The theories of Parsons and Althusser are compared in terms of the questions they asked, the answers they gave, and the methodological strategies they used to link the two in order to raise questions about the theoretical solutions sociologists have developed to confront methodological individualism and avoid psychological reductionism. In the theories of Parsons and Althusser action is linked to structure by a systems framework in which no theoretically relevant social action occurs outside the system. Both adapted natural science models to explanations of social phenomena by using analogies of the unconscious and of language. Because these theoretical conceptualizations do not enable one to specify the limits of structural effect, it is argued that they are reductionist. Alternative conceptualizations are suggested which conceive of social structure as setting limits but not preselecting behavior and as enabling theoretically meaningful choice out of multiple and conflicting pressures on social action. It is then argued that this choice must be incorporated in our theories of the social in order for us to explain social change. Finally, questions are raised about several underlying assumptions which may lead sociologists to sociologically reductionist theories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nancy DiTomaso (1982) studied this question.