write an essay on classical theory

A Classical Teacher's Journal

Essay writing #4: the classical argument.

The second essay format I teach my students is the classical argument. It is more advanced than the simple argument for a number of reasons.

To begin with, the thesis in a classical argument is debatable in a consequential way, meaning there is something at stake. That something might be political, social, religious, or any number of things that affect the broader world. Given this substantive nature, the argument often requires outside research as opposed to simply one’s own personal analysis. Finally, in order to lend authority to one’s position, the essay format spells out and refutes the opposing position .

In a middle school classroom like mine, I might use a simple argument for analysis of King Arthur but a classical argument for analysis of the justice of the Crusades. Given their complicated history and enduring legacy, a meaningful position on the Crusades requires research and attention to a vast array of conflicting viewpoints.

As I explain to my students, a classical argument is more than “I think this about such and such.” It’s also, “You should think this, too.” It’s clearly a persuasive argument because it tries to draw people to the writer’s viewpoint and dispel any doubt that other views could be correct.

The essay structure itself consists of five parts, which support a single thesis statement through deductive writing , meaning they begin with the thesis statement and then move on to support it.

PART ONE – THE INTRODUCTION AND THESIS STATEMENT

Happily, the introduction of a classical argument models the same format as that of a simple argument. It introduces the topic to be discussed and presents the thesis statement . I instruct students to limit themselves to approximately 3-5 sentences. The brevity of the opening paragraph is one of its strengths and should not be compromised by extraneous information.

This paragraph consists of three parts. The first is the opening sentence itself. This should typically consist of a simple statement of fact, especially for students who are just learning to write an essay for the first time. More “provocative” openings like questions or startling facts are a lot harder to pull off, and I recommend new writers avoid them.

The second part of the opening paragraph offers transitional background information and justification for why the topic is relevant.

Well-done transitional sentences pave the way for the final part of the opening, which is the one-sentence thesis itself, or the position the essay takes. I always remind students that the thesis should be something debatable much like an opinion. In other words, it is not simply a fact.

PART TWO – THE NARRATION

This part of the essay establishes context for the argument . First, it tells the story, so to speak, behind the essay. That story might be the history of a war or the facts of a case or some other relevant background.

Next, it addresses the reality that there are opposing views about the subject matter. It should state what those views are without actually getting into the arguments for either position. That will come later.

Finally, the narration makes a type of appeal to the reader, letting him know what is at stake in the essay and asking him to weigh each side carefully.

There is no set number of sentences, but a good paragraph of 8-10 sentences usually does it for middle school students. More advanced writers might write several paragraphs in this part.

PART THREE – THE CONFIRMATION

Much like the body of a simple argument, the confirmation presents the evidence to support the thesis. It should have a topic sentence, at least three pieces of thoroughly explained evidence, and a concluding sentence that clearly ties the confirmation back to the thesis.

Again, a good paragraph of 8-10 sentences is ideal for middle school students, but more advanced writers might have several paragraphs in this section as well. .

PART FOUR – THE REFUTATION AND CONCESSION

With careful planning, this part of the essay is often the strongest because it allows the writer to dismiss all, or nearly all, of the opposition’s claims .

It should have a topic sentence followed by as many objections as the writer can come up with. If there are areas where the opposition may have a good point, the writer should concede that but without giving full weight to their overall position. Finally, this part of the essay should have a concluding sentence that relates back to the thesis.

The refutation and concession should mirror the confirmation in structure and length.

PART FIVE – THE CONCLUSION

Its purpose is to drive home the thesis statement by casting its relevance more broadly than what was initially presented in the introduction and narration.

Beginning writers often erroneously think of a conclusion as a restatement of what has already been said. Though this might work on a basic level, it represents only a superficial understanding of the key purpose of the conclusion and tends to be boring.

I find it helpful to refer to the conclusion as the “so what” part of the essay . We often think of it in terms of the broad lessons we learned from exploring an argument in a specific context. In other words, it is the student’s opportunity to reiterate what is at stake in the argument.

The conclusion should be divided into three parts, inversely mirroring the introduction . It, too, should be relatively short but powerful.

The first part of the conclusion recalls the thesis but presents it in a new way. I refer to this as a “thesis with a twist.” The second part provides transitional information on the connection between the thesis and the stakes at play in the argument. The final part is broader still, typically consisting of only one or two sentences, and should press the moral imperative of making the “right” choice for “the world.”

A REMINDER ABOUT PROCESS

If the writing process is important for the simple argument, it is all the more important for the classical argument, which is far more complicated.

From using Socratic discussions and disputations, to developing a thesis, to outlining the argument, to writing it out, every phase needs thorough, well-planned attention. Any breakdown in the writing process can greatly undermine the strength of the argument, and it shows all the more in this essay format.

Conversely, careful adherence to the process results in a persuasive argument even if the writing is wanting in style and beauty.

The classical argument, when followed properly, is as full-proof of a persuasive format as it gets. Naturally, there will be many readers who are not convinced in the end, but they will at least have to concede that the argument is convincing.

First image courtesy of the New York Public Library, New York

Second image courtesy of the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.

Classical Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A (Very) Brief History of Rhetoric

The study of rhetoric has existed for thousands of years, predating even Socrates, Plato and the other ancient Greek philosophers that we often credit as the founders of Western philosophy. Although ancient rhetoric is most commonly associated with the ancient Greeks and Romans, early examples of rhetoric date all the way back to ancient Akkadian writings in Mesopotamia.

In ancient Greece and Rome, rhetoric was most often considered to be the art of persuasion and was primarily described as a spoken skill. In these societies, discourse occurred almost exclusively in the public sphere, so learning the art of effective, convincing speaking was essential for public orators, legal experts, politicians, philosophers, generals, and educators. To prepare for the speeches they would need to make in these roles, students engaged in written exercises called progymnasmata . Today, rhetorical scholars still use strategies from the classical era to conceptualize argument. However, whereas oral discourse was the main focus of the classical rhetoricians, modern scholars also study the peculiarities of written argument.

Aristotle provides a crucial point of reference for ancient and modern scholars alike. Over 2000 years ago, Aristotle literally wrote the book on rhetoric. His text Rhētorikḗ ( On Rhetoric ) explores the techniques and purposes of persuasion in ancient Greece, laying the foundation for the study and implementation of rhetoric in future generations. Though the ways we communicate and conceptualize rhetoric have changed, many of the principles in this book are still used today. And this is for good reason: Aristotle’s strategies can provide a great guide for organizing your thoughts as well as writing effective arguments, essays, and speeches.

Below, you will find a brief guide to some of the most fundamental concepts in classical rhetoric, most of which originate in On Rhetoric.

The Rhetorical Appeals

To understand how argument works in On Rhetoric , you must first understand the major appeals associated with rhetoric. Aristotle identifies four major rhetorical appeals: ethos (credibility), logos (logic), pathos (emotion), and Kairos(time).

Ethos – persuasion through the author's character or credibility. This is the way a speaker (or writer) presents herself to the audience. You can build credibility by citing professional sources, using content-specific language, and by showing evidence of your ethical, knowledgeable background.
Logos – persuasion through logic. This is the way a speaker appeals to the audience through practicality and hard evidence. You can develop logos by presenting data, statistics, or facts by crafting a clear claim with a logically-sequenced argument. ( See enthymeme and syllogism )
Pathos – persuasion through emotion or disposition . This is the way a speaker appeals to the audience through emotion, pity, passions, or dispositions. The idea is usually to evoke and strengthen feelings already present within the audience. This can be achieved through story-telling, vivid imagery, and an impassioned voice. Academic arguments in particular benefit from understanding pathos as appealing to an audience's academic disposition on a given topic, subject, or argument.
Kairos – an appeal made through the adept use of time. This is the way a speaker appeals to the audience through notions of time. It is also considered to be the appropriate or opportune time for a speaker to insert herself into a conversation or discourse, using the three appeals listed above. A Kairotic appeal can be made through calls to immediate action, presenting an opportunity as temporary, and by describing a specific moment as propitious or ideal.

