New Rules of Sociological Method

Critical Review on Introduction of the Book

Vaibhav Sehgal

3-A

Theory and Method

Semester 5

15000590

Author:
Anthony Giddens

Genre:
Sociology

Theme:
The introduction is based on the concept of "Sociology". Its a critical analysis to develop a body
of knowledge about social order, acceptance, and change. The aim is to conduct research that
may be applied directly to social policy and welfare, or refining the theoretical understanding of
social processes.

About the Introduction:

The book is narrated by Anthony Giddens who explains how he manages to bring together truly
diverse analytical traditions using theories of different authors about the concept of sociology.

Plot:
(Introduction to Second Edition):

Giddens used concepts from objectivist and subjectivist social theories, discarding structures,
which lacked regard for humanist elements. He critically engaged classical nineteenth and early
twentieth century social theorists such as Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, Max Weber and
Durkheim.
The author tried to address a long-standing divide between theorists who prioritise 'macro level'
studies of social life looking at the 'big picture' of society and those who emphasise the
'micro level' what everyday life means to individuals. He talks about " The Idea of Duality of
Structure" in the introduction, a structure which constraints and enables the actions of people.
Structure is to be understood as the social rules and resources which influence people's actions.
Structure places rules upon people, thus limiting their personal agency for action, but their
motivations for action is then positively defined within that structure. Social sanctions influence
interpersonal communication and interaction and thus norms are created as a property of the
system.

Structure is part of the motivation for action and it then becomes the consequence of action as
well. Rules cannot exist without the agency of action for people, and peoples agencies
recurrently strengthen those rules. Structure for Giddens is therefore not a static concept within
which we can study social behavior, but rather a dynamic and ongoing process.

" The idea of the duality of structure cannot cope with action oriented to large- rather than
small-scale contexts. For instance, it may work well when one considers an everyday
conversation between two people in the street, but does not fit a situation where, say, a group of
heads of state meet to take decisions affecting millions. The former situation, it might be said, is
inconsequential in its implications for larger social orders, while the latter affects such orders in
a direct and comprehensive way..."

In points 3 and 4, he talks about micro and macro analysis and tried to address a long standing
divide between theorists who prioritise macro level studies of social life looking at the 'big
picture' of society and those who emphasise the micro level what everyday life means to
individuals.

He criticized the functionalist approach, invented by Durkheim, treated society as a reality unto
itself, not reducible to individuals. He rejected Durkheim's sociological theory, which attempted
to predict how societies operate, ignoring the meanings as understood by individuals.

In structuration of society, he believes that sociologists have long been involved in documenting
unequal educational opportunities. Many projects were established in different countries from the
1950s onwards in order to uncover the factors influencing such inequalities. Giddens hoped that
a subject-wide "coming together" might occur which would involve greater cross-disciplinary
dialogue and cooperation, especially between anthropologists, social scientists and sociologists
of all types, historians, geographers, and even novelists. He believes that social scientists are
communicators who share frames of meaning across cultural contexts through their work.
(Introduction to First Edition):

Throughout the nineteenth century, social philosophy and the authors who were boasting about
it were against the intellectual theories given by the natural sciences. The authors were so hostile
towards these sciences that they were thinking to form their own society.

According to sociologists Comte and Marx, the natural science is the precedent to the study of
sociology. Comte believed that people understands much better when they associate the concepts
of sociology to other sciences. He described them as the logical order of studies helping us
understanding the human conduct in a better way. In this way, development of science became
closer to human life.

Giddens talks about symbolic interaction in later parts which means that people develop and rely
upon the process of social interaction. Symbolic interaction traces its origins
to Weber's assertion that individuals act according to their interpretation of the meaning of their
world. Symbolic interaction theory analyzes society by addressing the subjective meanings that
people impose on objects, events, and behaviors. Subjective meanings are given primacy because
it is believed that people behave based on what they believe and not just on what is objectively
true. Thus, society is thought to be socially constructed through human interpretation. People
interpret one anothers behavior and it is these interpretations that form the social bond. The
author claims that symbolic interactionism neglects the macro level of social interpretationthe
big picture. In other words, symbolic interactionists may miss the larger issues of society by
focusing too closely on the trees rather than the forest. The perspective also receives
criticism for slighting the influence of social forces and institutions on individual interactions. In
the case of smoking, the functionalist perspective might miss the powerful role that the
institution of mass media plays in shaping perceptions of smoking through advertising, and by
portraying smoking in film and television. In the cases of race and gender, this perspective would
not account for social forces like systemic racism or gender discrimination, which strongly
influence what we believe race and gender mean.

Analysis:
In the whole introduction of the book, the author is trying to explain the difference between
'macro' and 'micro' level of sociology. Though they are often referred as opposing approaches,
macro- and micro sociology are actually complementary approaches to studying society. Macro
sociology refers to sociological approaches and methods that examine large-scale patterns and
trends within the overall social structure, system, and population. On the other hand, micro
sociology focuses on smaller groups, patterns and trends, typically at the community level and in
the context of the everyday lives and experiences of people. These are complementary
approaches because at its core, sociology is about understanding the way large-scale patterns and
trends shape the lives and experiences of groups and individuals, and vice versa. Though they
take very different approaches to studying society, social problems, and people, macro- and
micro sociology both yield deeply valuable research conclusions that aid our ability to
understand our social world, the problems that course through it, and the potential solutions to
them.
My Opinion:

I agree with the theory that human sciences is connected to human consuct and its sociology in a
lot of ways. He very well explains the distinction between micro and macro level of sociology
with the help of examples and taking theories of other notable authors. The theory of
Structuration which he talks about in the second edition is based on the contemporary society
and is regarded as a very production writing. his theories of structuration helped the Indian
sociologists in counting the households of a village and giving the construction areas of these
houses.