SUBJ.

CODE: AS 1 the statement and the resolution of troubles properly lie within the individual as a
NAME: Selected Theories in the Applied Social Sciences biographical entity and within the scope of one’s immediate milieu – the social setting
TEACHER: Jan Joseph Rivera that is directly open to her personal experience and to some extent her wilful activity. A
DATE: WEEK 6 trouble is a private matter: values cherished by an individual are felt by her to be
TOPIC: THINKING LIKE A SOCIAL SCIENTIST threatened.

 Issues have to do with matters that transcend these local environments of the
Learning Objectives: individual and the range of her inner life. They have to do with the organization of
After reading this Chapter, you should be able to: many such milieu into the institutions of an historical society as a whole, with the ways
1. understand and apply the concepts of structure and agency to help you think sociologically in which various milieux overlap and interpenetrate to form the larger structure of
about the world around you, social and historical life. An issue is a public matter: some value cherished by publics is
2. understand and apply the concept of the sociological imagination to critically analyze different felt to be threatened. Often there is a debate about what that value really is and about
‘real world’ examples. what it is that really threatens it. This debate is often without focus if only because it is
the very nature of an issue, unlike even widespread trouble, that it cannot very well be
 C.Wright Mills (1916-1962) defined in terms of the immediate and everyday environments of ordinary people. An
→ coined the term ‘sociological imagination’ by which he meant the ability to connect issue, in fact, often involves a crisis in institutional arrangements, and often it involves
the individual with the social, the one with the many and seek to understand broader what Marxists call ‘contradictions’ or ‘antagonisms.’
trends, structures and ideas. Understanding this connection is helpful to think about
structure and agency and our place within it.  At its core, then, the sociological imagination helps us to think through two dualisms:
→ Agency is about our free will and potential to self-actualize our lives, whereas structure agency/structure, and macro/micro. That is:
is about the material and immaterial conditions within which we live, for example, the  agency – the ability of an individual to make free and independent choices about how
systems of governance, religion, social class, social norms and rules and regulations etc. they live, what they do, how they are etc, according to their own values and wishes,
It may be helpful to think of structure and agency on a continuum, a sliding scale  structure – the social structures that influence, constrain, and guide the ability of
between the two extremes of ultimate agency and totalizing structure. Neither individuals to make free and independent choices about how they live, what they do,
extreme pole exists in the real world, but our society or life may shift along this kind of how they are etc.,
continuum from time to time, due to circumstance or other factors.  micro – focusing on the smaller scale, like the individual or small groups of people, and
→ Even though we may sometimes think of structures as limiting our agency and  macro – focusing on a larger scale, like the structure of society and social institutions
curtailing us, we are also the creators and maintainers of the structures around us. This situated within.
interplay between agency and structure is nicely captured by the famous quote by
anthropologist Margaret Mead (1901-1978): “Never doubt that a small group of  Equipped with the sociological imagination, we social scientists can then reflect upon our
thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that own position within the world (empathy). This process of reflexivity, “involves considering
ever has.” one’s own place in the social world, not as an isolated and asocial individual but as a
consequence of one’s experience as a member of social groups.” (Willis, 2004: 22). The
 The concept of the sociological imagination is also a tool to help us, as social scientists, think sociological imagination is then not just a theoretical lens through which to perceive the
through agency and structure. Mills (2000 [1959]: 3) stated, “Neither the life of an world, but also an intensely practical viewpoint that allows us to see the world beyond our
individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both.” immediate surroundings.
Indeed, Mills (2000 [1959]) drew an important distinction between private ‘troubles’ and
public ‘issues’, explaining:  At its core, phronetic social science is described by Flyvbjerg (2001: 3) as focusing on the
 Troubles occur within the character of the individual and within the range of his or “reflexive analysis and discussion of values and interests” in ways that the natural
her immediate relations with others; they have to do with one’s self and with those sciences cannot. Thus, the social sciences encourage us to not deny subjectivities in
limited areas of social life of which one is directly and personally aware. Accordingly, research, but to instead embrace and grapple with them as meaningful and important
 aspects of our vocation. In doing so, we can more deeply acknowledge the impacts that the “The habitus, as the system of dispositions… is an objective basis for regular modes of
subjective values we live by have on our views about the world, including the different behaviours, and thus for the regularity of modes or practice, and if practice can be
approaches we might take to understanding and responding to different social issues. In predicted… this is because the effect of the habitus is that agents who are equipped
thinking, reflexively, through how our own values may shape and influence our views of the with it will behave in a certain way in certain circumstances” (Bourdieu 1990: 77)
world, it is also helpful to consider the role of cultural and moral relativism. [Bourdieu, 1990: In other words: Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology]

 Cultural and moral relativism refer to the understanding that values are dependent on and Almost always unconscious, these influencing factors (e.g., how English and Japanese make their
relative to the society from which they emerge. tea) allow individuals to believe they are acting according to their own agency, when in reality our
→ That is, your own values might be very different to someone who lives in a different decisions are always influenced by our habitus. Such a simple example is nevertheless helpful to
country, who lived at a different time, or who lives in the same country and has had a demonstrate how the habitus can shape our decisions, no matter how small, without our
different upbringing and different life experiences. A cultural relativist would argue that awareness of it.
this makes neither set of values ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; they are just different. The reality of
cultural and moral relativism requires that we, as social scientists, are reflexive about the Although the habitus is a relatively stable set of beliefs and values created by structure, there are
ways in which we see the world as well as the values that we bring to our research and certain “circumstances and contexts [that] are not necessarily receptive to or in tune with it”
work (‘our cultural baggage so to speak’). In essence, reflexivity involves ‘bending back’ on (Schirato and Roberts, 2018: 144).
oneself to acknowledge and understand how our own values influence how we see the
world around us, as well as our place within it. For Bourdieu, the problem for social scientists is to then understand how individuals can act
spontaneously in ways that are not always entirely shaped by structure itself. In other words,
how does agency continue to exist despite the powerful influence of structure?
STRUCTURE AND AGENCY, THROUGH A BOURDIEUSIAN LENS
GIDDENS AND STRUCTURATION
The concepts of agency and structure, introduced above, are tools used by social scientists to
understand how individuals act within society.  Anthony Giddens (1938-present), English sociologist
→ agency and structure are mutually dependent and reinforcing. Structure influences
As a recap, agency is the ability of individuals to interact spontaneously within society and agency, but the reverse is also true.
make choices according to their own free will. Structure is the influencing factors of the social → He saw the relation between agency and structure not as two opposing binaries but as
conditions that shape and constrain agency. Our choices as individuals within a society are a duality.
always influenced by numerous structures. Some are imposed upon us externally, such as social → Giddens’ structuration theory develops the argument that, “people produce their
class and systems of government. Others are internalised as values, for example as social and social systems employing rules and resources (structures) during interaction (agency),
religious norms. knowingly or unknowingly reproducing these structures via routines and rituals that are
Often, there are a mix of both external and internal elements to the structures that shape our often taken-for-granted or unquestioned” (Hardcastle, Usher, and Holmes 2005: 223).
choices. Moreover, whilst agency is inevitably shaped by structure, it is important to note that → Giddens proposes that agency and structure be viewed as two sides of then same coin,
the reverse is also true. Structure is far from a natural occurrence. We, as individuals, have the with each requiring the other for social practice to occur. Social institutions, as structure,
ability to create and maintain the structures around us. Social scientists aim to clarify this are preserved by the action of individuals through some form collective agreement. This
intricate relationship between agency and structure. consensus takes the form of action, where for example the legitimacy of the political
system is maintained by individuals collectively agreeing to attend the polling booth to
 Pierre Bourdieu (1930-2002), a French sociologist developed one perspective on structure vote. Without this complicit action, structure would be forced to operate differently. To
and agency continue the example above, such a government may form a military dictatorship to
→ For Bourdieu, “all activity and knowledge… are always informed by a relationship ensure people vote, which consequently undermines the legitimacy of structure.
between the agent’s history and how this history has been incorporated” (Schirato
and Roberts, 2018: p. 133). This position influences Bourdieu’s theory of ‘habitus’:
 → Giddens argues that this action of individuals in maintaining structure also means that
individuals have the ability to change structure. It is through the active agency of
individuals that the power of structure can be reorganized. OTHERING: PROCESSES OF MAKING SELF AND OTHER

We are individuals but also part of society; relationships are how we fit into a given society. In
INDIVIDUALS, GROUPS, CULTURE, SOCIETY the social sciences we use a range of methods to study the self (e.g., especially in psychology) and
others (e.g., especially in anthropology). In fact, understanding more about ourselves by studying
The individual is defined as a single human being, influenced by social structure, whilst others also has a long tradition: the search for common traits or cultural and social differences
retaining some degree of agency. In (neo)liberal capitalist societies, the individual is often has been at the forefront of sociology and anthropology, for example.
understood to be a rational and self-interested being who maximizes economic opportunity
(‘homo economicus’). However this definition is problematic and fails to appreciate the principles In these (and other) disciplines, the Other and their characteristics of otherness are often
of reciprocity that underlie many communitarian societies (e.g., see the example of hydrosocial studied not only to better understand relationships between ‘us’ and ‘Other’, but also to pose
territories in the Kayambi community of La Chimba, Equador, discussed by Manosalvas, problems. This is because the process of labelling someone as ‘Other’ inherently places them at
Hoogesteger, and Boelens, 2021), as well as many examples of generosity and selflessness within the margins, setting them apart from mainstream society on the basis of particular traits, and
capitalism. decentring their own identity. Moreover, othering often takes place on the basis of particular
traits, such as a person’s religious, social, cultural, sexual, or ethnic identities, and thus can have
One example can be seen in the act of gift giving. A theory of the gift was developed by French significant negative effects — giving way to ostracisation and discrimination. This process feeds
sociologist Marcel Mauss (1872-1950), where he discussed how gift giving brings with it a into an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ mentality that creates ‘in’ and ‘out’ groups as a result , (i.e.,
certain sense of obligation that escapes the typical “individualistic” view of modern societies. discrimination/alienation).
Rather than a collection of isolated individuals acting out of self interest, Mauss argued that the
act of gift giving develops a sense of reciprocity between individuals and groups. This reciprocity
ultimately strengthens relationships between different people — a process unable to be SEX, GENDER, AND SEXUALITY
accounted for by simply viewing individuals as self-serving and utilitarian.
Example aspects of social identity that can give way to ‘othering’ are sex, gender, and sexuality:
Social scientists are also interested in understanding how individuals interact within social groups. concepts that play a significant role in shaping our identities and experiences.
Belonging to a group requires adherence to certain expectations of conduct, some explicit and
others implicit. Society both shapes and is shaped by certain forces, including cultural values, While sex refers to a biological classification based on anatomy, hormones, and chromosomes,
institutions, and hierarchies. These forces organize individuals and smaller groups in such a way gender refers to the social and cultural norms, expectations, and behaviors that are associated
that they adhere to the expectations of a specific society. Nested within society are groups, with being labeled a particular sex. Gender is not solely based on biological sex and can vary
subcultures, and individuals, who can be broadly categorized as either conforming to social across cultures and time periods.
expectations, or as engaging in behaviour that deviates from these norms. This distinction is a
practical one, typically enforced by power structures such as government, police, and the legal Male and female are the most common binary sexes, but there are also individuals who have
system. intersex conditions and may have bodies that do not fit within typical binary definitions of male
or female. The term ‘nonbinary’ is regularly used as a sort of ‘ catch all’ to include diverse
In the social sciences, culture refers to the (implicit and explicit) shared beliefs, values, individuals who do not identify as either male or female.
customs, rules, behaviours, and artefacts that characterise a group or society. It encompasses
all aspects of social behaviour and norms and provides a framework for understanding the Typically, ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ are gendered traits that are used to describe certain
behaviour of individuals within that society. Culture can be defined as the “non-biological aspects qualities and behaviours that are expected to be associated with being male or female.
of society, all those things which are learnt or symbolic, including convention, custom and Masculinity is often associated with toughness, assertiveness, and competitiveness, while
language” (Willis, 2004: 73). It is culture that distinguishes the social organization of humans femininity is often associated with softness, emotional expressiveness, and nurturing.
from that of other animals.
In reality, however, traits that are considered either ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’ exist on a
spectrum; individuals can exhibit both masculine and feminine traits, regardless of their biological Borders mark the formal boundaries between different nation-states. Borders between groups
sex or gender identity. Indeed, critical scholars have also drawn attention to the ways in which of people are nothing new, but the formalised demarcation between political units or nation-
these gendered traits are bound up in expressions of power and domination. That is, the states as marked in maps and determined to be legally binding is a relatively new development.
categories themselves are oppressive social constructs rather than objective reflections of reality.
Early borders were physical, such as rivers, mountains and the sea. People were often divided into
 Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986), Feminist scholar and famous existentialist, chiefly lowland and highland peoples, or land and sea peoples, who traded and were in contact, even
influential in second-wave feminism though they were physically distanced.
→ In her book ‘The Second Sex’ (1949), she argued that femininity was a myth that
served to oppress women and deny their rights to free and equal participation in  James Scott
society. → has argued that in Southeast Asia peoples rejected formalised states and such political
manifestations by distancing themselves from lowland centres of commerce and state
building by moving into the highlands and maintaining more egalitarian and anarchic
In addition to sex and gender, sexuality refers to an individual’s sexual orientation and desires. societies.
For instance, sexual orientation can include — amongst other orientations — heterosexuality,
homosexuality, bisexuality, and pansexuality. Often used, for instance, the LGBTQI+ acronym With the rise of the nation-state in Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries, borders became
stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, and intersex, with the plus sign more politically significant. Nation-states sought to define their territories and assert their
representing a variety of other identities, including asexual, aromantic, and more. Sexuality is, sovereignty over their borders. To do this, they employed techniques such as boundary markers,
indeed, a complex and multi-faceted aspect of our identities that can be shaped by a variety of boundary surveys, and maps. These techniques were used to physically demarcate the border
influences, including biological, social, cultural, and psychological factors. and provide a clear visual representation of the territory controlled by a given state. Thus,
bordering techniques include the physical building of border fences, walls and other barriers as
Our sex, gender, and sexuality are important aspects of our social identities that can have well as the technological in the form of passports and other identification documents that tie us
significant influences on our lives. Indeed, they can be sources of opportunity as well as via citizenship to a particular nation-state.
oppression, depending on the social and cultural milieu within which a person exists.
Borders and bordering techniques have a long history tied to war, imperialism, and economic
Moreover, an intersectional perspective on these concepts recognises that individuals can face exploitation. Legal boundaries are often disputed by different ethnic, religious or otherwise
multiple forms of oppression and privilege based on their sex, gender, masculinity, femininity, distinctive groups. Conflicts over borders as the result of colonisation are often the result of
sexuality, but also other aspects of their identity. For example, a transgender woman of colour arbitrary border lines drawn on a map, then sanctified as law by colonising entities.
may face discrimination and prejudice based on both her gender identity and her race.
Additionally, individuals may also experience privilege based on one aspect of their identity while Due to the haphazard divisions of geographic areas without consideration for the people who
facing oppression based on another aspect. lived there, such as across Africa in the late 1800s, and across Australia from the late 1700s, the
peoples that occupy a particular area often became forcibly unified under a nation-state, despite
significant cultural differences. In other cases ethnic groups were split up by such arbitrary
GLOBALISATION, BORDERS, CAPITALISM borders across multiple nation-states.

