology" was taught for the first time in the United States in by William Graham Sumner, drawing upon the thought of Comte and Herbert Spencer rather than the work of Durkheim. The Department of History and Sociology at the University of Kansas was established in [33] [34] and the first full-fledged independent university department of sociology was established in at the University of Chicago by Albion W. Small â, who in founded the American Journal of Sociology. George Herbert Mead and Charles H. Cooley were influential in the development of symbolic interactionism and social psychology at the University of Chicago, while Lester Ward emphasized the central importance of the scientific method with the publication of Dynamic Sociology in The University of Chicago developed the major sociologists at the time. It brought them together, and even gave them a hub and a network to link all the leading sociologists. In, a third of all sociology graduate students attended the University of Chicago. Chicago was very good at not isolating their students from other Page 5

6 schools. They encouraged them to blend with other sociologists, and to not spend more time in the class room than studying the society around them. This would teach them real life application of the classroom teachings. The first teachings at the University of Chicago were focused on the social problems that the world had been dealt. At this time, academia was not concerned with theory; especially not to the point that academia is today. Many people were still hesitant of sociology at this time, especially with the recent controversial theories of Weber and Marx. The University of Chicago decided to go into an entirely different direction and their sociology department directed their attention to the individual and promoted equal rights. The program combined with other departments to offer students well-rounded studies requiring courses in hegemony, economics, psychology, multiple social sciences and political science. Albion Small was the head of the sociology program at the University of Chicago. He played a key role in bringing German sociological advancements directly into American academic sociology. Small also created the American Journal of Sociology. This made the findings more standardized, concise and easier to comprehend. Many remarkable sociologists such as George Hebert Mead, W. Thomas was an early graduate from the Sociology Department of the University of Chicago. He built upon his education and his work changed sociology in many ways. In, William I. This publication combined sociological theory with in depth experiential research and thus launching methodical sociological research as a whole. This publication also gave sociologists a new way to found their research and prove it on a new level. All their research would be more solid, and harder for society to not pay attention to it. In, Znaniecki developed a sociology department in Poland to expand research and teachings there. This was a major factor in the downfall of the Chicago school. In a sociology department was established in Germany at the Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich by Max Weber, who had established a new antipositivist sociology. The "Institute for Social Research" at the University of Frankfurt later to become the "Frankfurt School" of critical theory was founded in Most of this men would soon be forced out of Germany by the Nazis and arrive in America, influencing social research there. Their goal in creating the institute was to produce a place that people could discover and be informed of social life as a whole. Weil, Horkheimer, and Gerlach wanted to focus on interactions between economics, politics, legal matters, as well as scholarly interactions in the community and society. The main research that got the institute known was its revival of scientific Marxism. Many benefactors contributed money, supplies, and buildings to keep this area of research going. When Gerlach, became ill and had to step down as director, Max Horkheimer took his place. He encouraged the students of the institute to question everything they studied. If the students studied a theory, he not only wanted them to discover its truth themselves, but also to discover how, and why it is true and the theories relation to society. The regime also forced many students and staff from the entire Frankfurt University, and most fled to America. Many people forced from the institute also left the war path, but unlike the university, the institute lost too many people and was forced to close. In, the institute was reopened as a private establishment. From this point on the Institute of Social Research would have a close connection to sociology studies in the United States. Page 6

7 Chapter 3 : Editions of The Emergence of Sociological Theory by Jonathan H. Turner The leading authority on sociological theory, Dr. Turner is the author of 38 influential books, which have been published in twelve different languages, as well as the author of many research articles in numerous journals and books. An emergent property of a system, in this context, is one that is not a property of any component of that system, but is still a feature of the system as a whole. Nicolai Hartmann, one of the first modern philosophers to write on emergence, termed this categorial novum new category. Definitions[ edit ] This idea of emergence has been around since at least the time of Aristotle. The term "emergent" was coined by philosopher G. Lewes, who wrote: Every resultant is either a sum or a difference of the co-operant forces; their sum, when their directions are the same â their difference, when their directions are contrary. Further, every resultant is clearly traceable in its components, because these are homogeneous and commensurable. It is otherwise with emergents, when, instead of adding measurable motion to measurable motion, or things of one kind to other individuals of their kind, there is a co-operation of things of unlike kinds. The emergent is unlike its components insofar as these are incommensurable, and it cannot be reduced to their sum or their difference. The common characteristics are: He also says that living systems like the game of chess, while emergent, cannot be reduced to underlying laws of emergence: They serve merely to describe regularities and consistent relationships in nature. These patterns may be very illuminating and important, but the underlying causal agencies must be separately specified though often they are not. But that aside, the game of chess illustrates Indeed, you cannot even reliably predict the next move in a chess game. It also includes the players and their unfolding, moment-by-moment decisions among a very large number of available options at each choice point. The game of chess is inescapably historical, even though it is also constrained and shaped by a set of rules, not to mention the laws of physics. Moreover, and this is a key point, the game of chess is also shaped by teleonomic, cybernetic, feedback-driven influences. In terms of physical systems, weak emergence is a type of emergence in which the emergent property is amenable to computer simulation. This is opposed to the older notion of strong emergence, in which the emergent property cannot be simulated by a computer. Some common points between the two notions are that emergence concerns new properties produced as the system grows, which is to say ones which are not shared with its components or prior states. Also, it is assumed that the properties are supervenient rather than metaphysically primitive Bedau Weak emergence describes new properties arising in systems as a result of the interactions at an elemental level. However, it is stipulated that the properties can be determined only by observing or simulating the system, and not by any process of analysis. Bedau notes that weak emergence is not a universal metaphysical solvent, as the hypothesis that consciousness is weakly emergent would not resolve the traditional philosophical questions about the physicality of consciousness. However, Bedau concludes that adopting this view would provide a precise notion that emergence is involved in consciousness, and second, the notion of weak emergence is metaphysically benign. The whole is other than the sum of its parts. An example from physics of such emergence is water, being seemingly unpredictable even after an exhaustive study of the properties of its constituent atoms of hydrogen and oxygen. Bedau Rejecting the distinction[ edit ] However, "the debate about whether or not the whole can be predicted from the properties of the parts misses the point. Wholes produce unique combined effects, but many of these effects may be co-determined by the context and the interactions between the whole and its environment s " Corning In accordance with his Synergism Hypothesis, Corning Corning also stated, "It is the synergistic effects produced by wholes that are the very cause of the evolution of complexity in nature. Koestler Further, The ability to reduce everything to simple fundamental laws does not imply the ability to start from those laws and reconstruct the universe. The constructionist hypothesis breaks down when confronted with the twin difficulties of scale and complexity. At each level of complexity entirely new properties appear. Psychology is not applied biology, nor is biology applied chemistry. We can now see that the whole becomes not merely more, but very different from the sum of its parts. Anderson Viability of strong emergence[ edit ] The plausibility of strong emergence is questioned by some as contravening our usual understanding of physics. Although strong emergence is logically possible, it is uncomfortably like magic. Page 7

8 How does an irreducible but supervenient downward causal power arise, since by definition it cannot be due to the aggregation of the micro-level potentialities? Such causal powers would be quite unlike anything within our scientific ken. This not only indicates how they will discomfort reasonable forms of materialism. Their mysteriousness will only heighten the traditional worry that emergence entails illegitimately getting something from nothing. Now, M, as an emergent, must itself have an emergence base property, say P. Now we face a critical question: Why cannot P do all the work in explaining why any alleged effect of M occurred? Moreover, this goes against the spirit of emergentism in any case: One escape route that a strong emergentist could take would be to deny downward causation. However, this would remove the proposed reason that emergent mental states must supervene on physical states, which in turn would call physicalism into question, and thus be unpalatable for some philosophers and physicists. Meanwhile, others have worked towards developing analytical evidence of strong emergence. In, Gu et al. The view that this is the goal of science rests in part on the rationale that such a theory would allow us to derive the behavior of all macroscopic concepts, at least in principle. The evidence we have presented suggests that this view may be overly optimistic. The development of macroscopic laws from first principles may involve more than just systematic logic, and could require conjectures suggested by experiments, simulations or insight. To explain such patterns, one might conclude, per Aristotle, [2] that emergent structures are other than the sum of their