*Note: When using these terms in a Rhetorical Analysis, make sure your syntax is correct. One does not appeal to ethos, logos, or pathos directly. Rather, one appeals to an audience's emotion/disposition, reason/logic, or sense of the author's character/credibility within the text. Ethos, pathos, and logos are themselves the appeals an author uses to persuade an audience.

An easy way to conceptualize the rhetorical appeals is through advertisements, particularly infomercials or commercials. We are constantly being exposed to the types of rhetoric above, whether it be while watching television or movies, browsing the internet, or watching videos on YouTube.

Imagine a commercial for a new car. The commercial opens with images of a family driving a brand-new car through rugged, forested terrain, over large rocks, past waterfalls, and finally to a serene camping spot near a tranquil lake surrounded by giant redwood trees. The scene cuts to shots of the interior of the car, showing off its technological capacities and its impressive spaciousness. A voiceover announces that not only has this car won numerous awards over its competitors but that it is also priced considerably lower than comparable models, while getting better gas mileage. “But don’t wait,” the voiceover says excitedly, “current lessees pay 0% APR financing for 12 months.”

In just a few moments, this commercial has shown masterful use of all four appeals. The commercial utilizes pathos by appealing to our romantic notions of family, escape, and the great outdoors. The commercial develops ethos by listing its awards, and it appeals to our logical tendencies by pointing out we will save money immediately because the car is priced lower than its competitors, as well as in the long run because of its higher MPG rate. Finally, the commercial provides an opportune and propitious moment for its targeted audience to purchase a car immediately.

Depending on the nature of the text, argument, or conversation, one appeal will likely become most dominant, but rhetoric is generally most effective when the speaker or writer draws on multiple appeals to work in conjunction with one another. To learn more about Aristotle's rhetorical appeals, click here.

Components and Structure

The classical argument is made up of five components, which are most commonly composed in the following order:

Exordium – The introduction, opening, or hook.
Narratio – The context or background of the topic.
Proposito and Partitio – The claim/stance and the argument.
Confirmatio and/or Refutatio – positive proofs and negative proofs of support.
Peroratio – The conclusion and call to action.

Think of the exordium as your introduction or “hook.” In your exordium, you have an opportunity to gain the interest of your reader, but you also have the responsibility of situating the argument and setting the tone of your writing. That is, you should find a way to appeal to the audience’s interest while also introducing the topic and its importance in a professional and considerate manner. Something to include in this section is the significance of discussing the topic in this given moment (Kairos). This provides the issue a sense of urgency that can validate your argument.

This is also a good opportunity to consider who your intended audience is and to address their concerns within the context of the argument. For example, if you were writing an argument on the importance of technology in the English classroom and your intended audience was the board of a local high school, you might consider the following:

New learning possibilities for students (General Audience Concerns)
The necessity of modern technology in finding new, up-to-date information (Hook/Kairos)
Detailed narrative of how technology in one school vastly improved student literacy (Hook/Pathos)
Statistics showing a link between exposure to technology and rising trends in literacy (Hook/Logos)
Quotes from education and technology professors expressing an urgency for technology in English classrooms (Hook/Ethos)

Of course, you probably should not include all of these types of appeals in the opening section of your argument—if you do, you may end up with a boring, overlong introduction that doesn’t function well as a hook. Instead, consider using some of these points as evidence later on. Ask yourself: What will be most important to my audience? What information will most likely result in the action I want to bring about? Think about which appeal will work best to gain the attention of your intended audience and start there.

The narratio provides relevant foundational information and describes the social context in which your topic exists. This might include information on the historical background, including recent changes or updates to the topic, social perception, important events, and other academic research. This helps to establish the rhetorical situation for the argument: that is, the situation the argument is currently in, as impacted by events, people, opinion, and urgency of some kind. For your argument on technology in the English classroom, you might include:

Advances in education-related technology over the centuries
Recent trends in education technology
A description of the importance of digital literacy
Statistics documenting the lack of home technology for many students
A selection of expert opinions on the usefulness of technology in all classrooms

Providing this type of information creates the setting for your argument. In other words, it provides the place and purpose for the argument to take place. By situating your argument within in a viable context, you create an opportunity to assert yourself into the discussion, as well as to give your reader a genuine understanding of your topic’s importance.

Propositio and Partitio

These two concepts function together to help set up your argument. You can think of them functioning together to form a single thesis. The propositio informs your audience of your stance, and the partitio lays out your argument. In other words, the propositio tells your audience what you think about a topic, and the partitio briefly explains why you think that way and how you will prove your point.

Because this section helps to set up the rest of your argument, you should place it near the beginning of your paper. Keep in mind, however, that you should not give away all of your information or evidence in your partitio. This section should be fairly short: perhaps 3-4 sentences at most for most academic essays. You can think of this section of your argument like the trailer for a new film: it should be concise, should entice the audience, and should give them a good example of what they are going to experience, but it shouldn’t include every detail. Just as a filmgoer must see an entire film to gain an understanding of its significance or quality, so too must your audience read the rest of your argument to truly understand its depth and scope.

In the case of your argument on implementing technology in the English classroom, it’s important to think not only of your own motivations for pursuing this technology in the classroom, but also of what will motivate or persuade your respective audience(s). Some writing contexts call for an audience of one. Some require consideration of multiple audiences, in which case you must find ways to craft an argument which appeals to each member of your audience. For example, if your audience included a school board as well as parents andteachers, your propositio might look something like this:

“The introduction of newer digital technology in the English classroom would be beneficial for all parties involved. Students are already engaged in all kinds of technological spaces, and it is important to implement teaching practices that invest students’ interests and prior knowledge. Not only would the marriage of English studies and technology extend pedagogical opportunities, it would also create an ease of instruction for teachers, engage students in creative learning environments, and familiarize students with the creation and sharing technologies that they will be expected to use at their future colleges and careers. Plus, recent studies suggest a correlation between exposure to technology and higher literacy rates, a trend many education professionals say isn’t going to change.”

Note how the above paragraph considers the concerns and motivations of all three audience members, takes a stance, and provides support for the stance in a way that allows for the rest of the argument to grow from its ideas. Keep in mind that whatever you promise in your propositio and partitio (in this case the new teaching practices, literacy statistics, and professional opinion) must appear in the body of your argument. Don’t make any claims here that you cannot prove later in your argument.

Confirmatio and Refutatio

These two represent different types of proofs that you will need to consider when crafting your argument. The confirmatio and refutatio work in opposite ways, but are both very effective in strengthening your claims. Luckily, both words are cognates—words that sound/look in similar in multiple languages—and are therefore are easy to keep straight. Confirmatio is a way to confirm your claims and is considered a positive proof; refutatio is a way to acknowledge and refute a counterclaim and is considered a negative proof.

The confirmatio is your argument’s support: the evidence that helps to support your claims. For your argument on technology in the English classroom, you might include the following:

Students grades drastically increase when technology is inserted into academics
Teachers widely agree that students are more engaged in classroom activities that involve technology
Students who accepted to elite colleges generally possess strong technological skills

The refutatio provides negative proofs. This is an opportunity for you to acknowledge that other opinions exist and have merit, while also showing why those claims do not warrant rejecting your argument.

