Abstract
The study of institutions is central to the study of sociology. In this essay, a case is made for a macrosociology that conceptualizes institutional spheres as the structural and cultural milieus in which all lower levels of social reality, like individual, collective, and clusters of collective actors, are embedded. Spheres like religion or law vary in terms of their degree of physical, temporal, and social differentiation vis-à-vis all other institutional spheres, as well as, the degree to which they are symbolically distinct and, therefore, autonomous spheres of social reality and action. When viewed through an evolutionary and ecological perspective, institutional spheres lose the static nature found in functionalist accounts. Instead a recursive link between actors and environment is posited, highlighting the role the macro-level plays in shaping our everyday lives and social reality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The concept of autonomy is borrowed from Niklas Luhmann’s (2012) neo-system’s theory. While Luhmann saw the system autonomy as tantamount to closure and, thus, a solution to the problem of differentiation, our conceptualization moves away from closure to a more Weberian, social phenomenological perspective: autonomy means spheres become relatively discrete cultural systems that increase the probability that an actor or set of actions will orient their emotions, attitudes, and actions when physically or cognitively near the institutional sphere. Hence why physical, temporal, social, and symbolic space matters: all four of these dimensions can make salient one institutional sphere’s cultural reality vis-à-vis others.
- 2.
First, by “choice” I do not believe Spencer literally saw societies as making choices. He was aware that supraorganisms, like societies, are not like organisms because they have myriad “central nervous system” and therefore choices require quotations. Second, Spencer was not naïve to think the process was as simple as create new structures and/or cultures or collapse. His model was recursive, and when solutions were not found or were unsuccessfully implemented, rather than collapse, exigencies likely became amplified or intensified or new exigencies emerged (Turner 2010).
- 3.
The “core” metaphor is preferable to center if only because a core does not assume centrality, but rather an essential space from which key elements of institutional domains are produced and distributed. Hence, there can be more than one core, and cores do not have to be harmoniously integrated or coupled.
References
Abrutyn, S. (2009a). A general theory of institutional autonomy. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of California, Riverside.
Abrutyn, S. (2009b). Toward a general theory of institutional autonomy. Sociological Theory, 27(4), 449–465.
Abrutyn, S. (2013a). Political evolution, entrepreneurship, and autonomy: Causes and consequences of an “Axial” moment. Research in Political Sociology, 21, 3–29.
Abrutyn, S. (2013b). Reconceptualizing religious evolution: Toward a general theory of macro-institutional change. Social Evolution and History, 12(2), 5–36.
Abrutyn, S. (2013c). Reconceptualizing the dynamics of religion as a macro-institutional domain. Structure and Dynamics, 6(3), 1–21.
Abrutyn, S. (2014a). Religious autonomy and religious entrepreneurship: An evolutionary-institutionalist’s take on the axial age. Comparative Sociology, 13(2), 105–134.
Abrutyn, S. (2014b). Revisiting institutionalism in sociology: Putting the “Institution” back in institutional analysis. New York: Routledge.
Abrutyn, S. (2015a). The institutional evolution of religion: Innovation and entrepreneurship in ancient Israel. Religion, 45(4), 505–531.
Abrutyn, S. (2015b). Money, love, and sacredness: Generalized symbolic media and the production of instrumental, affectual, and moral reality. Czech Sociological Review, 51(3), 445–471.
Abrutyn, S., & Lawrence, K. (2010). From chiefdoms to states: Toward an integrative theory of the evolution of polity. Sociological Perspectives, 53(3), 419–442.
Abrutyn, S., & Mueller, A. S. (2014). Reconsidering Durkheim’s assessment of tarde: Formalizing a tardian theory of imitation, contagion, and suicide suggestion. Sociological Forum, 29(3), 698–719.
Abrutyn, S., & Mueller, A. S. (2015). When Too much integration and regulation hurt: Re envisioning Durkheim's altruistic suicide. Society and Mental Health. doi:10.1177/2156869315604346.
Abrutyn, S., & Turner, J. H. (2011). The old institutionalism meets the new institutionalism. Sociological Perspectives, 54(3), 283–306.
Abrutyn, S., & Van Ness, J. (2015). The role of agency in sociocultural evolution: Institutional entrepreneurship as a force of structural and cultural transformation. Thesis Eleven, 127(1), 52–77.
