Early inward his theoretical treatise of rational-choice sociology Foundations of Social Theory , James Coleman introduces a diagram of...
Early inward his theoretical treatise of rational-choice sociology Foundations of Social Theory, James Coleman introduces a diagram of dissimilar kinds of social activeness (34). This diagram is valuable because it provides a finely granulated classification of kinds of social action, differentiated past times the relationships that each sort stipulates with individuals inside the interaction.
Here is how Coleman describes the classification organization provided here:
Differing kinds of structures of activeness are industrial plant life inward society, depending on the kinds of resources involved inward actions, the kinds of actions taken, too the contexts inside which the actions are taken. (34)Here is the legend for the diagram:
| 1. Private actions 2. Exchange relations 3. Market 4. Disjoint authorization relations 5. Conjoint authorization relations 6. Relations of trust | 7. Disjoint authorization systems 8. Conjoint authorization systems 9. Systems of trust, collective behavior 10. Norm-generating structures 11. Collective-decision structures |
The regions of the diagram are organized into a pose out of higher-order groups:
A. Purposive action
B. Transfer of rights or resources
C. Unilateral transfer
D. Rights to command action
E. System of relations
F. Events with consequences for many
For example, social events falling inward zone 8 own got these distinguishing characteristics: they involve a transfer of rights to command action, shifting through unilateral transfer inside an existing organization of relations. An instance mightiness include a political party to divorce who surrenders his or her correct to command whether the kid is moved to to a greater extent than or less other state. This would hold upwards a unilateral transfer of command from 1 political party to the other party. Events inward zone seven differ from those inward zone 8 alone inward that they create non reverberate unilateral transfer. The same instance tin hold upwards adjusted to a zone seven instance past times stipulating that both parties must handgrip to the transfer of command of the child's residence.
It is interesting to reveal that the whole diagram takes house inside the domain of purposive activeness (A). This illustrates Coleman's commutation presupposition well-nigh the social world: that social outcomes final result from purposive, intentional actions past times individuals. If nosotros imagined that religious rituals were purely performative, serving every bit expressions of inner spiritual sense -- nosotros would reveal that these "social events" own got no house inward this diagram. Likewise, if nosotros catch that at that topographic point is an of import role for emotion, solidarity, hatred, or dear inward the social basis -- nosotros would reveal that actions too phenomena involving these factors would own got no house inward the diagram.
It would hold upwards interesting to endeavour to populate a to a greater extent than complex diagram with an initial construction something similar this:
Would this modified scheme give a dissimilar orientation to the "sociological imaginary"? Might nosotros imagine that the theories of of import intersectional figures similar Bourdieu, Tilly, or Foucault mightiness autumn inward the intersection of all 3 circles? Would episodes of contentious politics involve actions that are purposive, emotive, too performative? Is at that topographic point whatsoever argue (parsimony, perhaps) to endeavour to cut emotion too surgery to a dissimilar sort of purpose? Or it is amend to honestly recognize the variety of kinds of activeness too motivation? My inclination is to intend that Coleman's selection hither reflects "rational selection fundamentalism" -- the catch that ultimately all human actions are driven past times a calculation of consequences. And this supposition seems unjustified.
COMMENTS