What do you think?
Rate this book
Four Sociological Traditions
Presents a concise intellectual history of sociology organized around the development of 4 classic schools of thought: the conflict tradition of Marx and Weber, the ritual solidarity of Durkheim, the micro-interactionist tradition of Mead, Blumer and Garfinkel, and the utilitarian/rational choice tradition.
336 pages, Paperback
First published March 3, 1994
12 people are currently reading
270 people want to read
About the author
Randall Collins
59 books106 followers Dr. Randall Collins is an American sociologist who has been influential in both his teaching and writing. He has taught in many notable universities around the world and his academic works have been translated into various languages. Collins is currently Emeritus Professor of Sociology at the University of Pennsylvania. He is a leading contemporary social theorist whose areas of expertise include the macro-historical sociology of political and economic change; micro-sociology, including face-to-face interaction;and the sociology of intellectuals and social conflict. He has devoted much of his career and research to study society, how is it created and destroyed through emotional behaviors of human beings. He is considered to be one of the leading non-Marxist conflict theorists in the United States, and served as the president of the American Sociological Association from 2010 to 2011.
Dr. Collins' first position in academia was at UC Berkeley, followed by many other universities including the University of Wisconsin-Madison, followed by the UC San Diego, the University of Virginia, then UC Riverside, and finally the University of Pennsylvania. He took intermittent breaks from academia, as a novelist, and as a freelance scholar. He has also been a visiting professor at Chicago, Harvard, and Cambridge, as well as various schools in Europe, Japan, and China. Collins has published almost one hundred articles since finishing his undergraduate education. He has also written and contributed to several books with a range of topics such as the discovery of society to the sociology of marriage and family life.
Dr. Collins grew up in a slew of different cities and countries, his father being a diplomat (and possible spy) with the US State Department during the Cold War. They lived in Germany immediately following World War II, and later in Moscow, among other places such as Uruguay.
Dr. Collins' first position in academia was at UC Berkeley, followed by many other universities including the University of Wisconsin-Madison, followed by the UC San Diego, the University of Virginia, then UC Riverside, and finally the University of Pennsylvania. He took intermittent breaks from academia, as a novelist, and as a freelance scholar. He has also been a visiting professor at Chicago, Harvard, and Cambridge, as well as various schools in Europe, Japan, and China. Collins has published almost one hundred articles since finishing his undergraduate education. He has also written and contributed to several books with a range of topics such as the discovery of society to the sociology of marriage and family life.
Dr. Collins grew up in a slew of different cities and countries, his father being a diplomat (and possible spy) with the US State Department during the Cold War. They lived in Germany immediately following World War II, and later in Moscow, among other places such as Uruguay.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
July 25, 2011
This was a class text, but had I known of it before, I would have read it on my own. It is the perfect concise examination of four major sociological traditions, written by a respected theorist in his own right. Like a study of psychology, this book will have you examining your own life and your relation to the world around you. Returning back to university at an older age has illuminated the interdisciplinary nature of so many fields, and Collins masterfully, clearly incorporates philosophy, psychology, economics and religion in this book.
April 17, 2020
A very good, very concise (just 290 p long) summary of the main conceptual contributions and historical-academic lineage that made up the four main traditions of social theory in the author's view, until the mid 1980s: the conflict tradition, made up of the descendants of Marx/Engels and Weber; the American microinteractionist tradition including the symbolic interactionists, ethnomethodologists, and Goffman; the Durkheimian tradition(s) of functionalists Parsons and Merton and British Bernstein and Mary Douglas (whom I had read previously and understood next to nothing, really); and finally the almost strictly quantitative-based utilitarian/rational tradition (the whole talk of Kenneth Arrow, rational choice, bounded rationality, and the whole of economics-like thought in sociology).
