dfghgh

Licensed to:

© 2012, 2008 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, Web distribution, information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2001012345

ISBN-13: 978-1-111-30157-6

ISBN-10: 1-111-30157-3

Wadsworth20 Davis DriveBelmont, CA 94002-3098USA

Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with offi ce locations around the globe, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Brazil, and Japan. Locate your local offi ce at www.cengage.com/global

Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.

To learn more about Wadsworth, visit www.cengage.com/wadsworth

Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our preferred online store www.cengagebrain.com

Sociology in a Changing World, Ninth EditionWilliam Kornblum

Acquiring Editor: Erin Mitchell

Developmental Editor: Robert Jucha

Assistant Editor: John Chell

Editorial Assistant: Mallory Ortberg

Media Editor: Melanie Cregger

Marketing Manager: Andrew Keay

Marketing Assistant: Dimitri Hagnere

Marketing Communications Manager: Tami Strang

Content Project Manager: Cheri Palmer

Design Director: Rob Hugel

Art Director: Caryl Gorska

Print Buyer: Becky Cross

Rights Acquisitions Specialist: Dean Dauphinais

Production Service: MPS Limited, a Macmillan Company

Text Designer: Jeanne Calabrese

Photo Researcher: Premedia Global

Text Researcher: Sue Brekka

Copy Editor: Heather McElwain

Illustrator: MPS Limited, a Macmillan Company

Cover Designer: Riezebos Holzbaur/ Tae Hatayama

Cover Image: © Steve Schapiro/Corbis (top image) AFP/Getty Images (bottom image)

Compositor: MPS Limited, a Macmillan Company

For product information and technology assistance, contact us atCengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706.

For permission to use material from this text or product,submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions

Further permissions questions can be emailed [email protected]

Printed in the United States of America 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14 13 12 11

FM.indd iiFM.indd ii 24/12/10 4:35 PM24/12/10 4:35 PM

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Licensed to:

1A

riel

Ske

lley/

Ble

nd Im

ages

/Get

ty Im

ages

1

FOCUS QUESTIONSWhat is the sociological imagination, and how does it generate the questions that make sociology a “human science”?

How do sociologists study social change at different levels of social reality?

Who are the key thinkers and researchers who have transformed social thought into social science?

How do the major sociological perspectives approach different social issues?

The Sociological ImaginationSociology and Social ChangeFrom Social Thought to Social ScienceMajor Sociological Perspectives

Sociology: An Introduction

CH001.indd 1CH001.indd 1 21/12/10 5:00 PM21/12/10 5:00 PM


Licensed to:

2 CHAPTER ONE SOCIOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION

can learn a great deal about a com-munity or society by just watching the parade in Washington, D.C., or the more modest ones like that of Waterloo, New York. So much of the way a parade is organized is a pur-poseful display of what we value and how our society is changing. That a woman’s marching band takes a prominent role in the Washington parade, for example, tells us that gen-der equality and the role of women in the military is being emphasized by the parade’s organizers. Decisions as to which groups and individuals will lead the parade tell us a good deal about who has power or recognition in the community.

Parades may have religious sig-nificance, as when a town in Mexico or Central America gathers to parade its local saints through the joy-ful streets outside the church. The parade of worshippers who stream through the holy Muslim shrines of Mecca or Medina in Saudi Arabia attracts Muslims from throughout the world and presents a dazzling display of styles of dress and pious devotion. Parades may combine religious themes with celebrations of the people of the society them-selves, as we see in the annual Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans. There, an insightful observer can watch how people from different social back-grounds—rich, poor, black, white, women, men, and so on—interact in the parade. And the ways in which

What is the Memorial Day parade like in your town? Who participates? What feelings do people have as they watch the parade? For the residents of

Waterloo, New York, one of the earliest communities to hold a Memorial Day parade, the annual event is a source of local pride, and its parade is like those held in many other towns, villages, and cities throughout the United States each year at the end of May. At the oppo-site extreme, the largest and most elaborate Memorial Day parade is held in the nation’s capital, where the cere-mony includes decoration of the hundreds of thousands of graves of men and women who sacrificed their lives in the defense of the nation. With military personnel engaged in conflict in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in a troubled and often violent world, each Memorial Day parade in recent years has served as a reminder of the costs of war in deaths, wounds, and loss of loved ones.

Throughout the world, significant social occasions are marked by parades. The people walking or marching in the parade enjoy dressing in the appropriate uniforms or costumes and showing off before an admiring pub-lic. Spectators enjoy the pageantry, the excitement, the bands, the costumes, and much more. To sociologists and other keen observers, most parades are an occasion to observe people displaying many of the attributes of their societies that they value and enjoy.

Although the parades on Memorial Day commemo-rate military sacrifice and service to the nation, these parades have many additional meanings for a sociologi-cally observant spectator. In many communities, despite the underlying sadness of the occasion, a spirit of pride and joyfulness is evident in the marchers and the crowds. Children and teenagers may decorate their bicycles and ride alongside the marching bands and floats. Families wave and cheer for loved ones as they march by. The local school bands and organizations are often part of the march, as are many of the community’s prominent citizens and elected officials. An observant sociologist



Licensed to:

THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION 3

the parade and other Mardi Gras celebrations, especially the famous masked balls, have changed over the last few decades tell us a great deal about how New Orleans society is changing. For example, as the world witnessed during and after Hur-ricane Katrina, the people of New Orleans are quite diverse racially and ethnically. African Americans and other people of color are the major-ity of the city’s population, and many were too poor even to pay bus fare to escape from the city. Their neigh-borhoods were often below sea level and therefore were most likely to be destroyed. As New Orleans strug-gles to rebuild, the annual Mardi Gras parade is halted for a moment of silence in commemoration of Katrina’s 1,300 victims and for the losses so many residents suffered (Robertson, 2009).

Parades may also be revealing to a sociological observer who notes what groups are missing or under-represented in the passing contin-gents and in the watching crowds of spectators. Young people from poor families and men and women of racial and ethnic minority status are more likely to fight and die in wars in foreign lands. But are they ade-quately represented in the Memorial Day events? Are they represented among the parade’s leaders? Where do they figure in the parade? Their presence or absence, and the places of honor they may be accorded, can

sociological imagination: According to C. Wright Mills, the ability to see how social conditions affect our lives.

social conditions: The realities of the life we create together as social beings.

tell us a good deal about the equity of sacrifice and rec-ognition in the given town or city.

All these subjects will come up in later chapters. The point here is that sociologists love parades for what they can reveal about underlying social relations.

THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION

It may take some thought to see why various kinds of parades tell us a great deal about our own and other societies. After all, one might

argue that a parade is a special event. It is not meant to be “read” for its deeper social meanings. And no doubt most of the people who watch Mardi Gras parades, for example, are caught up in the fun of the event—by the creativity of the costumes, the flirtations that go on, the music and dance, and perhaps the drinking. They might be offended if someone asked them to look more analytically at the larger significance of their behavior. But a sophisticated understanding of social life requires some imagination. Although some participants in an event like a parade may be entirely caught up in the moment, others may also have fun while simultaneously thinking about what is going on at a deeper level.

One of the main goals of sociology courses is to help you develop the ability to both participate in social life and step back and analyze the broader meanings of what is going on. This ability is often called the sociological imagination. In this book, we hope to help you develop this special insight, which will equip you to use sociological knowledge in your daily life. Most of all, we hope to enable you to use your sociological imagination to gain wisdom about the society in which we all participate and for whose future we are all responsible.

Most people need some help in developing a sociological imagina-tion. This is especially true when it comes to understanding their own place in what might be thought of as the “parade” of social life. People with a limited sociological imagination often fail to distinguish between social forces and personal troubles. If they are excluded from the “parade” because they are unemployed, they blame themselves for failing to do better; if they divorce, they blame each other. When they see crime, they blame “human nature”; when they see success, they praise individual achievement. But this tendency to think of life as a series of individual mistakes or successes blinds them to the fact that social conditions also shape their lives, often in ways for which they can hardly be held account-able. The habit of seeing events mainly in terms of how they affect indi-viduals blinds people to the possibility of improving the way their society is organized.

Sociologists are concerned with how social conditions influence our lives as individuals. Social conditions are the realities of the life we create together as social beings. Conditions such as poverty, wealth, crime, and drug use, for example, differ from biological facts (facts concerning our behavior and needs as animals) and psychological facts (facts about our patterns of behavior as individuals). Sociologists do not deny that psy-chological facts are important. Differences among individuals help some people cope with stress better than others, seize opportunities that others



Licensed to:


allow to slip by, or fail where others succeed. But before saying that the success or failure of an individual or group is the result of psycho-logical causes, sociologists try to look at how social conditions such as poverty or wealth, war, or changes in the availability of jobs affect an individual’s chances of success.

According to sociologist C. Wright Mills, who made famous the term sociological imagi-nation, people often believe that their private lives can be explained mainly in terms of their personal successes and failures. They are critical of themselves but not of their societies. They fail to see the links between their own individual biographies and the course of human history. Often, they blame themselves for their troubles without grasping the effects of social change on their lives. “The facts of contemporary his-tory,” Mills points out, “are also facts about the success and the failure of individual men and women.” Mills further states:

When a society is industrialized, a peasant becomes a worker; a feudal lord is liquidated or becomes a businessman. When classes rise or fall, a man is employed or unemployed; when the rate of investment goes up or down, a man takes new heart or goes broke. When wars happen, an insurance salesman becomes a rocket launcher; a store clerk, a radar man; a wife lives alone; a child grows up without a father. (1959, p. 3)

According to Mills, neither a person’s biography nor the history of a society can be understood unless we consider the influence of each on the other:

People do not usually define the troubles they endure in terms of historical change and institutional contradiction. The well-being they enjoy, they do not usually impute to the big ups and downs of the societies in which they live. Seldom aware of the intricate connection between the patterns of their own lives and the course of world history, ordinary people do not usually know what this connection means for the kinds of people they are becoming and for the kinds of history-making in which they might take part. (1959, p. 1)

The social forces of history—war, depression or recession, increases in population, changes in production and consumption, and many other social conditions—become the forces that influ-ence individuals to behave in new ways. But those new ways of behavior themselves become social forces and, in turn, shape history.

