Social Change In America Book

Theorists and Historians
A. This book answers 2 simple questions- what is the use of social history to historians and what is the use of history to social theorists? [1]
B. A Dialogue of the deaf
1. Sociology: a study of human society with emphasis on generalizations [2]
2. History: is a study of plural societies examining the differences and changes over time
3. Historians and sociologists, for the most part, do not speak the same language. As Braudel put it "a dialogue of the deaf" [3]
4. How did this opposition between history & theory develop & how was it overcome?
5. The answer is in the next section looking at 3 periods: mid-18th, mid-19th, & 1920s
C. The Differentiation of History and Theory
1. The first social theorists arose in the 18th [4]
a) Montesquieu, Spirit of the Laws
b) John Millar, Observation on the Distinction of Ranks
c) Adam Ferguson, Essay on the History of Civil Society
d) Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations
e) Thomas Malthus, Essay on the Principle of Population
f) They distinguished 4 types of society based on their subsistence (hunting, raising of animals, agriculture, commerce)
g) They escaped from traditional history of politics and war.
2. In the 19th historians were moving away from social theory and social history [5]
a) Political history recovered its domain with Ranke
b) Ranke's emphasis on original documents made social history look unprofessional [6]
c) Dilthey & Croce believed that sociology was only a pseudo-science [7]
d) Toqueville, Marx, & Gustov Schmoller were unusual in that they combined theory with historical situations [8]
3. At the turn of the 20th Social theorists had an interest in history, yet dismissed what the historians were writing about [10]
a) Vilfredo Pareto, Treatise on General Society
b) Emile Durkheim, was intent on carving out the new discipline of sociology by distinguishing it from sociology, philosophy, and psychology.
c) Max Weber drew on history in his social theory
D. The Dismissal of the Past
1. After 1920 social theorists turned away from the past [11]
2. Economists were draw into a pure economic model
3. Psychologists turned from the library to the laboratory [12]
4. Sociologists began to take their data from society.
5. This dismissal had a price because sooner or later the past had to be studied [14]
E. The Rise of Social History
1. Max Weber makes his studies between Protestantism and Capitalism around 1900 [15]
2. Karl Lamprecht attempted to break the dominance of social history. He was most successful in the U.S. and France
a) Lamprecht's views were adopted by F.J. Turner and Robinson in America
b) Lucien Febvre and Marc Bloch criticized traditional history in France. Later, Braudel carried on their views [16]
F. The Convergence of Theory and History
1. In the 1960's social theorists and social historians began to produce a great number of books [18]
2. What are the reasons for this convergence?
a) Sociologists returning to fieldwork in underdeveloped countries began to examine change over time or history [19]
b) Historians had a massive shift of interest away from traditional political history
3. According to Peter Burke "Without the convergence of history and theory we are unable to understand either the past or the present."
4. Despite the convergence their is a tendency to fragment and debate models and methods [21]

. Social Theory and Social Change
A. Structuralism and functionalism have been criticized because they fail to account for change.
B. This chapter examines change [130]
C. Spencer's Model: evolutionary model
1. Gradual social change occurs through evolution. There is a shift from the simple to the complex [132]
2. In the traditional society there is a change from Gemeinschaft to Gesellschaft or community to a large impersonal society
3. In the traditional society people are hostile to change. In a modern society change is considered progress [133]
4. The culture of traditional societies are religious and mystical, modern societies are described as scientific and rational
5. Problems with this model
a) Societies do not always move in terms of increasing complexity. The case of the late Roman Empire exemplifies regression with the Barbarian invasions [136]
b) This model is criticized because all change is considered inherent to the system. The Black Death was not inherent.
D. Marx's Model
1. This is the revolutionary model in which societies depend on economic systems (modes of production) and contain internal conflicts which lead to revolutions [141]
2. Sequence of the forms of society tribal, slave, feudal, capitalist, socialist, communist
3. There is place for change in the "wrong" direction or refeudalization
4. There is place for external factors influencing change (ex. the re-opening of the Mediterranean)
5. Thus Marx meets historians criticisms better than Spencer
E. Conclusion
1. Burke wants historians to take social theory more seriously
2. Theory can never be 'applied' to the past.
3. What theory can do is to suggest new questions for historians to ask about their period
4. A good historian and a good theorist are those who are open to new ideas [165]