These four "traditions", as Collins is the first to admit, are convenient fictions. Still, he claims they are clearly visible, for instance, in the geographical distribution of researchers under their umbrella - conflict in Germany, microinteractionists in America, Durkheimians in France and Britain, and utilitarians in Britain (with everything mingling together in the US at the late 20th century). I found this particular claim to be flimsy, or, more specifically, of little explanatory value. At least in the case of Weberians and Marxists, which Collins claims wouldn't recognise themselves under the same tradition, I'd claim what unites them is precisely their competition for a similar mode/levdl of description (I was going to write market, and indeed I'd say there are markets among intellectuals for very different levels of description, just as there are are for political leanings, and the latter do not always go together with the former in the same combinations), that is, that of the conflict between different groups (be it organisations, classes or nations), with less relative importance to the individuals interacting that together somehow make up these larger structures. Relative, that is, to the microinteractionist tradition, which again also may be seen as competing for the same clientele as the symbolic interactionists and the ethnomethodologists (hence their mutual attacks on one another over time). The same principle can't be applied to the so-called Durkheimian tradition, whose three main offshoots mostly have in common only their intellectual forebear, but it most definitely applies to what Collins dubs the utilitarian or rational tradition. The mode of thinking associated with this latter tradition, that of statistical research in general and seemingly predominant in political science and economics in particular, has a tremendous appeal in today's society, drowned as it is in numbers, which are contested as much as they are seen as paths to our salvation (look no further than the number-based public debate surrounding measures against covid-19 right now), and it is no wonder research under it has grown incredibly in the decades since Collins' book - quantitative research is perceived as much more scientific, intuitive, and appealing to the average intellectual (esp outside the humanities) today than the boatload of concepts connected to very intricate and unique philosophies which are often seen to make up works based on Marx, Weber, or Durkheim.
Collins writes very clearly, which is of course a bit deceptive at times. Perhaps because the book intends to cover dozens of authors in so few pages, he can't help but be superficial at times, such as in his treatment of then-burgeoning Bourdieu (which, from this book, all we learn is that he was a French sociologist combining Durkheim with the conflict tradition).
It is already a very dated book - the 1994 2nd edition in fact is an expanded edition from the 1984 1st ed, which didn't include a chapter on the rational/utilitarian tradition. That is almost forty years ago, and a lot of authors which were just starting to become famous then such as Bourdieu, Latour, Habermas, and Luhmann are mostly missing from Collins' presentation.
The most important contribution of this book for me, a starting scholar in sociology (of law), was the historical overview Collins constructed of the (then) major names in social theory. He helped me locate (literally, there is a table for each chapter) authors whose names I had heard in very different places in a same grid, and to see exactly who connected to whom and in what order (something I consider particularly basic in comprehending any scientific tradition). I'm sure anyone interested in getting a broad but rather superficial look of "what is there" in social theory will enjoy this book.
These four "traditions", as Collins is the first to admit, are convenient fictions. Still, he claims they are clearly visible, for instance, in the geographical distribution of researchers under their umbrella - conflict in Germany, microinteractionists in America, Durkheimians in France and Britain, and utilitarians in Britain (with everything mingling together in the US at the late 20th century). I found this particular claim to be flimsy, or, more specifically, of little explanatory value. At least in the case of Weberians and Marxists, which Collins claims wouldn't recognise themselves under the same tradition, I'd claim what unites them is precisely their competition for a similar mode/levdl of description (I was going to write market, and indeed I'd say there are markets among intellectuals for very different levels of description, just as there are are for political leanings, and the latter do not always go together with the former in the same combinations), that is, that of the conflict between different groups (be it organisations, classes or nations), with less relative importance to the individuals interacting that together somehow make up these larger structures. Relative, that is, to the microinteractionist tradition, which again also may be seen as competing for the same clientele as the symbolic interactionists and the ethnomethodologists (hence their mutual attacks on one another over time). The same principle can't be applied to the so-called Durkheimian tradition, whose three main offshoots mostly have in common only their intellectual forebear, but it most definitely applies to what Collins dubs the utilitarian or rational tradition. The mode of thinking associated with this latter tradition, that of statistical research in general and seemingly predominant in political science and economics in particular, has a tremendous appeal in today's society, drowned as it is in numbers, which are contested as much as they are seen as paths to our salvation (look no further than the number-based public debate surrounding measures against covid-19 right now), and it is no wonder research under it has grown incredibly in the decades since Collins' book - quantitative research is perceived as much more scientific, intuitive, and appealing to the average intellectual (esp outside the humanities) today than the boatload of concepts connected to very intricate and unique philosophies which are often seen to make up works based on Marx, Weber, or Durkheim.