To take just one example, the not-so-distant ancestors of many African Americans were

brought to the Western Hemisphere in slave ships. African Americans have experienced slav-ery, war, emancipation, segregation, and rural and urban poverty. In reaction to the historical forces that deprived them of full citizenship in the United States, they developed a variety of behaviors, from the spirituals that expressed their deep feelings of religious faith and protest to boycotts and demonstrations against segrega-tion. These protests and demonstrations, which often took the form of a special kind of parade, became powerful social forces that continue to shape the history of the American people.

By applying the sociological imagination to events such as the way Hurricane Katrina changed New Orleans and its people, or to many of the episodes of tragedy and heroism that have occurred during the war in Iraq, one can begin to “grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society” (Mills, 1959, p. 6). Individual greed may explain why funds for maintaining levees were mis-managed, or why the federal government’s response to the suffering of the city’s most vulnerable residents was so negligent. But in addition to these more personal or psychologi-cal reasons, widespread failures of communica-tion and organization severely hampered the response to the disaster. In other words, fail-ures at the sociological level were as important as individual motivations.

The invasion of Iraq by the United States and its allies also demonstrates a host of soci-ological failures, the most important of which were lack of planning for a prolonged occupa-tion of a proud nation and underestimation of the likelihood of insurgency and civil war (Ricks, 2009).

One of the main objectives of this book is to help you apply your sociological imagination to an understanding of the social forces that are shaping your own place in the parade—that is, the forces that are shaping your life and those of the people you care about. The sociological imagination can help us avoid blaming our-selves needlessly for the troubles we encounter in life. It can help us understand, for example, why some people are rich and powerful but many others are not; why the benefits of good health care or enriching education are available to some but not to others; or why women may find themselves resenting the men in their lives. The sociological imagination helps us sort out which facts about ourselves are explained by our place in society and which ones are a result of our own actions. Above all, the sociological imagination can suggest ways in which we can realistically effect change in our lives and in society itself.



Licensed to:

SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL CHANGE 5

SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL CHANGE

Sociology is the scientific study of human societies and human behavior in the many

groups that make up a society. Sociologists must ask difficult, sometimes embarrassing questions about human life in order to explore the conse-quences of cataclysmic events such as those that shut down factories or enslave an entire people. To understand the possible futures of people who confront such drastic changes, sociologists are continually seeking knowledge about what holds societies together and what makes them bend under the impact of major forces such as war and migration.

Throughout this book, we will see that there are many ways in which sociologists can already predict the social changes that are likely to occur in coming years and decades. For example, as the proportion of elderly people in our society increases, we can predict how this important social change will bring about other changes in the need for health care or for improved retirement systems, or new defini-tions of the responsibilities of middle-aged chil-dren for the elderly. But there are also changes, such as the rise of terrorism directed against the United States, that might have been predicted and better anticipated but were not. Sociologists are trying to develop better knowledge about the causes of terrorism in order to help dimin-ish the likelihood of terrorism in the future. To do so, we conduct research to better understand how different societies are changing or remain-ing stable, which groups are benefiting from social change, and which groups are being left behind.

The Social EnvironmentThe knowledge sociologists gather covers a vast range. Sociologists study religious behavior; conduct in the military; the behavior of work-ers and managers in industry; the activities of voluntary associations such as parent–teacher groups and political parties; the changing rela-tionships between men and women or between aging individuals and their elderly parents; the behavior of groups in cities and neighbor-hoods; the activities of gangs, criminals, and judges; differences in the behaviors of entire social classes—the rich, the middle classes, the poor, the down-and-out; the way cities grow and change; the fate of entire societies during and after revolutions; and a host of other subjects. But how to make sure the information gathered is reliable and precise, how to use it to build the-ories of social cohesion and social change—that

is the challenge faced by the young science of sociology.

As in any science, there are many debates in sociology about the appropriate ways to study social life and about which theories or types of theories best explain social phenomena. Most sociologists, however, would agree with the fol-lowing position:

Human actions are limited or determined by “environment.” Human beings become what they are at any given moment not by their own free decisions, taken rationally and in full knowledge of the conditions, but under the pressure of circumstances which delimit their range of choice and which also fix their objectives and the standards by which they make choices. (Shils, 1985, p. 805)

This statement expresses a core idea of sociology: Individual choice is never entirely free but is always determined to some extent by a person’s environment. In sociology, envi-ronment refers to all the expectations and incen-tives established by other people in a person’s social world. For sociologists, therefore, the environment within which an individual’s biog-raphy unfolds is a set of people and groups and organizations, all with their own ways of think-ing and acting. Certainly each individual has unique choices to make in life, but the social world into which that person was born—be it a Native American reservation, an urban ghetto, a comfortable suburb, or an immigrant enclave in a strange city—determines to varying degrees what those choices will be.

Levels of Social RealityIn their studies of social environments, soci-ologists look at behaviors ranging from the intimate glances of lovers to the complex coor-dination of a space shuttle launch. For purposes of analysis, however, they often speak of social behavior as occurring at three different levels of complexity: micro, middle, and macro.

The Micro Level Micro-level sociology is con-cerned with observation of the behaviors of individuals and their immediate others—that is, with patterns of interaction among a few people. One example is Erving Goffman’s stud-ies of the routine behaviors of everyday life.

sociology: The scientific study of human societies and human behavior in the groups that make up a society.

micro-level sociology: An approach to the study of society that focuses on patterns of social interaction at the individual level.



Licensed to:


Goffman’s research showed how seemingly insignificant ways of acting in public actually carry significant meanings. In a study titled “Territories of the Self” (1972), Goffman categorized some of the ways in which we use objects as “markers” to claim a personal space:

Markers are of various kinds. There are “central markers,” being objects that announce a territorial claim, the territory radiating outward from it, as when sunglasses and lotion claim a beach chair, or a purse a seat in an airliner, or a drink on a bar the stool in front of it. . . . There are “boundary markers,” objects that mark the line between two adjacent territories. The bar used in supermarket checkout counters to separate one customer’s batch of articles from the next is an example. (pp. 41–42)

The last time you placed your sweater or book on the empty seat next to you on a bus, you told yourself that when someone came for the seat you would take up your things. But you hoped that the stranger who was com-ing along the aisle would get your message and choose another seat; you would claim your extra space as long as possible. You communicated all this by the manner in which you placed your marker and the persistence with which, by your body language, you defended “your” space.

The Macro Level Some sociologists deal almost exclusively with anal-ysis on a much larger scale, termed macro-level sociology. The macro level of social life refers to whole societies and how they are changing—that is, to revolutions, wars, major changes in the production of goods and services, and similar social phenomena that involve very large numbers of people. One example of macrosociological analysis is the study of how the shift from heavy manufacturing to high-tech industries has affected the way workers earn a living. Another example is the study of how the invasion and settlement of the American West in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries gave rise to the beliefs and actions that drove Native Americans onto reservations.

The Middle Level Middle-level sociology in-volves social phenomena that occur in commu-nities or in organizations such as businesses and voluntary associations. Middle-level social forms are smaller than entire societies but are larger and involve more people than micro-level social forms such as the family or the peer group, in which everyone involved knows everyone else or is in close proximity to the oth-ers (as on a bus or in a classroom). The drama that surrounds the firing of a coach on a sports team, and the reorganization of personnel that often follows, is an example of social change at the middle level of social analysis.

These three levels of sociological analysis can be helpful in understanding the experience of the immigrants from Asia, Africa, or Latin America who may be appearing in your town or community or in one nearby. Macro-level social forces such as war or overpopulation may account for the influx of immigrants. Middle-level social forces such as the availability of work at low wage and skill levels, or the pres-ence of earlier arrivals from other nations, may help explain why certain immigrant groups become concentrated in particular communi-ties within the United States. And at the micro level of analysis, there will be important differ-ences between the ways in which immigrant and native-born people interact on a daily basis, especially at first.

Note that the three levels of social reality are not defined according to fixed or standard mea-sures. Instead, they are used in relative fashion. The social impact of a global corporation such as General Electric, for example, can be analyzed at the macro level of the entire corporation and its dealings on the world stage. In that case, its component factories, and the trade unions they often battle against, are middle-level forms, and specific groups within those factories operate at the micro level within the global corporation. How one uses and defines these levels of social reality often depends on the type of sociological analysis one is performing.

The For Review chart on page 7 presents the three basic levels of sociological analysis along with some examples of the types of stud-ies conducted at each level. Throughout this book, we show how the sociological imagination can be applied at different levels of society. In this chapter, we set the stage by describing the basic perspectives from which modern sociolo-gists approach the study of social conditions. In the next chapter, we outline the procedures and methods sociologists use in conducting their research. We begin here with a brief description of the origins and development of the science of sociology.

macro-level sociology: An approach to the study of society that focuses on the major structures and institutions of society.

middle-level sociology: An approach to the study of society that focuses on relationships between social structures and the individual.

Each of these passengers in a railroad station waiting room has claimed a personal territory. Each has taken a separate bench and has chosen to sit at one end of the bench. If another person came to that bench, he or she would probably choose to sit as far away as possible.

Mic

hael

Dw

yer/

Sto

ck, B

osto

n In

c.



Licensed to:

FROM SOCIAL THOUGHT TO SOCIAL SCIENCE 7

FROM SOCIAL THOUGHT TO SOCIAL SCIENCE

Like all the sciences, sociology developed out of prescientific longings to understand

and predict. The world’s great thinkers have pondered the central questions of sociology since the earliest periods of recorded history. The ancient Greek philosophers believed that human societies inevitably arose, flourished, and declined. They tended to perceive the past as better than the present, looking back to a “golden age” in which social conditions were presumed to have been better than those of the degraded present. Before the scientific revolu-tion of the seventeenth century, the theologians and philosophers of Medieval Europe and the Islamic world also believed that human mis-ery and strife were inevitable. As the Bible put it, “The poor always ye have with you.” Mere mortals could do little to correct social condi-tions, which were viewed as the work of divine Providence.

The Age of EnlightenmentThe roots of modern sociology can be found in the work of the philosophers and scientists of the Great Enlightenment, which had its origins in the scientific discoveries of the seventeenth century. That pivotal century began with Gali-leo’s “heretical” proof that the earth was not the center of the universe; it ended with the publi-cation of Isaac Newton’s Principia Mathematica. Newton is often credited with the founding of modern science. He not only discovered the laws of gravity and motion but, in developing the calculus, also provided later generations with the mathematical tools whereby further discoveries in all the sciences could be made.

Hard on the heels of this unprecedented progress in science and mathematics came a theory of human progress that paved the way for a “science of humanity.” Francis Bacon in England, René Descartes and Blaise Pascal in France, and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in

Germany were among the philosophers who recognized the social importance of scientific discoveries. Their writings emphasized the idea of progress guided by human reason and opposed the dominant notion that the human condition was ordained by God and could not be improved through human actions (Bury, 1932; Nisbet, 1969).

Today, we are used to inventions crowding one upon another. Between the childhood of our grandparents and our own adulthood, society has undergone some major transformations: from agrarian to industrial production; from rural settlements and small towns to large cit-ies and expanding metropolitan regions; from reliance on wood and coal as energy sources to dependence on electricity and nuclear power; from typewriters to computers. In the seven-teenth century, however, people were used to far more stability. Ways of life that had existed since the Middle Ages were not expected to change in a generation.

The rise of science transformed the social order. As was often said at the time, science “broke the cake of custom.” New methods of navigation made it possible to explore and chart the world’s oceans and continents. Applied to warfare, scientific knowledge enabled Europe-ans to conquer the peoples of Africa, Asia, and the Western Hemisphere. In Europe, those con-quests opened up new markets and stimulated new patterns of trade that hastened the growth of some regions and cities and the decline of others. The entire human world had entered a period of rapid social change that continues today and shows no signs of ending.

The Age of RevolutionThe vehicle of social change was not science itself, because relatively few people at any level of society were practicing scientists. Rather, the modern era of rapid social change is a product of the many new ideas that captured people’s imagination during the eighteenth century. The series of revolutions that took place in

FOR REVIEW

Analytical Level Social Behaviors Studied Typical Questions

Macro Revolutions; intercontinental migrations; emergence of new institutions.

How are entire societies or institutions changing?

Middle Relations in bureaucracies; social movements; participation in communities, organizations, tribes.

How does bureaucracy aff ect personality? Do all social movements go through similar stages?

Micro Interaction in small groups; self-image; enactment of roles.

How do people create and take roles in groups? How are group structures created?

Levels of Sociological Analysis



Licensed to:


the American colonies, in France, and in Eng-land all resulted in part from social move-ments unleashed by the triumphs of science and reason. The ideas of human rights (that is, the rights of all humans, not just the elite), of democracy versus rule by an absolute monarch, of self-government for colonial peoples, and of applying reason and science to human affairs in general—all are currents of thought that arose during this period.

The revolutions of the eighteenth century loosed a torrent of questions that could not even have been imagined before. The old order of society was breaking down as secular (that is, nonreligious) knowledge replaced sacred tra-ditions. The study of laws and lawmaking and debates about justice in society began to replace the idea that kings and other leaders had a “divine right” to rule. Communities were break-ing apart; courts, palaces, and great estates were crumbling as people struggled to be free. What would replace them? Would the rule of the mob replace the rule of the monarch? Would greed and envy replace piety and faith? Would there be enough opportunities in the New World for all the people who were being driven off the land in the Old World? Would the factory sys-tem become the new order of society, and if so, what did that imply for the future of society?

No longer could the Scriptures or the clas-sics of ancient Greece and Rome be consulted for easy answers to such questions. Rather, it was becoming evident that new answers could be dis-covered through the scientific method: repeated observation, careful description, the formula-tion of theories based on possible explanations, and the gathering of additional data about ques-tions arising from those theories. Why not use the same methods to create a science of human society? This ambitious idea led to the birth of sociology. It is little wonder that the French phi-losopher Auguste Comte thought of sociology, even in its infancy, as the “queen of sciences,” one that would soon take its rightful place beside the reigning science of physics. It was Comte who coined the term sociology to designate the scientific study of society. He believed that the study of social stability and social change was the most important subject for sociology to tackle. He made some of the earliest attempts to apply scientific methods to the study of social life.

The Founders of SociologyIn the nineteenth century, an increasing num-ber of philosophers and historians began to see

themselves as specializing in the study of social conditions and social change. They attempted to develop global theories of social change based on the essential qualities of societies at differ-ent stages of human history, and they devoted much of their attention to comparing existing societies and civilizations, both past and pres-ent. As Comte put it, the age of discovery had revealed such an array of societies that, “from the wretched inhabitants of Tierra del Fuego to the most advanced nations of Western Europe,” there is such a great diversity of societies that comparisons among them will yield much insight into why they differ and how they change (1971/1854, p. 48).

The early sociologists tended to think in macrosociological terms. Their writing dealt with whole societies and how their special characteristics influence human behavior and social change. Most sociologists would agree that the nineteenth-century social theorists who had the greatest and most lasting influence on the field were Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim, and Max Weber. All three applied the new concepts of sociology to gain an understanding of the immense changes occurring around them.

Karl Marx German-born Karl Marx (1818–1883) became a radical philosopher as a young man and was embroiled in numerous insurrec-tions and attempts at revolution in Germany and France. Forced to flee Germany after the abortive European revolution of 1848, he lived and worked in England for the rest of his life. Often penniless, Marx worked for hours on end in the library of the British Museum, where he developed the social and economic theories that would have a major influence on socio-logical thought. His famous treatise Capital is a detailed study of the rise of capitalism as a dom-inant system of production. In this work and elsewhere, Marx set forth an extremely power-ful theory to explain the transformations taking place as societies became more industrialized and urbanized. He argued that those transfor-mations would inevitably end in a revolution in which the workers would overthrow capitalism, but he also believed that revolution could be hastened through political action.

Émile Durkheim Émile Durkheim (1858–1917) was the founder of scientific sociology in France. His books, among which the best known are The Division of Labor in Society, Rules of the Sociological Method, and Suicide, were pioneering examples of the use of com-parative data to assess the directions and con-sequences of social change. The first university professor with a chair in the “social sciences,”

scientific method: The process by which theories and explanations are constructed through repeated observation and careful description.

Karl Marx

Kar

l Mar

x M

useu

m T

rier

/Alf

redo

Dag

li O

rti/

The

Art

Arc

hive

/Pic

ture

Des

k

Émile Durkheim

© B

ettm

ann/

Cor

bis



Licensed to:


Durkheim was soon surrounded by a brilliant group of academic disciples who were deeply interested in understanding the vast changes that occurred in societies as they became more populous, more urbanized, and more techno-logically complex. In 1898, Durkheim and his colleagues established the first scientific journal in sociology, L’Année sociologique (The Sociologi-cal Year). This journal and much of Durkheim’s own writing were among the first examples of the application of statistics to social issues. (See the discussion of suicide in Chapter 2.)

Max Weber Max Weber (1864–1920) was a German historian, economist, and sociologist. Weber’s life, like Durkheim’s, spanned much of the second half of the nineteenth century and the early decades of the twentieth. Like the other early sociologists, therefore, Weber wit-nessed the tumultuous changes that were bring-ing down the old order. He saw monarchies tottering in the face of demands for democratic rule. He observed new industries and markets spanning the globe and linking formerly iso-lated peoples. He saw and described the rise of modern science and jurisprudence and modern ways of doing business. The growing tendency to apply rational decision-making procedures, rather than merely relying on tradition, was for Weber a dramatic departure from the older ways of feudal societies and mercantile aristoc-racies. Weber compared many different societ-ies to show how new forms of government and administration were evolving.

All three of these pioneers in sociology were scholars of great genius. They were also political activists. Marx, of course, was the most revolutionary of the three and devoted much of his energy to the international socialist move-ment. Durkheim was a lifelong socialist but was more moderate than Marx. Although he took stands on many political issues, Durkheim did not devote himself to political activities. As a young man, Weber had been involved in the movement to create a unified German nation, but as a mature scholar, he developed a belief in

“value-free” social science. A social scientist might draw research questions from personal politi-cal beliefs, but the research itself must apply sci-entific methods. This view, which Durkheim also shared, did much

to advance sociology to the level of a social science rather than just a branch of philosophy.

To become a science, sociology had to build on the research of its founders. The twentieth century brought changes of such magnitude at every level of society that sociologists were in increasing demand. Their mission was to gain new information about the scope and meaning of social change.

Women in Sociology In the late nineteenth century, as it emerged from philosophy to become an independent scholarly fi eld, sociology was dominated by white male university professors. There were a few

exceptions, such as W.E.B. DuBois and the brilliant Muslim social thinker Ibn Khaldun, but for the most part, the founders of sociology were European men.

A notable exception was Harriet Martineau (1802–1876), who is thought to have been the fi rst woman to contribute to the emerging fi eld of sociology.

Martineau wrote important sociological inter-pretations of the early phases of capitalism and modernity. She was also a social reformer whose writings on the plight of children and women in British factories were highly infl uen-tial (Hoecker-Drysdale, 1992).

In the United States as well, early female sociologists were usually barred from uni-versity positions, and their work was never accorded the intellectual respect it merited. An example is Ida B. Wells-Barnett (1862–1931), an African American woman raised in the South after the Civil War. She wrote extensively about the new forms of discrimination and rac-ism directed against her people and became a spokesperson for the civil rights of African

Americans and women. Recent scholarship by feminist sociologists has drawn renewed attention to her work and that of other women founders of sociology (Lengermann & Niebrugge-Brantley, 1998).

Today, sociology is far more diverse in every aspect, and women throughout the world are well represented among the fi eld’s most innovative minds. The photo of Manjula Giri shows a modern sociologist from a developing nation, Nepal, who is both a university-trained scholar and a dedicated social activist. Giri has written about the failure of revolution to improve the conditions of rural women in Nepal. In her own village, she is using her sociological skills to help local women develop a women’s farming cooperative. She has also started literacy classes and is planning to expand her work to other villages in the region. Giri is an example of the scholar-activist, a dual role that is increasingly common throughout the poorer regions of the world.

then&now

R. G

ates

/Hul

ton

Arc

hive

/Get

ty Im

ages

Ida B. Wells-Barnett

Cou

rtes

y of

Man

jula

Gir

i

Manjula Giri

Spe

ncer

Arn

old/

Hul

ton

Arc

hive

/Get

ty Im

ages

Harriet Martineau

Max Weber

Max

Web

er (1

864

–92

0) c

.189

6–

97 (b

/w p

hoto

), G

erm

an

Phot

ogra

pher

, (19

th c

entu

ry)/

Priv

ate

Col

lect

ion/

Arc

hive

s

Cha

rmet

/The

Bri

dgem

an A

rt L

ibra

ry



Licensed to:


The Rise of Modern SociologyWe credit the European social thinkers and phi-losophers with creating sociology, but nowhere did the new science find more fertile ground for development than in North America. By the beginning of the twentieth century, sociol-ogy was rapidly acquiring new adherents in the United States and Canada, partly because of the influence of European sociologists like Marx and Durkheim, but even more because of the rapid social changes occurring in North Amer-ica at the time. Waves of immigrants to cities and towns, the explosive growth of population and industry in the cities, race riots, strikes and labor strife, moral crusades against crime and vice and alcohol, the demand for woman suf-frage—these and many other changes caused American sociology to take a new turn. There was an increasing demand for knowledge about exactly what changes were occurring and whom they affected. In North America, there-fore, sociologists began to emphasize the quest for facts about changing social conditions—that is, the empirical investigation of social issues. As Peter Berger writes in Invitation to Sociol-ogy, “The sociologist . . . is someone concerned with understanding society in a disciplined way. The nature of this discipline is scientific” (1963, p. 16). This means that the sociologist is bound by scientific rules of evidence (discussed in the next chapter) and must strive to remain objec-tive and base his or her conclusions on empiri-cal findings rather than on personal hopes or prejudices.

Empirical Investigation Empirical informa-tion refers to carefully gathered, unbiased data regarding social conditions and behavior. In general, modern sociology is distinguished by its relentless and systematic search for empiri-cal data to answer questions about society. Jour-nalists, for example, also seek the facts about social conditions, but they must cover many different events and situations and present them as “stories” that will attract their readers’ interest. Because they usually cannot dwell on one subject very long, journalists often must content themselves with citing examples and quoting experts whose opinions may or may not be based on empirical evidence. In contrast, sociologists study a situation or phenomenon in more depth; when they do not have enough facts, they are likely to say, “That is an empirical question. Let’s see what the research tells us. If the answers are inconclusive, we will do more research.” Evidence based on measurable effects and outcomes is required before one can make an informed decision about an issue.

Among the chief goals of modern sociology are using the sociological imagination to ask rel-evant questions and seeking answers to those questions backed by evidence that others can verify. Anyone can make assertions about soci-ety or about why people behave the way they do. “I think it’s human nature to act selfishly, no matter what kind of education people have” is a common assertion that is not backed up by any solid evidence. As you read this book, you will learn that, to strengthen your sociological imagi-nation, you must learn how to apply evidence to your views and admit that you may modify your opinions upon careful consideration of that evidence.

The Social Surveys The empirical focus of American sociology began largely as an out-growth of the reform movements of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Dur-ing this period, the nation had not yet recovered from the havoc created by the Civil War. South-ern blacks were migrating to the more indus-trialized North in ever-increasing numbers, and at the same time, millions of European immi-grants were finding ill-paying jobs in larger cit-ies, where cheap labor was in great demand. By the turn of the twentieth century, therefore, the nation’s cities were crowded with poor families for whom the promise of “gold in America” had become a tarnished dream. In this time of rapid social change, Americans continually debated the merits of social reform and proposed new solutions for pressing social issues. Some called for socialism, others for a return to the free market, a ban on labor organizations, an end to immigration, or the removal of black Americans to Africa. But where would the facts to be used in judging those ideas come from?

To gain empirical information about social conditions, dedicated individuals undertook numerous “social surveys.” Jacob Riis’s (1890) account of life on New York’s Lower East Side; W.E.B. DuBois’s (1967/1899) survey of Phila-delphia blacks; Emily Balch’s (1910) depiction of living conditions among Slavic miners and steelworkers in the Pittsburgh area; and Jane Addams’s famous Hull-House Maps and Papers(1895), which described the lives of her neighbors in Chicago’s West Side slum area—these and other carefully documented surveys of the living conditions of people experiencing the effects of rapid industrialization and urbanization left an enduring mark on American sociology.

Sociology&Social Justice

W.E.B. DUBOIS The pioneer-ing sociologist W.E.B. DuBois used objective research to fight for social justice for



Licensed to:


African Americans. Social justice, as we will see throughout this book, involves fairness in the dis-tribution of opportunities and resources in soci-eties. DuBois’s book The Philadelphia Negro (1967/1899) showed how African Americans, who had technically been released from slavery after the Civil War, were denied opportunities in work and education that would allow them to escape conditions of dire poverty. DuBois helped direct sociological research to racial and social issues in minority communities, using empirical data to provide an objective account of the dis-mal social conditions of northern blacks at the turn of the twentieth century. By presenting the facts about the racism and social exclusion they experienced, DuBois created a model for using sociological research to press for greater social justice for African Americans and other minori-ties. The Research Methods box on page 13 presents an excerpt from the landmark survey conducted by DuBois, the first black sociologist to gain worldwide recognition.

The Chicago School and Human Ecology By the late 1920s, the United States had become the world leader in sociology. The two great cen-ters of American sociological research were the University of Chicago and Columbia University. At these universities and others influenced by them, two distinct approaches to the study of society evolved. The Chicago school empha-sized the relationship between the individual and society, whereas the major East Coast uni-versities, which were more strongly influenced by European sociology, tended toward macro-level analyses of social structure and change.

The sociology department at the University of Chicago (the oldest in the nation) extended its influence to many other universities, espe-cially in the Midwest, South, and West. At that time, the department was under the leadership of Robert Park and his younger colleague Ernest Burgess. Park in particular is associated with the Chicago school. His main contribution was to develop an agenda for sociological research that used the city as a “social laboratory.” Park favored an approach in which facts concerning what was occurring among people in their local communities (at the micro and middle levels) would be collected within a broader theoretical framework. That framework attempted to link macro-level changes in society, such as industri-alization and the growth of urban populations, to patterns of settlement in cities and to how people actually lived in cities.

In one of his essays on this subject, Park began with the idea that industrialization causes the breakdown of traditional “primary-group”

attachments (those of family members, age-mates, or clans). After stating the probable rela-tionship between the effects of industrialization and high rates of crime, Park asked several spe-cific questions:

What is the effect of ownership of property . . . on truancy, on divorce, and on crime?

In what regions and classes are certain kinds of crime endemic? In what classes does divorce occur most frequently? What is the difference in this respect between farmers and, say, actors?

To what extent in any given [ethnic] group . . . do parents and children live in the same world, speak the same language, and share the same ideas, and how far do the conditions found account for juvenile delinquency in that particular group? (1967/1925, p. 22)

This set of research questions, of which those quoted here are a small sample, inspired

The infamous strike of steelworkers in Homestead, Pennsylvania, in 1892 pitted workers and their families against the private security police hired by the Carnegie Corporation and later by the National Guard. The resulting violence and class confl ict was the subject of a pathbreaking social survey of social conditions among the workers by Emily Balch, who, like W.E.B. DuBois and Jane Addams, was an early practitioner of the new fi eld of sociology.

Lib

rary

of

Con

gres

s Pr

ints

and

Pho

togr

aphs

Div

isio

n [L

C-U

SZ6

2-75

205]



Licensed to:


and shaped the work of hundreds of sociologists who were influenced by the Chicago school. To this day, Chicago remains the most systemati-cally studied city in the United States, although similar research has been carried out in other large cities throughout the nation. From studies of the linguistic diversity of African peoples to attempts to understand the subtle negotiations by which youth gangs divide up an urban “turf,” the insights of the Chicago school remain a vital aspect of contemporary sociology (A. D. Abbott, 2001).

As you can see from the types of questions Park asked, the distinctive orientation of the Chicago school was its emphasis on the relation-ships among social order, social disorganization, and the distribution of populations in space and time. Park and Burgess called this approach human ecology. With many modifications, it remains an important, though not dominant, perspective in contemporary sociology.

Human ecology, as Park and others defined it, is the branch of sociology that is concerned with population growth and change. In particu-lar, it seeks to discover how populations orga-nize themselves to survive and prosper. Human ecologists are interested in how groups that are organized in different ways compete and coop-erate. They also look for forms of social organi-zation that may emerge as a group adjusts to life in new surroundings.

A key concept for human ecologists is com-munity. There are many ways of defining this term, just as there are many ways of defin-ing most of the central concepts of sociology. From an ecological perspective, however, the term community usually refers to a population that carries out major life functions (e.g., birth, marriage, death) within a particular territory. Human ecology does not assume that there will ever be a “steady state” or an end to the process of change in human communities. Instead, it attempts to trace the change and document its consequences for the social environment. What happens when newcomers “invade” a commu-nity? In what way are local gangs a response to recent changes in population or in the ability of members of a community to compete for jobs? Not only do populations change, but people’s preferences and behaviors also continually change. So do the technologies for producing the goods and services we want. As a result, our

ways of making a living, our modes of trans-portation, and our choices of leisure activities create constant change, not just in communities but in entire societies.

The Chicago school became known for this “ecological” approach, the idea that the study of human society should begin with empirical questions about population size, the distribution of populations over territories, and the like. The human ecologists recognized that many other processes shape society, but their most impor-tant contribution to the discipline of sociology was to include the processes by which popula-tions change and communities are formed.

Modern ecological theories also consider the relations between humans and their natural environment. We will see that the way people earn a living, the resources they use, the energy they consume, and their efforts to control pol-lution all have far-reaching consequences, not only for their own lives but also for the society in which they live. These patterns of use and consumption also have an increasing impact on the entire planet—so much so that ecological problems are becoming an ever more important area of sociological research. (See the Mapping Social Change box on pages 14–15.)

MAJOR SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES

Sociological perspectives are sets of ideas and theories that sociologists use in attempting to

understand various problems of human society, such as the problems of population size, conflict between populations, how people become part of a society, and other issues that we will encounter throughout this book. Although human ecology remains an important sociological perspective, it is by no means the only one modern sociolo-gists employ. Other perspectives, to which we now turn, guide empirical description and help explain social stability and social change.

InteractionismInteractionism is the sociological perspective that views social order and social change as resulting from the immense variety of repeated interactions among individuals and groups. Fam-ilies, committees, corporations, armies, entire societies—indeed, all the social forms we can think of—are a result of interpersonal behavior in which people communicate, give and take, share, compete, and so on. If there were no exchange of goods, information, love, and all the rest—that is, if there were no interaction among people—obviously there could be no social life at all.

human ecology: A sociological perspective that emphasizes the relationships among social order, social disorganization, and the distribution of populations in space and time.

interactionism: A sociological perspective that views social order and social change as resulting from all the repeated interactions among individuals and groups.