If you feel strange including information that seems to undermine or weaken your own claims, ask yourself this: have you ever been in a debate with someone who entirely disregarded every point you tried to make without considering the credibility of what you said? Did this make their argument less convincing? That’s what your paper can look like if you don’t acknowledge that other opinions indeed exist and warrant attention.

After acknowledging an opposing viewpoint, you have two options. You can either concede the point (that is, admit that the point is valid and you can find no fault with their reasoning), or you can refute their claim by pointing out the flaws in your opponent’s argument. For example, if your opponent were to argue that technology is likely to distract students more than help them (an argument you’d be sure to include in your argument so as not to seem ignorant of opposing views) you’d have two options:

Concession: You might concede this point by saying “Despite all of the potential for positive learning provided by technology, proponents of more traditional classroom materials point out the distractive possibilities that such technology would introduce into the classroom. They argue that distractions such as computer games, social media, and music-streaming services would only get in the way of learning.”

In your concession of the argument, you acknowledge the merit of the opposing argument, but you should still try to flip the evidence in a positive way. Note how before conceding we include “despite all of the potential for positive learning.” This reminds your reader that, although you are conceding a single point, there are still many reasons to side with you.

Refutation: To refute this same point you might say something like, “While proponents of more traditional English classrooms express concerns about student distraction, it’s important to realize that in modern times, students are already distracted by the technology they carry around in their pockets. By redirecting student attention to the technology administered by the school, this distraction is shifted to class content. Plus, with website and app blocking resources available to schools, it is simple for an institution to simply decide which websites and apps to ban and block, thereby ensuring students are on task.”

Note how we acknowledged the opposing argument, but immediately pointed out its flaws using straightforward logic and a counterexample. In so doing, we effectively strengthen our argument and move forward with our proposal.

Your peroratio is your conclusion. This is your final opportunity to make an impact in your essay and leave an impression on your audience. In this section, you are expected to summarize and re-evaluate everything you have proven throughout your argument. However, there are multiple ways of doing this. Depending on the topic of your essay, you might employ one or more of the following in your closing:

Call to action (encourage your audience to do something that will change the situation or topic you have been discussing).
Discuss the implications for the future. What might happen if things continue the way they are going? Is this good or bad? Try to be impactful without being overly dramatic.
Discuss other related topics that warrant further research and discussion.
Make a historical parallel regarding a similar issue that can help to strengthen your argument.
Urge a continued conversation of the topic for the future.

Remember that your peroratio is the last impression your audience will have of your argument. Be sure to consider carefully which rhetorical appeals to employ to gain a desirable effect. Make sure also to summarize your findings, including the most effective and emphatic pieces of evidence from your argument, reassert your major claim, and end on a compelling, memorable note. Good luck and happy arguing!

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

60 Aristotelian (Classical) Argument Model

Aristotelian argument.

The Aristotelian or classical argument is a style of argument developed by the famous Greek philosopher and rhetorician, Aristotle . In this style of argument, your goal as a writer is to convince your audience of something. The goal is to use a series of strategies to persuade your audience to adopt your side of the issue. Although ethos , pathos , and logos play a role in any argument, this style of argument utilizes them in the most persuasive ways possible.

Of course, your professor may require some variations, but here is the basic format for an Aristotelian, or classical, argumentative essay:

Introduce your issue. At the end of your introduction, most professors will ask you to present your thesis. The idea is to present your readers with your main point and then dig into it.
Present your case by explaining the issue in detail and why something must be done or a way of thinking is not working. This will take place over several paragraphs.
Address the opposition. Use a few paragraphs to explain the other side. Refute the opposition one point at a time.
Provide your proof. After you address the other side, you’ll want to provide clear evidence that your side is the best side.
Present your conclusion. In your conclusion, you should remind your readers of your main point or thesis and summarize the key points of your argument. If you are arguing for some kind of change, this is a good place to give your audience a call to action. Tell them what they could do to make a change.

For a visual representation of this type of argument, check out the Aristotelian infographic below:

Introduction to Aristotelian Argument

The Aristotelian or classical argument is a style of argument developed by the famous Greek philosopher and rhetorician, Aristotle. In this style of argument, the writer’s goal is to be convincing and to persuade your audience to your side of the issue through a series of strategies.

Start here!

Before you begin, review your assignment and ask yourself questions about what you might want to write about.

Use prewriting activities, such as brainstorming or listing, to help develop ideas for topics and angles.

Do your research! Find credible sources to help you build your argument.

But there’s more! There are some important concepts you need to learn about.

Modes of Persuasion

Ethos=credibility

Pathos=emotions

Logos=logic

Know Your Audience!

When writing a classical or Aristotelian argument, think about how you are going to be convincing to your audience!

Things to remember along the way…

Clear thesis

Support thesis

Opposing views

Cite sources

Sample Essay

For a sample essay written in the Aristotelian model, click here .

Aristotelian (Classical) Argument Model Copyright © 2020 by Liza Long; Amy Minervini; and Joel Gladd is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

4.2 Classical Philosophy

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

Evaluate the influence of Egyptian scholarship on classical Greek philosophy.
Describe the key ideas of the most influential Greek philosophers.
Describe the key ideas of the most influential Roman philosophers.
Distinguish between major schools of classical thought.

Egyptian Origins of Classical Philosophy

The understanding that the roots of classical thought lie, at least in part, in Egypt is as old as the ancient Greeks themselves. In The Histories of Herodotus , the ancient Greek historian Herodotus (c. 484–425 BCE) traces Greek beliefs about the gods, religious practices, and understanding of the natural world to Egypt. Herodotus claimed the ancient Greeks adopted practices and ideas as diverse as solemn processions to temples, the belief in an immortal soul, and the knowledge of geometry and astrology from the Egyptians. Herodotus notes that the people of Heliopolis , one of the largest cities in ancient Egypt, “are said to be the most learned in records of the Egyptians” (Herodotus 1890, 116). Plato spent 13 years in Heliopolis, and Pythagoras (c. 570–495 BCE) studied mathematics in Heliopolis for more than two decades (Boas 1948).

Egyptian and Babylonian Mathematics

Could Pythagoras have learned, rather than discovered, the “Pythagorean” theorem—the law of relationships between the sides and hypotenuse of a right triangle—in Egypt ? Almost assuredly. A Babylonian clay tablet dating to approximately 1800 BCE, known as Plimpton 322, demonstrates that the Babylonians had knowledge not only of the relationship of the sides and hypotenuses of a right triangle but also of trigonometric functions (Lamb 2017). Further, the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus provides evidence that the Egyptians had advanced knowledge of algebra and geometry as early as 1550 BCE, presenting problems that include calculating the volume of cylindrical granaries and the slope of pyramids. The Berlin Papyrus 6619, usually dated between 1800 BCE and 1649 BCE, contains a solution to a problem involving the Pythagorean theorem and evidence that the Egyptians could solve quadratic equations. Pythagoras studied with the priests of Heliopolis more than 1,000 years after these documents were created. It is possible that this Egyptian mathematical knowledge had been lost and that Pythagoras rediscovered the relationship during or after his studies in Heliopolis. However, given what we know now about Greek individuals visiting and residing in Egypt, it seems more likely that he was introduced to the knowledge there. As with mathematics, there are specific philosophical ideas that can be traced back to Egypt. This is particularly the case within metaphysics, the branch of philosophy that studies reality, being, causation, and related abstract concepts and principles.

