Abstract
In this chapter I present an original conception of relational analysis and aim to show how this conception can account for and further sociological pluralism while potentially increasing the unity of the field. Critiquing Caillé and Vandenberghe’s recent attempt to rally sociologists around Mauss’s gift concept, I argue for affirming a problems-oriented field that does not privilege any particular social problem. The test of a strategy of unification should not be merely the agreement of like-minded scholars but should rather be whether the framework is able to accommodate diverse approaches, particularly ones that are opposed to each other on issues of social ontology. To that end, I discuss the classical debate over the correct formulation of social ontology that took place between Emile Durkheim and Gabriel Tarde. Keying on the notion of emergence, I show how the latter can be re-thought as a common concern in relational analyses that can be extracted from works such as theirs. I argue that a relational analysis oriented via emergence to social problems can accommodate both of their approaches to social ontology. Such a scheme represents the best hope for unifying sociology without sacrificing its valuable diversity.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
For the sake of economy and relevance to my argument here I have reconstructed the debate selectively and in a different order than what took place in their dialogue.
References
Archer, M.S. 1995. Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. 1st ed. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bhaskar, R., M. Archer, A. Collier, T. Lawson, and A. Norrie, eds. 1998. Critical Realism: Essential Readings. London; New York: Routledge.
Caillé, A., and F. Vandenberghe. 2016. Neo-classical Sociology: The Prospects of Social Theory Today. European Journal of Social Theory 19: 3–20.
Candea, M. 2010. The Social after Gabriel Tarde: Debates and Assessments. 1st ed. London: Routledge.
Durkheim, E. 1982. Rules of Sociological Method. 1st American ed. New York: Free Press.
———. 1997. Suicide. New York: Free Press.
Latour, B., G. Harman, and P. Erdélyi. 2011. The Prince and the Wolf: Latour and Harman at the LSE. Winchester, UK; Washington: Zero Books.
Mauss, M. 2011. The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. Mansfield Centre, CT: Martino Fine Books.
Mauss, M., and M. Gane. 2005. The Nature of Sociology: Marcel Mauss. New York: Berghahn Books/Published in Association with Durkheim Press.
Mitchell, W.J.T. 1998. The Last Dinosaur Book: The Life and Times of a Cultural Icon. 1st ed. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
Tarde, G. 1903. The Laws of Imitation. New York: H. Holt and Company.
———. 2000. Social Laws: An Outline of Sociology. Kitchener: Batoche Books.
———. 2010. Penal Philosophy. Charleston: Nabu Press.
———. 2012. Monadology and Sociology. Melbourne: re.press.
Tarde, G., and E. Durkheim. 2010. The Debate. In The Social after Gabriel Tarde: Debates and Assessments, CRESC Series on Culture, Economy and the Social, ed. E.V. Vargas, B. Karsenti, and F. Ait-Touati. Trans. A. Damle and M. Candea. Edited by Matei Candea. London; New York: Routledge.
Toews, D. 2002. The Social Occupations of Modernity: Philosophy and Social Theory in Durkheim, Tarde, Bergson, and Deleuze. PhD thesis, University of Warwick.
———. 2003. The New Tarde: Sociology after the End of the Social. Theory, Culture & Society 20: 81–98.
———. 2010. Tarde and Durkheim and the Non-sociological Ground of Sociology. In The Social After Gabriel Tarde: Debates and Assessments, CRESC Series on Culture, ed. Matei Candea, 80–93. London; New York: Economy and the Social. Routledge.
———. 2013. Tarde’s Sociology of Difference: Its Classical Roots and Contemporary Meanings. Journal of Classical Sociology 13: 393–401.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Toews, D. (2018). Pluralism and Relationalism in Social Theory: Lessons from the Tarde–Durkheim Debate. In: Dépelteau, F. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Relational Sociology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66005-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66005-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66004-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66005-9
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)