• Precise founding date of sociology in the United States is difficult to pinpoint.

• A course in social problems was taught at Oberlin as early as 1858.

• The term sociology, coined by Comte, was used by George Fitzhugh in 1854.

• William Graham Sumner began teaching social science courses at Yale in 1873.

• During the 1880s, courses specifically titled “Sociology” started to appear.

• The first department with sociology in its name was established at the University of Kansas in 1889.

• In 1892, Albion Small moved to the University of Chicago and founded a new department of sociology.

• The University of Chicago department became the first major center of American sociology and sociological theory (Matthews, 1977).

Early American Sociological Theory

Politics

• Early American sociologists are best described as political liberals, unlike most early European theorists who were conservatives (Schwendinger and Schwendinger, 1974).

• The liberalism in early American sociology had two main elements:

  • Belief in the freedom and welfare of the individual, influenced more by Spencer than Comte’s collective view.

  • Adoption of an evolutionary view of social progress (W. Fine, 1979).

• Sociologists were divided on how to achieve social progress:

  • Some favored government intervention for social reform.

  • Others supported laissez-faire doctrine, advocating society should solve its own problems.

• Extreme liberalism closely aligns with conservatism.

• Belief in social progress and individual importance led to support for the existing social system with little systemic criticism.

• Early American sociology largely accepted capitalism without questioning it.

• Early sociologists envisioned a future of class harmony and cooperation rather than imminent class struggle.

• Consequently, early American sociological theory rationalized exploitation, imperialism (domestic and international), and social inequality.

• The political liberalism of early sociologists had deeply conservative implications.

Social Change and Intellectual Currents

• The founding of American sociological theory emerged from several key contexts, notably the social changes after the Civil War (Roscoe Hinkle, 1980; Ellsworth Fuhrman, 1980; Bramson, 1961).

• Factors such as industrialization and urbanization, important in European sociology, were also crucial in American sociology’s development.

• Early American sociologists saw both the positive possibilities and the dangers of industrialization.

• Although attracted to labor movement and socialist ideas for addressing industrialization’s dangers, early sociologists did not support radical societal overhaul.

• Christianity, especially Protestantism, strongly influenced the founding of American sociology (Vidich and Lyman, 1985).

• Sociology was viewed as a moral and intellectual response to American social problems, paralleling religious efforts to improve society.

• Sociologists mostly did not challenge the legitimacy of society due to their religious roots and parallels.

• The emergence of academic professions and modern universities in late 1800s America played a crucial role in sociology’s establishment.

• In contrast to Europe, where universities were already established, the fluid American university system facilitated sociology’s growth.

• Early American sociology shifted from a historical perspective to a positivistic (“scientistic”) orientation, favoring universalistic abstraction and quantitative methods over interpretive historical or cultural analysis (Dorothy Ross, 1991).

• Sociology focused more on scientific study of short-term processes rather than long-term historical interpretation.

• European sociological theory, especially Spencer and Comte, had a significant impact on early American sociology.

• Influence of Simmel was somewhat important initially, but Durkheim, Weber, and Marx influenced American sociology more gradually.

• Herbert Spencer’s ideas illustrate the impact of early European theory on American sociology.

Herbert Spencer’s Influence on Sociology

• Spencer’s ideas were more influential in early American sociology than those of Comte, Durkheim, Marx, and Weber for several reasons (Hofstadter, 1959):

  • Spencer wrote in English, unlike the others.

  • He used nontechnical language, making his work broadly accessible.

  • Some argue his lack of technicality reflected less scholarly sophistication.

  • Offered a scientific orientation appealing to a society enamored with science and technology.

  • Presented a comprehensive theory covering human history broadly.

  • His extensive work allowed his ideas to be interpreted diversely by many people.

  • His theory was soothing and reassuring during the disruptive process of industrialization, promising steady social progress.

• Spencer’s most famous American disciple was William Graham Sumner, who expanded many of Spencer’s Social Darwinist ideas.