Akhenaten’s Metaphysics

In the mid-14th century BCE, Akhenaten became pharaoh in Egypt . Partly in an attempt to undercut the growing power of the priests, Akhenaten abolished all other gods and established Aten , the sun god, as the one true god. Akhenaten held that solar energy was the element out of which all other elements evolved or emanated (Flegel 2018). In proposing this idea, Akhenaten established an unseen divinity responsible for causation. Aten became the one true substance that created the observable world. One hymn reads, “You create millions of forms from yourself, the one, / cities and towns / fields, paths and river” (Assmann [1995] 2009, 154). Although the Egyptian elite quickly reestablished the temples and the practices of the full pantheon of gods after Akhenaten’s death, theological thought incorporated this idea of an all-powerful invisible first cause. This idea evolved, with the phrase “one and the millions” coming to signify the sun god as the soul and the world as its body (Assmann 2004, 189). As you will see later in this chapter, this same concept—a single, invisible, unchanging substance expressing itself through forms to give rise to the material world—is the key principle in Plato’s metaphysics.

The Egyptian Origins Controversy

Scholars have long puzzled over to what extent the origins of classical thought can be said to lie in Egypt . In recent years, a heated debate has erupted over this question. In the three-volume text Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization , Martin Bernal , a contemporary American professor specializing in modern Chinese political history, argued that the ancient Egyptians and Phoenicians played a foundational role in the formation of Greek civilization and philosophy. He further claimed that an “ancient model” recognizing the African and Middle Eastern origins of Greece was widely accepted until the 19th century, when it was replaced by a racist “Aryan model” proposing Indo-European origins instead. Mary Lefkowitz , a contemporary professor of classical studies, has famously critiqued Bernal’s work. Lefkowitz’s position is that though it is important to acknowledge the debt the Greeks owe to Egyptian thought, Greek philosophy was not wholly derived from Egypt, nor did Western civilization arise from Africa. A bitter academic war of words has ensued, with Lefkowitz and other prominent scholars noting significant errors in Bernal’s scholarship. Lefkowitz authored Not Out of Africa: How Afrocentrism Became an Excuse to Teach Myth as History in 1997. Bernal responded with Black Athena Writes Back in 2001. This exchange reflects a much broader phenomenon in which academics spar over the accuracy of historical narratives and the interpretation of philosophical ideas, often presenting the issues as ethical questions. By thinking critically about these disagreements, we gain deeper insight not only into the topic of study but also into philosophical and political discourse today.

Write Like a Philosopher

Read the summary of these two articles: (1) Mary Lefkowitz’s “ Egyptian Philosophy: Influence on Ancient Greek Thought ” and (2) Simphiwe Sesanti’s “ Teaching Ancient Egyptian Philosophy (Ethics) and History: Fulfilling a Quest for a Decolonised and Afrocentric Education ”. Identify two arguments from each article, and identify two to three sources that could provide evidence to substantiate or refute each argument.

Ancient Greek Philosophy

Classical philosophy emerged in ancient Greece , following a procession from what are known as the Presocratics; to the three great philosophers, Socrates (470–399 BCE), Plato (c. 428–347 BCE), and Aristotle (384–322 BCE); and then to later schools of thought, including the Epicureans and Stoics. As is the case with all ancient societies, knowledge of these thinkers is limited by the documentation that has survived. Socrates, for example, wrote down nothing. Rather, Plato wrote dialogues featuring his mentor Socrates engaged in philosophical debate with various individuals in Athens, some of them his fellow citizens and other prominent visitors to the city. The material that has survived from ancient Greece has fueled philosophical discourse for two millennia.

The Presocratics

The term Presocratics is somewhat problematic. At least a few of the thinkers considered part of this school were contemporaries of Socrates and are mentioned in Plato’s dialogues. Foremost among these are the Sophists , traveling teachers of rhetoric who serve as foils for Plato ’s philosophers. Plato sought to distinguish philosophers, seekers of truth, from Sophists, whom he regarded as seeking wealth and fame and peddling in fallacious arguments. Indeed, one of the most prominent Sophists, Protagoras , is a main character in the dialogue that bears his name.

Researching the Presocratics is difficult because so little of their work has survived. What we have is fragmentary and often based on the testimony of later philosophers. Still, based on the work that is available, we can characterize the Presocratics as interested in questions of metaphysics and natural philosophy, with many of them proposing that nature consisted of one or more basic substances.

The fragments of the works of these early philosophers that have come down to us focus on metaphysical questions. One of the central debates among the Presocratics is between monism and plurism . Those who think nature consisted of a single substance are called monists, in contrast to pluralists, who see it as consisting of multiple substances. For example, the monist Thales of Miletus thought that the basic element that comprised everything was water, while Empedocles the pluralist sought to show that there were four basic elements (earth, air, fire, and water) that were resolved and dissolved by the competing forces of love and strife.

Prominent Monists

Presocratic philosophers who sought to present a unified conception of nature held that nature ultimately consists of a single substance. This proposition can be interpreted in various ways. The claim proposed by Thales of Miletus (620–546 BCE) that the basic substance of the universe was water is somewhat ambiguous. It might mean that everything is ultimately made of water, or it might mean that water is the origin of all things. Thales and two of his students, Anaximander and Anaximenes , made up the monist Milesian school . Anaximander thought that water was too specific to be the basis for everything that exists. Instead, he thought the basic stuff of the universe was the apeiron , the indefinite or boundless. Anaximenes held that air was the basic substance of the universe.

Parmenides , one of the most influential Presocratic monists, went so far as to deny the reality of change. He presented his metaphysical ideas in a poem that portrays himself being taken on a chariot to visit a goddess who claims she will reveal the truths of the universe to him. The poem has two parts, “the Way of the Truth”, which explains that what exists is unified, complete, and unchanging, and “the Way of Opinion”, which argues that the perception of change in the physical world is mistaken. Our senses mislead us. Although it might seem to us that Parmenides’s claim that change is not real is absurd, he and his student Zeno advanced strong arguments. Parmenides was the first person to propose that the light from the moon came from the sun and to explain the moon’s phases. In this way, he showed that although we see the moon as a crescent, a semicircle, or a complete circle, the moon itself does not change (Graham 2013). The perception that the moon is changing is an illusion.

Zeno proposed paradoxes, known as Zeno’s paradoxes , that demonstrate that what we think of as plurality and motion are simply not possible. Say, for example, that you wish to walk from the library to the park. To get there, you first must walk halfway there. To finish your trip, you must walk half of the remaining distance (one quarter). To travel that final quarter of the distance, you must first walk half of that (an eighth of the total distance). This process can continue forever—creating an infinite number of discrete distances that you must travel. It is therefore impossible that you arrive at the park. A more common way to present this paradox today is as a mathematical asymptote or limit ( Figure 4.4 ). From this point of view, you can never reach point a from point b because no matter where you are along the path, there will always be a distance between wherever you are and where you want to be.

The Paradoxes of Zeno

Prominent pluralists.

Parmenides and Heraclitus (525–475 BCE) held diametrically opposed views concerning the nature of the universe. Where Parmenides saw unity, Heraclitus saw diversity. Heraclitus held that nothing remains the same and that all is in flux. One of his most well-known sayings illustrates this well: “[It is not possible to step twice into the same river]. . . . It scatters and again comes together, and approaches and recedes” (quoted in Curd 2011, 45).