Licensed to:

MAJOR SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 13

The Social SurveyW.E.B. DuBois was one of the fi rst American sociolo-gists to publish highly factual

and objective descriptions of life in American cities. An African American, DuBois earned his doctorate in philosophy at Harvard before the turn of the twentieth century, when sociology was still regarded as a subfi eld of that discipline. But, as can be seen in this excerpt from his account of black life in Philadelphia about a century ago, DuBois was able to sharpen his argu-ments about the eff ects of racial discrimination with simple but telling statistics.

For a group of freedmen the question of economic survival is the most pressing of all questions; the problem as to how, under the circumstances of modern life, any group of people can earn a decent living, so as to maintain their standard of life, is not always easy to answer. But when the question is complicated by the fact that the group has a low degree of efficiency on account of previous training; is in competition with well-trained, eager and often ruthless competitors; is more or less handicapped by . . . discrimination; and finally, is seeking not merely to maintain a standard of living but steadily to raise it to a higher plane—such a situation presents baffling problems to the sociologist. . . .

And yet this is the situation of the Negro in Philadelphia; he is trying to better his condition; is seeking to rise; for this end his first need is work of a character to engage his best talents, and remunerative enough for him to support a home and train up his children well. The competition in a large city is fierce, and it is difficult for any poor people to succeed. The Negro, however, has two especial difficulties: his training as a slave and freedman has not been such as make the average of the race as efficient and reliable workmen as the average [native-born] American or as many foreign immigrants. The Negro is, as a rule, willing, honest and good-natured; but he is also, as a rule, careless, unreliable and unsteady. This is without doubt to be expected in a people who for generations have been trained to shirk work; but an historical excuse counts for little in the whirl and battle of breadwinning. Of course, there are large exceptions to this average rule; there are many Negroes who are as bright, talented and reliable as any class of workmen, and who in untrammeled competition would soon rise high in the economic scale, and thus by the law of the survival of the fittest we should soon have left at the bottom those inefficient and lazy drones who did not deserve a better fate. However, in the realm of social phenomena the law of survival is greatly modified by human choice, wish, whim and prejudice. And consequently one never knows when one sees a social outcast how far this failure to survive is due to the deficiencies of the individual, and how far to the accidents or injustice of his environment. This is

especially the case with the Negro. Every one knows that in a city like Philadelphia a Negro does not have the same chance to exercise his ability or secure work according to his talents as a white man. Just how far this is so we shall discuss later; now it is sufficient to say in general that the sorts of work open to Negroes are not only restricted by their own lack of training but also by discrimination against them on account of their race; that their economic rise is not only hindered by their present poverty, but also by a widespread inclination to shut against them many doors of advancement. . . .

What has thus far been the result of this complicated situation? What do the mass of the Negroes of the city at present do for a living, and how successful are they in those lines? And in so far as they are successful, what have they accomplished, and where they are inefficient in their present sphere of work, what is the cause and remedy? These are the questions before us, and we proceed to answer the first in this chapter, taking the occupations of the Negroes of the Seventh Ward first . . .

Of the 257 boys between the ages of ten and twenty, who were regularly at work in 1896, 39 percent were porters and errand boys; 25.5 percent were servants; 16 percent were common laborers, and 19.5 percent had miscellaneous employment. The occupations in detail are as follows:

Total population, males 10 to 20 651 Engaged in gainful occupations 257

Porters and errand boys 100 39.0%Servants 66 25.5%Common laborers 40 16.0%Miscellaneous employment*Teamsters 7*Apprentices 6*Bootblacks 6*Drivers 5*Newsboys 5*Peddlers 4*Typesetters 3*Actors 2*Bricklayers 2*Hostlers 2 51 19.5%*Typists 2*Barber 1*Bartender 1*Bookbinder 1*Factory hand 1*Rubber worker 1*Sailor 1*Shoemaker 1

257 100.0%

Note: This simple table includes much useful information, but modern tables present data more effi ciently. See Chapter 2 for a detailed discussion of the presentation of data in tables.Source: DuBois, 1967/1899, pp. 97–99.

Libr

ary

of C

ongr

ess

Prin

ts a

nd P

hoto

grap

hs D

ivis

ion

[LC

-US

Z62-

1238

22]

W.E.B. DuBois

The interactionist perspective usually gen-erates analyses of social life at the level of inter-personal relationships, but it does not limit itself to the micro level of social reality. It also

looks at how middle- and macro-level phenomena result from micro-level behaviors or, conversely, how middle- and macro-level influences shape the interactions among individuals. From the interactionist per-spective, for example, a family is a product of interactions among a set

researchmethods



Licensed to:


From a biological perspective, the success of any species is measured by how well it meets the broad requirements of population growth and maintenance. Every day the world’s 6 billion people seek and obtain

enough food to convert into bodily energy, a minimum of perhaps 1,500 calories a day for survival at starvation levels

(although this varies greatly with climate and other factors). Over 70 percent of the world’s population is inadequately nourished (that is, obtains

Een

perh( lth

mapping social change

Worldwide Calorie Consumption and Areas of Famine

fewer than 2,500 calories a day), often while engag-ing in hard physical labor. At the same time, a smaller proportion, including most (but by no means all) of the North American population, live so comfortably and well above the daily minimum that overweight and obesity are a major health problem.

Ecological theories help explain malnutrition and starvation in some areas of the world. In Soma-lia, for example, the combination of a desert envi-ronment and warring political factions produces social instability that leads to persistent famine. The problem is not so much that food is unavailable as that supplies cannot be delivered or distributed eff ectively.

Because children are the most vulnerable segment of any society’s population, they are usually aff ected most by adverse social conditions. This table shows that overall the percentages and numbers of under-weight, malnourished children in the developing coun-tries have declined from 37.4 percent (175.7 million) in 1980, to 26.7 percent (149.6 million) in 2000. The greatest improvements have occurred in Asia, where positive economic and social changes have brought higher levels of living to many. But in Africa, where civil strife in many regions blocks economic growth, the proportion of malnourished children is actually growing.

of individuals who define themselves as family members. But each person’s understanding of how a family ought to behave is a product of middle- and macro-level forces: religious teach-ings about family life, laws dealing with educa-tion or child support, and so on. And these are always changing. You may have experienced the consequences of changing values that cause older and younger family members to feel dif-ferently about such issues as whether a couple should live together before marrying. In sum, the interactionist perspective insists that we look carefully at how individuals interact, how they interpret their own and other people’s actions, and the consequences of those actions for the larger social group (Blumer, 1969b; Frank, 1988).

The general framework of interactionism contains at least two major and quite different sets of issues. One set concerns the problems of exchange and choice: How can social order exist and groups or societies maintain stability when people have selfish motives for being in groups—that is, when they are seeking to gain as much personal advantage as they can? The second set of issues involves how people actu-ally manage to communicate their values and how they arrive at mutual understandings. Research and explanations of the first problem

fall under the heading of “rational choice” (or exchange theory); the second issue is addressed by the study of “symbolic interaction.” In recent years, these two areas of inquiry have emerged as quite different yet increasingly related aspects of the study of interaction.

Rational Choice: The Sociological View Adam Smith, whose famous work The Wealth of Nations (1965/1776) became the basis for most subsequent economic thought, believed that individuals always seek to maximize their pleasure and minimize their pain. If they are allowed to make the best possible choices for themselves over time, they will also produce an affluent and just society. They will serve others, even when they are unaware that they are doing so, in order to increase their own benefit. They will choose a constitution and a government that protect their property and their right to engage in trade. They will seek the government’s protection against those who would infringe on their rights or attempt to dominate them, but the government need do little more than protect them and allow them to make choices based on their own reasoning.

You may have already encountered this the-ory, known as utilitarianism, in an economics or political science course. In sociology, it is applied

1980 1990 1995 2000

Region % Million % Million % Million % Million

Africa 26.2 22.5 27.3 30.1 27.9 34.0 28.5 38.3

Asia 43.9 146.0 36.5 141.3 32.8 121.0 29.0 108.0

Latin *America 14.2 7.3 10.2 5.6 8.3 4.5 6.3 3.4

Developing *countries 37.4 175.7 32.1 177.0 29.2 159.5 26.7 149.6

Source: WHO, 2000.

Global and Regional Trends in the Estimated Prevalence of Protein-Energy Malnutrition in Underweight Children Under 5, Since 1980



Licensed to:


Category

12345

Undernourished Description

�35%20–34%5–19%2.5–4%�2.5%no data

incomplete data

Very highModerately highModerately low

Very lowExtremely low

Source: World Food Programme.

The players on opposing teams are paying their respects to one another after a game of soccer. Here is an example of social interaction that is highly structured—the players form opposing lines that walk past each other and touch hands—but the players are also free to add their own comments and perform the ritual with a bit of personal style.

FR S

port

Pho

togr

aphy

/ A

lam

y

to a variety of issues. Often this rational-choice view of interaction is referred to as exchange theory because it focuses on what people seem to be getting out of their interactions and what they in turn are contributing to the relation-ship or to the larger group. In every interaction, something is being exchanged: It may be time or attention, friendship, material values (e.g., wages or possessions), or less easily calculated values such as esteem or allegiance. The larger the number of interacting members, the more com-plex the types of exchanges that occur among them. When people perceive an interaction as being one-way, they begin to feel that they are being exploited or treated unfairly and will usually leave the relationship or quit the group (Homans, 1961). In industry, for example, if workers feel that they are not being paid enough for their work, they may form a union, bargain collectively with the bosses, or even go on strike. But in doing so, each worker will weigh poten-tial benefits against potential losses—losses in pay, in esteem, in friendship, and so forth. The choices are not always easy, nor are the motiva-tions always obvious. When many values are involved, the rational calculation of benefits and costs becomes even more difficult.

Rational-choice models of behavior prompt us to look at patterns of behavior to see how

they conform to and depart from normal expectations of personal profit and loss. But those models do not always identify the underlying values. How we learn what to value in the first place, how we communicate our choices and intentions, how we learn new values through interaction—all are subjects that require other concepts besides those found in rational-choice theories of behavior. Such questions lead us toward research about



Licensed to:


how people actually carry out and understand human interaction in their daily lives.