• Spencer also influenced other early American sociologists like Lester Ward, Charles Horton Cooley, E. A. Ross, and Robert Park.

• By the 1930s, Spencer’s influence declined sharply due to the failure of his laissez-faire, Social Darwinist ideas in the face of social crises like war and economic depression.

• Talcott Parsons declared Spencer’s intellectual death for sociology in 1937, asking, “Who now reads Spencer?”

• Today, Spencer’s ideas hold mainly historical interest, though they shaped early American sociology significantly.

• William Graham Sumner (1840–1910):

  • Taught the first sociology course in the U.S. (Delaney, 2005b).

  • Major proponent of Social Darwinism in the U.S., though he may have softened his views late in life.

  • Advocated individual freedom and opposed government aid or interference.

  • Supported a survival-of-the-fittest social worldview: success deserved success, failure deserved failure.

  • Opposed welfare efforts, seeing them as interference with natural selection.

  • His views provided theoretical legitimacy for capitalism’s inequalities.

  • Sumner is now mainly of historical interest due to his crude legitimization of competitive capitalism and failure to build a lasting academic legacy at Yale.

• Lester F. Ward (1841–1913):

  • Career paleontologist who developed an interest in sociology after reading Spencer and Comte.

  • Published sociological works in late 1800s/early 1900s and became the first president of the American Sociological Society in 1906.

  • Believed society evolved from simple and morally poor to complex, happier, and freer.

  • Distinguished between pure sociology (studying social laws) and applied sociology (using knowledge to improve society).

  • Unlike Sumner, Ward supported social reform and was not an extreme Social Darwinist.

  • Historically important but not of long-term significance to sociological theory.

• Thorstein Veblen:

  • A theorist of the era with long-term significance and increasing contemporary influence in sociology.

• The Chicago School (with figures like Mead) became dominant in American sociology, known for being a rare example of a collective intellectual enterprise in sociology’s history (Bulmer, 1984).

• The tradition from the University of Chicago remains important for both theoretical and empirical sociology.

Thorstein Veblen (1857–1929)

• Veblen was not a sociologist but mainly worked in economics departments and was a marginal figure even in economics.

• Despite this, he produced a body of social theory with enduring significance across multiple disciplines, including sociology (Powers, 2004a, 2004b).

• Veblen’s central problem was the clash between “business” and “industry.”

• By business, Veblen meant the owners and leaders of industry who prioritized profits and often limited production to keep prices and profits high.

• This profit-focused behavior obstructed the smooth operation of the industrial system and harmed society, e.g., causing higher unemployment.

• Veblen believed society should be led by those who understood industry operations, such as engineers, interested in the general welfare.

• Most of Veblen’s importance today comes from his book The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899/1994) (Varul, 2007).

• Veblen criticizes the leisure class (closely tied to business) for promoting wasteful consumption.

• The leisure class engages in “conspicuous leisure” (nonproductive use of time) and “conspicuous consumption” (spending more money on goods than their worth).

• Other social classes are influenced by this and seek to emulate the leisure class directly or indirectly.

• This results in a society characterized by the waste of time and money.

• Unlike most sociological works of the time, and unlike most of Veblen’s other works, The Theory of the Leisure Class focuses on consumption rather than production.

• This focus anticipated the current shift in social theory from production to consumption (Slater, 1997; Ritzer, 2005a; Ritzer, Goodman, and Wiedenhoft, 2001).

• The journal Journal of Consumer Culture began publication in 2001, reflecting this shift.

THORSTEIN VEBLEN

A Biographical Sketch

• Thorstein Veblen was born on July 30, 1857, in rural Wisconsin to poor Norwegian immigrant farmers (Dorfman, 1966).

• He was the sixth of twelve children and escaped the farm at 17 to study at Carleton College, Minnesota.

• Early on, Veblen showed bitterness and humor that marked his later work; he met and married his first wife, niece of Carleton’s president, in 1888.