Anaxagoras (500–428 BCE) and Empedocles (494–434 BCE) were substance pluralists who believed that the universe consisted of more than one basic kind of “stuff.” Anaxagoras believed that it is mind, or nous , that controls the universe by mixing and unmixing things into a variety of different combinations. Empedocles held that there were four basic substances (the four elements of air, earth, fire, and water) that were combined and recombined by the opposing forces of love and strife.

Finally, there are the schools of the atomists , who held the view that the basic substance of the universe was tiny, indivisible atoms. For the atomists, all was either atoms or void. Everything we experience is a result of atoms combining with one another.

Connections

The chapter on metaphysics covers monism and pluralism across cultures.

Presocratic Theology

The Presocratic philosopher Pythagoras (570–490 BCE) and his followers, known as the Pythagoreans , comprised a rational yet mystical sect of learned men. The Pythagoreans had a reputation for learning and were legendary for their knowledge of mathematics, music, and astronomy as well as for their dietary practices and other customs (Curd 2011). Like Socrates, Pythagoras wrote nothing, so scholars continue to debate which ideas originated with Pythagoras and which were devised by his disciples.

Among the Pythagoreans’ key beliefs was the idea that the solution to the mysteries of the universe was numerical and that these numerical mysteries could be revealed through music. A reminder of their mathematical legacy can be found in the Pythagorean theorem , which students continue to learn in school. Pythagoreans also believed in the transmigration of souls, an idea that Plato would adopt. According to this doctrine, the soul outlives the body, and individuals are reborn after death in another human body or even in the body of a nonhuman animal.

Another important Presocratic philosopher who produced novel theological ideas is Xenophanes (c. 570–478 BCE). Xenophanes, who was fascinated by religion, rejected the traditional accounts of the Olympian gods. He sought a rational basis of religion and was among the first to claim that the gods are actually projections of the human mind. He argued that the Greeks anthropomorphized divinity, and like many later theologians, he held that there is a God whose nature we cannot grasp.

Socrates and Plato

As Socrates never wrote anything, he is remembered today because thinkers like Plato featured him in their writings. Plato deliberately dramatized the life of his teacher Socrates. One of the key questions of Plato’s scholarship is exactly how many liberties he took in depicting the life of his teacher. Scholars generally agree that the dialogues that Plato wrote early in his career are more faithful to the life of Socrates than later ones. His writings are usually divided into three periods: early, middle, and late.

The early dialogues feature a skeptical Socrates who refuses to advance any doctrines of his own. Instead, he questions his interlocutors until they despair of finding the truth at all. These early dialogues tend to be somewhat short with a simpler composition. One of the dialogues features a young man named Meno who is the pupil of a prominent Sophist. The dialogue focuses on the nature of virtue and whether virtue can be taught. At one point in the dialogue, Meno famously compares Socrates to a torpedofish, a fish similar to a stingray that paralyzes its prey. Socrates does this to his dialogue partners: they begin the discussion believing that they know something and over the course of the dialogue begin to question whether they know anything at all.

See the introduction to philosophy chapter for more on Socrates as the paradigmatic philosopher.

Gradually, Plato has Socrates give voice to more positive doctrines. These include what comes to be known as the theory of the forms , a metaphysical doctrine that holds that every particular thing that exists participates in an immaterial form or essence that gives this thing its identity. The invisible realm of the forms differs fundamentally from the changing realm we experience in this world. The invisible realm is eternal, unchanging, and perfect. The material things themselves change, but the immaterial forms remain the same. Consider, for example, the form of a rectangle: four adjacent straight sides that meet at 90-degree angles. You can draw a rectangle, but it is an imperfect representation. The desk or table you are sitting at might be rectangular, but are its edges perfectly straight? How perfect was the instrument that cut the sides? If you nick the edge of a table, then it changes and becomes less like the form of a rectangle. With the doctrine of forms, Plato may be said to combine the metaphysics of Parmenides with that of Heraclitus into a metaphysical dualism.

The philosopher’s task is to access the immaterial realm of the forms and try to convince others of its truth. Plato further believed that if we understand the true nature of virtues like wisdom, justice, and courage, we cannot avoid acting in accordance with them. Hence, rulers of states should be philosopher-kings who have the clearest understanding of forms. Yet philosopher-kings never have perfect knowledge because our understanding is based on a material realm that is always changing. True knowledge is only possible in the abstract realms, such as math and ethics.

In the dialogues, Socrates claims that he was divinely inspired to question prominent citizens of Athens to determine whether their claims to know could be verified. These citizens grow annoyed with Socrates after some years of this treatment, eventually bringing charges against him for corrupting the youth and making the weaker argument appear the stronger. The proceedings of the resulting trial were immortalized in Plato’s Apologia , where Socrates presents his defense of his life’s work as a philosopher. The dialogue’s name derives from the Greek apologia , meaning “defense”—Socrates never apologizes for anything! He is found guilty and sentenced to death. Socrates becomes a martyr to philosophy, put to death by the democratic government of Athens.

This text examines Plato’s ideas in greater depth in the chapters on metaphysics , epistemology , value theory , and political philosophy .

During the Middle Ages, people referred to Plato’s most famous pupil Aristotle as simply “the Philosopher.” This nickname is a testament to his enduring fame, as well as to the fact that he was driven by philosophical curiosity to try to understand everything under the sun. The first sentence of his famous work Metaphysics states, “Philosophy begins in wonder.” He exemplified this claim in his writing. His works ranged widely across all the main areas of philosophy, including logic, metaphysics, and ethics. In addition, he investigated natural philosophy , the fields of study that eventually gave rise to science. Aristotle also researched topics that would today be classified as biology and physics. Stylistically, his work was very different from that of his teacher. While Plato’s work was literary and even dramatic, Aristotle’s writings are presented as lecture.

Explore Aristotle’s ideas in greater depth in the chapters on metaphysics and epistemology .

Plato and his successors were prone to mysticism. It was easy to translate the philosophical theory of the forms into a mystical doctrine in which the forms were known by the mind of God. Aristotle resisted this trend. At the center of Aristotle’s work was his doctrine of the four causes . He believed that the nature of any single thing could be understood by answering four basic questions: “What’s it made of?” (material cause), “What shape does it have?” (formal cause), “What agent gave it this form?” (efficient cause), and, finally, “What is its end goal?” (final cause). Not only can we explain the nature of anything by answering these four basic questions, we can also understand the nature of the universe. Aristotle’s universe is a closed system that is comprehensible to humanity because it is composed of these four causes. Each cause leads to another, until we get to the first cause or prime mover at the head of it all. Somewhat obscurely, Aristotle claims that this first cause is “thought thinking itself.”

In addition to the doctrine of the four causes, it is important to understand Aristotle’s account of the soul. Unlike Plato, who held that the soul is an eternal substance that is reborn in various bodies, Aristotle has a functional conception of the soul. He defined the soul based upon what the soul does. In Aristotle’s understanding, all living things have souls. Plants have a vegetative soul that promotes growth and the exchange of nutrients. The animal soul, in addition to taking in nutrients and growing, experiences the world, desires things, and can move of its own volition. Added to these various functions in humans is the ability to reason.

With the four causes and the functional conception of the soul, we can begin to understand Aristotle’s ethics. Aristotle systematized Plato’s conception of ethics based upon his conception of the self and his four causes. Since everything that exists has a purpose, one of the basic questions for ethics is “What is the purpose of the human being?” After considering such candidates as pleasure and power, Aristotle settles on the answer “happiness” or, more accurately, “ eudaimonia .” Rather than a fleeting emotional state, eudaimonia is better understood as “flourishing.” So the question at the heart of Aristotle’s ethics is “How should humans best achieve happiness?” His basic answer is that we achieve eudaimonia by cultivating the virtues. Virtues are habits of character that help us to decide what action is preferable in a particular moment. Cultivating these virtues will helps us to lead a fulfilling life.

