Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Formal Analysis of Power Relations and Culture Change

A Formal Analysis of Power Relations and Culture Change A Formal Analysis of Power Relations and Culture Change SAGE Publications, Inc.1970DOI: 10.1177/002071527001100202 Bernard J. Siegel Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A. Introduction A BASIC PROBLEM in the analysis of social change has been the search for regularities - patterns of recurrent social phenomena. In the past, this search has been postulated on the assumption that such regularities exist and are discoverable. It is possible to quarrel with this assumption, but that does not obscure the fact that it is a reasonable and justifiable assumption, and argument about it merely obscures a more fundamental problem. What we should ask is why is it that social phenomena have been so intractable to our attempts at formulating statements about regularities? a In part, the answer can be given in terms of our assumptions about units of behavior as units of analysis. At the most microcosmic level of analysis we face the same problems as the physicist interested in sub-atomic quanta: we cannot simultaneously plot the position of our unit of analysis and describe its rate or direction of change. For the physicist as well as the social scientist, the difficulty is with the assumption of dynamic equivalence between stimulus and response http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Comparative Sociology SAGE

A Formal Analysis of Power Relations and Culture Change

A Formal Analysis of Power Relations and Culture Change

International Journal of Comparative Sociology , Volume 11 (2): 115 – Jun 1, 1970

Abstract

A Formal Analysis of Power Relations and Culture Change SAGE Publications, Inc.1970DOI: 10.1177/002071527001100202 Bernard J. Siegel Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A. Introduction A BASIC PROBLEM in the analysis of social change has been the search for regularities - patterns of recurrent social phenomena. In the past, this search has been postulated on the assumption that such regularities exist and are discoverable. It is possible to quarrel with this assumption, but that does not obscure the fact that it is a reasonable and justifiable assumption, and argument about it merely obscures a more fundamental problem. What we should ask is why is it that social phenomena have been so intractable to our attempts at formulating statements about regularities? a In part, the answer can be given in terms of our assumptions about units of behavior as units of analysis. At the most microcosmic level of analysis we face the same problems as the physicist interested in sub-atomic quanta: we cannot simultaneously plot the position of our unit of analysis and describe its rate or direction of change. For the physicist as well as the social scientist, the difficulty is with the assumption of dynamic equivalence between stimulus and response

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/a-formal-analysis-of-power-relations-and-culture-change-pm265CmDdh

References (31)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © 1970 by SAGE Publications
ISSN
0020-7152
eISSN
0020-7152
DOI
10.1177/002071527001100202
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

A Formal Analysis of Power Relations and Culture Change SAGE Publications, Inc.1970DOI: 10.1177/002071527001100202 Bernard J. Siegel Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A. Introduction A BASIC PROBLEM in the analysis of social change has been the search for regularities - patterns of recurrent social phenomena. In the past, this search has been postulated on the assumption that such regularities exist and are discoverable. It is possible to quarrel with this assumption, but that does not obscure the fact that it is a reasonable and justifiable assumption, and argument about it merely obscures a more fundamental problem. What we should ask is why is it that social phenomena have been so intractable to our attempts at formulating statements about regularities? a In part, the answer can be given in terms of our assumptions about units of behavior as units of analysis. At the most microcosmic level of analysis we face the same problems as the physicist interested in sub-atomic quanta: we cannot simultaneously plot the position of our unit of analysis and describe its rate or direction of change. For the physicist as well as the social scientist, the difficulty is with the assumption of dynamic equivalence between stimulus and response

Journal

International Journal of Comparative SociologySAGE

Published: Jun 1, 1970

There are no references for this article.