Alexander, J. C. (1988). Durkheimian sociology: Cultural studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alexander, J. C. (2004). Cultural pragmatics: Social performance between ritual and strategy. Sociological Theory, 22(4), 527–573.
Alford, R. R., & Friedland, R. (1985). Powers of theory: Capitalism, the state, and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Almond, G. A., Appleby, R. S., & Sivan, E. (2003). Strong religion: The rise of fundamentalism around the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bellah, R. N. (1964). Religious evolution. American Sociological Review, 29(3), 358–374.
Berman, H. J. (1983). Law and revolution: The formation of the western legal tradition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Blau, P. M. (1970). A formal theory of differentiation in organizations. American Sociological Review, 35(2), 201–218.
Blute, M. (2010). Darwinian sociocultural evolution: Solutions to dilemmas in cultural and social theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boli, J., Ramirez, F., & Meyer, J. W. (1985). Explaining the origins and expansion of mass education. Comparative Education Review, 29(2), 145–170.
Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14–25.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power (G. Raymond, & M. Adamson, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production: Essays on art and literature. New York: Columbia University Press.
Burke, K. (1989). On symbols and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Burke, P. J. (Ed.). (2006). Contemporary social psychological theories. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Carlin, J. E. (1980). Lawyers’ ethics. In W. M. Evan (Ed.), The sociology of Law: A social-structural perspective (pp. 257–267). New York: The Free Press.
Chase-Dunn, C., & Hall, T. D. (1997). Rise and demise: Comparing world-systems. Boulder: Westview Press.
Collins, R. (1981). Long-term social change and the territorial power of states. In Sociology since midcentury (pp. 71–108). New York: Free Press.
Collins, R. (1986). Weberian sociological theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davis, K., & Moore, W. E. (1945). Some principles of social stratification. American Sociological Review, 10(2), 242–249.
DiMaggio, P. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations (pp. 3–22). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Dobbin, F., & Sutton, J. R. (1998). The strength of a weak state: The rights revolution and the rise of human resources management divisions. American Journal of Sociology, 104(2), 441–476.
Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society (W. D. Halls, Trans.). New York: The Free Press.
Durkheim, E. (1895 [1982]). The rules of sociological method and selected texts on sociology and its method (W. D. Halls, Trans., 1st American ed.). New York: Free Press.
Edelman, L. B., & Suchman, M. C. (1997). The legal environments of organizations. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 479–515.
Eisenstadt, S. N. (1963). The political system of empires: The rise and fall of the historical bureaucratic societies. New York: Free Press.
Eisenstadt, S. N. (1964). Social change, differentiation and evolution. American Sociological Review, 29(3), 375–386.
Eisenstadt, S. N. (1980). Cultural orientations, institutional entrepreneurs, and social change: Comparative analysis of traditional civilizations. American Journal of Sociology, 85(4), 840–869.
Eisenstadt, S. N. (1984). Heterodoxies and dynamics of civilizations. American Philosophical Society, 128(2), 104–113.
Evans, P. (1995). Embedded autonomy: States and industrial formation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Fine, G. A. (1991). On the macrofoundations of microsociology: Constraint and the exterior reality of structure. The Sociological Quarterly, 32(2), 161–177.
Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2011). Toward a general theory of strategic action fields. Sociological Theory, 29(1), 1–27.
Fox, R. (1967). Kinship and marriage: An anthropological perspective. London: Cambridge University Press.
Freidson, E. (1962). Dilemmas in doctor-patient relationships. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human behavior and social processes (pp. 207–224). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 232–266). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Friedland, R., Mohr, J. W., Roose, H., & Gardinali, P. (2014). An institutional logic for love: Measuring intimate life. Theory and Society, 43(3–4), 333–370.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Pantheon Books.
Gospic, K., Mohlin, E., Fransson, P., Petrovic, P., Johannesson, M., & Ingvar, M. (2011). Limbic justice – Amygdala involvement in immediate rejection in the ultimatum game. PLoS Biology, 9(5), e1001054. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001054. doi:1001010.1001371/journal.pbio.1001054.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964.
Hawley, A. H. (1986). Human ecology: A theoretical essay. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hoebel, E. A. (1973). The Law of primitive Man. New York: Antheneum.
Humphreys, S. C. (1975). “Transcendence” and intellectual roles: The ancient Greek case. Daedalus, 104(2), 91–118.
Jepperson, R. L. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism of organizational analysis (pp. 143–163). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Johnson, A. W., & Earle, T. (2000). The evolution of human societies: From foraging groups to agrarian state. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Joyce, R. A. (2000). High culture, Mesoamerican civilization, and the classic Maya tradition. In J. Richards & M. Van Buren (Eds.), Order, legitimacy, and wealth in ancient states (pp. 64–76). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lawler, E. J., Thye, S., & Yoon, J. (2009). Social commitments in a depersonalized world. New York: Russell Sage.
Lenski, G. (1966). Power and privilege: A theory of social stratification. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1969). The elementary structures of Kinship (J. H. Bell, J. R. von Strumer, & R. Needhan, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.
Logan, J. R., & Molotch, H. L. (1988). Urban fortunes: The political economy of place. Berkeley: The University of California Press.
Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems (J. Bednarz Jr., & D. Baecker, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (2000). Art as a social system (E. M. Knodt, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (2004). Law as a social system (K. A. Ziegert, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (2012). Theory of society (B. Rhodes, Trans., Vol. I). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Malinowski, B. (1959). Crime and custom in savage society. Paterson: Littlefield, Adams, and Co.
Mauss, M. (1967). The gift: Forms and functions of exchange in archaic societies. New York: W. W. Norton.
Mayr, E. (2001). What evolution is. New York: Basic Books.
McCall, G. J., & Simmons, J. L. (1978). Identities and interactions. New York: Free Press.
Merton, R. K. (1967). Social theory and social structure (9th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Michels, R. (1911 [1962]). Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy (E. Paul, & C. Paul, Trans.). New York: Free Press.
Nee, V. (2005). The new institutionalisms in economics and sociology. In N. J. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology (2nd ed., pp. 49–74). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
North, D. C. (2005). Capitalism and economic growth. In V. Nee & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The economic sociology of capitalism (pp. 41–52). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. Glencoe: Free Press.
Parsons, T. (1963). On the concept of political power. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 107(3), 232–262.
Parsons, T. (1966). Societies: Evolutionary and comparative perspectives. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Radin, P. (1937 [1957]). Primitive religion: Its nature and origin. New York: Dover.
Rueschemeyer, D. (1986). Power and the division of labour. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Sahlins, M. (1972). Stone Age economics. New York: Aldine.
Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Shils, E. A. (1975). Center and periphery: Essays in macrosociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Simmel, G. (1907). The philosophy of money. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Spencer, H. (1897). The principles of sociology (Vol. I–III). New York: Appleton.
Starr, P. (1982). The social transformation of American medicine: The rise of the sovereign profession and the making of a vast industry. New York: Basic Books.
Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Menlo Park: The Benjamin Cummings Publishing Company.
Sutton, J. R., & Dobbin, F. (1996). The two faces of governance: Responses to legal uncertainty in U.S. Firms, 1955 to 1985. American Sociological Review, 61(5), 794–811.
Sutton, J., Dobbin, F., Meyer, J. W., & Scott, W. R. (1994). The legalization of the workplace. American Journal of Sociology, 99(4), 944–971.
Thomas, G. M., Meyer, J. W., Ramirez, F. O., & Boli, J. (1987). Institutional structure: Constituting state, society, and the individual. Newbury Park: Sage.
Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A New approach to culture, structure, and process. New York: Oxford University Press.
Timmermans, S. (2006). Postmortem: How medical examiners explain suspicious deaths. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Turner, R. H. (1978). The role and the person. American Journal of Sociology, 84(1), 1–23.
Turner, J. H. (1985). Herbert Spencer: A renewed appreciation. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Turner, J. H. (2003). Human institutions: A theory of societal evolution. Lanham: Bowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Turner, J. H. (2010). Theoretical principles of sociology, volume 1: Macrodynamics. New York: Springer.
Turner, J. H. (2011). Theoretical principles of sociology, volume 3: Mesodynamics. New York: Springer.
Weber, M. (1946). Science as a vocation. In H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 129–156). New York: Oxford University Press.
Weber, M. (1968). Max Weber on charisma and institution building. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Yoffee, N. (2005). Myths of the archaic state: Evolution of the earliest cities, states, and civilizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Abrutyn, S. (2016). Institutional Spheres: The Macro-Structure and Culture of Social Life. In: Abrutyn, S. (eds) Handbook of Contemporary Sociological Theory. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32250-6_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32250-6_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-61601-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-32250-6
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)