Main trends of research in the social and human ... - unesdoc - Unesco

Sociology 103
sociologists which the more profound Communist critics wish to bring to light.
Using the American sociologist as their main target, they stress his need to
split his roIe into a manifest and a latent function; he knows that his society is
bad, and must therefore claim the scientific purity of his work while rendering
latent service to the powers that be. The Communist concrete sociologist knows
that his society is good, and therefore he can openly acknowledge that he wants
his work to be useful and used.
Once one has properly analyzed the situation one can dismiss the mutual
accusations, and attend to what is obviously an important situation. Do Com-
munist sociologists really succeed in contributing to social planning through
their research? The claim that they do, is based on something like the following:
the sociologist analyses the situation; the Party bases a decision on his findings
and acts; the sociologist sees whether the action is successful and, if it is not,
studies the difficulties and suggests corrections on which the Party acts again.
Thus, by continuous, obviously dialectical interaction between research and
decision, political action would be more successful and sociology as a sphere
of knowledge would be enriched. I am sure that most Western sociologists look
with interest and perhaps with envy at the outcome. They know how difficult
it is to perform experiments with human beings and how this slows down the
progress of the social sciences. A planned society provides the opportunity of
watching experiments on a grand scale. It is quite possible that sociologists tied
into such a design might make great contributions to our science.
From its beginning, Marxism has taken pride in its combination of praxis
and theory. For the sociologist this meant that he had clear-cut directives,
provided by theory, as to what to look for. And these directives were always
substantive: trace whatever you observe back to the technical and social ele-
ments in the mode of production. But another, more formal theoretical impera-
tive is conceivable: relate whatever you observe to something else, but do not
stop at descriptive correlations ; instead, look for a mechanism which accounts
for the connections, and conceive this mechanism so broadly that it fits practi-
cally any social situation which you care to investigate. This kind of quest for
theory has led to functionalism.
Functionalism
It cannot be my intention to give a rounded picture of functionalism, as the
literature is far too vast.59 But it is probably the best example of the inventiveness
and: the uncertainties attached to the double effort SO characteristic of con-
temporary sociology : to systematize the increasing amount of factual informa-
tion available without falling back on empty speculation on the past and future
of all societies. I shall try to reveal the seductive character of the basic idea as
well as to its vagueness which, Proteus-like, escapes from or adapts itself to
critical examination. The best procedure is probably to start with a brief chron-
ological survey.
In 1893 Durkheim called the two initial sections of his monograph on the
division of labour ‘causes’ and ‘conditions’. Briefly thereafter he formulated the
methodological rule: ‘when the explanation of a social phenomenon is under-