Skip to main content
Log in

What makes a difference? Symmetry as a sociological concept

  • Published:
Theory and Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article discusses symmetry as an analytical tool for sociological analysis. Symmetry is presented as a property of social formations and a way to generate information about them through their mutual comparisons. The concept thus displaces the old dichotomy between individual and society. The latter forces to think in terms of wholes and parts, unduly limiting the possibilities at hand by keeping individuals as prisoners of societies, as it were. Symmetry opens the door for more alternatives by making room for more social formations at the same time. To develop this concept, the article turns to both Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory and Harrison White’s network theory which are presented as enacting an “order from noise” approach (as opposed to an “order from order” approach). The article then reconstructs a whole spectrum going from social formations at a high level of symmetry to social formations at a low level of symmetry. At the first end, we have social formations like groups that define the identities of persons (or even define persons as identities). At the other end, we have entire functional sectors (like politics, science, law, economy, etc.) whose chief characteristic is to be asymmetric to each other (so that doing politics, for instance, is unlike doing science and vice-versa).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Archer, M. (1995). Realist Social Theory: A Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge University Press.

  • Azarian, G. R. (2005). The General sociology of Harrison C. White: Chaos and Order in Networks. Palgrave.

  • Baraldi, C., Corsi, G., & Esposito, E. (2021). Unlocking Luhmann. Bielefeld University Press.

  • Bhaskar, R. (1989). The possibility of Naturalism. Harvester Wheatsheaf.

  • Borch, C. (2011). Niklas Luhmann. Routledge.

  • Breiger, R. L. (1974). The duality of persons and groups. Social Forces, 53, 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/53.2.181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLanda, M. (2006). A New Philosophy of History. Continuum.

  • DeLanda, M. (2016). Assemblage theory. Edinburgh University Press.

  • Durkheim, E. (1984). The Division of Labor in Society. Free Press.

  • Elder-Vass, D. (2010). The Causal Power of Social Structures. Cambridge University Press.

  • Fontdevila, J., & White, H. C. (2013). Relational Power from switching across netdoms through reflexive and Indexical Language. In F. Dépelteau, & C. Powell (Eds.), Applying relational sociology (pp. 155–179). Palgrave.

  • Fontdevila, J., Opazo, M. P., & White, H. C. (2011). Order at the Edge of Chaos: Meaning from Netdom switching Across Functional Systems. Sociological Theory, 29(3), 178–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9558.2011.01393.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, S. (2001). Against Essentialism. Harvard University Press.

  • Fuhse, J. (2022). Social networks of communication and meaning. Oxford University Press.

  • Godart, F. C., & White, H. C. (2010). Switching under uncertainty: The coming and becoming of meanings. Poetics, 38, 567–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2010.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guy, J. S. (2018). Niklas Luhmann before relational sociology: The cybernetics roots of systems theory. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 35, 856–868. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guy, J. S. (2019a). Problems and differentiation: A Deleuze-Luhmann encounter. Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 26, 29–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guy, J. S. (2019b). Theory beyond structure and Agency. Palgrave-Macmillan.

  • Guy, J. S. (2019c). Digital technology, digital culture and the metric/nonmetric distinction. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, 55–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guy, J. S. (2020). Are relational processes teleological or self-referential? What relational sociology can learn from systems theory. Digithum, 26, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.7238/d.v0i26.374159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F. (2017). Médium et choses. Vrin.

  • Latour, B. (2013). An Enquiry into Modes of existence. Harvard University Press.

  • Luhmann, N. (1982). The differentiation of Society. Columbia University Press.

  • Luhmann, N. (1989). Ecological communication. University of Chicago Press.

  • Luhmann, N. (1995). Social Systems. Stanford University Press.

  • Luhmann, N. (1998). Love as passion. Stanford University Press.

  • Luhmann, N. (2002). Theories of distinction. Stanford University Press.

  • Luhmann, N. (2012). Theory of Society, volume one. Stanford University Press.

  • Luhmann, N. (2013a). Introduction to Systems Theory. Polity.

  • Luhmann, N. (2013b). Theory of Society, volume two. Stanford University Press.

  • Mische, A. & White, H. (1998). Between Conversation and Situation: Public Switching Dynamics across Network Domains. Social Research, 65(3), 695–724.

  • Porpora, D. (1989). Four Concepts of Social Structure. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 19(2), 195–211.

  • Roth, S. (2013). Dying is only human: The case death makes for the immortality of the person. Tamara Journal for Critical Organization Inquiry, 11(2), 35–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S., Clark, C., Trofimov, N., Mkrtichyan, A., Heidingsfelder, M., Appignanesi, L., & Kaivo-Oja, J. (2017). Futures of a distributed memory. A global brain wave measurement (1800–2000). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 118, 307–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S., Dahms, H. F., Welz, F., & Cattacin, S. (2019a). Print theories of computer societies. Introduction to the digital transformation of social theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 149, 119778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S., Schwede, P., Valentinov, V., Žažar, K., & Kaivo-oja, J. (2019b). Big data insights into social macro trends (1800–2000): A replication study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 149, 119759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmel, G. (1950). The sociology of Georg Simmel. Free Press.

  • Simmel, G. (2009). Sociologies, Inquiries into the Construction of Social Forms (two volumes) Brill.

  • Vandenberghe, F. (1999). The Real is Relational”: An epistemological analysis of Pierre Bourdieu’s Generative Structuralism. Sociological Theory, 17(1), 32–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Foerster, H. (2003). Understanding understanding. Springer-Verlag.

  • Von Foerster, H., & Broecker, M. (2010). Part of the World. University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign.

  • Weber, M. (1958). From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. Oxford University Press.

  • Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society, two volumes. University of California Press.

  • White, H., Fuhse, J., Thiemann, M., & Buchholz, L. (2007). Networks and Meaning: Styles and Switchings. Soziale Systeme, 13(1–2), 543–555. https://doi.org/10.1515/sosys-2007-1-246

  • White, H. (2008). Identity and Control, 2nd edition Princeton University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steffen Roth.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Prof. Guy has sadly passed away last year.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guy, JS., Roth, S. What makes a difference? Symmetry as a sociological concept. Theor Soc 52, 947–964 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-023-09519-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-023-09519-2

Keywords

Navigation