Skip to main content

Pluralism and Relationalism in Social Theory: Lessons from the Tarde–Durkheim Debate

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Relational Sociology
  • 2161 Accesses

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.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 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.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar, R., M. Archer, A. Collier, T. Lawson, and A. Norrie, eds. 1998. Critical Realism: Essential Readings. London; New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caillé, A., and F. Vandenberghe. 2016. Neo-classical Sociology: The Prospects of Social Theory Today. European Journal of Social Theory 19: 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Candea, M. 2010. The Social after Gabriel Tarde: Debates and Assessments. 1st ed. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E. 1982. Rules of Sociological Method. 1st American ed. New York: Free Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997. Suicide. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B., G. Harman, and P. Erdélyi. 2011. The Prince and the Wolf: Latour and Harman at the LSE. Winchester, UK; Washington: Zero Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauss, M. 2011. The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. Mansfield Centre, CT: Martino Fine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauss, M., and M. Gane. 2005. The Nature of Sociology: Marcel Mauss. New York: Berghahn Books/Published in Association with Durkheim Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, W.J.T. 1998. The Last Dinosaur Book: The Life and Times of a Cultural Icon. 1st ed. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarde, G. 1903. The Laws of Imitation. New York: H. Holt and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Social Laws: An Outline of Sociology. Kitchener: Batoche Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Penal Philosophy. Charleston: Nabu Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. Monadology and Sociology. Melbourne: re.press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toews, D. 2002. The Social Occupations of Modernity: Philosophy and Social Theory in Durkheim, Tarde, Bergson, and Deleuze. PhD thesis, University of Warwick.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003. The New Tarde: Sociology after the End of the Social. Theory, Culture & Society 20: 81–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Tarde’s Sociology of Difference: Its Classical Roots and Contemporary Meanings. Journal of Classical Sociology 13: 393–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics