Editing Social theory (section)

==History==

===Ancient===
[[Confucius]] (551–479 BCE) envisaged a just society that went beyond his contemporary society of the [[Warring States]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Macionis|first=John J.|author2=Plummer, Ken |year=2005|title=Sociology. A Global Introduction|publisher=Pearson Education|location=Harlow|edition=3rd|page=12|isbn=0-13-128746-X}}</ref> Later on, also in China, [[Mozi]] (''circa'' 470 – ''circa'' 390 BCE) recommended a more pragmatic sociology, but ethical at base.

In the West, [[Augustine of Hippo|Saint Augustine]] (354–430) was concerned exclusively with the idea of the ''just society''. St. Augustine describes late [[Ancient Rome|Ancient Roman]] society through a lens of hatred and contempt for what he saw as false [[deity|Gods]], and in reaction theorized [[City of God (book)|City of God]].{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}} [[Ancient Greek]] philosophers, including [[Aristotle]] (384–322 BC) and [[Plato]] (428/427 or 424/423 – 348/347 BC), did not see a distinction between politics and society.  The concept of society did not come until  the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment period]].  The term, ''société'', was probably first used as key concept by [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau|Rousseau]] in discussion of social relations.<ref>{{cite book |author=Heilbron, Johan |title=The Rise of Social Theory |publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1995}}</ref> Prior to the enlightenment, social theory took largely [[narrative]] and [[Norm (sociology)|normative]] form. It was expressed as stories and fables, and it may be assumed the [[pre-Socratic]] philosophers and religious teachers were the precursors to social theory proper.{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

===Medieval===
{{Main|Sociology in medieval Islam|Muqaddimah|Asabiyyah}}

There is evidence of [[early Muslim sociology]] from the 14th century: in [[Ibn Khaldun]]'s ''[[Muqaddimah]]'' (later translated as ''Prolegomena'' in [[Latin]]), the introduction to a seven volume analysis of [[Universal history (genre)|universal history]], was the first to advance [[social philosophy]] and [[social science]] in formulating theories of [[Structural cohesion|social cohesion]] and [[social conflict]]. [[Ibn Khaldun]] is thus considered by many to be the forerunner of sociology.<ref name=Mowlana>H. Mowlana (2001). "Information in the Arab World", ''Cooperation South Journal'' '''1'''.</ref><ref name=Akhtar>S. W. Akhtar (1997). "The Islamic Concept of Knowledge", ''Al-Tawhid: A Quarterly Journal of Islamic Thought & Culture'' '''12''' (3).</ref> [[Ibn Khaldun|Khaldun's]] treatise described in ''[[Muqaddimah]]'' ''(Introduction to History)'', published in 1377, two types of societies: (1) the city or [[town]]-dweller and (2) the mobile, [[nomadic]] societies.{{citation needed|date=September 2012}}

=== European social thought ===
[[Modernity]] arose during the Enlightenment period, with the emergence of the [[world economy]] and exchange among diverse societies, bringing sweeping changes and new challenges for society.  Many [[France|French]] and [[Scotland|Scottish]] intellectuals and [[philosopher]]s embraced the idea of progress and ideas of modernity.<ref>{{cite web |title=Enlightenment Period: Thinkers & Ideas |url=https://www.history.com/topics/european-history/enlightenment |website=HISTORY |access-date=13 November 2023 |language=en |date=21 February 2020}}</ref>

The Enlightenment period was marked by the idea that with new [[Discovery (observation)|discoveries]] challenging the traditional way of thinking, scientists were required to find new normativity. This process allowed [[scientific knowledge]] and society to [[Social progress|progress]].{{Citation needed|date=March 2018}}  French thought during this period focused on [[moral]] critique and criticisms of the [[monarchy]].<ref name="Callinicos" />{{rp|15}} These ideas did not draw on ideas of the past from classical thinkers, nor involved following [[religion|religious]] teachings and authority of the [[monarch]].

A common factor among the classical theories was the agreement that the [[history of humanity]] is pursuing a fixed path. They differed on where that path would lead: [[social progress]], technological progress, decline or even fall. Social cycle theorists were skeptical of the Western achievements and technological progress, but argued that progress is an illusion of the ups and downs of the historical cycles. {{Citation needed|date=March 2018}} The classical approach has been criticized by many modern sociologists and theorists; among them [[Karl Popper]], [[Robert Nisbet]], [[Charles Tilly]] and [[Immanuel Wallerstein]].

The 19th century brought questions involving [[social order]].  The [[French Revolution]] freed French society of control by the monarchy, with no effective means of maintaining social order until [[Napoleon I of France|Napoleon]] came to power.  Three great classical theories of social and historical change emerged: the [[social evolutionism]] theory (of which [[Social Darwinism]] forms a part), the [[social cycle theory]], and the [[Marxism|Marxist]] [[historical materialism]] theory.{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

19th-century classical social theory has been expanded upon to create newer, contemporary social theories such as [[Multilineal evolution|multilineal theories of evolution]] ([[neoevolutionism]], [[sociobiology]], [[theory of modernization]], [[theory of post-industrial society]]) and various strains of [[Neo-Marxism]].{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, social theory became closely related to academic [[sociology]], and other related studies such as [[anthropology]], [[philosophy]], and [[social work]] branched out into their own disciplines. Subjects like "[[philosophy of history]]" and other multi-disciplinary subject matter became part of social theory as taught under sociology.{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

A revival of discussion free of disciplines began in the late 1920s and early 1930s. The [[Frankfurt School|Frankfurt Institute for Social Research]] is a historical example. The [[Committee on Social Thought]] at the [[University of Chicago]] followed in the 1940s. In the 1970s, programs in Social and Political Thought were established at [[University of Sussex|Sussex]] and [[York University|York]]. Others followed, with emphases and structures, such as Social Theory and History ([[University of California, Davis]]). [[Cultural Studies]] programs extended the concerns of social theory into the domain of [[culture]] and thus [[anthropology]]. A chair and undergraduate program in social theory was established at the [[University of Melbourne]]. Social theory at present seems to be gaining acceptance as a classical academic discipline.{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

==== Classical social theory ====
{{Main|History of sociology}}
[[Adam Ferguson]], [[Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu|Montesquieu]], and [[John Millar (philosopher)|John Millar]], among others, were the first to study society as distinct from political institutions and processes.  In the nineteenth century, the [[scientific method]] was introduced into study of society, which was a significant advance leading to development of [[sociology]] as a [[discipline]].<ref>{{cite web |title=The History Behind Sociology |url=https://www.thoughtco.com/history-of-sociology-3026638 |website=ThoughtCo |access-date=21 November 2023 |language=en}}</ref>

In the 18th century, the pre-classical period of social theories developed a new form that provides the basic ideas for social theory, such as [[evolution]], [[philosophy of history]], social life and [[social contract]], public and [[general will]], competition in social space, organismic pattern for social description. [[Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu|Montesquieu]], in ''The Spirit of Laws'', which established that social elements influence human nature, was possibly the first to suggest a universal explanation for [[history]].<ref>{{cite book |author=Althusser, L. |title=Politics and History |year=1972}}</ref>  Montesquieu included changes in [[mores]] and manners as part of his explanation of political and historic events.<ref name="Callinicos" />{{rp|23}}

Philosophers, including [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], [[Voltaire]], and [[Denis Diderot]], developed new social ideas during the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] period that were based on [[reason]] and methods of scientific inquiry.  [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] in this time played a significant role in social theory. He revealed the origin of [[Social inequality|inequality]], analyzed the social contract (and social compact) that forms [[social integration]] and defined the social sphere or [[civil society]]. [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] also emphasized that man has the liberty to change his world, an assertion that made it possible to program and change society.{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

[[Adam Smith]] addressed the question of whether vast inequalities of wealth represented progress.  He explained that the wealthy often demand [[convenience]], employing numerous others to carry out [[employment|labor]] to meet their demands.{{Citation needed| date= March 2018}}  Smith argued that this allows wealth to be redistributed among inhabitants, and for all to share in progress of society.  Smith explained that social forces could regulate the [[market economy]] with social objectivity and without need for [[government]] intervention.  Smith regarded the [[division of labor]] as an important factor for economic progress.  [[John Millar (philosopher)|John Millar]] suggested that improved status of [[women]] was important for progress of society.  Millar also advocated for [[Abolitionism|abolition]] of [[slavery]], suggesting that personal [[liberty]] makes people more industrious, ambitious, and [[productivity|productive]].<ref>{{cite book |author=Meek, Rodney L. |title=Economics and Ideology and Other Essays |year=1967}}</ref>

The first "modern" social theories (known as classical theories) that begin to resemble the analytic social theory of today developed simultaneously with the birth of the science of sociology. [[Auguste Comte]] (1798–1857), known as the "father of sociology" and regarded by some as the first philosopher of science,<ref>{{cite book|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/comte/|title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|date=19 October 2017|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|access-date=19 October 2017|via=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|last1=Bourdeau |first1=Michel }}</ref> laid the groundwork for [[positivism]] – as well as [[structural functionalism]] and [[social evolutionism]]. [[Karl Marx]] rejected Comtean positivism but nevertheless aimed to establish a ''science of society'' based on [[historical materialism]], becoming recognised as a founding figure of sociology posthumously. At the turn of the 20th century, the first of German sociologists, including [[Max Weber]] and [[Georg Simmel]], developed sociological [[antipositivism]]. The field may be broadly recognized as an amalgam of three modes of social scientific thought in particular; Durkheimian [[sociological positivism]] and [[structural functionalism]], Marxist historical materialism and [[conflict theory]], and Weberian [[antipositivism]] and [[verstehen]] critique.{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

Another early modern theorist, [[Herbert Spencer]] (1820–1903), coined the term "[[survival of the fittest]]". [[Vilfredo Pareto]] (1848–1923) and [[Pitirim A. Sorokin]] argued that "history goes in cycles," and presented the [[social cycle theory]] to illustrate their point. [[Ferdinand Tönnies]] (1855–1936) made ''community'' and ''society'' (''[[Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft]]'', 1887) the special topics of the new science of "sociology", both of them based on different modes of [[will (philosophy)|will]] of [[social actor]]s.{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

The 19th century pioneers of social theory and sociology, like Saint-Simon, Comte, Marx, [[John Stuart Mill]] or Spencer, never held university posts and they were broadly regarded as philosophers. [[Emile Durkheim]] endeavoured to formally established academic sociology, and did so at the [[University of Bordeaux]] in 1895, he published ''[[Rules of the Sociological Method]]''. In 1896, he established the journal ''[[Année Sociologique|L'Année Sociologique]]''. Durkheim's seminal monograph, ''[[Suicide (Durkheim book)|Suicide]]'' (1897), a case study of suicide rates amongst [[Catholic]] and [[Protestant]] populations, distinguished sociological analysis from [[psychology]] or [[philosophy]].{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

====Post-modern social theory====
{{Further|post-modern feminism|postmodernism|post-structuralism}}
The term "postmodernism" was brought into social theory in 1971 by the Arab American Theorist [[Ihab Hassan]] in his book: ''The Dismemberment of Orpheus: Toward a Postmodern Literature''. In 1979 [[Jean-François Lyotard]] wrote a short but influential work ''[[The Postmodern Condition|The Postmodern Condition: A report on knowledge]]''. [[Jean Baudrillard]], [[Michel Foucault]], and [[Roland Barthes]] were influential in the 1970s in developing postmodern theory.

Scholars most commonly hold ''[[postmodernism]]'' to be a movement of ideas arising from, but also critical of elements of [[modernism]].{{citation needed|date=February 2012}} The wide range of uses of this term resulted in different elements of modernity are chosen as being continuous. Each of the different uses is rooted in some argument about the nature of knowledge, known in philosophy as [[epistemology]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Allan|first1=Kenneth|last2=Turner|first2=Jonathan H.|year=2000|title=A formalization of postmodern theory|journal=Sociological Perspectives|volume=43|issue=3|pages=363|doi=10.2307/1389533|issn=0731-1214|jstor=1389533|s2cid=55576226 |url=http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/K_Allan_Formalization_2000.pdf}}</ref> Individuals who use the term are arguing that either there is something fundamentally different about the transmission of meaning, or that modernism has fundamental flaws in its system of knowledge. {{citation needed|date=March 2018}}

