On Theoretical Sociology [Paperback]

Robert K. Merton (Author)

Product Details

• Paperback: 180 pages
• Publisher: Free Press; 624 edition (October 1, 1967)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0029211506
• ISBN-13: 978-0029211502
• Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.5 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 8.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #118,565 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent overview of social structures, January 25, 2004

By A Customer

This review is from: On Theoretical Sociology (Paperback)

Great introduction to the functional analysis of social structures. Merton has written important essays introducing students and scholars to contemporary sociology.

Easy to understand -- yet written at a high intellectual level.

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Respecting the Masters., December 28, 2008

By 

J. Held (Winterset, Iowa USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: On Theoretical Sociology (Paperback)

Robert Merton divides this book into five chapters. Chapters three through five are taken from part one of his previous works titled, "Social Theory and Social Structure". Chapters one and two have been added to this previous work to attempt to better explain sociological theory and its connection to its past as a prerequisite to any future gains of knowledge within the filed of sociology.

The book primarily addresses the distinct differences between the study of sociology and the study of sociological history and theory. Merton states that this division has caused many problems related to gaining new knowledge. There seems to be an antagonistic existence between sociological historians and researchers. He states that the historians are concerned with protecting the ancient sociological masters from plagiarism by modern sociological researchers. This division is harmful to the field in that the social sciences must rely on past knowledge to create new knowledge. He states that knowledge within the social sciences is gained incrementally rather than at all once. The hard sciences rely on only modern theory to apply their skills to gain new knowledge. The humanities such as literature rely on the ancient ones primarily to gain new knowledge. The examples used are of science and literature. One would surely not use ancient theory in science to study modern phenomenon such as human genetics. The opposite could be said when studying literature. One would need to study the ancient greats of literature to form the necessary basic knowledge to further one's understanding of literature, (e.g. Shakespeare). Sociology falls in between these two examples. Merton feels that one cannot study sociological theory without having a thorough understanding of its history. One must build upon past achievements and failures to gain new knowledge in the field of sociology.

The biggest problem with achieving new knowledge is the amount of criticism levied onto its creator. The protectors of the ancient masters, the sociological historians, feel nostalgia about their masters and take offense to new researchers claim to new theory. They will attack the new theory as having no originality through the use of matching words to ancient text or theory, however this wrong according to Merton. I agree that it is wrong in that comparing words from one author to another without first distinguishing the meaning or concept behind the word is "spinning" the truth. I understand Merton to be comparing the researcher with the historian as one that seeks to gain knowledge with one that seeks to gain victory or prestige. This could compare to ancient philosophy in that it was the Sophists that used language to battle rather than to gain new knowledge. Merton termed this as Adumbrationism or "the denigrating of new ideas by pretending to find them old".

A clear example of this was Sorokin's berating of Marx and Engel as being without originality and that their theories were completely political. However, as progress has been made, Sorokin later concluded that while it could be given some credit outside of the political realm it still lacked distinction from previous works. Marx agreed that the components of his theories were not new, however he insisted that these components had never been applied to specific areas of society in the way in which he has applied them. For example social classes was not a new term but combined with the history of mankind through mans struggles between classes created a new form of knowledge. This conflict between researcher and historian has and will stymie new knowledge in the field of sociology.

I agree that when studying sociology one must address the masters of the field prior to embarking on any new study. This basic understanding is necessary to understanding any new modern theory. It also plays an important aspect in relaying the milieu of the original sociological theory. Theory can be applicable in one environment but then be completely irrelevant in another. The same can be said of time periods as the social milieu can change not only over place but also of time. For example, the feeling of loss will increase with each additional loss when the individual experiencing the loss is isolated from others experiencing loss, (e.g. the loss a mother would experience with the death of her husband and son in a car crash would be greater than that of a mother who experienced the death of just her son in a car crash). This theory would be false if experienced during a mass disaster such as a large series of car crashes within close proximity. For example, the loss a mother feels would decrease, as compared to the previous example, if she is witnessed to other mothers experiencing greater loss, (e.g. a mother that losses her son, daughter, husband, and father in a car crash). Merton would also assert that time could change the loss felt. Death and the loss of loved ones are relative to the age being compared. The death of a loved one fighting a holy crusade was seen as glorious with some grieving while the death today of a soldier fighting in a foreign conflict might contain some pride in "God and Country" would have far greater feeling of loss by loved ones.

This book was easy to understand and comprehend as it was enjoyable. This book makes a connection with the MLS degree in regards to knowledge and the ways of knowing. It addresses the implications of politics into research and the stagnation of new knowledge that results. Merton was a joy to read and really brought home his point concerning the connection between old and new theory as a prerequisite to gaining new knowledge. He addressed this connection by terming it a "dialogue" between the ancient masters and oneself. Just as two researchers conducting a study may use discourse to advance any knowledge one must do the same with ancient theories.