Historical comparison as a sociological instrument (original) (raw)

A Sociological Comparative Study to Vladimir Lenin and Antonio Gramsci's views on the State

Journal of University of Raparin

This theoretical study tries to illustrate, evaluate and compare Vladimir Lenin and Antonio Gramsci’s views on the state. In doing so the study will try to answer this vital question: to what extent Gramsci’s ideas were dependent upon those of Lenin and more specifically, to what extent is Gramsci’s analysis of the capitalist state ultimately no more powerful than that of Lenin? It should be emphasised that this study has been done according to a comparative methodology of the history of theory applied in the fields of sociology in general and political sociology in particular. Basically, this study has been done according to an explanatory approach applied in both fields of politics and political sociology. This study divided into eight sections. The first section devoted to the introduction. The second section deals with Lenin’s view on the revolution, power and the socialist state. The third section explains Gramsci’s view on the hegemony of the party and the state. Section four ...

SOC 503 CLASSICAL SOCIAL THEORY

CLASSICAL SOCIAL THEORY

This course is designed to introduce graduate students a broad introduction to the history of classical sociological thought. Students are going to learn and discuss not only the essential scholars and their theories but also epistemological and ontological grounds that shaped the discipline of sociology. The class will focus on some of the founding thinkers and sociologists not only from the Western tradition but also from the Islamic tradition such as Al-Mawardi (d. 1058), Ibn Bajja (d. 1138), Ibn Tufail (1185), Kınalızade Ali Çelebi (d. 1572), Saint-Simon (d. 1825), A. Comte (1857), H. Martineau (d. 1876), Karl Marx (d. 1883), E. Durkheim (d. 1917), G. Simmel (d. 1918), M. Weber (1920), and T. Parsons (1979) in a comparative way. Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) is not going to be covered in this class because students who are taking this class are having another mandatory graduate course on Ibn Khaldun at the same time in this semester. In this course, students will learn and analyze how these thinkers and sociologists made great contributions in the historical context and played important roles in the histories of sociology in different parts of the world. In other words, this course “explore possibilities in thinking about the classics’ legacy in a manner that contextualizes, provincializes and pluralizes a powerful metanarrative that shapes the discipline of sociology” (Curato, 2013: 274). Here, there is need to emphasize that there is no single history of the discipline of sociology and sociological thought which has diverse epistemological and ontological traditions in various civilizations. In this course, students are expected to become familiar with leading and founding theorists, sociologists and their thoughts through some of their primary/selected texts in order to be able to gain a more comprehensive understanding of social and cultural phenomena. This course will help students to start to develop their skills for a deeper understanding of social world and critical thinking by utilizing sociological theories.

Nations States, Statistical Groups, Individuals and Other Groups

This paper enquires into the complex ontology of groups. Methodological individuals suggests that groups can be reduced to the aggregation of individual actions. However, all groups are not, so to speak, born equal in relation to individual action. In particular I distinguish between two types of groups: what I call " natural groups " and " statistical groups ". I analyze the different relationship which both types of group they entertain with modern nation-states, as well as with different types of theories of justice. Central to my argument is the idea that different types of groups reflect the various ways in which we understand and divide the population and that the ontology of groups has fundamental epistemological and political dimensions.

Four Concepts of Social Structure DOUGLAS V. PORPORA

Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 1989

Social structure is one ofthe most central concepts in sociology. Yet there is wide disagreement about what it means. This disagreement is consequential because differences in the way sociologists conceptualize social structure lead to very different approaches to sociology. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, because there is so much dispute about what social structure means or should mean, in the first part ofthis paper I will simply present without argument four different conceptions of social structure that are prominent in the field. Although the alternative conceptions I will examine are not necessarily exhaustive, they do represent what are probably the most commonly held views. Examining them, therefore, should significantly advance our thinking on this important but elusive concept. The second objective of this paper, which I will pursue in a subsequent discussion, is to make a case in favor of one of these four alternatives, namely one that traditionally has been associated with Marx.

Social classes and subaltern groups: Theoretical distinction and political application

The purpose of this article is to draw a theoretical distinction between the notions of 'social classes' and 'subaltern groups' as defined in The Prison Notebooks by Antonio Gramsci. This distinction will involve a brief discussion about the notions of 'social classes' evolved by other key authors in the area, apart from Gramsci himself, such as Marx, D. Bensaïd, E. P. Thompson and N. Poulantzas, who, on this question, have close affinities with the ideas of Gramsci. Finally, I seek to make suggestions about how this distinction can be applied, together with some critical observations on 'Subaltern Studies' and some final considerations with regard to this article as a whole.