Theory and Society - Statement of Goals for Theory and Society

Theory and Society as a Forum for Better Theory

There are many modes of theorizing, but for us, there is a mandate they must meet: to discover the forces driving human behavior, interaction, and patterns of social organization. Sociological theory is at its best when it is general, abstract, and amenable to empirical investigation, seeking to uncover those laws or regularities that undergird variations in social phenomena across time and space.

There will always be disagreements over explanations, especially in a field like sociology. Theorizing often revolves around disputes and contentions, and the only way to sort through such disagreements is to publish them for assessment by readers of the journal. We thus encourage and invite “adversarial collaborations” (Clark and Tetlock, 2023) among theorists who might hold different priors, assumptions, or competing hypotheses about how the social universe operates. No progress will be made from ideological or political homogeneity: disagreement and debate are pillars of intellectual advance.

Sociological theorizing also often revolves around biographical discussions of key figures and their intellectual environment in the founding of sociology (everyone from Durkheim to Du Bois). But, while interesting as history, these biographical accounts are less important than the theories these people have developed and inspired. Thus, individuals and their biographies, per se, are not as important as their ideas about how societies operate. Ultimately, no individual is immune from personal and professional foibles, as well as poor judgments based on ideologies and other biases. In contrast, a genuinely good idea or uncovered theoretical principle is stubbornly unforgettable.

Numerous such principles have already been discovered—consider the often symmetrical relationship between outgroup enmity and ingroup solidarity (the so-called Simmel-Coser principle) or that, under threat, individuals across societies will embed into strict hierarchies with strong punishments for deviance (from, most recently, Gelfand, 2011). Hundreds more examples might be listed as part of the corpus of theoretical social science and we’re interested to see more being discovered; interesting new ideas, or ideas that extend the current theoretical knowledge base.

Finally, sociological theory is by its very nature interdisciplinary across the social and life sciences. As the broadest of the social sciences, sociologists should be eager to draw from other related disciplines like political science, anthropology or economics, but perhaps even more importantly, we must be eager to glean valuable insights from fields such as biology, zoology, behavioral genetics, or cognitive psychology/neuroscience.

Without scientific sociological theory, sociology as a discipline will not be respected inside or outside of academia. Righteous anger is not particularly helpful and will never be enough—there must be a formal body of knowledge about how and why problematic patterns of social organization are generated.  Theoretical knowledge can explain how things came to be and, often, provide guidelines for changing patterns of social organization. To abandon theory in favor of ideologically driven social movements is, in many ways, a formula for avoiding the actual hard work of solving problems in human societies. Scientific theories (broadly conceived) are, we believe, the best strategy for improving our lives. 

Our Goals for Theory and Society

It will take time for us to fully implement our vision, but here are some of our promises to authors and readers of Theory and Society:

1. Drastically shorter turnaround times for submitted papers.
2. Special issues highlighting unanswered questions and uninvestigated areas within sociological theory.
3. New publishing opportunities, such as short-form “theory briefs” which highlight new and experimental ideas.
4. A new platform for productively disagreeing “dialogues” between theorists about fundamental assumptions and perspectives.
5. A new platform for “forum articles,” where one author submits a longer contentious/creative/new idea, and other scholars are asked to respond.

Kevin McCaffree and Jonathan Turner

Citations

Clark, Cory J., and Philip E. Tetlock. "Adversarial collaboration: The next science reform." In Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology: Nature, Scope, and Solutions, pp. 905-927. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2023.

Gelfand, Michele J., Jana L. Raver, Lisa Nishii, Lisa M. Leslie, Janetta Lun, Beng Chong Lim, Lili Duan et al. "Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study." science332, no. 6033 (2011): 1100-1104.