SUMMARY LECTURES ENP22803
MICRO SOCIOLOGY
ERVING GOFFMAN 1922-1982
Coined the idea of self-presentation: very radical at the time. Was a variant of
Interpretative sociology: a sociology of people interpreting and attaching meaning to their world. You are either for agency or structuralism: schism in sociology. Tries to find implicit rules that govern life. Disturbances are used to discover these.
Dramaturgical approach social life is like a performance: a play enacted on a stage, in front of an audience. Why? Because you want an audience to test your identities (front stage) and teammates with whom you withdraw backstage and can converse casually. Tact: helping people out when people make mistakes. Goffman’s methodology was participant observation, often very deep. Institutions that should deal with madness, criminality or illness often enhance the phenomena they should reduce because within these total institutions only two identities are possible: right and wrong. Goffman’s focus on micro situations makes him lose track of the bigger picture.
PIERRE BOURDIEU 1930-2002
Looked at how the cultural elite convince the rest of society that they are special, and how this keeps them in power. Theory of Bourdieu on consumption: people consume to show their status. Did work on Capital, but found the economic definition too narrow. Bourdieu said you cannot become rich overnight: you need to accumulate capital. Three forms: Economic capital. This is defined by property rights. Cultural capital. It is connected to knowledge, and takes three forms: Embodied knowledge (knowledge that is a part of you), objectified form (things people use to furnish their living environment) and institutionalised form (titles, diplomas). Social Capital. Resources that you can mobilise by knowing someone. The three forms of capital can be interchanged, but sometimes there are barriers. People show their differences in capital: Distinction. Bourdieu also coined the idea of Habitus. It connects action and structure: laws of fields are inscribed into human agents (Structured), but they are responsible for reproducing these laws (Structuring). It defines your future choices. In his book, Distinction, Bourdieu tried to measure the class struggles. He found a relationship between social class and taste, and how this permeates all aspects of people’s lives (see habitus). The elite have accumulated cultural capital over time and have a higher cultural competence (ability to understand works of art). Nowadays, class differences are smaller, and high-brow culture has been popularised. The concepts he used are still valid though.
JAMES S. COLEMAN 1926-1995
He looked mostly at individuals: see how small interactions lead to larger institutions. He conducted a very large study on education in the US. He said that equality should be measured by looking at the results of students, not the resources of schools. He found that it wasn’t so much the school that mattered, but the background that children came from. To improve school results they should be (forcibly) mixed. Coleman became famous for his work on rational action. Individual behaviour can be explained by looking at the individual’s wishes. People try to maximise their rewards and minimise their costs. When with these choices you only have to take yourself into account they are parametric, when your decisions affect others they are strategic choices. Introduced the idea of prisoner’s dilemma, which will lead to a non-efficient outcome (nash-equilibrium). Rational choice is very attractive, as it is relatively simple and unites the social sciences. In most discussions, it is implicitly assumed. Coleman also talks about social capital. He says this is a consequence of rationally acting individuals, and calls it a public good, not individual property (like Bourdieu). Social capital is constructed through closure from other networks, stability and shared ideology. His idea that everything is rational makes it impossible to question it. He also could not offer an explanation on how cumulative knowledge is created.