The argument for the necessity of the term states that economic and technological conditions of our age have given rise to a decentralized, media-dominated society. {{Citation needed| date= March 2018}} These ideas are [[simulacra]], and only inter-referential representations and copies of each other, with no real original, stable or objective source for [[communication]] and meaning. [[Globalization]], brought on by innovations in communication, [[manufacturing]] and [[transportation]],<ref>{{cite journal|last=L Arxer|first=Steven|year=2008|title=Addressing postmodern concerns on the border: globalization, the nation-state, hybridity, and social change|journal=Tamara Journal of Critical Organisation Inquiry|volume=7|issue=1/2|pages=179|issn=1532-5555}}</ref> is cited as one force which has decentralized modern life, creating a culturally pluralistic and interconnected global society, lacking any single dominant center of political power, communication, or intellectual production. The postmodern view is that inter-subjective knowledge, and not objective knowledge, is the dominant form of [[discourse]]. The ubiquity of copies and dissemination alters the relationship between reader and what is read, between observer and the observed, between those who consume and those who produce.{{citation needed|date=March 2018}}

Not all people who use the term postmodern or postmodernism see these developments as positive.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Petrov|first=Igor|year=2003|title=Globalization as a Postmodern Phenomenon|journal=International Affairs|volume=49|issue=6|pages=127|issn=0130-9641}}</ref> Users of the term argue that their ideals have arisen as the result of particular economic and social conditions, including "[[late capitalism]]", the growth of [[Broadcasting|broadcast]] media, and that such conditions have pushed society into a new [[historical period]].

====Today====
In the past few decades, in response to postmodern critiques,{{Citation needed|date=March 2018}} social theory has begun to stress free will, individual choice, subjective reasoning, and the importance of unpredictable events in place of [[determinism|deterministic necessity]]. [[Rational choice theory]], [[symbolic interactionism]], [[false necessity]] are examples of more recent developments. A view among contemporary sociologists is that there are no great unifying 'laws of history', but rather smaller, more specific, and more complex laws that govern society.{{Citation needed|date=December 2017}}

Philosopher and politician [[Roberto Mangabeira Unger]] recently attempted to revise classical social theory by exploring how things fit together, rather than to provide an all encompassing single explanation of a universal reality. He begins by recognizing the key insight of classical social theory of society as an artifact, and then by discarding the law-like characteristics forcibly attached to it. Unger argues that classical social theory was born proclaiming that society is made and imagined, and not the expression of an underlying natural order, but at the same time its capacity was checked by the equally prevalent ambition to create law-like explanations of history and social development. The [[human sciences]] that developed claimed to identify a small number of possible types of social organization that coexisted or succeeded one another through inescapable developmental tendencies or deep-seated economic organization or psychological constraints. [[Marxism]] is the star example.<ref name="Unger">{{cite book|title=Social Theory: Its situation and its task|url=https://archive.org/details/falsenecessityan0000unge|url-access=registration|last=Unger|first=Roberto Mangabeira|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1987|location=Cambridge|isbn=9780521329750 }}</ref>{{rp|1}}

Unger, calling his efforts "super-theory", has thus sought to develop a comprehensive view of history and society. Unger does so without subsuming deep structure analysis under an indivisible and repeatable type of social organization or with recourse to law-like constraints and tendencies.<ref name="Unger" />{{rp|165}} His articulation of such a theory is in ''False Necessity: Anti-Necessitarian Social Theory in the Service of Radical Democracy'', where he uses deep-logic practice to theorize human social activity through anti-necessitarian analysis.

Unger begins by formulating the theory of false necessity, which claims that social worlds are the artifact of human endeavors. There is no pre-set institutional arrangement that societies must adhere to, and there is no necessary historical mold of development that they will follow. We are free to choose and to create the forms and the paths that our societies will take. However, this does not give license to absolute contingency. Unger finds that there are groups of institutional arrangements that work together to bring about certain institutional forms—[[liberal democracy]], for example. These forms are the basis of a social structure, which Unger calls [[formative context]]. In order to explain how we move from one formative context to another without the conventional social theory constraints of historical necessity (e.g. feudalism to capitalism), and to do so while remaining true to the key insight of individual human empowerment and [[anti-necessitarian social thought]], Unger recognized that there are an infinite number of ways of resisting social and institutional constraints, which can lead to an infinite number of outcomes. This variety of forms of resistance and [[empowered democracy|empowerment]] make change possible. Unger calls this empowerment [[negative capability]]. However, Unger adds that these outcomes are always reliant on the forms from which they spring. The new world is built upon the existing one.<ref name="fn 35">{{cite book|title=False Necessity: Anti-Necessitarian Social Theory in the Service of Radical Democracy, Revised Edition|last=Unger|first=Roberto|publisher=Verso|year=2004|isbn=978-1-85984-331-4|location=London|pages=35–36, 164, 169, 278–80, 299–301}}</ref>