Social Theory by William Outhwaite - Akshaya

In attempts to link various disciplines to geography, I read Social Theory by Professor William Outhwaite. It allowed me to gain a better understanding of the social aspects of geography and how they relate to the economic, political and so on. The book introduced me to numerous topics that I will discuss in this post which were greatly fascinating, ranging from capitalism to theories of religion. 

The place of inequalities in society is a constantly discussed and relevant topic. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a social theorist who believed that social inequalities should not diverge too far from natural inequalities (such as strength and skill). This introduces the idea that unequal rewards may, in fact, be fairer, such as performance related pay. This was used in the UK during 1980s, but was abandoned in 1990s as seen as intrusive, divisive and not worth the trouble, especially as people tend to compare themselves with people similar to themselves rather than people who are much richer than them, or higher in status, and so on. 

There have been large changes to economic theory in regard to social inequalities. Previously it was believed that inequality was good for economic growth as provides incentives for hard work and investment, however now economic theory has swung to the opposite view. High levels of inequality actually reduce opportunities and incentives for poorer individuals and households, discouraging them in particular from investing in education. This supports the argument by developmental theorists that supporting female education is the key to economic growth. 

Furthermore, stark inequalities encourage migration flows. This has led to many EU countries being concerned with reducing inequalities between states, as mass uncontrolled migrated leads to difficulties in social provision, as well as fuelling xenophobia in the native population. 

Capitalism is a key matter in Social Theory, with the basic principles and ethics of it being discussed in detail. Karl Marx spoke of how commodities have ‘use value’ and ‘exchange value’, and how we fetishize commodities, such as designer handbags, and give them a higher monetary value. This ties in with the concept of reification, which is the turning of a human relation into a thing. This idea was formed by the Hungarian Marxist George Lullács, who combined Marx’s ideas of fetishism of commodities with Max Weber’s concept of rationalism. Reification is central to neo-Marxist critical theory. 

The capacity of humans to work is also a commodity under capitalism. The source of profit in capitalist economies is that workers produce more value than they receive in wages, therefore exploitation of wage labour is intrinsic to the process of capitalism. However, workers cannot realistically demand the ‘full value of their labour’, as it is not compatible with the survival of capitalism. Clause Four of the Labour Party constitution, introduced in 1918 and removed in 1995, recognised this connection, and stated that ‘common ownership’ may allow for ‘the most equitable distribution’. In capitalism ‘rate for the job’ obscures the extraction of surplus value, thus justifying the exploitation. It is a subtler ideology that legitimates inequalities and exploitation based on gender, ethnicity, etc. 

Industrialism is a concept by Raymond Aron, which explores the similarities between developed capitalist and socialist societies. They are both often devoted to large scale industrial production, have a large, highly educated population living in cities, and so on. They are very different in terms of what is or is not privately owned, but the basic infrastructure and demographic structures are very similar. This is very similar to Marx’s concept of technological determinism, where technology determines social relations. 

Marx also critiqued religion and described it as ‘the opium of the people’, where people take refuge in illusions of religion because our social and political conditions are unsatisfactory.

There was a huge rise in anti-capitalist movements during the last third of the 20^thcentury, with a rise in new socialist movements, such as for gender equality and protecting the environment. With Marx’s ideas it is possible to argue that only socialism can provide the conditions for the sustainable development of human societies, and this further evident with his daughter, Eleanor Marx, being a pioneer of Marxist feminism.

Modern post-colonial theory discusses whether the emergence of capitalism is a ‘European miracle’ or a reconfiguration of global relations of production, trade and military conquest in which different world regions rise and fall. It also studies connections between European colonialism and racism, however social theorists were slow to discuss post-colonial theory. Questions of race were to some extent put on the social theory agenda by the US Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, as was gender by later feminist movements, but despite this, social theorists remained predominantly white and male. This is evident with social science often avoiding using the term ‘race’, as it is seen as being irrevocably contaminated by European racism. However now, post-colonial theory in the US has led to renewed attention, for example, to the work of the African-American sociologist and activist W. E. B. Du Bois. 

Evolutionary Social Theory is a theory by Herbert Spencer, which states that it is possible to use organisms as an analogy for human societies, where the brain is the government, the nerves are the transport networks and so on. Thus, social development can be comparable to natural evolution, for example, the shift in human societies from militaristic to industrial forms. However, there are problems with transferring evolutionary ideas from nature to society. Concept of ‘survival of the fittest’ do not really apply, because are the winners of wars necessarily the fittest? Can the collapse of societies be explained so simply? It is much more complicated than that.

Emile Durkheim continued the evolutionary approach in the 19^thcentury with his contrast between ‘mechanical solidarity’ and ‘organic solidarity’. Mechanical solidarity can be seen in tribal societies, where people have sense of commonality with everyone being hunter-gatherers doing the same things. Then there is Organic solidarity, which occurs when there is more developed division of labour. Here people depend on one another for goods and services. Durkheim stressed the need for solidarity and shared ideas to cement these interdependencies. 

In Durkheim’s Suicide (1897), he discussed how social variables explain differences in suicide rates. There were higher suicide rates among Protestants than Catholics, possibly due to Catholics being more closely integrated and having rituals of confession and absolution, whereas Protestantism encourages independent reflection, possibly weakening the force of shared beliefs, as well as having a lonelier relationship with an absent God. Furthermore, single people were on the whole more prone to suicide than married people, again suggesting the importance of social ties and the necessity of social integration.

Webers’ ideas of rationalism led him to devise four main types of action that our actual actions may conform more or less closely to:

• Traditional action– this is mostly unreflective and is the idea of something being a ‘habit’ or ‘just the way we do it here'
• Emotionally Driven action– this is usually unreflective and is often understandable, even if we may think it’s a bit excessive
• Purposive-Rational action– this is where we adopt what we think is the best means to achieve a given purpose. If there are no satisfactory means available to us we simply give up (e.g. being unable to complete a journey in a given time)
• Value-Rational action– this is where we pursue the value whatever the cost may be, such as with resistance fighters. The motive here is what Weber calls the ‘ethic of conviction’ 

Similarly, Jürgen Habermas developed three standard models for action:

• Strategic action– This is the same as Purposive-Rational, and involves manipulating people as you manipulate other aspects of the environment in order to achieve a given end
• Normatively Regulated action– This is a functionalist idea that people’s action and role behaviour are governed by their respect for a shared system of values
• Dramaturgical Model of action– This stressed the idea of social action as a performance

All three of these models rely on the more fundamental idea of communicative action, in which people aim to come to an agreement in a variety of ways, from their internal feelings to what is morally right, and so on. He uses these models of action to show how, in European modernity from around the 17^thcentury, people began to question traditional beliefs and authorities, and to think about a more rational reordering of social relations. This can be seen by the occurrence of the French Revolution. 

Georg Simmel believed that human society is essentially based on our awareness of being part of society, our ideas about society and the idea that we form a society made up of people like ourselves. This is the concept of social constructionism, which is prominent in postmodern theory. A banknote is just a piece of paper/plastic; it is social definition that gives it value. It is also important to acknowledge that Sigmund Freud’s analysis has fundamentally shaped our understanding of humanity and hence culture and society.

Globalisation is a very relevant topic and one that I have a particular interest in. An extreme version of globalisation theory says that states are now becoming irrelevant in the modern world, which is now dominated by flows of capital, labour, ideas and other cultural forms. Not all globalisation theorists go as far as to say that we should drop references to national states, but a common theme is that the national state has become less influential with the growth of supranational organisations, such as the EU, and increased international migration. This has also led to modern societies have become less bounded and more fragmented. Early theories of globalisation tended to focus on the economic aspects, but social theorists quickly highlighted the wider social and cultural dimensions. It is ultimately important to approach a topic as vast as globalisation with a framework that does not isolate its economic, political, social and cultural aspects, but instead studies their interrelations. McDonald’s is just as much a cultural phenomenon as it is economic, as well as being biological with the disastrous impact ‘Western’ fast food has had on the health of populations in Asia and Africa. 

Michel Foucault studied the emergence of modern sexual morality in the mid 1970s. His notion of an ethics of the body and the self, and disciplinary power are important in feminist theory and second wave feminism, when the slogan was ‘the personal is political’. Although he did not particularly focus on gender, the relevance of his work in feminism is undeniable.

The impacts that social structures and cultures have on politics are very diverse; this is largely due to, according to Montesquieu, the role of history and tradition. This is evident by the fact that being a monarchist in France would be to be part of an eccentric political minority, whereas in Britain the controversial minority view is republicanism. Elite theorists stress the permanent antagonism between the elites and the masses, where the counter-elites are periodically replacing the existing elites, therefore not changing the basic structure. This is known as elite circulation. 

Society gives us our identity, our morality, our religion and so on, but if what we call society has a beginning, it may also have an end. Humanity has become much more individualistic; this can be seen with class influences on life chances now intersecting with those of ethnicity, gender, geography and household size. Previously, industrial forms of production caused people to cluster in large occupational communities with similar conditions of life and similar political preferences. Now large industries have declined, and these areas have diversified. Class has not become irrelevant, it simply determines life chances in more diverse and complicated ways.

In conclusion, this book was incredibly fascinating, despite being difficult to follow at times with the constant introductions to new concepts. I learnt a lot and would definitely recommend it as a way of introducing yourself to social theory, and allowing you to draw connections between various disciplines, so you can have a greater understanding of the world we live in.