Social structure is one ofthe most central concepts in sociology. Yet there is wide disagreement about what it means. This disagreement is consequential because differences in the way sociologists conceptualize social structure lead to very different approaches to sociology. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, because there is so much dispute about what social structure means or should mean, in the first part ofthis paper I will simply present without argument four different conceptions of social structure that are prominent in the field. Although the alternative conceptions I will examine are not necessarily exhaustive, they do represent what are probably the most commonly held views. Examining them, therefore, should significantly advance our thinking on this important but elusive concept. The second objective of this paper, which I will pursue in a subsequent discussion, is to make a case in favor of one of these four alternatives, namely one that traditionally has been associated with Marx.As far as the views that will be considered are concerned, social structure refers to one of the following: I . Patterns of aggregate behavior that are stable over time 2 . Lawlike regularities that govern the behavior ofsocial facts 3. Systems of human relationships among social positions 4. Collective rules and resources that structure behaviorThe first conception is most closely associated with exchange theorists, notably Homans ( I 975), and some symbolic interactionists, but most recently has been given a strong defense by Collins ( I 98 I ) . Looking at Collins's defense in particular, I will argue that this conception leads to a methodological individualist approach to sociology that is ultimately. unable to explain a wide range of macrosocial phenomena such as deindustrialization, power and economic crisis. The second conception represents the view of the so-called
Critical realism is a philosophy of science that positions itself against the major alternative philosophies underlying contemporary sociology. This book offers a general critique of sociology, particularly sociology in the United States, from a critical realist perspective. It also acts as an introduction to critical realism for students and scholars of sociology. Written in a lively, accessible style, Douglas V. Porpora argues that sociology currently operates with deficient accounts of truth, culture, structure, agency, and causality that are all better served by a critical realist perspective. This approach argues against the alternative sociological perspectives, in particular the dominant positivism which privileges statistical techniques and experimental design over ethnographic and historical approaches. However, the book also compares critical realism favourably with a range of other approaches, including poststructuralism, pragmatism, interpretivism, practice theory, and relational sociology. Numerous sociological examples are included, and each chapter addresses well-known and current work in sociology.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.