THREE SOCIOLOGICAL

THEORIES

hypotheses that make up systems

WOUT ULTEE

UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA

NOVEMBER 11, 2012

FOR AT LEAST FOUR REASONS CONTEMPORARY STUDENTS OF

SOCIOLOGY STILL LIKE DURKHEIM’S SUICIDE FROM 1897

FIRSTLY, BECAUSE SUICIDE SEVERELY TESTS A THEORY AGAINST GOVERNMENTAL

STATISTICS

SECONDLY, BECAUSE SUICIDE TURNS A SEEMINGLY

PHILOSOPHICAL, PSYCHOPATHOLOGICAL AND

PSYCHOLOGICAL QUESTION INTO A SOCIOLOGICAL QUESTION

THIRDLY, DURKHEIM’S SUICIDE IS LIKED BECAUSE ITS THEORY

CONSISTS OF ABSTRACT HYPOTHESES AND CONCRETE

HYPOTHESES

BECAUSE OF THIS ‘MULTI-LAYERED THEORY’, DURKHEIM

SURPASSES MARX’ AND WEBER’S WORK

MARX’ LAW OF CAPITALIST ACCUMULATION (THE MORE CAPITAL IN A FREE MARKET

SOCIETY, THE LOWER THE WAGES) REMAINED A HYPOTHESIS NOT EXPLICITLY

DERIVED FROM SOME THEORY

WEBER DID NOT EVEN TRY TO FORMULATE HYPOTHESES, HE DEVELOPED A SPECIAL

TYPE OF CONCEPTS HE CALLED IDEALTYPES

EVERY HYPOTHESIS CONSISTS OF CONCEPTS, BUT MANY SOCIOLOGICAL CONCEPTS NEVER

WERE USED FOR HYPOTHESES

THE FOURTH REASON THAT DURKHEIM’S LE SUICIDE IS STILL LIKED IS THAT MULTI-LAYERED

THEORIES SEEM RARE IN SOCIOLOGY

HOWEVER, THIS REASON IS MISTAKEN

TODAY I WILL PRESENT TWO OTHER MULTI-LAYERED

THEORIES

MULTI-LAYERED THEORIES OCCUR IN ANY THEORETICAL

TRADITION OF SOCIOLOGY, AND EVEN WEBER WORKED WITH ONE

BUT WHY ARE MULTI-LAYERED THEORIES ATTRACTIVE?

FIRSTLY, BECAUSE BUILDING A MULTI-LAYERED THEORY

AMOUNTS TO SAYING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WITH A LIMITED

NUMBER OF WORDS AS POSSIBLE

SECONDLY, BECAUSE A HIGHER- LEVEL , ABSTRACT, HYPOTHESIS OF A MULTI-LAYERED THEORY

SHOWS WHY LOWER-LEVEL, CONCRETE, HYPOTHESES ARE

NOT ALWAYS TRUE

DURKHEIM’S THEORY OF SUICIDE WENT BEYOND THE THREE HYPOTHESES HE PRESENTED SUCCINTLY IN LE SUICIDE

DURKHEIM SOUGHT TO EXPLAIN AS MANY STATISTICAL

REGULARITIES AS POSSIBLE WITH AS SMALL A NUMBER OF

HYPOTHESES AS POSSIBLE

THAT IS THE ART OF THEORY FORMATION: SAYING A LOT

WITH A FEW WORDS

THE MORE STRONGLY INTEGRATED A RELIGIOUS GROUP, THE LOWER ITS SUICIDE RATE

CATHOLICS ARE A MORE INTEGRATED RELIGIOUS GROUP THAN PROTESTANTS

-----------------------------------PROTESTANTS HAVE A HIGHER SUICIDE RATE THAN CATHOLICS

EDUCATION LOWERS INTEGRATION IN RELIGIOUS GROUPS

---------------------------------

IN ITALIAN PROVINCES WITH A HIGHER PERCENT OF ILLITERATE PERSONS, THE SUICIDE RATE IS LOWER

--------------------------------------------

STANDS FOR THE DERIVATION OF THE MORE CONCRETE HYPOTHESIS FROM THE MORE ABSTRACT HYPOTHESIS AND AN AUXILIARY ASSUMPTION

IF THE AUXILIARY ASSUMPTION IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT,THE CONCRETE HYPOTHESIS CANNOT BE DERIVED