RANDALL COLLINS 1941-PRESENT
He worked on both the macro and micro level, which is unique in sociology. Most famous for his theory on Interaction Ritual Chains. This explains the reproduction of symbols, ideas and group solidarities through interaction rituals. How interaction situations produce individuals. A ritual becomes a ritual when you are involved in it, are focused on one thing and when you notice this. This has as a result the creation of collective effervescence. It has several ingredients (Bodily co-presence, barrier to outsiders, mutual focus of attention and shared mood) and several outcomes, when successful (group solidarity, Emotional Energy, sacred objects, standards of morality). Emotional energy is the will to engage in more interactions. You need rituals to keep this high. Symbols can also carry over the emotional energy, and the standards of morality can distinguish you from others. Collins himself calls this an expansion on Coleman: choosing to perform in IRs is a form of rational choice.
DISCUSSION SESSION COLLINS
Collins uses micro emotions (caused by rituals) to explain macro happenings (solidarity). Emotions aren’t just outbursts, they are always present, different cultures all have the four basic emotions: anger, fear, happiness and sadness/disappointment. The will to gain emotional energy is a driving force in behaviour: and people make rational choices to optimise this. Collective effervescence is about creating a common mood, and this intensifies the emotion felt. Bodily presence can be an intensifier, but is not necessary. It is easier to leave rituals at which you are not bodily present. The order-giver sometimes gives orders to an order-taker to assert his authority. This raises his EE, but lowers that of the order-taker. Order-takers can become angry (if low control) or extremely subservient (if high control) when being dominated. Emotions are short-term, EE is something long-term, collective. He uses four characteristics to identify how much energy individuals get from a ritual. Ritual intensity (how much collective effervescence is created) Central/peripheral participation (how close are they to the group). Density (how close the people in the group are) Diversity (how large their difference in background, this changes the type of energy created). Winners in a group make themselves the focus of the ritual.