It is generally true to say that Plato tended to be more focused on the transcendental world of the forms while Aristotle and his followers were more focused on this worldly existence. They shared a belief that the universe was comprehensible and that reason should serve as a guide to ordering our lives.

Aristotle’s virtue ethics are explored in much greater depth in the chapters on value theory and normative moral theories .

In the wake of the giants of Greek philosophy—Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle—some philosophers turned away from Plato’s ideal forms and toward materialism. In this, they can be seen as furthering a trend already present in the thinking of Aristotle. For Aristotle, there can be no immaterial forms—everything that exists has some material basis, though he allows an exception for his first cause, the unmoved mover.

The Epicureans steadfastly rejected the existence of immaterial forms, unmoved movers, and immaterial souls. The Epicureans, like Aristotle, embraced empiricism , which means that they believed that all knowledge was derived from sense experience. This view was the basis of the revival of empiricism in 18th-century British thought and scientific practice. They espoused an ethical naturalism that held that in order to live a good life we must properly understand human nature. The ultimate goal of life is to pursue pleasure. Despite their disagreements with Plato and, to a lesser extent, Aristotle, the Epicureans agreed with their predecessors that human existence ought to be guided by reason.

The two principal Greek Epicureans were Epicurus himself (341–270 BCE) and his Roman disciple Lucretius (c. 99–55 BCE). Although Epicurus’s views are characterized as hedonistic, this does not mean that he believed that we ought to be indiscriminate pleasure-seekers. Instead, he proposed that people could achieve fulfilling lives if they were self-sufficient and lived free from pain and fear. Of course, complete self-sufficiency is just as impossible as a life utterly free from pain and fear, but Epicurus believed that we should strive to minimize our dependence upon others while limiting the pain in our lives. Epicureans thought that the best way to do this was to retire from society into philosophical communities far from the hustle and bustle of the crowd. Epicurus and Lucretius saw the fear of death as our most debilitating fear, and they argued that we must overcome this fear if we were going to live happy lives.

Lucretius developed Epicurean philosophy in a poem called De Rerum Natura (On the nature of things) . This poem discusses ethical ideas, but physics provides its focus. Lucretius adopts a material atomism that holds that things are composed of atoms in motion. Rejecting religious explanations, he argues that the universe is governed by chance and exemplified by these atoms in motion. Although the Epicurean philosophers were critically responding to the work of Plato and Aristotle, it should be evident that they also have antecedents in Presocratic thought. We can see this in their atomism and their religious skepticism, which hearkens back to Xenophanes.

Roman Philosophy

Just as Hellenistic philosophy developed in the long shadows cast by Plato and Aristotle, Roman philosophy also used these two giants of Greek philosophy as reference points. While Roman philosophical traditions were built upon their Greek forebearers, they developed in a Roman cultural context. Rome began as a republic before becoming an empire, and Roman philosophy was affected by this political transformation. Still, Roman philosophical schools were thoroughly grounded in Greek philosophy, with many Roman philosophers even choosing to write in Greek rather than Latin, since Greek was viewed as the language of scholarship.

Rhetoric and Persuasion in Politics

Recall that Plato defined philosophy in opposition to sophistry. Whereas the philosopher sought the truth in a dispassionate way using reason as a guide, the Sophist addressing a crowd was indifferent to truth, seeking power and influence by appealing to the audience’s emotions. This harsh critique of rhetoric, which can be defined as the art of spoken persuasion, softened with subsequent philosophers. Indeed, Aristotle wrote a text called Rhetoric in which he sought to analyze rhetoric as the counterpart to philosophy. The tension never disappears entirely, however, and the relationship between philosophy and rhetoric and, more generally, the relationship between philosophy and politics remains a perennial question.

Despite the fact that his ideal statesman was a philosopher, Plato generally sought to keep philosophy distinct from the grubbiness of real politics and was concerned about the messiness of democratic politics in particular. In the Roman political context, this ambivalence becomes less apparent. Examples of philosophers who were also statesmen include Cicero (106–43 BCE) and Marcus Aurelius (121–180 CE). Marcus Aurelius even served as emperor of Rome from 161 to 180 CE. However, as the Roman Republic gave way to the Roman Empire, philosophers shifted inward by focusing on things that were in their control.

Aristotle held that eudaimonia is worthwhile at least in part because it helps us to better deal with various inevitable misfortunes. The Roman Stoics further developed this idea, proposing four core virtues: courage, justice, temperance, and wisdom. The Stoics were wary of the type of false judgments that might arise from the emotions. They were also uneasy with the loss of control associated with strong emotions, observing that some people can become enslaved to their passions. The Stoics prized rational self-control above everything else. This constant work at maintaining inner freedom epitomizes the Stoic conception of philosophy (Hadot 2002).

Marcus Aurelius was both a Roman emperor and a Stoic philosopher. His writings, which he meant only for himself, were eventually published in Meditations , a work that serves as one of the major sources of Stoic thought. Although much of Marcus Aurelius’s reign fell under a period known as the Pax Romana, when the empire enjoyed relative stability and peace, the end of his reign occurred during a period of major wars and a plague. This famous passage, taken from Book VII, Section 47 of the Meditations , provides advice about how to deal with pain or grief called by an external source. Translate it into your own language. Then explain why you agree or disagree with Marcus Aurelius’s conclusions.

If you are grieved about anything external, ’tis not the thing itself that afflicts you, but your judgment about it; and it is in your power to correct this judgment and get quit of it. If you are grieved at anything in your own disposition; who hinders you to correct your maxims of life? If you are grieved, because you have not accomplished some sound and virtuous design; set about it effectually, rather than be grieving that it is undone. “But some superior force withstands.” Then you have no cause of sorrow; for, the fault of the omission lies not in you. “But, life is not worth retaining, if this be not accomplished.” Quit life, then, with the same serenity, as if you had accomplished it; and with good-will, even toward those who withstand you.

The Stoics were systematic philosophers whose writings focused on ethics, physics, logic, rhetoric, and grammar. For the Stoics, the world consists of material bodies in motion, causally affecting each other. Real entities are those capable of causally affecting one another. The Stoic god is a material entity who exists in nature and meticulously manages it, the material first cause of the universe, Aristotle’s unmoved mover incarnated as a material entity. In other words, God is an animating reason that gives life to the universe. Unlike the Christian God who transcends the universe, the Stoic god is found within it, a force immanent to the universe who combines and recombines the four elements into things we can experience because they act upon us and we upon them. Stoicism developed at a time when politics in the Roman world was increasingly seen as something outside individuals’ power to change. So Stoics let politics go. While turning away from politics may indeed promote a tranquil life, it also promotes passivity. Thus, Stoicism reached a conclusion similar to that reached by Daoism, as explored in the chapter on early philosophy .

Stoic ideas are enjoying something of a revival, as evidenced by the popularity of Ran Holliday’s Daily Stoic podcasts.

