The American University in Kyrgyzstan
Department of Sociology
Classical Social Theory: The European Tradition
Instructor: Madeleine Reeves, CEP Visiting Lecturer
Course Code: SOC 210
Class meets: Tu, Fri 1.00 pm
Office hours: to be arranged
Email: madeleinereeves@yahoo.com
Phone: 66-10-92 (office)
66-26-48 (home)
Course description
How does society hang together, and why does it sometimes seem to fall apart? What are
the possibilities and problems of the “modern” world: is it a world of increasing freedom,
or one of increasing alienation, bureaucratisation and despair? How can we explain
individual action and the social contexts in which all humans necessarily exist? Can we
ever fully “get outside” our own world-view and examine it critically. How can we
account for sudden and dramatic shifts in social and political structures? Do individuals
make society, or does society make individuals? How do we make sense of the injustices
we see in our world? How is it that some people have power over others?
These questions, which motivate the social sciences, remain as challenging today as they
ever were. This course examines some of the answers that were offered to these
questions during a period of massive political, social and ideological change. We will
look at the work of some of the most powerful and influential thinkers of the midnineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and the answers they attempted to formulate to
these questions. We will examine these authors both textually, by engaging with original
texts (rather than simple potted summaries) and contextually, by looking at the social
context in which they were writing and the impact this had upon their ideas. We will
examine their agreements and their disagreements, as well as their impact upon social
thought up to our own day.
The aim of this course is four-fold:
a) to introduce students to some of the key social thinkers, their theories, and the
contexts in which they wrote;
b) to enable students to engage with, comprehend and analyse complex and often
challenging theoretical texts (and hopefully by the end to enjoy them too!);
c) to help students to develop personal, critical responses to these texts and
formulate
these responses in a coherent, focused fashion;
d) through that process, to help students to “think sociologically” - that is to make
theory their own by linking the answers suggested by these classical texts to their
own understanding of the social world.
Assessment rationale
The assessment will be based upon 3 basic elements: your degree of participation in the
class, the quality of your answers to two in-class exams, and your response to 4 x 2-page
AQCIs (these are explained below). In all cases, I am much more interested in seeing
whether you have understood and are able to convey the ideas and arguments of the
theorists whose work we will be reading, than to see whether you have memorised lots of
random facts about them. Remember - this is ultimately a class about ideas and about the
“big questions” which every thinking person asks themself, rather than about dates and
numbers.
1. Attendance, participation and timeliness of work. It follows from the introduction
given above that doing social theory is an active process, which involves reflecting upon
and sharing personal experience of the social world, as much as reading what certain
classical authors thought about it. Active class participation is therefore an essential part
of this course and it will be assessed as part of your final grade (10%). Active class
participation depends on critical, engaged reading of the text, and thoughtful writing of
the AQCI responses. Questions, comments and interjections relating to the material
covered are actively welcomed during lectures. Back-row discussions, sleeping during
class and doing homework for other courses is definitely not!!! Students who are clearly
not attempting to engage with the material or who consistently miss classes will be
dropped from the course. Written work that is handed in late will likewise result in a
penalty for this part of the grade.
2. Mid-term and final exams. These will be closed-book, in-class exams dealing with
all of the material covered in the first half of the course, and the entire course
respectively. The exams will consist of a mixture of short answer and essay-style
questions.
3. AQCIs. An “AQCI” is a short (approx. two pages A4), structured and critical
response to a particular text or texts which are set for that section of the course. Four of
these AQCIs are due during the course of the term, to be handed in at the end of each of
the five major sections of the course (that is, during the second class meetings of weeks 5,
8, 11 and 16 - see schedule of classes below). Writing these on a regular basis is
intended to help you to do three things:
a) to read, comprehend and analyse the texts that are set for the class more fully
b) to begin to identify the connections (and contradictions) between different texts
within and between different sections of the course
c) to connect what you read to your own experience, and to your studies in other
classes at AUK
These four responses will form the largest single element of your grade for the course
(40%): it is therefore worth writing them with as much care and thoughtfulness as you
would give to an essay. Completed AQCIs will frequently form the basis for class
discussion and debate.
So what exactly is an “AQCI”....?
AQCI
stands for ARGUMENT, QUESTION, CONNECTIONS AND
IMPLICATIONS. It is a structured response to one or more of the readings (other than
the Ritzer textbook) set for the particular section of the course. Each AQCI should be
structured so as to include the following 6 elements:
1. CENTRAL QUOTATION. Quote a sentence (or excerpts from linked sentences) from
the text that you think is central to the author’s argument. Always fully cite the text and
page from which you are quoting.
2. ARGUMENT.
In a few (perhaps 3-4) sentences, state what you understand the
author’s (or authors’) implicit or explicit argument to be in the text that you are referring
to. You should state both what you think the author is arguing for, and, where
appropriate, what s/he is arguing against.
3. QUESTION. Raise a question which you think is not fully or satisfactorily answered
by the text. This should be a question of interpretation, rather than just one of fact.
4. EXPERIENTIAL CONNECTION. In a few sentences, say how the argument that
you have mentioned is confirmed or contradicted by your own experience, by that of
someone or some group else, or common sense. In your experience, is the author’s
argument plausible or problematic, and why?
5. TEXTUAL CONNECTION. How does the argument of the text(s) you are referring to
connect with, support, contradict or undermine the observation or argument of some other
text which you have come across in this, or any other AUK course. If you can, present a
quote from the other text (citing it properly) and explain how, in your opinion, the present
text’s argument contradicts with, confirms, clarifies, elaborates or in some way interacts
with the other text’s argument or point. This will become easier as the class progresses
and we begin to identify the similarities - and contradictions of opinion - between the
different theorists we read. However, you should not feel restricted to using other class
texts for comparison - the “text” for connection might be something you read in the
paper, a report you saw on television, an article you read for another class entirely...
6. IMPLICATIONS. In a few sentences, discuss what you think are the implications
(znacheniia, posledstviia) of this argument (the one stated in #2 above) are for our
understanding of some aspect of the social world. In what way does the argument shed
light on things for us today, for the different ways we could order our own world, for
resolving some of the pressing social issues facing Kyrgyzstan and the wider world?
You may find it helpful (at least initially), to lay out your answer as six separate
elements. When you feel more confident, you might want to try linking the six elements
of the answer into a single, continuous response. So long as your AQCI is
comprehensible, faults of English grammar and style will not be penalised in the
assessment. It is much better that you attempt to express your ideas (even at the cost of
linguistic inaccuracies) than that you produce a text which is grammatically sound but
thoroughly unoriginal.
Assessment and grading
In summary, the different sections of the course are weighted like this:
Attendance, class participation and
timeliness of written work
Mid-term exam
Final exam
4 AQCIs
20 points
40 points
60 points
4 X 20 points
10 %
20 %
30 %
40 %
Total possible
200 points
100 %
Grades will be awarded on the following basis:
170 points and over
150-169 points
130-149 points
110-129 points
under 110 points
A
B
C
D
F
Practicalities
This is a 3-credit course, and the assumption is that students will be putting in 2-3 hours
outside the classroom for every classroom hour. That means not just skimming through
the text each week, but really reading through in detail, asking yourself it there are
aspects you don’t understand, and checking out other books, or coming to see the
instructor during office hours, to try to make clear those aspects which are proving more
difficult. If you are experiencing difficulties with the course - with the workload, the
readings, following the lectures etc. - please let me know! I am very happy to adapt the
course to meet the needs of students who are taking it, but I do not read minds, so do
come and talk to me.
I am sensitive to the fact that many AUK students are juggling full-time study with
employment outside the University and that this can be a difficult act to manage.
However, I am also of the opinion that class time must take priority over any paid
employment you may have, and that it is your responsibility to make sure that your
employer is aware of your academic schedule. If, for any reason, you are unable to
attend a particular class please contact me in advance- I am much more sympathetic
about absences if I know about them in advance. Consistent absences without the
support of a doctor’s note will not be tolerated and students missing too many classes will
be dropped from the course.