• Graduated in 1880, initially obtained a teaching job, but the school closed; moved east to study philosophy at Johns Hopkins University but lacked scholarship funding.

• Moved to Yale, obtained a Ph.D. in 1884, studied under William Graham Sumner.

• Despite strong recommendations, Veblen struggled to get a university position due to agnosticism, lack of professional reputation, and perceived lack of polish.

• Was idle for some years, attributing this to ill health, then resumed studies at Cornell University in social sciences by 1891.

• Became a fellow at the University of Chicago in 1892 with help from professor A. Laurence Laughlin; did editorial work for The Journal of Political Economy.

• Taught some courses at Chicago and published in The American Journal of Sociology, but remained a marginal figure.

• Published his best-known book, The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), while at Chicago; his position remained insecure.

• After requesting a raise, the university president hinted he could leave; eventually promoted to assistant professor.

• Teaching style described as monotonous and boring; classes started large but often dwindled by semester end.

• Marriage crumbled and his affairs offended Victorian morals; left Chicago in 1906 for an associate professorship at Stanford University.

• At Stanford, taught mainly undergraduates who found him off-putting in appearance and teaching style; labeled a “tramp” by some students.

• Forced to resign in 1909 due to womanizing, struggled to find other academic positions.

• Secured a position at the University of Missouri in 1911, at a lower rank and pay; disliked Columbia, Missouri, calling it a “woodpecker hole” and the state a “rotten stump”.

• Published another notable book, The Instinct of Workmanship and the State of the Industrial Arts (1914) while at Missouri.

• In 1917 moved to Washington, D.C. to assist a group commissioned by President Woodrow Wilson on WWI peace settlements.

• Worked briefly for the U.S. Food Administration, then became editor of The Dial magazine in New York City; lost position after editorial shift.

• Connected with the New School for Social Research, where he received comparatively high pay, partly funded by a former Chicago student.

• Lived frugally and invested money in raisin vineyards in California and the stock market, both of which later failed.

• Returned to California in 1926, living modestly in a shack; economic situation worsened as investments lost value.

• Earned modest royalties ($500-$600 annually) and financial support from a former student.

• Known as an unusual man, often silent for hours in conversations; declined presidency of the American Economic Association despite friends’ support.

• Described by a bookseller as an ascetic, mysterious person with long hair and a gentle air, who was elusive and unique in character (Tilman, 1992).

• Thorstein Veblen died on August 3, 1929, just before the Great Depression, which many felt his work had anticipated (Powers, 2005b).

JOSEPH SCHUMPETER

A Biographical Sketch

• Joseph Schumpeter was born and educated in Austria-Hungary, earning his Ph.D. in 1906 from the University of Vienna.

• After practicing law in Egypt for a year, he achieved early success as a promising young economist.

• His academic career was interrupted by World War I.

• Served as Minister of Finance in Austria’s only socialist government between the wars.

• Later became president of a bank, which collapsed in 1924 due to the Vienna stock market crash, bankrupting Schumpeter.

• Despite this personal disaster, he gained invaluable practical insight into capitalism and its constant “gales.”

• Took a position at the University of Bonn (Germany) in 1925.

• Began visiting Harvard in the late 1920s and moved there permanently in 1932 due to the rise of Nazism in Germany.

• Taught at Harvard until his death in 1950.

• Schumpeter had an aristocratic demeanor, devoted significant time to his appearance and dress (took an hour to get dressed).

• Told students his three life ambitions were to be the world’s greatest economist, horseman, and lover.

• His personal life was marked by tragedy; he had two great loves: his mother, who ensured his proper upbringing, and his second wife (married in 1925).

• In 1926, both his mother died in June and his wife and son died in childbirth in August.

• Despite recovering, he described his life as one of peace but not joy.

• In fall 1926, he began recopying his wife’s diary, adding his own commentary and thoughts.

• Elevated his dead wife and mother into personal deities for advice and protection.