From the ancient empires that rose and fell, to colonization during the expansion of the British The nation-state is also closely linked to the emergence of capitalism and both developed in
and Spanish empires, to the new forms imperialism led by American expansionism, human step. The nation-state provided the market security, infrastructure and more cohesive
history has long been a global history. This history, far from a unified tale of the equality of regulations across a larger geographic area. To sustain economic growth, nation-states entered
human beings sharing a single world, is divided: along lines of class, race, religion, nationality, and into competition with other states, that also have the potential for conflict. However the general
gender. It is the job of social scientists to address these conflicts and inconsistencies, so as to fruitful collaboration between the political (nation-state) and economic (capitalism) system has
imagine a better world united by a shared humanity. generated the world we inhabit today.
 globalisation, emphasising the need to critically examine the process and its effects on
This has made capitalism the dominant ideology across the globe. Fundamentally an economic people and societies.
system, capitalism has nevertheless evolved over its relatively short history into a political and
social system. This system shapes the lives of individuals, as well as defined the borders of  Immanuel Wallerstein developed world systems theory as a theoretical framework to
nations and interactions between them. explain the dynamics of the global capitalist economy and its effects.
→ According to the world systems theory, the global economy can be divided into three
 Ellen Meiksins Wood (1999: p.2) main categories: core, semi-periphery, and periphery. Core countries are highly
→ defines capitalism as “a system in which goods and services, down to the most basic industrialized and economically dominant, possessing a disproportionate amount of
necessities of life, are produced for profitable exchange, where even human labour- wealth and power in the world system. Peripheral countries, on the other hand, are
power is a commodity for sale in the market, and where all economic actors are less industrialized and economically dependent, often serving as suppliers of raw
dependent on the market”. Whilst workers require the market for sale of their labour, materials for the core. Semi-peripheral countries occupy a middle ground between
capitalists also require it for the purchase of labour and the sale of goods and services. the two, sometimes acting as intermediaries between the core and periphery.
As an ideology, capitalism is treated as a natural, necessary system resulting from Enlightenment → The relationships between these three groups are characterised by unequal power
notions of human nature as rational, self-interested, and competitive. However, using a social dynamics and exploitation. Core countries are seen as benefiting from the exploitation
science lens allows us to see capitalism as a relatively new idea that has developed out of conflict, of peripheral countries, which are subjected to low wages, poor working conditions,
exploitation, and imperialism. Capitalism today is inseparable from globalization, defined by and limited access to (often their own) resources. Over time, this leads to unequal
international trade systems, markets, and the supremacy of multi-national corporations. development, poverty, and underdevelopment in peripheral countries, perpetuating
their position as suppliers of cheap labor and raw materials.
Globalization refers to the increasing interconnectedness and interdependence of the world’s
economies, societies, and cultures due to advancements in communication, transportation, and
technology.

Critics soon showed that globalisation rests on exploitation and unequal global power relations.

 For example, Eric Wolf’s work, “Europe and the People Without History” shows how
globalisation has been driven by the interests of dominant states and capital, leading to
cultural and economic imperialism.
→ He argues that globalisation is not a neutral process, but one that reinforces the power
dynamics between the Global North and South.
→ His work also demonstrates that globalisation is not a new phenomenon but the latest
word to describe a long process of economic exchange and integration across the
world.

 Sidney Mintz, in his work “Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History”,
→ critiques the way colonial sugar producing islands in the Caribbean were thrust into
unequal trading relations with the colonial homeland consuming the sugar. He shows
how these unequal power dynamics lead to the exploitation of resources and people in
the Global South.
→ Mintz also documents the ways in which the global trade of sugar has shaped cultural
and economic systems, creating a dependence on sweet foods in the Global North.
Both studies offer important perspectives on the cultural and economic impacts of