Occasionally, my CEP outreach obligations mean that I will not be present for a
particular class. In such situations I will inform students in advance, and will endeavour
wherever possible to schedule in a make-up class at the earliest opportunity.
SCHEDULE OF CLASSES
______________________________________________________________________________________
____
SECTION I: THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION
Week 1a
Introductions
Week 1b
Critical reading and writing skills
Topics for discussion:
Reading critically and writing for comprehension; making theory your own;
thinking and contextually.
Reading:
 University of Victoria Counselling Services, ‘Reading to Comprehend and to Learn’
[WWW site]: http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learn/program/handouts/psqr5.html
 Daniel Chandler, 1995. ‘Writing Academic Essays’
[WWW site] http://www.aber.ac.uk/~ednwww/Undgrad/writess.html
 University of Chicago, ‘Conceiving, Composing and Critiquing a Paper’
Week 2
Thinking sociologically
Topics for discussion:
What is theory and why do we need it? Changing conceptions of sociology as a
discipline; the problem of canons and those who get left out; “transitions” and why the classics might still
be relevant; recurrent themes and debates. What is the relevance of a West European canon for
Kyrgyzstan? What is its relevance personally?
Reading:
 Zygmunt Bauman, ‘Sociology: What For?’ from Thinking Sociologically. Oxford, UK:
Blackwell. 1990: 1-19.
 Charles Lemert, ‘Social Theory: Its Uses and Pleasures’ from Social Theory: The
Multicultural and Classic Readings. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. 1999: 1-20
 Craig Calhoun, ‘Whose Classics? Which Readings? Interpretation and Cultural
Difference in
the Canonization of Sociological Theory’ from Stephen Turner, (ed.), Social
Theory
and Sociology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. 1996: 70-96
______________________________________________________________________________________
____SECTION II: PROGRESS AND ITS PROPHETS
Optional:
Week 3
Origins I. France: Enlightenment, Revolution and Reaction.
Topics for discussion:
Enlightenment roots; the double revolution and its impact in France; science,
positivism and early sociology in France. How much are our ideas the products of our age? Can we ever
really know how others felt and thought? Is society “progressing” or “regressing”?
Reading:
 George Ritzer, ‘Intellectual forces and the rise of sociological theory’ from
Sociological
Theory: Fourth Edition New York: McGraw-Hill. 1996, p. 9-15 (as far as
Durkheim), p. 16-17
(biography of Comte)
 Marie-Jean Condorcet, ‘Sketch of a Historic Tableau of the Progress of the Human
Mind’
(1822) from Lester Crocker (ed.), The Age of Enlightenment: Selected Documents.
London: Macmillan. 1969: 304-11
 Auguste Comte, extracts from The Positive Philosophy (1840-42), in Henry Aiken,
(ed.), The
Age of Ideology. New York: New American Library. 1956: 124-137
Optional:
Industrial and
 Krishan Kumar, ‘New Worlds’ from Prophecy and Progress: The Sociology of
Post-Industrial Society. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books, 1977: 13-44
Week 4
Origins II. Britain: Empiricism, Evolution and Reform
Topics for discussion:
Britain’s industrial revolution and its impact on social and political thought.
Darwin, evolution and “social Darwinism”. The roots of individualism and empiricism. What is the
relationship of the natural and social sciences? Are the latter just an extension of the former?
Reading:
New
 George Ritzer, ‘The Origins of British Sociology’ from Sociological Theory, 4th Edn.
York: McGraw Hill, 1996: 31-37
 Ernst Mayer, ‘Darwin’s Influence on Modern Thought’. Scientific American, Jul 2000:
67-71
MacMillan.
 Herbert Spencer, ‘Social Structure and Social Function’ (1897) from Lewis Coser and
Bernard Rosenberg (eds.), Sociological Theory: A Book of Readings. New York:
1982: 466-471
Week 5 Origins III. Germany: Romanticism, Historicism, Dialectic
Topics for discussion:
The context of 19th Century German social thought; Kant, Hegel and the Young
Hegelians. Romanticism and conceptions of historical change. Evolution, dialectic, revolution: how
should we best account for historical change?
Reading:
Sociological
 George Ritzer, ‘The Development of German Sociology’ and ‘Karl Marx’ from
Theory, 4th Edn. New York: McGraw Hill, 1996: 20-25 and 41-50
Optional:
Political
 J.S. McClelland, ‘The Hegelian Context of Marxism’ from A History of Western
Thought. London and New York: Routledge. 1996: 520-540
 Eric Hobsbawm, ‘Science, Religion, Ideology’ from The Age of Capital, 1848-1875.
London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1995 [1962]: 251-254; 258-271
Friday meeting of week 5: 1st AQCI due
______________________________________________________________________________________
____
SECTION III: THE DARK FACE OF MODERNITY
Week 6 Marx before Marxism: alienation in the modern world
Topics for discussion:
Marx’s biography, intellectual and social influences and context. Concept of
alienation. Historical materialism. Alienation in the contemporary world. Can we regain our ‘speciesbeing’ in the modern world of work? Does technology render the world more or less alienated?
(ed.),
 George Ritzer, ‘Human Potential’ and ‘Alienation’ from Sociological Theory, 4th Edn.
York: McGraw Hill, 1996: 50-61
 Karl Marx: ‘Preface to A Critique of Political Economy’ (1859), in David McLellan
Karl Marx: Selected Writings. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 1977: 388-391
 Karl Marx: ‘Preface’ and ‘Alienated Labour’ from The Economic and Philosophical
Manuscripts (1844), in David McLellan (ed.), Karl Marx: Selected Writings. Oxford,
UK: Oxford University Press, 1977: 76-87
Optional:
Karl
 T. B. Bottomore and Maximilien Rubel, ‘Marx’s sociology and social philosophy’ from
Marx: Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy. Harmondsworth, UK:
Penguin, 1961:17-43
Reading:
New
Week 7 Durkheim on Anomie and Suicide
Topics for discussion:
Context of, and influences upon, Durkheim’s thought. Durkheim as sociologist:
the forging of a discipline. Society sui generis. Are there such things as social facts? Anomie and suicide
as social phenomena. Anomie vs. alienation. Mrs. Thatcher once said that ‘there is no such thing as
society’. What do you think she meant by this? Do you agree with her view? Is the individual prior to
society, or the other way round? Is society more than the sum of its parts?
Reading:
McGraw(as far as
Social
Theory: The
 George Ritzer, ‘Emile Durkheim’ from Sociological Theory, 4th Edn New York:
Hill, 1996, p. 75-79; 82-83 (Durkheim’s biography), p. 84 (on anomie), p. 86-92
section on religion)
 Emile Durkheim: ‘Anomie and the modern division of labor’ (1902), ‘Sociology and
Facts’ (1897) and ‘Suicide and Modernity’ (1897) in Charles Lemert (ed.), Social
Multicultural and Classic Readings. Boulder, CO: Westview. 1999: 70-82
Optional:
 Raymond Aron, ‘Le Suicide’ in Main Currents in Sociological Thought II.
Harmondsworth,
UK: Penguin. 1970 :33-45
Week 8 Weber and the “iron cage” of modern life
Topics for discussion: Weber: biography and its impact upon his social and political thought. Weber’s iron
cage of bureaucracy: its origins, effects and contemporary forms; ‘McDonaldization’ as a contemporary
manifestation?
Is the modern world ‘an iron cage’ of bureaucracy? If so, how might we escape it? If not, where was
Weber’s prediction wrong?
Reading:
 George Ritzer, ‘Max Weber’ from Sociological Theory: 4th Edn. New York: McGrawHill,
1996, p. 109-122; 146-150 (on religion and the rise of capitalism)
 Max Weber, ‘Asceticism and the Spirit of Capitalism’ (1904-5) from The Protestant
Ethic
and the Spirit of Capitalism. London: Routledge. 1992:155-183
Optional:
Essays
 Max Weber, excerpts from ‘Bureaucracy’ in Gerth and Mills (eds.), From Max Weber:
in Sociology. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1970 :196-209, 221-230, 240-244
Friday meeting of Week 8: 2nd AQCI due and in-class Mid-term exam
______________________________________________________________________________________
____SECTION IV: ORDER, CONFLICT AND REVOLUTION
Week 9 Marx on class conflict and revolution
Topics for discussion:
Marx’s historical materialism; ideas of class, conflict and revolution. Marx and
subsequent Marxisms. Is class still a relevant concept? Is a truly proletarian revolution still possible?
Does the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and Central Asia invalidate Marx’s theory?
Charles
Westview.
 George Ritzer, ‘Capital’ (to end of chapter) from Sociological Theory: 4th Edn. New
McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 64-74
 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels extracts from ‘The Communist Manifesto’ (1848) in
Lemert (ed.), Social Theory: The Multicultural and Classic Readings. Boulder, CO:
1999: 37-41
Optional:
Karl
 Karl Marx, ‘Inaugural Address to the First International’, (1864) in McLellan, (ed.),
Marx: Selected Writings . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1977: 531-537
Reading:
York:
Week 10
Weber: Power, authority, responsibility
Topics for discussion:
Weber’s dialogue with Marx; class and status; types of authority. The
responsibilities of the politician and scientist. Who really holds power in our world today? Politicians?
Businessmen? The media? What kind of authority, if any, do they have?
Press.
 George Ritzer, ‘Class, Status and Party’ (as far as section on rationalization) from
Sociological Theory, 4th Edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 126-135
 Max Weber, selections from ‘Socialism’ (1918) in Lassman and Speirs, (eds.), Weber:
Political Writings, ed. Lassman and Speirs. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
1996: 287-303
Optional:
Max
 Max Weber, selections from ‘Politics as a Vocation’ in Gerth and Mills, (eds.), From
Weber: Essays in Sociology. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1970: 77-128
Reading:
Week 11
Durkheim: Searching for Order
Topics for discussion:
Functions and orders in Durkheim’s work; the rationality of the ‘irrational’.
Durkheim on religion and primitive classification. Do social structures determine social functions or the
other way round? What makes some kinds of society more stable than others?
Reading:
Theory:
 George Ritzer, ‘The Division of Labor in Society’ and ‘Religion’ from Sociological
4th Edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996: 79-86, 92-95
 Emile Durkheim, selections from ‘The Method of Determining this function’ from The
Division of Labor in Society (1893) New York: The Free Press. 1999: 16-29
Optional:
Cultural
 Emile Durkheim, ‘Primitive Classifications and Social Knowledge’(1903) and ‘The
Logic of Collective Representations’ (1912) from Lemert (ed.), Social Theory: The
Multicultural and Classic Readings. Boulder, Westview. 1999: 82-98
2nd Meeting of Week 11: 3rd AQCI due
______________________________________________________________________________________
____
SECTION V: SELVES AND OTHERS
Week 12
Simmel: Strangers, others and selves
Topics for discussion:
Influences upon Simmel’s thought; the importance of the “micro”-world; levels
of social reality, the impact of numbers upon types of interaction. To understand the social world, should
we start from micro-structures of small-scale interaction and build upwards, or should we look at the
macro-level and examine how it impacts upon the micro-forms? How might Marx and Simmel have
addressed this question?
Reading:
McGrawMulticultural
Optional:
(eds.),
York:
 George Ritzer, ‘Georg Simmel’ from Sociological Theory, 4th Edn. New York:
Hill, 1996, p. 155-168 (as far as section on social structures)
 Georg Simmel, ‘The Stranger’ (1908) from Lemert (ed.), Social Theory: The
and Classic Readings. Boulder, Westview. 1999.184-188
 Georg Simmel, ‘The Dyad and The Triad’ from Lewis Coser and Bernard Rosenberg
Sociological Theory: A Book of Readings. New York: MacMillan. 1982: 45-53
 Louis Coser, ‘Georg Simmel: The Work’ from Masters of Sociological Thought. New
Harcourt Brace Janovich, 1977: 177-194
Week 13
Cooley and Mead: “Looking-glass selves”
Topics for discussion:
Cooley, Mead and the origins of symbolic interactionism. Behaviourism, and
the importance of observable behaviours. Symbols, interpretation and the importance of language. What
gives ‘me’ my identity? My genes? My parents? My surroundings? How should we balance “nature” and
“nurture” in accounting for individual personality and behaviour?