MACRO SOCIOLOGY
Explain social development and individual behaviour from the structural characteristics of society.
TALCOTT PARSONS 1902-1979
Famous for
Structural functionalism. Society is an ordered, encompassing system with a structure. In modern societies there are coordination problems, to overcome this there is specialisation, and functions are split between different institutions: functional differentiation. There needs to be a balance between these different functions. Society has stability as a characteristic, there is only slow evolution. In a social system three subsystems support each other: cultural system (values) social system (institutions) and psychic systems (dispositions). Each system needs to have functions fulfilled.
Parsons developed the AGIL scheme: four functions that all societies have to fulfil to survive in the long run: Adaptation (to nature, or other social systems) Goal attainment (defining it, and how to get there. We call this the political system), Integration (Norms and values that keep society together) and Latent Pattern Maintenance (Making sure that society is reproduced in the future). Societies are stable system because the norms and values are programmed into them: deviant behaviour is punished. In modernity there is more specialization, and you can recognize this by looking at pattern-variables. He is criticised as making society seem too ordered, and there is no space for human action. Also, trying to cover all sociological theories can makes the categories used too broad.
JEFFREY ALEXANDER 1947-PRESENT
A part of neo-functionalism: making problems easier to handle by only looking at sub-systems (e.g. law, economy, civil sphere). He has a special focus on the Civil Sphere, this is where people develop norms and values, here they make the identity of society. He sees culture as a structure that is normative, it defines what people believe and do. The civil sphere is organised using binary codes something is either civil, or anti-civil. Alexander says that these binary codes are redefined through debates, in the civil sphere. Everyone should have a predisposition to participate in this debate. Key institutions are Communicative (public opinion, polls, associations) and Regulatory. Political parties set the agenda for the debate. Other, non-civil spheres can spill over into the civil sphere: economic inequalities heightening some people in debates. To remedy this, societies can go into Civil repair.
DISCUSSION SESSION ALEXANDER
Alexander says that what keeps society together, solidarity, must be studied in itself. A closer look at the civil sphere is therefore needed. By talking about functions he connects his theory to that of Parsons. Civil sphere is the identity of society. The civil sphere creates a we, distinguished from the other. An example of how the civil sphere works: pressures from the civil sphere on the legal and economic sphere resulted in the abolishment of child labour. There are norms and values there, but they are also created there. Identity is often linked to geography. The identity of the Netherlands is seen as being always there, primordial. In reality, it is created and recreated, for example by groups that are excluded from the civil sphere: these try to change history to include themselves in it. These people challenge the identity. The civil sphere should be independent from other spheres: no spill over. If this does happen, society attempts civil repair. Civil repair often fails, but it has nonetheless made large differences in worker’s rights etc.
NIKLAS LUHMANN 1927-1998
He was captured by Parsons’ approach of seeing society as a whole. All systems have boundaries, making them specific. To make boundaries a system needs to fulfil its functions. Functional structuralism, societies become more complex, and by making subsystems this can be reduced somewhat (e.g., in law you don’t talk power). Societies are Social systems. The communication between people is what makes the system, not the individuals. Every sub-system has a binary code as the basis for communication. Example: environmental problems. They cannot be fixed by incorporating them into existing sub-systems, so Luhmann says a new sub-system should be created. Very abstract, hard to see what it means for society. Human agency is completely ignored.
MICHEL FOUCAULT 1926-1984
Worked within structuralism, and how power works in individual life, the underlying mechanics. In pre-modern times the crime was punished, now the criminal is punished more. In the modern age power works in several different ways: Surveillance: people do not know if they are being watched, so they act as if being watched all the time. Judgment becomes normalised judgment: on the basis of order and standards. This all to achieve discipline: deviant behaviour is corrected, almost automatically. Foucault also coined the idea of Discourse: A shared way of talking, system of reference. This can limit room for deviations, and can be used by politicians to force their reality on society. Foucault sees power everywhere, but it is often invisible as a result of discourse/framing. This can be more effective.
EFFECTS OF SECOND MODERNITY ON THE MACRO LEVEL
Applying sociological theories on the contemporary period of time. Trying to answer the question of what is happening around us today. Almost all writers highlight certain parts of modernity, but they have in common the impact of globalisation on social relations in modern societies. This has caused a new modernity: Second modernity as preceded by first modernity. The world has become more complex: Internet, neoliberalism, Supra-national politics, omnipresence of the market.
MANUEL CASTELLS 1942-PRESENT
Has done a lot of work on the Global network society. Everything that matters in society is organised around electronic information flows. In these networks, space and time no longer seem to matter. Space of flows: flows of information that travel the world. This is where the important stuff happens now. He opposes this to Space of places: real places where people experience ordinary things, somewhat like the old time. Castells says social change is how the space of flows affects the space of places (Glocalisation). If you see a company as a network it can be in several places at the same time. Important nodes are called networks, and the state turns into just a node: politics are deterritorialised. The GNS makes sociologists have to rethink key concepts, such as power. Castells defines four types: Networking power (Inclusion/exclusion of a network), Network Power (The standards that control a network, and if they have more connections e.g. are present in more networks they are more powerful) Networked power (Power of elites) Network-making power (new, based on the capacity to construct and code networks (by programmers) and to connect it to other networks (Switchers) <-Very Important).
DISCUSSION SESSION CASTELLS
In his paper, Castells reaches new definitions of power, and the main new powers are those of the programmers and the switchers, which form network-making power. The main mechanisms of power of the state are violence and discourse. Power over is to control someone else, Power to is to be able to change something. Power is also the institutional arrangements that make people act in a certain way. Power is relational, Domination is institutional. There are three sources of power for the state: Violence, money and trust. The violence monopoly is only legitimate if the discourse is embedded in the society. People who are not part of a network are infinitely far away. Networked power: simple answer: there are power relationships that have to do with its programmed goals. Impossible answer: there is no single most powerful person.
JOHN URRY 1946-PRESENT
Done a lot of work on the shift to mobile modernity. He thinks that sociology should focus more on mobility to be relevant for the 21st century. Social relations have been globalised, so sociology should be redesigned. The concept of society is problematic now because they are connected to nation-states, whose role is eroded. Globalisation results in massive increases of mobilities, and Urry calls these flows and fluids. This involves looking at the infrastructures that feed an object (e.g. the house). He distinguishes between flows and fluids: flows are Globally Integrated Networks, and they are more or less manageable because they use standardised formulas. Fluids are much less predictable: environmental risks, Internet etc. Complexity science is needed to describe these fluids (example of complexity science: tipping point).
SASKIA SASSEN 1949-PRESENT
Sassen shows how three components, territory, authority and rights mark the changes between different forms of society. Thesis: the nation-state has made today’s global era possible. Sassen says that place is still important in today’s globalised world. Global cities will become key: they concentrate vital knowledge, people and institutions. In Castells’ words: they are important nodes. They are the sites of power. Sassen’s idea of functions is based on Tokyo, London, New York. Some new Asian cities are very different, and do not fit with her ideas. She sees globalisation everywhere, saying it is inevitable. Nobody is studying that some countries are not connected: what does this mean? Protests now are about more than being connected on the internet, you also have to make yourself visible in a place. Images of this can be diffused over the world, enhancing the protest.
EFFECTS OF MODERNITY ON THE MICRO LEVEL
ULRICK BECK 1944-PRESENT
Beck says sociologists should build realistic utopias. Cosmopolitan society is his utopia. Beck want sociologists to do more research above the national level. Beck has also done a lot of work on the risk society. There is a difference in perception of risks in reflexive modernity: risks cannot be seen directly anymore. Scientists also do not know for sure how to deal with them. The old dominant logic of welfare-distribution shifts to a logic of risk-distribution: some people are more susceptible to risks. He also did work on Life politics. People need to build their own lifestyle now, through consumption, identity etc. Beck says his idea of Cosmopolitan society is a way of dealing with the ‘other’ in society. You need to accept that person as an individual.
ZYGMUNT BAUMAN 1925-PRESENT
Says that we no longer live in a culture where the economy is dominant, but culture is dominant. Has done a lot of work on the shift from fixed to liquid modernity: for example consumption becoming the basis of identity. In fixed modernity, the role of the government was to build an ideal order, as designed by scientists. In liquid modernity this is challenged: it is impossible to make an ideal order, there are several different orders, and people need to be able to adapt to these different orders. Now, there is more freedom for people to choose, but this also means that they HAVE to choose. Bauman says that the state only protects the private sphere, but it should also protect the public sphere because some people are dependent on it. People are increasingly turning themselves into commodities, but Bauman says this will fail in the end, because a commodity cannot grasp the complexity of a person.

