Abstract
This paper describes and makes the case for sociological metatheorizing, or the systematic study of sociological theory. Three types of metatheorizing are delineated on the basis of their end products: the attainment of a deeper understanding of theory, the creation of new theory, and the creation of an overarching theoretical perspective (a metatheory). The basic problems in metatheorizing are reviewed and it is concluded that the most basic difficulty has been the lack of a clear definition of the subfield. Some thoughts on the future of metatheorizing in sociology are offered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander, Jeffrey 1982–1983 Theoretical Logic in Sociology. Four Volumes. Berkeley: University of California Press.
1985a “The ‘individualist dilemma’ in phenomenology and interactionism.” In S. N. Eisenstadt and H. J. Helle (eds.), Macro-Sociological Theory: 25–27. Beverly Hills, Ca: Sage.
Alexander, Jeffrey, ed. 1985b Neofunctionalism. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Alexander, Jeffrey C. andPaul Colomy 1990 “Neofunctionalism today: Reconstructing a theoretical tradition.” In George Ritzer (ed.), Frontiers of Social Theory: The New Syntheses: 33–67. New York: Columbia University Press.
Alexander, Jeffrey C. et al., eds. 1987 The Macro-Micro Link. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Antonio, Robert J. 1990 “The decline of the grand narrative of emancipatory modernity: Crisis or renewal in neo-Marxian theory?” In George Ritzer (ed.), Frontiers of Soical Theory: The New Syntheses: 88–116. New York: Columbia University Press.
Brown Richard 1987 Social As Text: Essays on Rhetoric, Reason and Reality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
1984 The Chicago School of Sociology: Institutionalization, Diversity, and the Rise of Sociological Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
1985 “The Chicago school of sociology: What made it a school?” The History of Sociology: An International Review 5:61–77.
1975 Conflict Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Science. New York: Academic Press.
1981a “On the microfoundations of macrosociology.” American Journal of Sociology 86:925–942.
1981b “Micro-translation as a theory-building strategy.” In Karin Knorr-Cetina and Aaron Cicourel (eds.), Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: 81–108. New York: Methuen.
1985 Weberian Sociological Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1986a “Is 1980s sociology in the doldrums?” American Journal of Sociology 91:1336–1355.
1986b “The passing of intellectual generations: Reflections on the death of Erving Goffman.” Sociological Theory 4: 106–113.
1988 “The micro contribution to macro sociology.” Sociological Theory 6:242–253.
1989a “Sociology: Proscience or antiscience?” American Sociological Review 54:124–139.
1989b “Toward a neo-Meadian sociology of mind.” Symbolic Interaction 12:1–32.
Edel, Abraham 1959 “The concept of levels in sociological theory.” In L. Gross (ed.), Symposium on Sociological Theory: 167–195. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.
Fine, Gary 1990 “Symbolic interactionism in the post-Blumerian age.” In Ritzer (ed.), Frontiers of Social Theory: The New Syntheses: 117–157. New York: Columbia University Press.
Furfey, Paul Hanly 1953 The Scope and Method of Sociology: A Metasociological Treatise. (1965) New York: Cooper Square Publishers.
Gouldner, Alvin 1970 The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. New York: Basic Books.
Gross, Llewellyn 1961 “Preface to a metatheoretical framework for sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 67:125–136.
1982 “The use and abuse of Kuhnian paradigms in the sociology of knowledge.” British Journal of Sociology 16:85–101.
1987 “The nature of ‘schools’ in the sociology of knowledge: The case of the ‘Chicago School.’” Sociological Review 35:245–278.
Kellner, Douglas 1990 “The Postmodern Turn: Positions, Problems, and Prospects.” In George Ritzer (ed.), Frontiers of Social Theory: The New Syntheses: 255–286. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lehman, Edward W. 1988 “The theory of the state versus the state of theory.” American Sociological Review 53:807–823.
1973 Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York: Harper & Row.
1983 “Theories and theory groups revisited.” In Randall Collins (ed.), Sociological Theory-1983: 319–337. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
1975a Sociology: A Multiple Paradigm Science. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
1975b “Sociology: A multiple paradigm science.” American Sociologist 10:156–167.
1979 “Toward an integrated sociological paradigm.” In William Snizek, Ellsworth Fuhrman, and Michael Miller (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Theory and Research: 25–46. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
1981 Toward an Integrated Paradigm: The Search for an Exemplar and an Image of the Subject Matter. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
1981 “The rise of micro-sociological theory.” Sociological Theory 3:88–98.
1987 “The current state of metatheory.” Sociological Perspectives: The Theory Section Newsletter 10:1–6.
1988 “Sociological metatheory: A defense of a subfield by a delineation of its parameters.” Sociological Theory 6:187–200.
Ritzer, Geroge 1989a “Metatheorizing as a prelude to theory development.” Paper presented at the meetings of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco, CA.
1988b “Of levels and ‘intellectual amnesia’” Sociological Theory 7:226–229.
1990a “Micro-macrolinkage in sociological theory: Applying a meta-theoretical tool. In George Ritzer (ed.), Frontiers of Social Theory: 347–370. The New Syntheses: 1–30. New York: Columbia University Press.
1990b “The current status of sociological theory: The new syntheses.” In George Ritzer (ed.), Frontiers of Social Theory: The New Syntheses: 1–30. New York: Columbia University Press.
Skocpol, Theda 1986 “The dead end of metatheory.” Contemporary Sociology 16:10–12.
Sorokin, Pitirim 1928 Contemporary Sociological Theories. New York: Harper Brothers.
1979 “The significance of schools in the development of sociology.” In William Snizek, Ellsworth Fuhrman, and Michael Miller (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Theory and Research: 211–233. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
1986 “Hegemonic schools and the development of sociology: Rethinking the history of the discipline.” In Richard C. Monk (ed.), Structures of Knowing: 417–441. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
1985 “In defense of positivism.” Sociological Theory 3: 24–30.
1986 The Structure of Sociological Theory, 4th ed. Chicago: Dorsey Press.
Turner, Jonathan H. andA. Z. Maryanski 1988 “Is ‘Neofunctionalism’ really functional?” Sociological Theory 6:110–121.
Vidich, Arthur J. andStanford M. Lyman 1985 American Sociology: Wordly Rejections of Religion and Their Directions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Wallace, Walter 1988 “Toward a disciplinary matrix in sociology.” In Neil Smelser (ed.), Handbook of Sociology: 23–76. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
1979 “The rise and fall of dominating theories in American sociology.” In William Snizek, Ellsworth Fuhrman, and Michael Miller (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Theory and Research: 47–79. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
1988 “The micro-macro problem in social theory.” Sociological Theory 6:254–261.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ritzer, G. Metatheorizing in sociology. Sociol Forum 5, 3–15 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01115134
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01115134