SOCIETY, CULTURE AND CHANGE

THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION
Sociology is often defined as the science of society. In this lecture it is argued that even more important than science is sociology’s use of the imagination. Indeed, it is suggested that science is not possible without the imagination. This insight, although subject to dispute, has led sociologists, starting with C.Wright Mills, to speak of the “sociological imagination.” The lecture begins by questioning what we mean by the imagination in general and the sociological imagination in particular. It highlights Mills’ concerns with the relationship between “personal troubles” and “public issues.” It then proposes four dimensions or sensibilities of the sociological imagination.

THE IMAGINATION
“Never does the soul think without phantasm” (imagination)

(Aristotle)

“the union of deep feeling with profound thought … to see again, those things in which … custom and the common view … had bedimmed all the lustre, had dried up the sparkle and dew drops”

(Samuel Taylor Coleridge)

“[that] whereby ordinary things should be presented to the mind in an unusual way”

(William Wordsworth)

THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION

“being able to ‘think ourselves away’ from the familiar routines of our daily lives in order to look at them anew”

Anthony Giddens

(Sociology Second Edition,

Polity Press, Oxford. 1993:18)

“a quality of mind” … [that can] “grasp the interplay of the individual and society, of biography and history, of self and world.”

C. Wright Mills

The Sociological Imagination (1959)

You can read the original at http://www.lclark.edu/~goldman/socimagination.html

“A useful starting point for seeing why it is worthwhile to develop a sociological imagination has for some time been C. Wright Mills (1959) observation on the differences between our everyday knowledge of our social environment and a sociological understanding… There is a strong tendency in liberal democracies towards seeing human behaviour in terms of individual characteristics, abilities, choices and preferences… What sociologists, on the other hand, are more interested in is establishing the relationship between what happens to individuals…and the larger processes of social, economic and political change which might be said to lie underneath or behind those happenings… The sociological imagination wrote Mills, ‘enables us to grasp history and biography and the relation between the two in society.”

(Van Krieken et. al. 2006: 4)

A kind of interpretive imagination which does not treat its subject matter like objects in the natural world. The sociological imagination is anthropological, historical and critical.

(Holmes et. al., 2003: 7)

FOUR SENSIBILITIES OF THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION
1. The Analytical Sensibility (science)
What are the components of this situation and how do they relate to one another? The search for trends, correlation, causes, structures, functions and meanings that can be empirically demonstrated.
2. The Historical Sensibility
Where does this event, experience, belief or biography stand in the course of history? How does this current social phenomenon compare and contrast with past historical events, experiences and possibilities?
3. The Anthropological Sensibility
How what is is done “here” different from what is done elsewhere by “others”? Can the experience of different societies and cultures help us understand our cultural situation and ourselves better?
4. The Critical Sensibility
How could things be otherwise? Does the way that things “happen to be” at present “have to be”? Are there better alternatives for human ecology, communality and personal well being than how things currently operate?
SOME MAJOR TYPES OF HUMAN SOCIETY
1. Hunter-Gatherer Societies (500,000? years ago)
2. Pastoral and Agrarian Societies (c. 12,000 years ago)

3. Traditional City-states I (Empires and Slavery) (6,000

years)

4. Traditional City-states II (“Feudal”) (800-1850 AD)

5. Modernity — (200 years of Industrial-Capitalism)

For those who want a Short History of the World, go to:
http://worldhistoryforusall.sdsu.edu/dev/bigeras.htm

This typology is based very loosely upon the third chapter in the Third Edition (1997) of Anthony Giddens introductory textbook, Sociology (Polity Press: Cambridge) which is on reserve in the Library (at HM51 G444). For a more extended treatment of how we might differentiate various “types” of society see Bodley, J., (2000) Cultural Anthropology: Tribes, States and the Global System, Third Edition. (Mayfield: Mountain View) Library Call No. GN316 .B63.

FURTHER READING SUGGESTIONS
THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION
Mills, C.W. (1999) [1959] The Sociological Imagination. Oxford University Press. New York. Read Chap. 1. Online at http://www.lclark.edu/~goldman/socimagination.html

NB* Don’t forget the video series in the Library called “The Sociological Imagination”. It has 26 Titles on all sorts of sociological concepts and topics. (Lib Call No. HM51 S6 1991)

ANALYTICAL DIMENSION (Some Examples)
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)

http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/home/Home?opendocument

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS): Census of Population and Housing (2006) Results

http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/d3310114.nsf/Home/census

Graetz, B and McAllister, I. (1994) Dimensions of Australian Society. McMillan Education. South Melbourne.

Harding, A. (2005) “Recent Trends in Income Inequality in Australia”. NATSEM, 31 March. (Do Statistics always give us the real picture? Compare this article with the one by Wicks below) http://www.natsem.canberra.edu.au/publications/papers/cps/cp05/cp2005_005/cp2005_005.pdf

Mouzos, J (2002) Homicide in Australia: 2000-2001 National Homicide Monitoring Program Annual Report. Australian Institute of Criminology. Canberra.

Neame, P. (1997) Suicide and Mental Health in Australia and New Zealand. Neame. Brisbane.

Wicks, J. (2005) “The Reality of Income Inequality in Australia”. Social Policy Paper, No. 1. St. Vincent de Paul Society. May. (Compare with Harding article above).

http://www.vinnies.org.au/UserFiles/File/NATIONAL/Social%20Justice/2005%20May%2029%20%20The%20Reality%20of%20Income%20Inequality%20in%20Australia.pdf

Zeremes, M. (1995) Unemployment in Queensland: Dimensions and Trends. Queensland Parliamentary Library. Brisbane.