Читать книгу Understanding Racism - Hephzibah Strmic-Pawl - Страница 7

Studying theory is a difficult endeavor, particularly because there is not one unambiguous, distinct definition of what constitutes theory—or what does not constitute theory. This point may seem remarkable, considering the breadth and depth of classes and books devoted to discussing theory, as though the definition of it is a given and understood. In reality, sociology and other social science disciplines have multiple research traditions that lead to different utilizations and definitions of theory.¹ Gabriel Abend interrogates “the meaning of theory” and suggests that there are seven main ways sociologists use theory, including a proposition between variables, an explanation of a social phenomenon, or an overall perspective that provides “conceptual equipment.”² Thus, sociologists, and specifically theorists, often use theory in different, and sometimes contrasting, manners. In a move to provide a basic conceptualization, the noted social theorist Jeffrey Alexander states that “theory is a generalization separated from particulars, an abstraction separated from a concrete case,”³ and similarly Hans Joas and Wolfgang Knöbl in their book Social Theory note that “theories should be understood as generalizations.”⁴ In this sense, any analysis that goes from the specifics of one case to making a claim about how conditions might operate generally can be construed as (moving toward) theory.

We are constantly engaging with theory. On a daily basis, we interpret our social worlds and make generalizations about them in order to understand those social worlds. For example, you might have a theory that car salespeople are dishonest, so you visit multiple car lots to ensure that the best price is attained. Or you have a theory that you pick up good habits from friends, so you make a point to socialize with people who work hard. Joas and Knöbl remark that “theory is as necessary as unavoidable. Without it, it would be impossible to learn or to act in a consistent fashion; without generalizations and abstractions, the world would exist for us only as a chaotic patchwork of discrete, disconnected experiences and sensory impressions.”⁵ Theory guides behavior, and behaviors lead to amended or new theories.

It is important to grasp the fundamental necessity of theory. Theories guide us in how to understand and interpret social problems. For instance, take the two major sociological theories of conflict theory and symbolic interactionism. Conflict theory pays attention to how society is largely divided into “the haves,” who have resources and power, and the “have-nots,” who do not have resources and power. Symbolic interactionism pays attention to how people interact with each other and develop meaning through symbols. Now, take the social problem of teen pregnancy. Proponents of conflict theory would analyze this problem as one of haves and have-nots, wherein have-nots are more likely to experience teen pregnancy because they have less access to healthcare information and resources. Thus, the conflict theory solution would be to provide these resources. Proponents of symbolic interactionism will interpret the same data differently, as they will pay attention to symbols and meaning making. Symbolic interactionists would look at how sex is marketed to teenagers and how condoms are seen as not sexy. A symbolic interactionist solution would be to change the meaning around teen sex and condoms. These examples provide two important lessons about the necessity of theory: (1) Theory guides how one interprets data, and (2) theory and action must be connected. To the first point, theory helps explain observations and therefore frames interpretation and analysis of data. However, one theory is not always necessarily better than another, as seen in the example of conflict theory and symbolic interactionism. It is likely correct that teen pregnancy is affected by resources (conflict theory) and meanings around sex and condoms (symbolic interactionism), so multiple theories can coexist, rather than one being right and the other wrong. To the second point, theory and practice need each other. In the preceding example, the theoretical analysis of teen pregnancy means little if a solution is not provided. Theory is useless without action, but action needs effective theory to be most beneficial. Thus, it is understandable when Alexander argues that “theory is crucial, indeed that it is the heart of science.”⁶