Symbolic Interactionism When we make choices about our interactions with other peo-ple, we may be said to be acting rationally. Other forces are likely to shape our behavior as well. For example, you may select a particular course because the instructor is rumored to be good. But what does “good” mean—clear and well organized? An easy grader? Friendly? Humor-ous? The dimensions of a choice can be compli-cated, and we may not be aware of everything that goes into our decisions. You may, without realizing it, choose a course as much to be with certain other people as to be in that particular course. Our choices tell other people about us: what we like, what we want to become, and so on. Indeed, the way people dress, the way they carry themselves (body language), the way they speak to each other, and the gestures they make convey a great deal of information that is not always intentional or expressed in speech. Some forms of communication give information without speaking it, or speak one thing and mean another. But words are of great importance too, and the content of communication is made explicit in words and sentences. Sociologists refer to all these aspects of behavior as symbolic interaction. From the symbolic-interactionist perspective, “society itself tends to be seen as a mosaic of little scenes and dramas in which people make indica-tions to themselves and others, respond to those indications, align their actions, and so build identities and social structures” (Rock, 1985, p. 844).

Symbolic interactionists call attention to how social life is “con-structed” through the mundane acts of social communication. For example, in all the choices students make—joining friendship groups, learning the school’s informal rules of school, challenging and breaking those rules—the social order of student society, or “college culture,” is actually “constructed.” Erving Goffman, whose work was mentioned ear-lier, is known for his research on these processes. Goffman applied the symbolic-interactionist perspective to the study of everyday interactions such as rituals of greeting and departure, of daily life in asylums and gambling houses, and of behavior in streets and public places. His work examines how people behave in social situations and how others rate their “performances.”

The power of symbolic interactionism lies in its ability to generate theories about how people learn to play certain roles and how those roles are used in the social construction of groups and organizations. However, if we want to think sociologically about more complex phenomena, such as the rise of bureaucratic organizations or the reasons why some societ-ies experience revolutions, we also need the concepts developed by two other perspectives: functionalism and conflict theory.

FunctionalismIs society simply the sum total of countless micro-level exchanges and communicative interactions, or do the organizations within a society have properties independent of the actions of individuals? When we

speak of the family, the army, the corporation, or the laboratory, we generally have in mind an entity marked by certain specific functions, tasks, and types of behavior. The army requires that its members learn to engage in armed com-bat, even if that is not what they will be doing most of the time. The family requires that its members behave in nurturant ways toward one another. The farm requires that those who run it know how to plant and harvest. Individual interactions may determine how well a given person performs these various tasks; but the larger organization—the army, the family, the farm—establishes specific ways of behaving and doing the work of that organization. In this sense the organization, which exists longer than any of its members, has its own existence.

The functionalist perspective asks how soci-ety manages to carry out the functions it must perform in order to maintain social order, feed large masses of people each day, defend itself against attackers, produce the next generation, and so on. From this perspective, the many groups and organizations that make up a soci-ety form the structure of human society. This social structure is a complex system designed to carry out the essential functions of human life. The function of the family, for example, is to raise and train a new generation to replace the old; the function of the military is to defend the society; the function of schools is to teach the next generation the beliefs and skills they will need to maintain the society in the future; and a major function of religion is to develop shared ideas of morality.

When a society is functioning well, all its major parts are said to be well integrated and in equilibrium. But periods of rapid social change

The cubicles of an open offi ce space—whose occupants perform the specifi c duties required by their jobs—have become a visual metaphor for the functionalist arrangement of modern work life.

© B

ill L

ai/T

he Im

age

Wor

ks

functionalism: A sociological perspective that focuses on the ways in which a complex pattern of social structures and arrangements contributes to social order.



Licensed to:


can throw social structures out of equilibrium. Entire ways of life can lose their purpose or function. When that happens, the various struc-tures of society can become poorly integrated, and formerly useful functions can become dysfunctional.

Consider an example: In agrarian societies, in which most people work the land, families typically include three generations, with many members in each generation living close to one another. Labor is in great demand; many hands are needed where there are no machines to per-form work in fields and barnyards and granaries. Early marriage and large numbers of children in the agrarian family help such a society function optimally. When the society industrializes and its agriculture becomes mechanized, however, families may continue to produce large numbers of children even though the demand for farm-hands has decreased. When they grow up, those children may migrate to towns and cities. The migrants are likely to continue to value large families and to have numerous children, but if they are unable to find jobs, they may join the ranks of the unemployed and their children may grow up in poverty. In this situation, the family can be said to be poorly integrated with the needs of the society; the value of large family size has become dysfunctional—it no longer contributes to the well-being of groups or individuals.

Conflict TheoryA major flaw in the functionalist perspective is that we have rarely seen anything approaching equilibrium in human societies. Inequalities of wealth and power, racism, religious intolerance, ethnic hatreds, grinding economic competi-tion, and criminality constantly threaten peace and the smooth functioning of even the most affluent and stable societies (Barash, 2002). In the twentieth century alone, two world wars and many civil wars disrupted the lives of mil-lions of people. Almost as devastating was the Great Depression of the 1930s, the most severe economic slump in modern history. Worst of all were the nightmares of the Nazi Holocaust and the purges of Stalinist Russia, in which more than 20 million people were exterminated.

The world wars, the depression, and the Holocaust shocked and demoralized the entire world. They also called into question the opti-mism of the nineteenth- and early twentieth-century social philosophers, many of whom believed in the promise of progress through modern science and technology. Between 1914 and the end of World War II, modern ideas and technologies were used for horrible purposes often enough to disillusion all but the most

These Iraqi refugees living on the streets of Syrian and Lebanese cities are unable to return to destroyed and dangerous neighborhoods in Iraq. They and millions of others in similar situations are a reminder that the physical and emotional scars of war last long after the cessation of hostilities. As wars become more destructive, the study of social confl ict and its solutions takes on even greater urgency.

Ago

stin

o Pa

ccia

ni/A

nzen

berg

er/R

edux

ardent optimists. Bewildered intellectuals and political leaders turned to sociology to find some explanation for those horrors.

Marxian Theory One explanation was provided by Marxian theory. According to Marx, the rise of capitalism was the cause of conflict in modern times. Under capitalism, forms of exploitation and domination spread. For example, in the early period of industrial capitalism, workers were forced to work twelve hours a day, six days a week; in less developed areas of the world, large populations were virtually enslaved by the new colonial powers.

At the heart of capitalism, for Marx, is conflict among people in dif-ferent economic classes, especially between those who control wealth and power and those who do not. Marx argued that the division of people in a society into different classes, defined by how they make a living, always produces conflict. Under capitalism, this conflict occurs between the owners of factories and the workers. Marx believed that class conflict would eventually destroy or at least vastly modify capitalism. His theory is at the heart of what has come to be known as conflict theory or the conflict perspective.

In the 1960s, when protests against racism and segregation, the Vietnam War, pollution of the environment, and discrimination against women each became the focus of a major social movement, the con-flict perspective became more prominent. It clearly was not possible to explain the rapid appearance of major social movements with theories that emphasized how the social system would function if it were in a state of equilibrium. Even Marxian theory did not do a very good job of predicting the protest movements of the 1960s, or their effects on Ameri-can society. The environmental movement and the women’s movement, for example, were not based on economic inequalities alone, nor were the people who joined them necessarily exploited workers. Sociologists studying the role of conflict in social change therefore had to go beyond

conflict perspective: A sociological perspective that emphasizes the role of conflict and power in society.



Licensed to:


Society on Parade Everybody loves a parade, and no one more than sociologists. We see parades as events that intentionally display the people, the values, and the social structures we

cherish. Parades also yield endless sociological insights into other people’s social worlds. The way particular sociologists analyze a parade may tell us something about their concerns and values as well. Take the annual Rose Bowl parade in Pasadena, California. A functionalist sociologist would argue

visualsociology

© C

rand

all/

The

Imag

e W

orks

© Z

bign

iew

Bzd

ak/T

he Im

age

Wor

ks

the Marxian view. Many turned to the writings of the German sociologist Georg Simmel (1904), who argued that conflict is necessary as a basis for the formation of alliances. According to Sim-mel, conflict is one means whereby a “web of group affiliations” is constructed. The continual shifting of alliances within this web of social groups can help explain who becomes involved in social movements and how much power those movements are able to acquire.

Power The concept of power holds a central place in conflict theory. From the functionalist perspective, society holds together because its members share the same basic beliefs about how people should behave. Conflict theorists point out that the role of power is just as important as the influence of shared beliefs in explaining why society does not disintegrate into chaos. Power is the ability of an individual or group to change the behavior of others. A nation’s government, as we will see in Chapter 4, usually controls the use of force (a form of power) to maintain social order. For sociologists who study conflict and power, the

important questions are who benefits from the exercise of power and who loses. For example, when the government intervenes in a strike and obliges workers to return to their jobs, does the public at large or the corporation against which the workers were striking benefit most? And what about the workers themselves? What do they gain or lose? Such questions are central to conflict theory today (Foucault, 2001; Gramsci, 1971).

The Multidimensional View of SocietyEach of the sociological perspectives leads to different questions and different kinds of observations. These are extremely powerful analytical tools. Anyone who masters them and learns to apply them in appropriate ways will have an immense advantage over more naive observers of the ever-changing parade of social life (Merton, 1998). From the eco-logical perspective come questions about how populations can exist and flourish in various natural and social environments. From the interactionist perspective come questions about how people get along and behave in groups and organizations of all kinds. Functionalism asks

power: The ability to control the behavior of others, even against their will.



Licensed to:


that the parade affi rms the society’s values of competi-tion and success and, in the process, helps the mer-chants of Pasadena. A sociologist with a more critical eye might call attention to the way the parade affi rms values that perpetuate inequality and social injustices. The Rose Bowl queen may be beautiful and talented, but a critical interpretation might emphasize how she is set on a pedestal and brought along to adorn the male fi eld of combat. From this perspective, the queen sym-bolizes women as beautiful objects to be possessed by men with power and money. An interactionist analysis might see the parade and its viewers as a form of public theater in which the symbols of American culture are displayed in endless variations as the diff erent fl oats pass by.

A saint’s day parade in a devout Roman Catholic village of Central or South America off ers another glimpse into the interactions that mark a special event in a village society. Who carries the village’s patron saint? By what rules of social standing are people arranged in the parade? Simply by describing who’s who in the parade, a local informant could off er many insights into the way the village is organized and how its people think and feel.

A military parade may be a joyous or ominous event, depending on whether one is on good terms with the generals or not. From a functionalist perspective, this is a display of force. Offi cial communications may por-tray it as a way of demonstrating that the nation has

the capacity to defend itself against other nations. In many parts of the world, how-ever, military parades are also meant to let citizens know in no uncertain terms who controls the use of deadly force. From a confl ict perspective, these parades reveal who has power in the society and how that power is used to favor some groups, who are usually featured in the parade, over others, who often are not included among the marchers.

©IS

SO

OF/

SA

NO

GO

/Get

ty Im

ages

Perspective Description Generates Questions About�.�.�. Applications

Interactionism Studies how social structures are created in the course of human interaction

How people behave in intimate groups; how symbols and communication shape perceptions; how social roles are learned and society is “constructed” through interaction

Education practice, courtroom procedure, therapy

Functionalism Asks how societies carry out the functions they must per-form; views the structures of society as a system designed to carry out those functions

How society is structured and how social structures work together as a system to perform the major functions of society

Study of formal organizations, development of social policies, management science

Confl ict Theory Holds that power is just as important as shared values in holding society together; confl ict is also responsible for social change

How power aff ects the distribution of scarce resources and how confl ict changes society

Study of politics, social movements, corporate power structures

PERSPECTIVESMajor Sociological Perspectives

questions about how society is structured and how it works as a social system. And the conflict perspective asks how power is used to maintain order and how conflict changes society.

These different perspectives developed as sociologists asked different questions about

society. In contemporary sociology, each continues to stimulate relatively distinct research based on the types of questions being asked. Yet a great deal of research combines the insights of different perspectives in ways that vastly increase the power of the resulting analysis. The Perspectives Chart above summarizes the major sociological perspectives and the kinds of questions they ask.



Licensed to:


SUMMARY

What is the sociological imagination, and how does it generate the questions that make sociology a “human science”?• Sociology is the scientific study of

human societies and of human behavior in the groups that make up a society. It is concerned with how social conditions influence our lives as individuals. The ability to see the world from this point of view has been described as the sociological imagination.

How do sociologists study social change at different levels of social reality?• Sociologists study social behavior at three

levels of complexity. Micro-level sociology deals with behaviors that occur at the level of the individual and immediate others. The middle level of sociological observation is concerned with how the social structures in which people participate actually shape their lives. Macro-level studies attempt to explain the social processes that influence populations, social classes, and entire societies.

Who are the key thinkers and researchers who have transformed social thought into social science?• The scientific discoveries of the

seventeenth century led to the rise of the idea of progress, as opposed to the notion of human helplessness in the face of divine Providence.

• In the eighteenth century, revolutions in Europe and North America completely changed the social order and gave rise to new perspectives on human social life.

• Out of this period of social and intellectual ferment came the idea of creating a science of human society. Sociology, as the new science was called, developed in Europe in the nineteenth century.

• During that formative period, several outstanding sociologists shaped and refined the new discipline. Among them were Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim, and Max Weber.

• In the twentieth century, sociology developed most rapidly in North America, spurred by the need for empirical information concerning social conditions. Numerous “social surveys” were conducted around the turn of the century; by the late 1920s, two distinct approaches to the study of society had evolved at American universities. The “Chicago school” focused on the relationship between the individual and society, whereas the major East Coast universities leaned toward macro-level analysis.

• Under the leadership of Robert Park and Ernest Burgess, the Chicago school developed the approach known as human ecology. This perspective emphasizes the relationships among social order, social disorganization, and the distribution of populations in space and time. Fundamental to this approach is the concept of community, meaning a population that carries out major functions within a particular territory.

How do the major sociological perspectives approach different social issues? • Modern sociologists employ other basic

perspectives in addition to human ecology. Interactionism is a perspective that views social order and social change as resulting from all the repeated interactions among individuals and groups.

• One version of this approach is rational-choice or exchange theory, which focuses on what people seem to be getting out of their interactions and what they contribute to them. Another is the symbolic-interactionist perspective, which studies how social structures are actually created in the course of human interaction.

• Functionalism, in contrast, is concerned primarily with the large-scale structures of society; it asks how those structures enable society to carry out its basic functions.



Licensed to:

SUMMARY 21

• In the decades since World War II, functionalism has been strongly challenged by the conflict perspective, which emphasizes the role of conflict and power in explaining not only why societies change but also why they hold together.

• None of the major sociological perspectives is fully independent of the others. Each emphasizes different questions and different observations about social life. Used in combination, they greatly increase our ability to understand and explain almost any aspect of human society.

The Kornblum Companion Websitewww.cengagebrain.comSupplement your review of this chapter by going to the companion website to take one of the tutorial quizzes, use the flash cards to master key terms, and check out the many other study aids you’ll find there. You’ll also find special features, such as GSS data and Web links that will put data and resources at your fingertips to help you with that special project or to do some research on your own.



Licensed to:

C-1

Images; Page 79, Eugene Richards/Reportage Division/Getty Images; Page 82, Picture Alliance/Photoshot; Page 86, John Neubauer/PhotoEdit; Page 86, Nicolas Sapieha/Art Resource, NY; Page 90, Nicholas Roberts/Reuters /Landov; Page 90, Photo by Romana Vystaova; Page 90, Rick Friedman/WpN/Photoshot

Chapter 5Page 96, Photosindia/Getty Images; Page 97, AP Photo/Ramon Espinosa; Page 98, AP Photos; Page 102, S. Curtiss, Genie: A Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern Day “Wild Child” (Academic Press, 1977). Used by permission; Page 103, Nina Leen/Time Life Pictures/Getty Images; Page 107, Rich Puchalsky; Page 111, Erik Isakson/Fancy/Photolibrary; Page 113, The New York Public Library, Photography Collection, Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs; Page 114, Spencer Grant/PhotoEdit; Page 116, AP Photos; Page 116, Courtesy of the Ludin Family; Page 117, Kuttig - People/Alamy; Page 119, AP Photos; Page 119, Eric Miller/Getty Images

Chapter 6Page 125, Paul Chesley/Getty Images; Page 126, Columbia University Press; Page 128, Marc Goff/Shutterstock.com; Page 129, Ken Heyman/Woodfin Camp & Associates; Page 136, By kind permission of the Trustees of the Wallace Collection, London/Art Resource, NY; Page 139, Patrick Durand/Sygma/Corbis; Page 141, Zoran Karapancev/Shutterstock.com; Page 142, Lee Foster/Alamy; Page 148, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 148, AP Photos; Page 150, Ken Heyman/Woodfin Camp & Associates; Page 150, Juerco Boerner/Picture Press/Photolibrary; Page 150, Luiz C. Marigo/Peter Arnold Images/PhotoLibrary

Chapter 7Page 153, Jason Stitt/ Shutterstock.com; Page 159, 2010 Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II /The Bridgeman Art Library; Page 160, kzenon/iStockphoto.com; Page 162, Imagno/Hulton Archive /Getty Images; Page 163, Wallace Kirkland/Time Life Pictures/Getty Images; Page 166, Bob Krist/Documentary/Corbis; Page 166, John Nordell/Index Stock Imagery/Photolibrary; Page 171, Pat Behnke/Alamy; Page 172, Leonard Freed/Magnum Photos; Page 173, AP Photos/Ron Haviv/VII; Page 175, AP Photo/Gustavo Ferrari; Page 176, Richard Levine/Alamy; Page 176, Kayte Deioma/PhotoEdit

Chapter 8Page 179, Dale Mitchell/Shutterstock.com; Page 182, Essex Institute, Salem, Massachusetts/Peabody Essex Museum; Page 183, Erich Schlegel/Dallas Morning News/Corbis; Page 187, UPI Photo/Monika Graff/Newscom; Page 188, Rafiqur Rahman/Reuters NewMedia Inc./Corbis; Page 189, Roger Viollet Collection/Getty Images; Page 189, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 189, Alex Segre/Alamy; Page 189, A. Ramey/PhotoEdit; Page 193, Beau Lark/Fancy/Corbis; Page 201, The Granger Collection, New York; Page 201, AP Photos; Page 205, Margaret Morton author/photographer The Tunnel (Yale University Press, 1995); Page 205, Margaret Morton author/photographer The Tunnel (Yale University Press, 1995); Page 205, Margaret Morton author/photographer The Tunnel (Yale University Press, 1995)

Chapter 9Page 208, Jim West/Photolibrary; Page 212, Collection of Palm Springs Art Museum; Page 212, AP Photo/Jack Plunkett; Page 212, Adam Osterman/Getty Images; Page 217, TANNEN MAURY/EPA /Landov; Page 220, Steven Rubin/The Image Works; Page 221, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 222, Culver Pictures, Inc; Page 227, 1987 Matt Herron/Take Stock; Page 227, 1987 Matt Herron/Take Stock; Page 227, 1987 Matt Herron/Take Stock

Chapter 10Page 230, Mike Goldwater/Alamy; Page 237, Catherine Karnow/Corbis; Page 238, Anne-Marie Palmer/Alamy; 1, Xinhua /Landov; Page 243, Bibliothèque nationale de France; Page 243, Chang W. Lee/The New York Times/Redux; Page 247, AP Photos; Page 247, ITAR-TASS Photo Agency/Alamy; Page 255, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, 1887 (oil on canvas), Vasnetsov, Victor Mikhailovich (1848-1926)/Museum of Religion and Atheism, St. Petersburg, Russia/The Bridgeman Art Library; Page 255, Sebastiao Salgado/Contact Press Images; Page 255, Sebastiao Salgado/Contact Press Images; Page 255, AP Photo/Ramon Espinosa

Chapter 11Page 258, George Robinson/Alamy; Page 259, Jose More; Page 262, Jeff Greenberg/PhotoEdit; Page 273, Bettman/Corbis; Page 273, ROD LAMKEY JR/AFP/Getty Images; Page 275, Barbara Norfleet; Page 278, Elliot Erwitt/

Credits

Chapter 1Page 1, Ariel Skelley/Blend Images/Getty Images; Page 6, Michael Dwyer/Stock Boston Inc.; Page 8, Karl Marx Museum Trier/Alfredo Dagli Orti/The Art Archive/Picture Desk; Page 8, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 9, Max Weber (1864-920) c.1896-97 (b/w photo), German Photographer, (19th century)/Private Collection/Archives Charmet/The Bridgeman Art Library; Page 9, Spencer Arnold/ Hulton Archive/Getty Images; Page 9, R. Gates/Hulton Archive/Getty Images; Page 9, Manjula Giri; Page 11, Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division [LC-USZ62-75205]; Page 13, Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division [LC-USZ62-123822]; Page 15, FR Sport Photography/Alamy; Page 16, Bill Lai/The Image Works; Page 17, Agostino Pacciani/Anzenberger/Redux; Page 18, Crandall/The Image Works; Page 18, Zbigniew Bzdak/The Image Works; Page 19, ISSOUF SANOGO/AFP/Getty Images

Chapter 2Page 22, Jim West/Alamy; Page 23, AP Wide World Photos; Page 25, UPI/Bettman/Corbis; Page 25, AP Photos; Page 30, Courtesy of Douglas Harper/Paradigm Publishers; Page 30, William Kornblum; Page 41, AP Photos; Page 41, AP Photos

Chapter 3Page 44, Ansres Prerz Moreno/Picture Alliance/Photoshot; Page 46, Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology; Page 49, Photofest; Page 49, Michael Newman/PhotoEdit; Page 51, guatebrian/Alamy; Page 51, David Sutherland/Alamy; Page 51, John Cancalosi/Alamy; Page 51, Chenault Studios; Page, 53, AP Photo; Page 53, AP Photos; Page 54, Underwood & Underwood/Bettmann/Corbis; Page 54, Ron C. Angle/Getty Images News/Getty Images; Page 57, Everett Collection; Page 60, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 61, Richard B. Levine; Page 63, Hans Georg Roth/Documentary/Corbis; Page 65, Gianni Dagli Orti/The Art Archive/Alamy; Page 67, Margaret Washington/Cornell University; Page 69, The Art Archive/Egyptian Museum Cairo/Alfredo Dagli Orti /Picture Desk

Chapter 4Page 72, Martin Rose/FIFA/Getty Images; Page 73, Eugene Richards/Reportage Division/Getty Images; Page 79, Eugene Richards/Reportage Division/Getty Images; Page 79, Eugene Richards/Reportage Division/Getty

Entries that appear in magenta refer to the optional Global Social Change chapter.

CREDIT.indd 1CREDIT.indd 1 24/12/10 3:47 PM24/12/10 3:47 PM


Licensed to:

C-2 CREDITS

Trust www.ImogenCunningham.com; Page 366, ©1973, 2010 The Imogen Cunningham Trust www.ImogenCunningham.com; Page 366, ©1968, 2010 The Imogen Cunningham Trust www.ImogenCunningham.com

Chapter 15Page 368, Queerstock, Inc./Alamy; Page 369, Eugene Richards/Reportage Division/Getty Images; Page 369, Eugene Richards/Reportage Division/Getty Images; Page 372, Paul Conklin/PhotoEdit; Page 372, Stephanie Maze/Woodfin Camp & Associates; Page 378, Newscom; Page 389, Erich Lessing/Art Resource, NY; Page 393, Kevin Rivoli; Page 396, Phillip Jarrell/Digital Vision/Getty Images; Page 396, Frank Fournier/Contact Press Images; Page 396, Dan Habib Photography

Chapter 16Page 399, Bill Pugliano/Getty Images; Page 401, AP Photo/Khalil Hamra; Page 404, David Moore/Black Star; Page 404, Robert Goldwitz/Photo Researchers, Inc.; Page 405, Reuters/Corbis; Page 408, Edmundo Morales; Page 409, Collection of the Museum of American Folk Art, New York. Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Edwin C. Braman, 1983. 14.4; Page 409, Collection of Sandra S. Jaffe/Preservation Hall; Page 412, Susan Kornblum; Page 414, National Anthropological Archives; Page 415, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 416, Bob Daemmrich/Stock Boston Inc.; Page 417, Ross Marino/Corbis; Page 422, AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino; Page 424, Tony Savino/The Image Works; Page 426, AP Photos; Page 426, Steven Rubin/The Image Works; Page 426, Steven Rubin/The Image Works

Chapter 17Page 429, David Smith/Alamy; Page 430, Courtesy of Jonas Chartock; Page 433, George Holton/Photo Researchers, Inc.; Page 450, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 450, Mark Lewis; Page 454, Courtesy of Allison Serafin; Page 454, AP Photos/Brandon Hoffman; Page 454, Courtesy of Orin Gutlerner

Chapter 18Page 457, vario images GmbH & Co.KG/Alamy; Page 462, The Granger Collection, New York; Page 464, adrian arbib/Alamy; Page 465, Edmundo Morales; Page 467, Simon Marcus/PhotoLibrary; Page 468, Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division; Page 469, China Newsphoto /Reuters /Landov; Page 484, Gary Conner/PhotoEdit; Page 484, The Print Collector/Alamy; Page 484, Billy E. Barnes/PhotoEdit

Chapter 19Page 487, Jim Arbogast/Digital Vision/Jupiter Images; Page 488, SHAH MARAI/AFP/Getty Images; Page 491, The Granger Collection, New York; Page 494, Fuse/Jupiter Images; Page 496, David R. Frazier Photolibrary, Inc./Alamy; Page 499, Pete Winkel; Page 500, AP Photo/Paul Sakuma; Page 506, M. Wuerker; Page 509, AP Photo; Page 509, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 509, /AP Photo/Ed Andrieski; Page 510, AP Photo/Charles Dharapak; Page 512, AP Photo/Jerome Delay; Page 512, Dmitri Kessel/Time Life Pictures/Getty Images; Page 512, Stephanie Sinclair/Corbis

Chapter 20Page 516, Rachel Epstein/PhotoEdit; Page 517, © Francois Dumont/Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF); Page 517, © Remy Zilliox/Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF); Page 519, DESMOND KWANDE/AFP/Getty Images; Page 526, Stedelijke Musea Brugge, Memlingmuseum, Sint-Janshospitaal, Bruges; Page 529, AP PHOTO/CP,Adrian Wyld

Chapter 21Page 532, Brasil2/iStockphoto.com; Page 535, Corbis; Page 544, AP Photo/Lenny Ignelzi; Page 545, MARWAN IBRAHIM/AFP/Getty Images; Page 545, North Wind/North Wind Picture Archives; Page 547, Peter Menzel/Stock Boston Inc.; Page 548, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 548, Kirk Condyles; Page 553, Dennis Stock/Magnum Photos; Page 553, Joe Carini/The Image Works; Page 553, J. B. Diederich/Contact Press Images; Page 560, Kirk Condyles; Page 560, Wendy Ewald; Page 560, Wendy Ewald

Chapter 22Page 563, Boris Breuer/Getty Images; Page 568, AP Photo/Jerome Delay; Page 569, Nik Wheeler/Corbis; Page 572, Brandt/Hulton Archive/Getty Images; Page 573, Getty Images; Page 573, George Hall/Corbis; Page 576, Michael Grecco/Stock Boston Inc.; Page 581, MOHSIN RAZA/Reuters /Landov; Page 583, Réunion des Musées Nationaux/Art Resource, NY; Page 588, Betty Press/Woodfin Camp & Associates; Page 588, Kyaman goldsmiths, Anna Village, Cote d’Ivoire, Photograph by Eliot Elisofon, 1972, EEPA EECL 6951, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives, National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian Institution; Page 589, Courtesy of United Nations/DPI; Page 589, “A Harrist Church in the Blokosso section of Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire. Photography by Albert Votaw, 1969, T 2 IVC 1 AV 69, Eliot Elisofon Photographic Archives; National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian Institution

Magnum Photos; Page 283, Nathan Benn/Woodfin Camp & Associates; Page 284, Frances Roberts/Alamy; Page 286, Michael Jacobson-Hardy; Page 286, Michael Jacobson-Hardy; Page 286, Michael Jacobson-Hardy

Chapter 12Page 289, ullstein bild/The Image Works; Page 290, AP Photo/David Bookstaver; Page 293, AP Photo/Jae C. Hong; Page 294, Bettmann/Corbis; Page 294, Richard Avery/Stock Boston Inc.; Page 299, Newscom; Page 300, Gibson, James F./Library of Congress[LC-DIG-cwpb-01005]; Page 304, Sarah Hadley/Alamy; Page 307, Robert Brenner/PhotoEdit; Page 309, Courtesy Devah Pager; Page 310, Chicago Historical Society; Page 310, Peter Turnley/Corbis; Page 315, Jim Noelker/The Image Works; Page 316, William Johnson/Stock Boston Inc.; Page 316, Steve Skjold/PhotoEdit; Page 317, Dan Dry/Dan Dry & Associates

Chapter 13Page 320, David Bunting/Alamy; Page 321, Chenault Studios/Decature, AL; Page 323, Paul Chesley/Stone/Getty Images; Page 324, KHALED DESOUKI/AFP/Getty Images; Page 325, The Kobal Collection/Picture Desk; Page 326, Dorthea Lange/The Library of Congress[LC-DIG-fsa-8b29516]; Page 326, Bill Ganzel, www.ganzelgroup.com; Page 330, Musee Conde, Chantilly, France/Giraudon/The Bridgeman Art Library; Page 333, Catherine Ursillo/Photo Researchers, Inc.; Page 334, AP Photos; Page 336, Hulton Archive/Archive Photos/Getty Images; Page 336, Easterling Studios; Page 337, The State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg/Photo by Vladimir Terebenin, Leonard Kheifets, Yuri Molodkovets; Page 338, FPG/Getty Images; Page 341, Chenault Studios/Decatur, AL; Page 341, Chenault Studios/Decatur, AL; Page 341, Chenault Studios/Decatur, AL; Page 341, Chenault Studios/Decatur, AL

Chapter 14Page 345, Keith Brofsky/Brand X Pictures/Jupiter Images; Page 346, ©1974, 2010 The Imogen Cunningham Trust www.ImogenCunningham.com; Page 352, Jim West/Alamy; Page 354, Farrel Grehan/Photo Researchers, Inc.; Page 355, AP Photos; Page 356, Huntington Library/SuperStock; Page 356, Dave Sartin Photography; Page 356, David Deas/DK Stock/Getty Images; Page 361, Hulton Archive/Archive Photos/Getty Images; Page 364, UN Photo/Grunzweig; Page 366, ©1975, 2010 The Imogen Cunningham Trust www.ImogenCunningham.com; Page 366, ©1976, 2010 The Imogen Cunningham

CREDIT.indd 2CREDIT.indd 2 24/12/10 3:47 PM24/12/10 3:47 PM


dfghgh

Documents