• Known primarily as an economist, Schumpeter was a multidisciplinary thinker, valuing law, mathematics, history, sociology, psychology, and political science.

• Integrated insights across disciplines, focusing on major economic issues of his time.

• Followed a European tradition aimed at constructing grand social theory.

Joseph Schumpeter (1883–1950)

• Joseph Schumpeter, like Veblen, was primarily an economist, not a sociologist, but is regarded as a significant figure in economic sociology.

• He is best known for his work on the nature of capitalism, particularly the concept of “creative destruction.”

• Creative destruction is central to capitalism, where creation or innovation occurs only through the destruction of older or outdated elements that hinder new developments or the capitalist system as a whole.

• Schumpeter’s theory presents capitalism as a dynamic process, contrasting with more static economic theories like supply and demand, which he critiques as dominant but limited.

• His approach forms part of a highly dynamic economic theory emphasizing change and innovation.

The Chicago School

• The Department of Sociology at the University of Chicago was founded in 1892 by Albion Small.

• Small’s intellectual work is less significant today than his role in the institutionalization of sociology in the United States.

• He was instrumental in establishing the Chicago department as the center of sociology in the U.S. for many years.

• Small coauthored the first sociology textbook in 1894.

• In 1895, he founded the American Journal of Sociology, which remains a dominant journal in the discipline.

• In 1905, Small cofounded the American Sociological Society, the main professional association for American sociologists.

• Due to embarrassment over the society’s initials ASS, the name was changed in 1959 to the American Sociological Association (ASA).

Early Chicago Sociology

• The early Chicago sociology department had a strong connection with religion.

• Some members were ministers or sons of ministers.

• Albion Small believed the ultimate goal of sociology must be essentially Christian.

• This belief led to the view that sociology should focus on social reform.

• Sociology was also expected to be scientific in its approach.

• The department aimed to practice scientific sociology with the objective of social amelioration.

• This work took place in the context of the rapidly growing city of Chicago, experiencing both urbanization and industrialization with their positive and negative effects.

W. I. Thomas (1863–1947)

• In 1895, W. I. Thomas became a fellow at the Chicago department and wrote his dissertation in 1896.

• Thomas’s lasting significance lies in his emphasis on the need for scientific research on sociological issues.

• His major work, The Polish Peasant in Europe and America (1918), coauthored with Florian Znaniecki, marked a shift in sociology toward empirical research using a theoretical framework.

• The study is seen as a landmark for moving sociology away from abstract theory and library research to the study of the empirical world.

• Norbert Wiley highlighted the book’s role in clarifying sociology’s unique intellectual space.

• The research spanned eight years in Europe and the United States, focusing on social disorganization among Polish migrants.

• Although the specific data lost lasting importance, the methodology—using autobiographies, paid writings, family letters, newspapers, public and institutional documents—was highly significant.

• While the book was primarily a macrosociological study of social institutions, Thomas later shifted toward a microscopic, social-psychological focus.

• Thomas is famous for the statement: “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences” (Thomas and Thomas, 1928).

• This highlights the importance of people’s perceptions and how these affect their actions.

• Thomas’s social-psychological focus contrasts with the macroscopic, social-structural and social-cultural perspectives of European scholars like Marx, Weber, and Durkheim.

• This focus became a defining characteristic of the Chicago school’s theoretical product: symbolic interactionism.

Robert Park (1864–1944)

• Robert Park joined the Chicago department as a part-time instructor in 1914 and quickly became a central figure.

• Park was the dominant figure in the Chicago department, which dominated sociology until the 1930s.

• He studied in Europe and helped introduce continental European thinkers to Chicago sociologists.

• Park took courses with Georg Simmel, whose ideas on action and interaction influenced the Chicago school’s theoretical orientation.

• Before sociology, Park worked as a reporter, which shaped his understanding of urban problems and the importance of fieldwork and personal observation.

• His experience led to the Chicago school’s focus on urban ecology.

• Park played a key role in mentoring graduate students and developing a cumulative program of graduate research.

• In 1921, Park and Ernest W. Burgess published Introduction to the Science of Sociology, an influential textbook emphasizing science, research, and broad study of social phenomena.

• From the late 1920s and early 1930s, Park spent less time in Chicago.

• His longstanding interest in race relations (he was once secretary to Booker T. Washington) led him to join Fisk University, a historically Black university, in 1934.

• Park’s departure contributed to the decline of the Chicago department in the 1930s, although it was not the sole cause.

• Before discussing the decline and the rise of other theories, attention is drawn back to early Chicago figures with lasting theoretical significance: Charles Horton Cooley and especially George Herbert Mead.

Charles Horton Cooley (1864–1929)

• Charles Horton Cooley spent his career at the University of Michigan but his theoretical perspective aligned with symbolic interactionism, the Chicago school’s key contribution.

• Cooley earned his Ph.D. from Michigan in 1894, before a sociology department existed there; his exam questions came from Columbia University under Franklin Giddings.

• He began teaching at Michigan in 1892, before completing his doctorate.

• Though Cooley theorized about large-scale social phenomena like social classes and institutions, he is mainly remembered for his focus on social-psychological aspects of social life.

• His work parallels that of George Herbert Mead, though Mead had a deeper and more lasting influence on sociology.

• Cooley emphasized that consciousness cannot be separated from the social context.

• He introduced the concept of the looking-glass self, which explains how people’s consciousness is shaped through continuous social interaction.

• Another important concept by Cooley is the primary group, defined as intimate, face-to-face groups critical for linking individuals to society.

• The family and peer group are primary groups crucial for social development, where the looking-glass self emerges and the individual learns to consider others.

• Both Cooley and Mead rejected behaviorism, opposing the idea that humans blindly respond to external stimuli.

• They argued people possess consciousness and a self, and sociologists must study this dimension of social reality.

• Cooley advocated the method of sympathetic introspection, urging sociologists to empathize and put themselves in the actors’ place to analyze meanings and motives behind behavior.

• Sympathetic introspection was criticized as unscientific, and Mead’s work improved on this method.

• Despite differences, Cooley and Mead shared the view that sociology should focus on consciousness, action, and interaction within social-psychological phenomena.

ROBERT PARK

A Biographical Sketch

• Robert Park did not follow a typical academic path; he had a varied career before becoming a sociologist late in life.

• His diverse experiences shaped the Chicago school, symbolic interactionism, and much of sociology.

• Born in Harveyville, Pennsylvania, on February 14, 1864.

• As a student at the University of Michigan, influenced by thinkers like John Dewey.

• Desired real-world experience over purely academic life, stating he wanted to gather “all the joys and sorrows of the world.”

• Began career as a journalist, focusing on vivid accounts of city life, using field observation and scientific reporting methods akin to urban ethnology.

• Grew dissatisfied with journalism because it did not satisfy his intellectual needs or contribute to social reform.

• At age 34 in 1898, left journalism to study philosophy at Harvard for one year.

• Moved to Berlin, Germany, where he encountered Georg Simmel, whose work greatly influenced Park’s sociology.

• Received the only formal sociological training from Simmel’s lectures; most knowledge came from his own observations.

• Completed his doctoral dissertation at the University of Heidelberg in 1904, but was dissatisfied with it.

• Rejected a summer teaching job at University of Chicago and distanced himself from academia initially.

• Became secretary and chief publicity officer for the Congo Reform Association, advocating against exploitation in the Belgian Congo.

• Met Booker T. Washington and became his secretary, actively supporting the Tuskegee Institute and African American causes.

• In 1912, met Chicago sociologist W. I. Thomas who invited him to teach a course on “the Negro in America” at Chicago.

• Started teaching at Chicago in 1914, with growing class sizes, joined the American Sociological Society, and became its president a decade later.

• Earned a full professorship at Chicago in 1923 at age 59 after gradually securing a full-time appointment.

• Played a key role shaping the intellectual orientation of the University of Chicago’s sociology department over two decades.

• Remained active after retirement in the early 1930s, teaching and conducting research at Fisk University until nearly 80 years old.

• Traveled extensively and died on February 7, 1944, just before his 80th birthday.

George Herbert Mead (1863–1931)

• The most important thinker linked to the Chicago school and symbolic interactionism was philosopher George Herbert Mead, not a sociologist.

• Symbolic interactionism as a theory was created by Mead’s students from various inputs.

• Mead had a deep personal impact on students who developed symbolic interactionism.

• His students compiled notes from his courses and published Mind, Self and Society (1934/1962) posthumously, moving his ideas from oral to written tradition.

• Mind, Self and Society remains a foundational text and main intellectual pillar of symbolic interactionism.

• Mead’s ideas should be understood in the context of psychological behaviorism, which he admired and from which he adopted many tenets.

• He accepted behaviorism’s focus on the actor and behavior, including consideration of rewards and costs of actions.

• Mead rejected behaviorism’s exclusion of consciousness from scientific study and sought to scientifically analyze the mind.

• His focus on consciousness aligned with Cooley’s, but Mead aimed for a more scientific conception by extending behaviorist principles.

• Mead provided American sociology with a social-psychological theory contrasting with the largely societal theories of major European thinkers.

• Simmel was a notable European theorist whose focus on action and interaction influenced symbolic interactionism alongside Mead’s focus on consciousness.

• This focus on the individual and interaction created a weakness in Mead’s work and symbolic interactionism regarding analysis at the societal and cultural levels.

The Waning of Chicago Sociology

• Chicago sociology reached its peak in the 1920s but began to decline in the 1930s after the death of Mead and departure of Park.

• The decline was due to several reasons, with two being most important.

• First, the discipline increasingly focused on being scientific, emphasizing sophisticated methods and statistical analysis.

• The Chicago school was seen as emphasizing descriptive, ethnographic studies focused on subjects’ personal orientations or their “definitions of the situation” (Thomas).

• Park grew to despise statistics, calling it “parlor magic,” because it limited the analysis of subjectivity and the peculiar.

• Although important quantitative work was done at Chicago, it was overshadowed by its association with qualitative methods.

• Second, resentment grew outside Chicago toward its dominance in the American Sociological Society and the American Journal of Sociology.

• The Eastern Sociological Society was founded in 1930, with eastern sociologists vocal against Chicago and Midwest dominance.

• By 1935, this led to a non-Chicago secretary of the association and the creation of a new journal, the American Sociological Review.

• Wiley noted that “the Chicago school had fallen like a mighty oak,” signaling the rise of other power centers, especially Harvard and the Ivy League.

• Symbolic interactionism, as an indeterminate, oral tradition, lost ground to more explicit, codified theories like structural functionalism associated with the Ivy League.

Women in Early Sociology

• Simultaneously with developments at the University of Chicago and the creation of European sociology by Durkheim, Weber, and Simmel, a network of women social reformers developed pioneering sociological theories.

• Key women included Jane Addams, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Anna Julia Cooper, Ida Wells-Barnett, Marianne Weber, and Beatrice Potter Webb.

• Except possibly Cooper, these women were connected through their relationship to Jane Addams.

• These women are largely unrecognized in conventional sociology histories, reflecting the impact of gender politics and sociology’s uncritical view of its own practices.

• Collectively, their work represents a coherent and complementary early feminist sociological theory.

• Their theories are characterized by:

  1. Emphasis on women’s experiences, lives, and works as equally important to men’s.

  2. Awareness of speaking from a situated and embodied standpoint, contrasting with male sociological theory’s tone of imperious objectivity.

  3. Belief that sociology’s purpose is social reform, aiming to improve lives through knowledge.

  4. Focus on inequality as the chief social problem to be addressed.

• Differences among these women lie in the specific inequality focus—gender, race, class, or their intersection.

• All engaged in social and political activism that shaped North Atlantic societies, blending theory with practice.

• They saw social science research as integral to both their theoretical work and activism and were innovative in social science methods.

• Despite marginalization as sociologists, their research methods were often adopted by mainstream sociology, while their activism was used to exclude them from being recognized as sociologists.

• They are remembered more as social activists and social workers than sociologists.

• Their legacy is a sociological theory that calls for both action and thought.

W.E.B. Du Bois and Race Theory

• W.E.B. Du Bois (1868–1963) taught in a sociology department at Atlanta University but is better known as a public intellectual and civil rights leader, especially with the NAACP.

• Though not often seen as a sociologist or theorist, much of his writing contains powerful sociology and abstract ideas that function as theory.

• Like Marx, Du Bois did not separate theory from practice; he developed ideas primarily to advance civil rights for African Americans.

• His reputation in sociology largely rests on The Philadelphia Negro (1899), a pioneering ethnographic study of Philadelphia’s seventh ward, which he conducted alone using multiple methods.

• Du Bois produced numerous books, articles, and editorials, with few explicitly labeled as theory, but his autobiographical works (notably The Souls of Black Folk, 1903) contain important theoretical reflections.

• Central to his thought were the “race idea”, which he called the “central thought of all history,” and the “color line,” seen as a global and national racial division.

• A key theoretical concept is the veil, symbolizing a thin but real barrier separating African Americans and whites, allowing mutual visibility but maintaining separation.

• Another major concept is double-consciousness, the experience of “two-ness” where African Americans see themselves through the eyes of others.

• While Du Bois did not present a full theory of society, he developed important theoretical ideas on race and race relations in the U.S. and worldwide.

• With the rise of multicultural and feminist theories, Du Bois’s focus on race and his African American perspective have gained renewed admiration and inspired contemporary thinkers building on his legacy.

Sociological Theory to Midcentury

The Rise of Harvard, the Ivy League, and Structural Functionalism

• The rise of sociology at Harvard began with the arrival of Pitirim Sorokin in 1930.

• At the time Sorokin arrived, Harvard had no sociology department, but by the end of his first year, the department was organized, and he was appointed its head.

• Sorokin was a sociological theorist who continued publishing into the 1960s, though his work is surprisingly little cited today.

• The dominant view is that Sorokin’s theorizing has not stood the test of time, though some disagree.

• Sorokin’s long-term significance may lie in creating Harvard’s sociology department and hiring Talcott Parsons.

• Talcott Parsons, formerly an economics instructor at Harvard, was hired as an instructor in sociology and became the dominant figure in American sociology.

• Parsons is known for introducing European theorists to American audiences, developing his own sociological theories, and mentoring many students who became major sociological theorists.

Talcott Parsons (1902–1979)

• Parsons’s early major contribution was his influence on graduate students, many of whom became notable sociological theorists.

• Most famous among his students was Robert Merton (Ph.D. 1936), a key figure in Parsonian-style theorizing at Columbia University.

• In 1936, Kingsley Davis received his Ph.D., and along with Wilbert Moore (Harvard Ph.D. 1940), coauthored a central work in structural-functional theory, which became the major product of Parsons and his followers.

• Parsons produced influential graduate students well into the 1960s.

• The pivotal year was 1937, when Parsons published The Structure of Social Action, significant for four reasons:

  • Introduced grand European theorizing (Durkheim, Weber, Pareto) to a large American audience.

  • Paid little attention to Marx and Simmel, which contributed to Marxian theory’s marginalization in sociology.

  • Asserted sociological theorizing as a legitimate and important activity in sociology.

  • Presented specific sociological theories that influenced sociology deeply.

• Parsons initially considered himself an action theorist, focusing on actors, thoughts, and actions.

• Over time, he increasingly adopted structural-functionalism, focusing on large-scale social and cultural systems.

• He argued there was no contradiction between action theory and structural-functionalism but became best known as a structural functionalist.

• Structural-functionalism dominated sociology until the 1960s, focusing on relationships among large social structures and institutions.

• Parsons’s major works on structural-functional theory include The Social System (1951).

• He emphasized social structures as mutually supportive, maintaining dynamic equilibrium and social order.

• Parsons viewed social change as an orderly process and later adopted a neo-evolutionary view of social change.

• Concerned with intersystemic relations between the social, cultural, and personality systems, emphasizing cohesion, consensus, and order.

• Social structures were seen as performing positive functions for each other.

• Parsons’s prominence solidified structural-functional theory’s dominance in the U.S., supported by his students and disciples.

• Negative consequences of Parsons’s work include:

  • Interpretations of European theorists often reflected Parsons’s own orientation rather than theirs, leading to erroneous interpretations.

  • Early neglect of Marx, marginalizing Marxian theory in sociology for many years.

  • Structural functionalism developed serious theoretical weaknesses, though criticism was muted by Parsons’s dominance until much later.

• Understanding Harvard sociology’s development in the 1930s also involves considering the work of George Homans.

George Homans (1910–1989)

• George Homans, a wealthy Bostonian, received his bachelor’s degree from Harvard in 1932.

• During the Great Depression, he was unemployed but financially secure.

• In 1932, Homans attended a course on Vilfredo Pareto’s theories taught by physiologist L. J. Henderson; Parsons also attended these seminars.

• Homans was drawn to Pareto because Pareto’s ideas aligned with his conservative, anti-Marxist views as a Republican Bostonian from a wealthy family.

• Homans believed Pareto provided a defense against Marxist revolutionary arguments.

• Homans coauthored An Introduction to Pareto (1934), which established him as a sociologist despite limited prior exposure to sociology.

• In 1934, Homans became a junior fellow at Harvard, a program created to circumvent Ph.D. requirements; he never earned a Ph.D. but became a major sociological figure.

• He remained a junior fellow until 1939, during which he increasingly absorbed sociology.

• By 1939, Homans was affiliated with the Harvard sociology department, but this affiliation was interrupted by World War II.

• After the war, Parsons founded the Department of Social Relations at Harvard, and Homans joined it.

• Homans respected some of Parsons’s work but was highly critical of Parsons’s theorizing style.

• He argued Parsons’s theory was not genuine theory but a vast system of intellectual categories fitting most social phenomena.

• Homans believed theory should be built from the ground up, based on careful empirical observation, unlike Parsons’s top-down theoretical approach.

• Homans collected extensive empirical data over years but only found a satisfying theoretical framework in the 1950s.

• This framework was psychological behaviorism, particularly influenced by Harvard psychologist B. F. Skinner.

• Based on this, Homans developed his influential exchange theory.

• Harvard’s major theoretical product, structural functionalism, rose to preeminence in sociology in the late 1930s, overtaking the Chicago school and symbolic interactionism.

The Chicago School in Decline

• By the mid-1930s, the Chicago department was in decline due to the death of Mead, departure of Park, the revolt of eastern sociologists, and the founding of the American Sociological Review.

• Despite this decline, the Chicago school remained influential in sociology into the early 1950s.

• The central figure in the Chicago department during this period was Herbert Blumer (1900–1987).

• Blumer was a major exponent of the theoretical approach developed at Chicago from the works of Mead, Cooley, Simmel, Park, Thomas, and others.

• He coined the term “symbolic interactionism” in 1937.

• Blumer played a key role in sustaining the symbolic interactionism tradition through his teaching at Chicago.

• He authored numerous essays that helped keep symbolic interactionism vital into the 1950s.

• The Chicago school declined further when Blumer moved in 1952 from Chicago to the University of California at Berkeley.

• Despite changes, the Chicago tradition remains alive today with significant exponents spread across the U.S. and the world.