 George Ritzer, ‘The Ideas of George Herbert Mead’ from Sociological Theory, 4th Edn.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 332-351 (up to section on Erving Goffman)
 Cooley, ‘The Looking-Glass Self’ from Lemert (ed.), Social Theory: The Multicultural
and
Classic Readings. Boulder, Westview. 1999: 188-189
 Mead, ‘The Self, the I, and the Me’ from Lemert (ed.), Social Theory: The
Multicultural and
Classic Readings. Boulder, Westview. 1999: 224-229
Reading:
______________________________________________________________________________________
____
SECTION VI: EMBRACING UNREASON
Week 14
Nietzsche: Morality as the “danger of dangers”
Topics for discussion:
Nietzsche’s challenge to 19th Century assumptions, and his significance for the
development of 20th Century social and political thought. The embracing of unreason and the challenging
of morality. The (mis)-appropriation of Nietzsche. The challenges and insights of his work. Is there any
“absolute” conception of morality, or are all conceptions of the “good”, and of right and wrong socially
conditioned and socially determined? How might conflicting moral codes be reconciled?
Reading:
 J.P. Stern, ‘Nietzsche in company’ from Nietzsche (Fontana Modern Masters Series).
London: Fontana. 1978: 13-26
Optional:
(1887)
 Friedrich Nietzsche, ‘Preface’ and ‘First Essay’ from On the Genealogy of Morality
ed. Keith Ansell-Pearson. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994: 3-37
Week 15
Le Bon: Crowds and Collective Psychology
Topics for discussion:
Dilemmas of democracy and fear of the “mob”. Modernity as the era of crowds.
Gustave Le Bon’s background, influences and theory of the “mind of the crowd”. Reasons for the changing
fate of Le Bon’s text. Do you/we act differently in crowds than we do as individuals? If so, why? Should
we think of crowds having “a mind of their own?” How and by whom are they driven?
Reading:
 Gustave Le Bon, extracts from ‘The Mind of Crowds’ from The Crowd: A Study of the
Popular Mind (1895). Harmondsworth, Penguin. 1960: 36-59
Optional:
Study of
 Robert K. Merton, ‘The Ambivalences of Le Bon’s The Crowd’ from The Crowd: A
the Popular Mind (1895). Harmondsworth, Penguin. 1960:v-xxxix
Week 16
Freud: Civilization and its discontents
Topics for discussion:
Freud’s theory of the unconscious and its impact upon subsequent social and
psychological thought. The relevance of Freud’s theories to the social world. Freud’s account of
“civilization and its discontents”. The conflict between the demands of instinct and those of civilization. Is
our behaviour in small (or large) part determined by unconscious drives and desires? How do we account
for the rational and irrational aspects of personal and societal behaviour? Are the demands of instinct
really in opposition to the demands of civilization? What did Freud think about the future of Western
civilization? Do you agree with his assessment?
Short
 James Strachey, ‘Sigmund Freud: A Sketch of His Life and Works’ from Sigmund
Short Accounts of Psycho-Analysis. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1963, p. 11-24
 Sigmund Freud, ‘Lecture number 3 on Psycho-analysis’ from Sigmund Freud, Two
Accounts of Psycho-Analysis. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1963, p. 55-69
Optional:
Civilization,
Penguin.
 Sigmund Freud, extracts from ‘Civilization and its Discontents’ (1929) from
Society and Religion. Volume 12 of the Penguin Freud Library. London:
1991: 251-340
Reading:
Freud, Two
Meeting 2 week 16: 4th AQCI due
Week 17
Reading and exam week
Meeting 2 week 17: In-class final exam