Download - HSRC Press

Free download from www.hsrcpress.ac.zation, the following emerges: Concepts, or rather constructs, such as, forexample, alienation typically consist of many shades of meaning — a varietyof connotative elements. Theoretical concepts are rich in connotation. Onecould also use the analogy of a field of meaning to illustrate this idea.Wittgenstein uses the term “family of resemblances”.Within a given field of meaning, certain shades of meaning are more closelyassociated than others. Together, these shades of meaning within a field ofmeaning, constitute the meaning of the concept. The association betweenspecific shades of meaning, that is, the central dimensions of meaning, isclearly not a coincidental matter — it is not simply given. It is only within theframework of a theory, a model, or a typology that the dimensions of meaning— the associations — may be systematised through the process of definition.And this is the function of theoretical definition: to arrange or systematize themost important dimensions of meaning of theoretical concepts logically.To arrange logically would, in this context, imply that the logical rules ofcorrect classification, the rule of mutual exclusion and exhaustiveness, must beadhered to. This may be explained in the following manner: Assume that wewished to develop a classification of types of societies on the basis of theirlevel of development. The classification which we develop is the following:industrialized societies, agrarian societies, and high-technology societies. Thissimple typology would, clearly, not be acceptable because there is a largedegree of overlap between the first and third categories; they do not excludeone another completely. This principle will be addressed in more detail at alater stage (chapter 6).Using the example of alienation, we have been able to demonstrate that a goodtheoretical definition implies that (1) the essential dimensions of meaning of aconcept have been identified, and (2) that these dimensions are, as far aspossible, mutually exclusive. Judged on face value, it would appear thatStroup’s typology does not entirely comply with the second of theserequirements: the dimensions isolation and loneliness, as well as those whichhe called indifference and disenchantment, could be regarded as overlappingcategories. Seeman’s five dimensions, on the other hand, appear even uponcursory inspection, to be valid (exhaustive and mutually exclusive) categories.Rose, following the lead of Phillips (1966), introduced the term internaltheoretical validity and listed three characteristics of acceptable theoreticalexplication. These are clarity, scope, and systematic import. Rose describedeach of these terms briefly as follows:Clarity is the concept’s potential for leading to indicators, which dependson the degree to which it implies a chain of lower-level concepts; scope isthe breadth (or narrowness) of the class of phenomena to which theconcept applies; and systematic import is the extent to which the conceptis used in propositions and theories (1982: 40).63