parts on the assumption that the emergent order will not arise if the various parts simply interact independently of one another. However, there are those who disagree. In fact, some systems in nature are observed to exhibit emergence based upon the interactions of autonomous parts, and some others exhibit emergence that at least at present cannot be reduced in this way. In particular renormalization are methods in theoretical physics which enables scientists to study systems that are not tractable as the combination of their parts. Defining structure and detecting the emergence of complexity in nature are inherently subjective, though essential, scientific activities. Despite the difficulties, these problems can be analysed in terms of how model-building observers infer from measurements the computational capabilities embedded in non-linear processes. The discovery of structure in an environment depends more critically and subtly, though, on how those resources are organized. The synergies associated with emergence are real and measurable, even if nobody is there to observe them. They contend that artistic selfhood and meaning are emergent, relatively objective phenomena. Pearce has used emergence to describe the experience of works of art in relation to contemporary neuroscience. In international development, concepts of emergence have been used within a theory of social change termed SEED-SCALE to show how standard principles interact to bring forward socio-economic development fitted to cultural values, community economics, and natural environment local solutions emerging from the larger socio-econo-biosphere. These principles can be implemented utilizing a sequence of standardized tasks that self-assemble in individually specific ways utilizing recursive evaluative criteria. Emerging Literatures, Bern, Berlin, etc. By opposition, "emergent literature" is rather a concept used in the theory of literature. Emergent properties and processes[ edit ] An emergent behavior or emergent property can appear when a number of simple entities agents operate in an environment, forming more complex behaviors as a collective. If emergence happens over disparate size scales, then the reason is usually a causal relation across different scales. In other words, there is often a form of top-down feedback in systems with emergent properties. Emergent behaviours can occur because of intricate causal relations across different scales and feedback, known as interconnectivity. The complex behaviour or properties are not a property of any single such entity, nor can they easily be predicted or deduced from behaviour in the lower-level entities, and might in fact be irreducible to such behavior. The shape and behaviour of a flock of birds [1] or school of fish are good examples of emergent properties. One reason emergent behaviour is hard to predict is that the number of interactions between a system components increases exponentially with the number of components, thus allowing for many new and subtle types of behaviour to emerge. Emergence is often a product of particular patterns of interaction. Negative feedback introduces constraints that serve to fix structures or behaviours. In contrast, positive feedback promotes change, allowing local variations to grow into global patterns. Another way in which interactions leads to emergent properties is dual-phase evolution. This occurs where interactions are applied intermittently, leading to two phases: On the other hand, merely having a large number of Page 8

9 interactions is not enough by itself to guarantee emergent behaviour; many of the interactions may be negligible or irrelevant, or may cancel each other out. In some cases, a large number of interactions can in fact hinder the emergence of interesting behaviour, by creating a lot of "noise" to drown out any emerging "signal"; the emergent behaviour may need to be temporarily isolated from other interactions before it reaches enough critical mass to self-support. Thus it is not just the sheer number of connections between components which encourages emergence; it is also how these connections are organised. A hierarchical organisation is one example that can generate emergent behaviour a bureaucracy may behave in a way quite different from that of the individual humans in that bureaucracy ; but emergent behaviour can also arise from more decentralized organisational structures, such as a marketplace. In some cases, the system has to reach a combined threshold of diversity, organisation, and connectivity before emergent behaviour appears. Unintended consequences and side effects are closely related to emergent properties. Instead a component implements a behaviour whose side effect contributes to the global functionality [ Steels In other words, the global or macroscopic functionality of a system with "emergent functionality" is the sum of all "side effects", of all emergent properties and functionalities. Systems with emergent properties or emergent structures may appear to defy entropic principles and the second law of thermodynamics, because they form and increase order despite the lack of command and central control. This is possible because open systems can extract information and order out of the environment. Emergence helps to explain why the fallacy of division is a fallacy. Emergent structures in nature[ edit ] This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. November Ripple patterns in a sand dune created by wind or water is an example of an emergent structure in nature. Emergent structures can be found in many natural phenomena, from the physical to the biological domain. For example, the shape of weather phenomena such as hurricanes are emergent structures. The development and growth of complex, orderly crystals, as driven by the random motion of water molecules within a conducive natural environment, is another example of an emergent process, where randomness can give rise to complex and deeply attractive, orderly structures. Water crystals forming on glass demonstrate an emergent, fractal process occurring under appropriate conditions of temperature and humidity. However, crystalline structure and hurricanes are said to have a self-organizing phase. Page 9

10 Chapter 4 : The Emergence and Development of Sociology ( Words) Sociology should be interesting. After all, it's about people! The Emergence of Sociological Theory is just that: interesting. Inside, you'll discover the major theories of why groups of people act the way they do, and how you can use those theories in your daily life. It's easy to understand and. Postmodern Social theory got its identity during But its roots go back to about three decades earlier. Before the emergence of social theory, we had sociological theory which explained the ordering of society within the disciplinary framework of sociology. Such theories included functionalism, conflict, symbolic interactionism, exchange, and structuralism. The objective of sociological theories was to account for the world which goes beyond what we can see and measure. Such a theory has made generalizations about, and classifications of, the social world. What differentiates sociological theory from other social theories is that the former constructs its generalizations or abstractions within the conceptual and theoretical framework of sociology. Social theory has a broader network and includes interdisciplinary boundaries. It extends beyond the framework of sociology. And, interestingly enough, a large number of social theory builders are non-sociologists by training. Postmodern theory, therefore, is essentially a social theory. It has also been a product of non- sociologists, namely, Lyotard, Derrida and Jameson. Rise of social theory: The rise of social theory is related to post-modernity. Earlier, the sociological theory explained the ordering of traditional and modern societies. Theory is defined in different terms. According to Michael Faia, a theory is a set of interrelated propositions that allow for the systematization of knowledge, explanation and prediction of social life, and generation of new research hypotheses. George Ritzer does not show his dissatisfaction with this definition of theory. Many of the celebrated sociological theories fall short on one or more of the formal components of this definition. There is no definite consensus about the definition of theory. It is better to call a theory, which the sociologists define as theory. Sociological theory has enjoyed status of celebration for a long period in the discipline. It has witnessed theoretical celebrities of the kind of Durkheim, Pareto, Marx, Parsons, Merton and others. How is it that such a grand design of sociological theory collapsed like a pack of cards in? The answer to this question explains the causes for the emergence of postmodern social theory. These are noted below: Modern sociology has changed radically: Modernity promised a bright future for the common man. It interpreted history as a symbol of progress. Sociological theory took an inspiration from the idea that history has a shape; it goes somewhere and leads to progress. This notion of progress has collapsed. Social inequalities have multiplied, poorer have become the poorest and unemployment has taken its worse toll. In the developing countries such as India and Africa, the sociological theories have conspired to maintain the status quo in such a way that the elite political leaders and high-ups have cornered a larger share of development benefits. Weberian, Marxian or Parsonian image of society is now nowhere available. People everywhere are in a mood to commit mutiny any time. The modern society is now a consumer society, a simulation society, a media society, a cyber society and an information society. For the study of such a postmodern society, sociological theory is not equipped with an appropriate kit of concepts and theoretical frameworks. It has simply become outdated. There is yet another reason for the condemnation of sociological theory. The modernists under the slogan of positivism developed theories which posed serious environmental challenges. Nothing did they do to counter these challenges. Things have come to such a stage that at the start of s everyone was an environmentalist of some sort. In the past, the people were in touch with nature and were, therefore, in harmony with it. They may not have dominated nature in the way that we hope to, but by being subordinate to it, they may perhaps have lived sustainably with it. But, in the wake of modern industrialism, nature has been progressively marginalized. As a result of it, environmental threats have disturbed our modern forms of social and political organizations. How do sociological theories plan to resolve these environmental threats? In countries like India, sociologists have yet not laid their hands on environmental threats. What has happened in modern society is that its dependence on natural forces has been diminished considerably. For example, in practical terms, we have vastly shortened distances between our cities through innovations in transport technology. Nowadays, electronic communications permit virtually instantaneous interaction between one continent and Page 10

11 another. Our ability to harness energy from coal, gas and petrol has lessened our dependence on the climate. In this way people can live essentially similar lives, using essentially the same products, eating approximately the same food. In other words, people have more or less overcome the environmental constraints presented by distances, the climate, and even the limitations which stem from the nature of living organism. Looking at all these changes between man and nature, McKibben has recently been able to speak of the end of nature. These are some of the challenges to sociological theory. The theory has to mend its methods of building itself. If the environmental threats are not resolved in the favour of mankind, what is the use of such a theory? Grand narratives marginalized the local narratives: Sociological theories celebrate the status of being grand. They are holistic, i. They draw their inferences from totality. And, in this approach, the plural and diverse culture is either negated or overlooked. What is meaningful in this respect is the local narrative. And, the ordinary man is related to the grass roots of the society. Kapadia in India do not show any concern for the subaltern people who pass their total life in local culture. For them, it is the local narrative which matters. Modern society has created lots of problems for the modern man: Modernity means industrialism, capitalism and state power. All these forms of modernity including rationality have been vulgarized beyond any hope of repair. Commodification of goods in post-fordism era has made the society a consumer one, rationality has taken the form of hyper-rationality and social stratification has dragged the common man below the poverty line. And, what have sociological theories done to solve some of these pressing problems. In such a situation, postmodern social theory seems to be a viable alternate, at least for a trial. Opposition to regimented boundaries: Disciplinary boundaries in sociology are so abiding that no theorist can dare to cross these. The modern sociological theories have become regimented theories.. There is no openness. Nothing in stratification is complete without reference to Marx, Durkheim, and Weber. Any discussion on such themes ultimately boils down to the pioneering thinkers. I learnt a lot from such inter-subjective communications. Marx, Durkheim, Weber and Levi-Strauss were most helpful in this connection. They were kind friends who helped me grow. I would like my students to learn from them too. I am sure they will make better use of their friendship than I did. Now that the unlearning phase of postmodernism is over, and with it the pretentious posturing of cultural studies where every intellectual weakness become a moral value there is hope ahead. Sociology and anthropology can once again draw strength from their disciplinary grid and look forward to a grand renewal emphasis added. Obviously, Dipankar Gupta is among those who hope that there is almost end of post-modernity. And, the renewal of mega-narratives is somewhere round the corner. The literature on post-modernity in sociology has an ascending graph all over the world and there are also sociologists who are eager enough to celebrate their past glory of metanarratives. Such rejoicings also give rise to the emergence of postmodern social theory in developing countries like India. Some celebrated non-sociologists, namely, Lyotard, Derrida and Jameson have started writing within the realm of so-called sociological theory. These non-sociologist postmodern thinkers have alleged that so far sociological theory has failed to work for the emancipation of human beings. On the other hand, life today has become more miserable. What is worse, one who writes against these established sociologists is considered to be a rebel. The postmodern social theorists, to be honest enough, have also been not successful to provide any alternate theory of society but for one thing, it is certain: Scientific sociology has invited postmodern social theory: The pioneer sociologists tried to develop sociology on the idea of positivism. Jurgen Habermas, who is known for his support for modernity, also argues that sociology took to science as its method of enquiry. The modernists still have the extravagant expectation that the arts and sciences would promote not only the control of natural forces but also understanding of the world and of the self, moral progress, the justice of institutions and even the happiness of human beings. Chapter 5 : The Emergence of Sociological Theory ebay Now published by SAGE, this scholarly text covers the first one hundred years of sociological theorizing, from, focusing primarily on Comte, Spencer, Marx, Weber, Simmel, Durkheim, and Mead. Page 11

12 Chapter 6 : Holdings : The emergence of sociological theory / York University Libraries See more The Emergence of Sociological Theory by Jonath to friends Share on Facebook - opens in a new window or tab Share on Twitter - opens in a new window or tab Share on Pinterest - opens in a new window or tab. Chapter 7 : History of sociology - Wikipedia Sociological Theory is an attempt to trace the development of sociological theory from the classical to the modern period. A comprehensive and balanced introduction, it studies all the important thinkers chronologically so that the students can locate the continuity as well as the discontinuity of thoughts and themes. Chapter 8 : The Emergence of Sociological Theory by Jonathan H. Turner The emergence of sociological theory (The Dorsey series in sociology) Published January 1st by Dorsey Press Unknown Binding, pages Author(s). Chapter 9 : Emergence of Sociological Thought - Hillsdale College The theory of scientific evolution was brought into sociology by Herbert Spencer ( ) in his book Principles of Sociology (). Spencer observed that the study of sociology was, the study of evolution in its most complex form". Page 12