THE MORE INTEGRATED A HOUSEHOLD, THE LOWER ITS SUICIDE RATE

SINGLE PERSONS HAVE FEWER HOUSEHOLD TIES THAN MARRIED PERSONS

-------------------------------------

THE SUICIDE RATE FOR SINGLE PERSONS IS HIGHER THAN FOR MARRIED PERSONS

A HOUSEHOLD WITH CHILDREN FORMS A MORE INTEGRATED GROUP THAN A HOUSEHOLD WITHOUT CHILDREN

--------------------------------

MARRIED PERSONS WITHOUT CHILDREN HAVE A HIGHER SUICIDE RATE THAN MARRIED PERSONS WITH CHILDREN

THE MORE INTEGRATED A POLITICAL GROUP, THE LOWER ITS SUICIDE RATE

IN TIMES OF WAR POLITICAL INTEGRATION RISES

-------------------------------------

IN TIMES OF WAR THE SUICIDE RATE IS LOWER THAN IN TIMES OF PEACE

SOME WARS HAVE LESS PUBLIC SUPPORT THAN OTHERS

---------------------------------

LESS POPULAR WARS LOWER THE SUICIDE RATE LESS

THE MORE INTEGRATED A GROUP, THE HIGHER THE CHANCES THAT ITS NORMS REGARDING SUICIDE ARE FOLLOWED

ALL GROUPS HAVE NORMS FORBIDDING SUICIDE

------------------------------------- THE MORE INTEGRATED ANY GROUP, THE LOWER ITS SUICIDE RATE

ARMIES ARE EXCEPTIONAL AND PLACE A LOW VALUE ON INDIVIDUAL LIFE

-----------------------------------SUICIDE IS MORE FREQUENT IN ARMIES THAN OUTSIDE THEM

THE MORE INTEGRATED A GROUP, THE HIGHER THE CHANCES THAT EACH AND EVERY OF ITS NORMS IS FOLLOWED

-----------------------------------THE MORE INTEGRATED A GROUP, THE HIGHER THE CHANCES THAT ITS NORMS REGARDING SUICIDE ARE FOLLOWED

GROUPS HAVE NORMS FORBIDDING YOUNG PEOPLE TO COMMIT PETTY CRIMES

--------------------------------

YOUNG PEOPLE COMMIT FEWER PETTY CRIMES IF THEIR TIES WITH THEIR PARENTS AND WITH SCHOOL ARE STRONGER

THE LAST IMPLICATION IS TESTED IN TRAVIS HIRSCHI’S CAUSES OF

DELINQUENCY FROM 1968

HIRSCHI DOES NOT REFER TO DURKHEIM’S SUICIDE

HIRSCHI’S INTERMEDIARY GROUPS OF YOUNG PEOPLE ARE PAARTLY NEW COMPARED TO

DURKHEIM:

THE FAMILY, SCHOOL, AND PEERS

THE OBVIOUS STRONG TEST PERTAINS TO YOUNG PERSONS WITH STRONG TIES TO OLDER

CRIMINAL FRIENDS

LETS US LOOK MORE CLOSELY AT DURKHEIM-HIRSCHI HYPOTHESIS:

THE MORE INTEGRATED A PERSON IS IN ANY OF A SOCIETY’S INTERMEDIARY GROUPS,

THE MORE LIKELY THIS PERSON IS TO LIVE OF TO ANY OF THE NORMS OF THESE

GROUPS

THIS HYPOTHESIS IS NOT SIMPLY GENERAL,

IT IS HIGHLY INFORMATIVE BECAUSE IT APPLIES TO ANY INTERMEDIARY GROUP

AND TO ANY OF THE NORMS OF THESE GROUPS

IN ADDITION, WITH THIS HYPOTHESIS ONE IS ABLE TO

SUGGEST WHY THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO, SAY, THE

STATISTICAL REGULARITY THAT PROTESTANTS HAVE A HIGHER

SUICIDE RATE THAN CATHOLICS

THE SUICIDE RATE FOR PROTESTANT ENGLAND WAS UNEXPECTEDLY LOW,

BUT IN ENGLAND PROTESTANTS WERE A STRONGLY INTEGRATED GROUP BECAUSE THE ANGLICAN

CHURCH WAS THE STATE CHURCH (UNLIKE GERMANY)

DURKHEIM ALSO SHOWED THAT MORE INTEGRATION IN THE ARMY MAKES FOR A

HIGHER SUICIDE RATE

THE SUICIDE RATE FOR OFFICERS WAS HIGHER THAN FOR ENLISTED MEN

THIS IS AN EXCEPTION TO THE LOWER-LEVEL HYPOTHESIS THAT MORE INTEGRATION

MAKES FOR LESS SUICIDE

HOWEVER, THE FINDING MAY BE EXPLAINED BY THE HYPOTHESIS THAT MORE

INTEGRATION MAKES FOR LESS NORMATIVE DEVIANCE

SO, AGAIN, THE DIFFICULTY IS SOLVED BY FIDDLING WITH THE AUXILIARY

ASSUMPTIONS

IN POWER AND PRIVILEGE FROM 1966 LENSKI MADE

EMPIRICAL REGULARITIES BY COMPARING REPORTS OF

THE FIELDWORK UNDERTAKEN BY

ENTHNOGRAPHERS AND ANTHROPOLOGISTS IN PRE-

INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES

LENSKI DISTINGUISHED SOCIETIES INTO TYPES AFTER THE LEVEL OF THEIR SUBSISTENCE

TECHNOLOGY

HUNTING AND GATHERING (BOW AND ARROW)

SIMPLE HORTICULTURE (DIGGING STICK OR HOE)

ADVANCED HORTICULTURE (METAL TOOLS)

SIMPLE AGRICULTURE (PLOW)

ADVANCED HORTICULTURE (IRON TOOLS)

INDUSTRY (MACHINES NEXT TO MANPOWER)

EACH (BRACKETED ) INVENTION MADE FOR MORE FOOD FROM LESS TERRITORY

LENSKI FOUND THAT DIFFERENCES IN THE STANDARD OF LIVING WERE SMALLER IN

HUNTING AND GATHERING SOCIETIES THAN IN SIMPLE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES

DIFFERENCES IN ADVANTAGES WERE SMALLER IN SIMPLE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES THAN IN

ADVANCED HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES

DIFFERENCES IN ADVANTAGES WERE SMALLER IN ADVANCED HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES

THAN IN SIMPLE AGRARIAN SOCIEITES

DIFFERENCES IN ADVANTAGES WERE SMALLER IN SIMPLE AGRARIAN SOCIETIES THAN IN

ADVANCED AGRARIAN SOCIETIES

THE TECHNOLOGY HYPOTHESIS:

THE MORE DEVELOPED A SOCIETY’S SUBSISTENCE TECHNOLOGY, THE LARGER

THE DIFFERENCES IN PRIVILEGES BETWEEN ITS INHABITANTS

HOWEVER, THE TECHNOLOGY HYPOTHESIS WAS CONTRADICTED BY LENSKI’S FINDING

FOR INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES:

IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES INCOME INEQUALITIES ARE SMALLER THAN IN

ADVANCED AGRARIAN SOCIETIES

LENSKI THEN POSITED THAT SOCIETIES NOT ONLY HAVE A TECHNOLOGY, BUT

ALSO AN IDEOLOGY

WHEREAS IN ADVANCED AGRARIAN SOCIETIES THE RULING IDEOLOGY WAS

THAT THE STATE WAS PRIVATE PROPERTY OF THE RULER

IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES GOVERNMENT WAS OF THE PEOPLE,

FOR THE PEOPLE AND BY THE PEOPLE

THE MORE EGALITARIAN THE IDEOLOGY OF INDUSTRIAL

SOCIETIES,

THE SMALLER THEIR INCOME INEQUALITIES

THREE TYPES OF IDEOLOGIES, RANKED AFTER DEGREE OF

EGALITARIANISM:

LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES

SOCIAL-DEMOCRATIC IDEOLOGIES

COMMUNIST IDEOLOGIES

INCOME INEQUALITIES ARE LARGER IN LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC

INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES THAN IN SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC INDUSTRIAL

SOCIETIES

BUT IN COMMUNIST INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES INCOME INEQUALITIES WARE BARELY SMALLER THAN IN SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC INDUSTRIAL

SOCIETIES

WHAT WENT WRONG WITH THE IDEOLOGY HYPOTHESIS – AND THE

TECHNOLOGY HYPOTHESIS?

LENSKI’S HIGHER-LEVEL HYPOTHESIS INVOKES THE

BALANCE OF POWER OR THE WEIGHT OF RESOURCES BETWEEN THE INHABITANTS OF SOCIETIES

LENSKI’S HIGHER LEVEL HYPOTHESIS:

A PERSON WITH MORE POWER HAS MORE PRIVILEGES

THE MORE ASYMMETRIC THE BALANCE OF POWERS IN A SOCIETY

ARE, THE LARGER ARE THE INEQUALITIES IN ADVANTAGES IN

THIS SOCIETY

IN HUNTING AND GATHERING SOCIETIES THERE ARE NO PERMANENT

DIFFERENCES IN STRENGTH AND SKILLS BETWEEN THE MALE HUNTERS

THE HUNTING GROUNDS ARE COMMUNAL PROPERTY

IN SIMPLE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETIES GARDENS ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND A STRONGER MAN WITH MORE WIVES

OWNS A LARGER GARDEN

METAL TOOLS INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY OF THE LAND BUT ALSO

ARE USED AS EFECTIVE WEAPONS BY STRONG MEN

THE PLOW ALLOWS FOR CULTIVATING MORE LAND THAN THE HOE OR DIGGING STICK

IN SIMPLE AGRARIAN SOCIETIES DIFFERENCES IN LAND OWNERSHIP MAKE FOR NEW

INEQUALTIES IN ADVANTAGES

IN ADVANCED AGRARIAN SOCIETIES OWENERSHIP OF IRON TOOLS, PARTICULARLY

WEAPONS, MAKES FOR ADDITIONAL INEQUALITIES IN ADVANTAGES

THE PERSONS WITH THE MOST WEAPONS IMPOSE TAXES AND FORM A SOCIETY’S STATE

WEAPONS BRING LAND

EACH TECHNOLOGICAL INVENTION IS A NEW MEANS OF

POWER OR A RESOURCE

AND NEW AND OLD RESOURCES TEND TO ACCUMULATE IN THE

SAME HANDS

WITH THE NEW RESOURCES BEING MORE POWERFUL THAN

THE OLD ONES

HOW ABOUT THE INVENTION OF MACHINES?

OWNERSHIP OF MACHINES IS A NEW AND POWERFUL RESOURCE IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES

BUT OWNERS OF MACHINES ARE NOT ALWAYS ABLE TO INVENT MACHINES ON THEIR OWN, TO

MAKE THEM AND TO RUN THEM

MAKING MACHINES REQUIRES COMPLEX SKILLS

OPERATING MACHINES REQUIRES COMPLEX SKILLS

INDUSTRY CREATES NEW RESOURCES THAT DO NOT CUMULATE WITH THE PRIME NEW RESOURCE OWNERSHIP OF MACHINES

SO, THE AUXILIARY ASSUMPTION THAT WITH EACH HIGHER LEVEL OF

SUBSISTENCE TECHNOLOGY, A SOCIETY’S BALANCE OF POWER BECOMES MORE

ASYMMETRIC

GOES WRONG FOR INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES

HERE AGAIN A DIFFICULTY IS SOLVED BY FIDDLING WITH

THE AUXILIARY ASSUMPTIONS

IN A DEMOCRACY, IN CONTRAST TO AN ABSOLUTE RULER OR AN OLIGARCHY,

EVERYBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO VOTE

THIS POLITICAL RESOURCE IS EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED AND MAKES FOR LOWER

INCOME INEQUALITIES

POLITICAL OUTCOMES DEPEND UPON THE PARTY VOTED FOR

IF THE NEW VOTERS VOTE FOR THE PARTY OF THE OLD RULERS, LITTLE WILL

CHANGE

IF THE NEW VOTERS VOTE FOR EGALITARIAN PARTIES, INCOME

INEQUALITIES WILL BECOME SMALLER

COMMUNISM DID NOT CHANGE INCOME INEQUALITIES MORE THAN SOCIAL

DEMOCRACY

BECAUSE THE STATE OWNED ALL THE MEANS OF DESTRUCTION (COERCION), ALL THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION AND ALL THE

MEANS MEANS OF COMMUNICATION,

MAKING FOR STRONGLY PRIVILEGED BUREAUCRATS

BUT WHY DID EGALITARIAN IDEOLOGIES ARISE?

IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES MAKING AND WORKING MACHINES REQUIRES

MORE KNOWLEDGE THAN THE OWNERS OF MACHINES CAN POSSESS

THESE PERSONS WITH PRODUCTIVE SKILLS HAVE NOT ONLY A

BARGAINING POWER FOR WAGES, BUT ALSO FOR A SAY IN POLITICS

KNOWLEDGE CANNOT EASILY BE SUBSTITUTED

SO, LENSKI’S POWER HYPOTHESIS

EXPLAINS THE KNOWN EXCEPTIONS FOR HIS TECHNOLOGY HYPOTHESIS

AND HIS IDEOLOGY HYPOTHESIS

IN MY OPINION, THE STRONGER TESTS OF LENSKI’S HYPOTHESES

PERTAIN NOT TO INCOME INEQUALITY

BUT TO SOCIAL MOBILITY

THE STRUCTURE OF LENSKI’S THEORY

POWER HYPOTHESIS

TECHOLOGY HYPOTHESIS IDEOLOGY HYPOTHESIS

ETHNOGRAPHIC FINDINGS STATE INCOME FIGURES

THE THIRD MULTI-LAYERED THEORY MAY BE FOUND IN

NORBERT ELIAS’

UBER DEN PROZESS DER CIVILIZATION (ON THE CIVILZING

PROCESS)

FROM 1939

FOR THIS THEORY AND

FOR FIDDLING WITH ITS AUXILIARY ASSUMPTIONS TO DEAL WITH CONTRADICTORY FINDINGS

SEE THE 2001 ARTICLE OF FLAP & ULTEE

THE STRONGER A SOCIETY’S STATE, THE STRICTER THE RULES OF CIVILIZED BEHAVIOR

IN FRANCE, FROM 1300 UNTIL 1850 THE MONOPOLY OF THE STATE ON THE MEANS OF VIOLENCE BECAME STRONGER AND STRONGER-----------------------------------------------------------IN FRANCE, FROM 1300 UNTIL 1850 A TREND TOWARDS STRICTER STANDARDS OF CIVILIZED BEHAVIOR

BUT WHY WOULD A STRONGER STATE MAKE FOR MORE CIVILIZED BEHAVIOR?

THIS QUESTION LEADS TO A HIGHER-LEVEL HYPOTHESIS IN ELIAS’ THEORY:

THE MORE DEPENDED THE MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY ARE UPON ITS OTHER

MEMBERS,

WHETHER POLITICALLY, ECONOMICALLY OR ANY OTHER FORM

OF DEPENDENCY,

THE STRICTER THEIR STANDARDS FOR CIVILIZED BEHAVIOR WILL BE