ANTHONY GIDDENS 1938-PRESENT
Giddens is a very committed sociologist: he wants to change the world. He developed a new formal theory:
Structuration theory. A social theory that bridges the difference between macro and micro sociologists. Central focus is the idea of agency.
Nation-states take on a new role in modernity, but they are still a crucial power container. Giddens says that the classics (Durkheim, Marx, Weber) were looking at the first shift to modernity. He found out that it is different because of changes in four institutions: Capitalism, Industrialism, Surveillance (the state), Military (the state). Market and politics have become separated, The state surveys, and this is backed up by their monopoly of violence (the military, in the end). All clusters are relevant at the same time, the classics looked at only one cluster. Reflexive modernity leads to time-space distantiation: social relations are stretched. People are also disembedded: no longer naturally connected to society. Globalisation brings some disruptions, but is not overall bad. Trust changes, and politics become life politics. Trust takes a different form: symbols (eco-labels) but also faceless commitments. It has to do with 1. Past performance. 2. Technology used. 3. People involved. Thus, active trust management is needed: at access-points their doubts are reassured (see Goffman). He has also done work on life politics: how should we live, but also connecting the personal and the planetary.
DISCUSSION SESSION GIDDENS
Distinguishes between emancipatory politics and life politics. The former is about overcoming tradition, and breaking illegitimate domination: you look at other people. It can take three forms: Exploitation, Inequalities and Oppression, though there is a lot of overlap. The answers are more clear: Justice, Equality and Participation are necessary. Emancipatory politics is about moving away from something, but it doesn’t state where you’re going. Life politics is a politics of the self. It is about the choices you have after being emancipated. These individual choices affect politics: if all women work society can change. It is related to four themes. 1. Self-identity. Your identity involves actions, and to assert your identity you need to work on your body (e.g. to be healthy you have to eat healthy). 2. Reproduction. Because of new techniques, the definition of life is challenged. Biological reproduction is now completely social. And sexuality is no longer related to reproduction. 3. Globalisation. Choices of individual humans can have a large effect on the planet’s ecology. These new global problems require a global coordination, but this is hard as these global problems seem far removed from individuals. 4. Existence. Ehh? Individuals should be aware of the questions these themes raise, and they should try to answer them.

EXAM QUESTIONS
Goffmans’ form of interpretative sociology is called the ‘dramaturgical approach’ (right/wrong)
Goffman is a micro sociologist (right/wrong)
Mention three key concepts from the micro-sociology of Goffman
The area behind the curtains in which stewardesses relax can be regarded as front stage regions (right/wrong)
According to Goffman, hospitals and prisons can be regarded as ‘total institutions’ (right/wrong)
Goffman favours participant observation (right/wrong)

Define Bourdieus’ concept of Habitus and explain why and how this concept connects agency and structure
Muscles are an objectified form of cultural capital (right/wrong)
The ‘search for distinction’ is considered by Bourdieu to be an important driver of human action in all major fields of social life (right/wrong)
According to Bourdieu, higher classes have better/more legitimate tastes (right/wrong)

According to Alexander, institutions that are based on bonds of loyalty and personal relations belong to the anti-civil sphere (right/wrong)
The theory of Alexander on the civil sphere belongs to the family of system-theories in sociology (right/wrong)
Mention three sub-systems or spheres as distinguished by Alexander
Multi-culturalism implies the purification of the outgroup-qualities (right/wrong)

Correct or not?
sub-systems in societies are created to reduce complexity
communication between sub-systems is not possible because the people involved do not want to talk to each other
Open question
Explain what Luhmann means when he claims that social systems are based on communication and not on people. Give an example.

True or not?
It is more effective to discipline people in contemporary societies through the visible use of power than via indirect invisible means
Only by studying the permanent social structures underlying social phenomena is it possible to explain these phenomena
Foucault understands surveillance to mean that power does not have to be visible provided it is organised in such a way that the effect is permanent but the required action is not
Open question
Explain with the help of the concept of ‘framing’ why the recent debate on the future of the European Union has not resulted in a clear strategy.

The concepts of reflexive modernity and second modernity are interchangeable (right/wrong)
The shift or switch-over from the first to the second modernity brings along major qualitative changes in the institutions of modernity (right/wrong)
With Castells, the space of place is used to describe the heightened time-space dynamics in the global network society (right/wrong)
Define and discuss four forms of power in the network society as defined by Castells

John Urry discusses mobilities because he things that conventional definitions of ‘society’ and ‘social system’ have become outdated (right/wrong)
Globally Integrated Networks (GIN’s) are used to analyze flows that show unpredictable behaviours due to globalization (right/wrong)
According to Urry, sociology could benefit from complexity sciences when trying to understand processes of social change (right/wrong)
MacDonalds is a good example of a global fluid (right/wrong)

According to Sassen the nation-state has lost its importance in today’s global age (right/wrong)
In today’s global age place has lost meaning (right/wrong)
Global cities are strategic sites for global networks (right/wrong)
Explain what the acronym TAR stands for and how Sassen puts it central to the study of globalization

The ‘anthropological shock’ of Chernobyl refers to the awareness of the invisibility of many environmental risks as well as to the perceived lack of control of these risks (right/wrong)
Beck is the inventor of the concept of ‘risk-society’ (right/wrong)
Second Modernity brings along the gradual breakdown of existing institutional frames for identity formation (right/wrong)
Cosmopolitanism as a concept is more encompassing and radical when compared to multi-culturalism (right/wrong)

Correct or not:
in liquid modernity scientists are ‘legislators’ and not ‘interpreters’
under liquid modernity, individuals are forced to build their own identity
uncertainty in liquid modernity is the consequence of not knowing enough and more research can solve this
Open question:
Why are consumers ultimately not commodities according to Bauman?

Giddens uses a discontinuous view of historical development to explain the particular characteristics of reflexive versus simple modernity (right/wrong)
Globalization refers to the increased levels of time-space distanciation and the disembedding of social relations out of their local contexts
Active trust means trust to be gained and sustained by both facework and faceless commitments and mechanisms (right/wrong)