Collins writes very clearly, which is of course a bit deceptive at times. Perhaps because the book intends to cover dozens of authors in so few pages, he can't help but be superficial at times, such as in his treatment of then-burgeoning Bourdieu (which, from this book, all we learn is that he was a French sociologist combining Durkheim with the conflict tradition).
It is already a very dated book - the 1994 2nd edition in fact is an expanded edition from the 1984 1st ed, which didn't include a chapter on the rational/utilitarian tradition. That is almost forty years ago, and a lot of authors which were just starting to become famous then such as Bourdieu, Latour, Habermas, and Luhmann are mostly missing from Collins' presentation.
The most important contribution of this book for me, a starting scholar in sociology (of law), was the historical overview Collins constructed of the (then) major names in social theory. He helped me locate (literally, there is a table for each chapter) authors whose names I had heard in very different places in a same grid, and to see exactly who connected to whom and in what order (something I consider particularly basic in comprehending any scientific tradition). I'm sure anyone interested in getting a broad but rather superficial look of "what is there" in social theory will enjoy this book.
June 17, 2018
чудесна книжка, але вимагає попереднього знання соціологічних теорій. без цього текст просто буде або огорошувати кількістю нової інформації, або ж даватиме надто стислий, а тому наче зіжмаканий виклад теорій. але якщо орієнтуватися в суті більшості теорій, то книга стає просто розкішною. в ній багато інформації про бічні/другорядні праці в межах різних теорій, які додають глибини: чому теорія розвивавалася так, а не інакше. книга показує і основні напрями розвитку теорій, чим виконує роль "карти місцевості": ось тут теорія рухалася так, але далі потрапила в дискусію з іншою теорією - і вийшов такий результат.
тому однозначно обов'язкова книга для прочитання всіма, хто хоче бути в курсі тенденцій теоретичних пошуків в соціології
тому однозначно обов'язкова книга для прочитання всіма, хто хоче бути в курсі тенденцій теоретичних пошуків в соціології
Read
December 14, 2021leck mein ei
bin ich froh dass das vorbei
ist
- ein gedicht von mir über meinen „einführung in die soziologie“ kurs
bin ich froh dass das vorbei
ist
- ein gedicht von mir über meinen „einführung in die soziologie“ kurs
April 11, 2022
Probably everyone's more or less internally feels the commonalities and differences in the thinking structure of this or that thinker who does not openly agree with each other or does not belong to the same school. The author has overcome the traditional division of schools of thought and proposed a new, original and legitimate categorization. For example, the author has united Marx and Weber in "Conflict Theory" and these two schools are proposed as continuous rather than conflicting conceptions. The author combines different thinkers in 4 traditions, thus introducing a certain intellectual order in sociology. The book is quite small, but the basic concepts are very clear and well-structured. In addition, references with comments are very useful. In a word, it is highly recommended for both university students (introductory courses in sociology) and general readers.
October 22, 2013
I had been recommended this book by a professor years ago during my undergraduate studies, but only now, during the last year of my PhD in Sociology, I took the time to actually read it.
The main idea behind the book is great: usually as an undergraduate student of the social sciences, you are required to gain knowledge about a large number of authors, but you rarely are provided with a good overview of how their work is connected.
I thoroughly enjoyed the prologue that gave insight into the environment in which early social philosophers, economists and the like developed their theories. Since I am not a big fan of conflict/critical theories (in stark contrast to the author) and read the book mainly for the Durkheimian tradition, I skipped over large parts of the first chapter, but I did read its appendix and large parts of chapter 2. And I am not impressed. I had noticed some imprecisions in the prologue already, but the parts on Simmel and Parsons are merely rants about why their work is flawed. The author very clearly has his favourites, and his favourite points within the larger framework of theorists' works, and he focusses freely on them instead of giving a thorough, holistic recount of the sociological theory network - has he promises. This makes it impossible for the readers to assess for themselves which theories they find most useful as empirical tools.
The whole tradition of functionalism is given merely five pages? -You can't be serious! If you have points of critique, please lay out the entire theory before us and then point out what parts of it you find flawed.
The main idea behind the book is great: usually as an undergraduate student of the social sciences, you are required to gain knowledge about a large number of authors, but you rarely are provided with a good overview of how their work is connected.
I thoroughly enjoyed the prologue that gave insight into the environment in which early social philosophers, economists and the like developed their theories. Since I am not a big fan of conflict/critical theories (in stark contrast to the author) and read the book mainly for the Durkheimian tradition, I skipped over large parts of the first chapter, but I did read its appendix and large parts of chapter 2. And I am not impressed. I had noticed some imprecisions in the prologue already, but the parts on Simmel and Parsons are merely rants about why their work is flawed. The author very clearly has his favourites, and his favourite points within the larger framework of theorists' works, and he focusses freely on them instead of giving a thorough, holistic recount of the sociological theory network - has he promises. This makes it impossible for the readers to assess for themselves which theories they find most useful as empirical tools.
The whole tradition of functionalism is given merely five pages? -You can't be serious! If you have points of critique, please lay out the entire theory before us and then point out what parts of it you find flawed.
September 26, 2020
A reasonably clear and gentle introduction to some of the major theoretical threads in sociology. Marx, Weber and Durkheim are discussed extensively, as is appropriate. Karl Mannheim, N.D.F. de Coulanges and Kai Erickson were new acquintances whose work piqued my interest.
I do wonder why all the introductions to/overviews of sociology discuss functionalism but always make sure to paint it as pretty much useless categorization. After reading several introductory volumes I'm left confused as to why functionalism was in vogue at all or why it needs to be discussed if it was so utterly mistaken. I'm sure there's another side to this story, but I'm yet to hear it.
I do wonder why all the introductions to/overviews of sociology discuss functionalism but always make sure to paint it as pretty much useless categorization. After reading several introductory volumes I'm left confused as to why functionalism was in vogue at all or why it needs to be discussed if it was so utterly mistaken. I'm sure there's another side to this story, but I'm yet to hear it.
June 12, 2020
Read as a textbook for an exam. The four traditions presented in this book are 1) Conflict, 2) Utilitarian/Rational, 3) Durkheimian, and 4) Microinteractionist. Two middle ones were probably easiest for me to follow. It gave a nice overview to the field and dropped plenty of names to look for if something seemed interesting. Being about 30 years old, a revised version of even older Three Sociological Traditions, I was left wondering what has happened in sociology after that. To add 30 years to a century-old discipline is a lot.
Anyway, serves the purpose.
Anyway, serves the purpose.
August 31, 2025
A lazy review: I think anything written by Randall Collins is worth reading and this book is no exception. He lays out the interplay and lineage of major sociologists somewhat like chess books trace openings and their relations with one another. You really need to have a tremendous grasp of the subject to be able to do this in a readable manner, which he does. He never takes his eyes off the end goal and keeps asking whether some development or thinker has in fact contributed to the actual progress of sociology as a science.
May 19, 2020
Very much appreciated the insights on how the institutional specifics of universities in different regions and times led to disparate outcomes of the structure of social sciences.
April 7, 2023
I'm trying read a book here but didn't allow me to open it. Why?
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews