Durkheim’s sui generis reality and the central subject matter of social science

This is social science: A ‘patterned activity’ oriented to attaining objective knowledge of human society

“…13 The groundwork for Durkheim’s sociology – the central focus here – entailed delineating his central subject matter at the basic descriptive level and, concomitantly, at the theoretical level. To wit: the big idea in Durkheim’s discussions of his central subject matter is a theoretical entity – collective representations – that lends coherence to the social facts and the realized instances of behavior that ground this entity (Malczewski, 2013). Durkheim’s main theoretical contention is that collective representations explain the realized instances of acting, thinking, and feeling for which individual actors are proximately responsible.…”

“…Saint-Simon’s approach, as is well known, did not meet with success – and two centuries later the definition of the field of human distinctiveness remains contested (see Abbott, 2004: 41–79; Alexander, 1988; Alexander and Seidman, 1990; Alexander and Smith, 2010; Bunge, 1998; Friedman, 2004; Malczewski, 2013; Pascale, 2010; Sewell, 2005a; Tilly, 2005), leading the sociologist Liah Greenfeld to argue that the paradigm of the social sciences does not focus on humanity (Greenfeld, 2004, 2005b; also see Friedman, 2004: 144) and the historian William H. Sewell, Jr to ask seriously the elementary question ‘What do we mean by the “social” in “social science”?’ (2005a: 318). Contributing to this major debate, the late sociologist Charles Tilly (2005) argued that three types of approaches or metatheories – systemic, dispositional, and transactional (or relational) – account for the several ways in which what is generally recognized as social science has developed (2005; also see Bunge, 1996, 1998, whose individualism–holism–systemism trilemma echoes this in certain ways).…”

“…Saint-Simon's approach, as is well known, did not meet with success -and two centuries later the definition of the field of human distinctiveness remains contested (see Abbott, 2004: 41-79;Alexander, 1988;Alexander and Seidman, 1990;Alexander and Smith, 2010;Bunge, 1998;Friedman, 2004;Malczewski, 2013;Pascale, 2010;Sewell, 2005a;Tilly, 2005), leading the sociologist Liah Greenfeld to argue that the paradigm of the social sciences does not focus on humanity (Greenfeld, 2004(Greenfeld, , 2005b; also see Friedman, 2004: 144) and the historian William H. Sewell, Jr to ask seriously the elementary question 'What do we mean by the "social" in "social science"? ' (2005a: 318).…”

On the Centrality of Action: Social Science, Historical Logics, and Max Weber's Legacy

“…The other is, of course, Émile Durkheim, whose theory of collective representations and basic focus on social facts (“manners of acting, thinking, and feeling,” which are essentially symbolically constituted phenomena) offers perhaps the most systematic treatment of the issue (1937 [1895]: v; Malczewski, , and ; cf. Mauss, : v).…”

“…The convergence of Weber and Durkheim on this matter is examined in Malczewski (; cf. Malczewski, ; Greenfeld, ).…”