Unfortunately no one can tell you what social theory is… you have to see it for yourself.
Anthony Elliott in his book Contemporary Social Theories covers the whole spectrum of sociological models for approaching life. Perhaps one way to explain Social Theories is to re-label it as “world views”. It is the lens in which one sees the world, but then more than that it is the way in which one approaches the world as well. To illustrate further, Social Theory is the pair of glasses and the map for an individual.
This abstractness is common of Elliott’s writing as he also well-written in subjects such as concept of self-concept, Identities, Personal reinvention, individualism, Psychoanalytical theory, postmodernism, and even the social impact of plastic surgery. In other words, Elliott writes a lot about things that no one can agree on definitions for (which is very representative of postmodernism itself). Elliott through his track record of published works seems that his life’s work is social commentary on social commentary, whether it be current theories, past theories, or the circumstances that forced the transitions. Elliott will probably never run out of material since the numbers of Social Theories are only increasing in abundance.
Before I dive into the frustrations with this book, I should clarify the relevance of this type of study at all. This topic is important because, as Elliott would say, Social Theories (and Psychoanalytics) are a powerful and dangerous tool because if understood it can be used to influence populations. In Social Theory Since Freud, Elliot lists some who have “deployed psychoanalysis to politicize issues such as desire, sexuality, repression, and identity.”[1] Additionally, Social theory is important because it helps the leader or educator understand the world in which they are speaking to. Ironically, though it is not very helpful for a leader to teach their casual students or laymen about such things. Talking to people about postmodernism (which we all are postmodern) is like talking to a fish about water. Instead this type of information should inform the lecturer and leader on how to communicate, not necessarily what to communicate. I love learning about Postmodernism and Elliott’s chapter on the Philosopher Jean Baudrillard (who’s works even influenced the 1999 blockbuster The Matrix)[2] was especially engaging to me. The conversation about Postmodernism and how it is affecting our media and our mediums of information transfer is interesting on all levels for me.
However, I realize it’s limitations in affecting the everyday lives of the students I teach. After all, the Matrix doesn’t talk about Postmodernism, it just presents information in a postmodern way, which is partly why it resonated so well. (And that fact that it’s stinking cool probably helped too.)
A few problems that are evident and well documented about the concept and the field of Social theory is the realization of the limitations that are inherent in the word “theory.” The reality that all of this (462 pages) of “introduction” could actually turn out to be wrong. Meaning that all of this work from the original authors and commentators on the authors could just be wrong. With all the controversy surrounding each and everyone one of the theories, and the failure to agree on the definitions of what is what makes it painfully obvious that at least some, if not most are wrong. The social theory could explain the worldview or it could just be an academic’s projection of connections that aren’t actually there. Beautiful Mind anyone? Eduardo de La Funete in his review of a supplemental book by the author, Profiles in Contemporary Social Theory brings up by biggest concern, what sort of role is this type of textbook supposed to play in education?[3] I agree with La Funete. It’s unfortunate that this book on “Social Theory” does not seem to have application for the vast majority of society.
To continue to pile on the frustrations of the limitations of Social Theory, one just has to look at the newest project that Anthony Elliot is working on. Currently, Elliot is studying and writing about the “Robotic Future” that our world will inevitably enter into. Personally, I can’t see any value in writing on this. Everyone has seen the Jetson’s. We all know there are going to be robots in the future. What is gained by writing about it? It’s about as “Ivory Tower” as you can get.
The book boasts a review published on the author’s website that this book is “dazzlingly accessible.” This only could only have been written by an enamored academic, and not someone actually sitting through a class on it. It is abstract, vague and has difficulty in showing it’s immediate application, despite each chapter ending with follow-up questions.
But before I take too many shots at Elliot, I will digress. After all, if you aim for a king, you better aim to kill. And I recognize my inability, or anyone’s inability to deconstruct a field of study which has been around since before Freud, (although only contemporary social theory since 1920). And Elliot is currently the King when it comes to Social Theory. His book’s are the standards in which other academics will quote to give validity to their own hypotheses. My final conclusion would, despite my frustrations, be to leave respecting Elliot and this book as a great tool for reference as commentary on society.
[1] “Books,” Anthony Elliott, http://www.anthonyelliott.org/books/.
[2] “On Postmodernity,” Introduction to Jean Baudrillard, Module on Postmodernity, https://www.cla.purdue.edu/english/theory/postmodernism/modules/baudrillardpostmodernity.html.
[3] Eduardo De La Fuente, Profiles in Contemporary Social Theory, Journal of Sociology pg. 312-313.
7 responses to “Unfortunately no one can tell you what social theory is… you have to see it for yourself.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Kyle, I was worried my title was too long 🙂
I like the idea of social theory being the glasses and map of the world. I brings to my imagination how easily we misunderstand each other when each of us are wearing our own glasses. I love seeing your personality throughout this blog.
I had similar thoughts about how this “introduction” was larger than it should have been. So if robotics, which every sci-fi movie loves to promote, isn’t where you think Elliot should focus his attention, what should be areas studied and discussed that might be shaping the present and future societal norms?
Fair question! I’m not sure. I suppose I should have studied semiotics if I wanted to be able to answer that question.
Hi Kyle,
Your concept of Social Theory actually being understood as “worldview” really resonated with me. Well thought!
As I struggled to understand social theory, I wish I would have used your lens to think critically about it. It would have made things much more simple for this simple minded guy…
I too loved the lenses analogy you gave. I too appreciated the concept of social theory, but also struggled with the failure to see it as truly applicable most of the time. I suppose my problem was the “reality” factor of someone’s situation. I can see the potential as a minister trying to communicate with someone on the need to understand the perspective of the other person, but when I thought about those people living in shipping containers in South Africa, I did not see how their view of things would necessarily open them up to better options; their reality just did not offer opportunity. So as a tool, this theory works, but on an individual basis, I believe it is fraught with obstacles.
So here is the question; in the Matrix, we see Neo given the opportunity to change his perceived view of himself into a more accurate world-view (in other words, he was not in the real world, but he could change that); do you see the potential for such a reality changer if one is shown their real social theory? (not leaving the Matrix…just completely changing their life’s path)
Great insight! sounds like you nailed it to me. #ThereIsNoSpoon
Kyle,
If social theory is another way to say world view, (which I agree with) then this book is just another commentary on how dissected this world is. Did you feel he did a good job on possibly giving some road signs on how to navigate or did you find it a disjointed effort?
Jason
Kyle,
You have a knack, or gift, for cutting to the chase. Thank you! You could take your abstract idea with the eyeglasses and work it into a social discussion on virtual reality? You are young enough to see it go forward for many years, unless Christ returns sooner I hope!
“It’s the question that drives us.”1 I encourage you to keep going, you have a gift for seeing into things and discerning what is going on. I think you can see end states, maze solutions, and impending social outcomes. I bet you have experienced this in both secular and spiritual scenarios. It is a burden and a gift, and I pray for your continued success as God calls you.
Stand firm,
M. Webb.
1 William Irwin, ed. The matrix and philosophy: Welcome to the desert of the real. Vol. 3. (Open Court Publishing, 2002) 5.