Academic Skepticism

Academic Skepticism is another aspect of Roman philosophy that developed out of a tendency found in earlier Greek thought. Recall that Socrates questioned whether we could ever know anything at all. The Academic Skeptics opposed the Stoic claims that sense impressions could yield true knowledge, holding instead that knowledge is impossible. Instead of knowledge, Academic Skeptics articulated the idea of degrees of belief. Things are more or less believable based on various criteria, and this degree of believability is the basis for judgment and action. Disciples of the Greek philosopher Pyrrho (c. 360–270 BCE) held that we had to suspend judgment when it comes to knowledge claims, going so far as to say that we cannot even reliably claim that we cannot know anything. Rather than suspending all judgment, Academic Skeptics sought to demonstrate that knowledge claims lead us to paradoxical conclusions and that one can argue cogently both for and against the same proposition.

The philosopher, orator, and statesman Cicero (106–43 BCE) was the most prominent of the Academic Skeptics . His works provide much of the information we have about the school. He had a decisive influence on Latin style and grammar and was decisive in the introduction of Hellenistic philosophy into Rome. The rediscovery of his work in the 15th century ushered in the European Renaissance.

Neoplatonism

Plotinus (c. 204–270) led a revival of Plato’s thought in the late Roman Empire that lasted until Emperor Justinian closed Plato’s Academy in 529. Plotinus believed that he was simply an expositor of Plato’s work, but the philosophy he developed, known as Neoplatonism , expanded on Plato’s idea. Neoplatonism arose during a time of cultural ferment in the Roman Empire, incorporating ideas borrowed from sources such as Judaism and early Christianity. The key metaphysical problem in Neoplatonism was accounting for how a perfect God could create a universe that was manifestly imperfect. Plotinus solved this problem by applying ideas similar to Plato’s theory of forms. The perfect, unchanging realm is the one inhabited by God, but creation inhabits the changing realm, which only mirrors forms imperfectly. Plotinus claims that creation emanates from God, but the further one is from this source the less perfect things become.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction

Authors: Nathan Smith
Publisher/website: OpenStax
Book title: Introduction to Philosophy
Publication date: Jun 15, 2022
Location: Houston, Texas
Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction
Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/4-2-classical-philosophy

© Dec 19, 2023 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

Home — Essay Samples — Science — Theory — The Classical Conditioning Theory Of Learning

The Classical Conditioning Theory of Learning

Categories: Classical Conditioning Theory

About this sample

Words: 645 |

Published: Mar 19, 2020

Words: 645 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

Expert in: Psychology Science

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1068 words

1 pages / 370 words

1 pages / 355 words

2 pages / 783 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Theory

Al-Fedaghi, S. (2012). A Conceptual Foundation for the Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication. International Journal of Soft Computing.Benz, A. (2012). Errors in Pragmatics. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information: The [...]

Nivaldo J. Tro. (2021). Chemistry: Structure and Properties. Pearson.

The scientific method is about ordinary people doing ordinary things that includes you me and other scientists in the world. It is how scientists gather new ideas or analyze information The scientific method is a process or step [...]

According to Dortha Orem every human need to do some tasks in everyday life that are important for their survival these tasks called selfcare. Problem develop when that human is un-able to perform that task on its own or without [...]

Lead prosecutors, by their exceptional nature, are hostile players in the legitimate framework. They will likely test, convict, and take a stab at equity. They are prosecutors; they make the main moves and start their ruckuses. [...]

Plume origin is unknown but it probably originates at the core of the mantle boundary where there is a variation in topography of a few hundred meters and where the convecting liquid core is losing heat by conduction. This heat [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Search Menu
Browse content in Arts and Humanities
Browse content in Archaeology
Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
Archaeology by Region
Archaeology of Religion
Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
Biblical Archaeology
Contemporary and Public Archaeology
Environmental Archaeology
Historical Archaeology
History and Theory of Archaeology
Industrial Archaeology
Landscape Archaeology
Mortuary Archaeology
Prehistoric Archaeology
Underwater Archaeology
Urban Archaeology
Zooarchaeology
Browse content in Architecture
Architectural Structure and Design
History of Architecture
Residential and Domestic Buildings
Theory of Architecture
Browse content in Art
Art Subjects and Themes
History of Art
Industrial and Commercial Art
Theory of Art
Biographical Studies
Byzantine Studies
Browse content in Classical Studies
Classical History
Classical Philosophy
Classical Mythology
Classical Literature
Classical Reception
Classical Art and Architecture
Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
Greek and Roman Epigraphy
Greek and Roman Law
Greek and Roman Papyrology
Greek and Roman Archaeology
Late Antiquity
Religion in the Ancient World
Digital Humanities
Browse content in History
Colonialism and Imperialism
Diplomatic History
Environmental History
Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
Historical Geography
History by Period
History of Emotions
History of Agriculture
History of Education
History of Gender and Sexuality
Industrial History
Intellectual History
International History
Labour History
Legal and Constitutional History
Local and Family History
Maritime History
Military History
National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
Oral History
Political History
Public History
Regional and National History
Revolutions and Rebellions
Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
Social and Cultural History
Theory, Methods, and Historiography
Urban History
World History
Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
Language Learning (Specific Skills)
Language Teaching Theory and Methods
Browse content in Linguistics
Applied Linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics
Computational Linguistics
Forensic Linguistics
Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
History of English
Language Acquisition
Language Evolution
Language Reference
Language Variation
Language Families
Lexicography
Linguistic Anthropology
Linguistic Theories
Linguistic Typology
Phonetics and Phonology
Psycholinguistics
Sociolinguistics
Translation and Interpretation
Writing Systems
Browse content in Literature
Bibliography
Children's Literature Studies
Literary Studies (Asian)
Literary Studies (European)
Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
Literary Studies (Romanticism)
Literary Studies (American)
Literary Studies (Modernism)
Literary Studies - World
Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
Literary Studies (19th Century)
Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
Literary Studies (African American Literature)
Literary Studies (British and Irish)
Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
Literary Studies (History of the Book)
Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
Literary Studies (War Literature)
Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
Mythology and Folklore
Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
Browse content in Media Studies
Browse content in Music
Applied Music
Dance and Music
Ethics in Music
Ethnomusicology
Gender and Sexuality in Music
Medicine and Music
Music Cultures
Music and Religion
Music and Media
Music and Culture
Music Education and Pedagogy
Music Theory and Analysis
Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
Musicology and Music History
Performance Practice and Studies
Race and Ethnicity in Music
Sound Studies
Browse content in Performing Arts
Browse content in Philosophy
Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
Epistemology
Feminist Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy
Metaphysics
Moral Philosophy
Non-Western Philosophy
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Perception
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Law
Philosophy of Religion
Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
Practical Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
Browse content in Religion
Biblical Studies
Christianity
East Asian Religions
History of Religion
Judaism and Jewish Studies
Qumran Studies
Religion and Education
Religion and Health
Religion and Politics
Religion and Science
Religion and Law
Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
Religious Studies
Browse content in Society and Culture
Cookery, Food, and Drink
Cultural Studies
Customs and Traditions
Ethical Issues and Debates
Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
Sports and Outdoor Recreation
Technology and Society
Travel and Holiday
Visual Culture
Browse content in Law
Arbitration
Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
Commercial Law
Company Law
Browse content in Comparative Law
Systems of Law
Competition Law
Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
Government Powers
Judicial Review
Local Government Law
Military and Defence Law
Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
Construction Law
Contract Law
Browse content in Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Criminal Evidence Law
Sentencing and Punishment
Employment and Labour Law
Environment and Energy Law
Browse content in Financial Law
Banking Law
Insolvency Law
History of Law
Human Rights and Immigration
Intellectual Property Law
Browse content in International Law
Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
Public International Law
IT and Communications Law
Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
Law and Politics
Law and Society
Browse content in Legal System and Practice
Courts and Procedure
Legal Skills and Practice
Primary Sources of Law
Regulation of Legal Profession
Medical and Healthcare Law
Browse content in Policing
Criminal Investigation and Detection
Police and Security Services
Police Procedure and Law
Police Regional Planning
Browse content in Property Law
Personal Property Law
Study and Revision
Terrorism and National Security Law
Browse content in Trusts Law
Wills and Probate or Succession
Browse content in Medicine and Health
Browse content in Allied Health Professions
Arts Therapies
Clinical Science
Dietetics and Nutrition
Occupational Therapy
Operating Department Practice
Physiotherapy
Radiography
Speech and Language Therapy
Browse content in Anaesthetics
General Anaesthesia
Neuroanaesthesia
Browse content in Clinical Medicine
Acute Medicine
Cardiovascular Medicine
Clinical Genetics
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Dermatology
Endocrinology and Diabetes
Gastroenterology
Genito-urinary Medicine
Geriatric Medicine
Infectious Diseases
Medical Toxicology
Medical Oncology
Pain Medicine
Palliative Medicine
Rehabilitation Medicine
Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
Rheumatology
Sleep Medicine
Sports and Exercise Medicine
Clinical Neuroscience
Community Medical Services
Critical Care
Emergency Medicine
Forensic Medicine
Haematology
History of Medicine
Browse content in Medical Dentistry
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Paediatric Dentistry
Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
Surgical Dentistry
Browse content in Medical Skills
Clinical Skills
Communication Skills
Nursing Skills
Surgical Skills
Medical Ethics
Medical Statistics and Methodology
Browse content in Neurology
Clinical Neurophysiology
Neuropathology
Nursing Studies
Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Gynaecology
Occupational Medicine
Ophthalmology
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Browse content in Paediatrics
Neonatology
Browse content in Pathology
Chemical Pathology
Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
Histopathology
Medical Microbiology and Virology
Patient Education and Information
Browse content in Pharmacology
Psychopharmacology
Browse content in Popular Health
Caring for Others
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Self-help and Personal Development
Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
Cell Biology
Molecular Biology and Genetics
Reproduction, Growth and Development
Primary Care
Professional Development in Medicine
Browse content in Psychiatry
Addiction Medicine
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Forensic Psychiatry
Learning Disabilities
Old Age Psychiatry
Psychotherapy
Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Public Health
Browse content in Radiology
Clinical Radiology
Interventional Radiology
Nuclear Medicine
Radiation Oncology
Reproductive Medicine
Browse content in Surgery
Cardiothoracic Surgery
Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
General Surgery
Neurosurgery
Paediatric Surgery
Peri-operative Care
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Transplant Surgery
Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
Vascular Surgery
Browse content in Science and Mathematics
Browse content in Biological Sciences
Aquatic Biology
Biochemistry
Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
Developmental Biology
Ecology and Conservation
Evolutionary Biology
Genetics and Genomics
Microbiology
Molecular and Cell Biology
Natural History
Plant Sciences and Forestry
Research Methods in Life Sciences
Structural Biology
Systems Biology
Zoology and Animal Sciences
Browse content in Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Computational Chemistry
Crystallography
Environmental Chemistry
Industrial Chemistry
Inorganic Chemistry
Materials Chemistry
Medicinal Chemistry
Mineralogy and Gems
Organic Chemistry
Physical Chemistry
Polymer Chemistry
Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
Theoretical Chemistry
Browse content in Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Architecture and Logic Design
Game Studies
Human-Computer Interaction
Mathematical Theory of Computation
Programming Languages
Software Engineering
Systems Analysis and Design
Virtual Reality
Browse content in Computing
Business Applications
Computer Security
Computer Games
Computer Networking and Communications
Digital Lifestyle
Graphical and Digital Media Applications
Operating Systems
Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
Atmospheric Sciences
Environmental Geography
Geology and the Lithosphere
Maps and Map-making
Meteorology and Climatology
Oceanography and Hydrology
Palaeontology
Physical Geography and Topography
Regional Geography
Soil Science
Urban Geography
Browse content in Engineering and Technology
Agriculture and Farming
Biological Engineering
Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
Electronics and Communications Engineering
Energy Technology
Engineering (General)
Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
History of Engineering and Technology
Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Technology of Industrial Chemistry
Transport Technology and Trades
Browse content in Environmental Science
Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
Environmental Sustainability
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
History of Science and Technology
Browse content in Materials Science
Ceramics and Glasses
Composite Materials
Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
Nanotechnology
Browse content in Mathematics
Applied Mathematics
Biomathematics and Statistics
History of Mathematics
Mathematical Education
Mathematical Finance
Mathematical Analysis
Numerical and Computational Mathematics
Probability and Statistics
Pure Mathematics
Browse content in Neuroscience
Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
Development of the Nervous System
Disorders of the Nervous System
History of Neuroscience
Invertebrate Neurobiology
Molecular and Cellular Systems
Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
Neuroscientific Techniques
Sensory and Motor Systems
Browse content in Physics
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
Biological and Medical Physics
Classical Mechanics
Computational Physics
Condensed Matter Physics
Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
History of Physics
Mathematical and Statistical Physics
Measurement Science
Nuclear Physics
Particles and Fields
Plasma Physics
Quantum Physics
Relativity and Gravitation
Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
Browse content in Psychology
Affective Sciences
Clinical Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Neuroscience
Criminal and Forensic Psychology
Developmental Psychology
Educational Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology
Health Psychology
History and Systems in Psychology
Music Psychology
Neuropsychology
Organizational Psychology
Psychological Assessment and Testing
Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
Psychology Professional Development and Training
Research Methods in Psychology
Social Psychology
Browse content in Social Sciences
Browse content in Anthropology
Anthropology of Religion
Human Evolution
Medical Anthropology
Physical Anthropology
Regional Anthropology
Social and Cultural Anthropology
Theory and Practice of Anthropology
Browse content in Business and Management
Business Strategy
Business Ethics
Business History
Business and Government
Business and Technology
Business and the Environment
Comparative Management
Corporate Governance
Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship
Health Management
Human Resource Management
Industrial and Employment Relations
Industry Studies
Information and Communication Technologies
International Business
Knowledge Management
Management and Management Techniques
Operations Management
Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Pensions and Pension Management
Public and Nonprofit Management
Strategic Management
Supply Chain Management
Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice
Criminology
Forms of Crime
International and Comparative Criminology
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Development Studies
Browse content in Economics
Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
Asian Economics
Behavioural Finance
Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
Economic Systems
Economic History
Economic Methodology
Economic Development and Growth
Financial Markets
Financial Institutions and Services
General Economics and Teaching
Health, Education, and Welfare
History of Economic Thought
International Economics
Labour and Demographic Economics
Law and Economics
Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
Microeconomics
Public Economics
Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
Welfare Economics
Browse content in Education
Adult Education and Continuous Learning
Care and Counselling of Students
Early Childhood and Elementary Education
Educational Equipment and Technology
Educational Strategies and Policy
Higher and Further Education
Organization and Management of Education
Philosophy and Theory of Education
Schools Studies
Secondary Education
Teaching of a Specific Subject
Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
Teaching Skills and Techniques
Browse content in Environment
Applied Ecology (Social Science)
Climate Change
Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
Natural Disasters (Environment)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
Browse content in Human Geography
Cultural Geography
Economic Geography
Political Geography
Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
Communication Studies
Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
Browse content in Politics
African Politics
Asian Politics
Chinese Politics
Comparative Politics
Conflict Politics
Elections and Electoral Studies
Environmental Politics
European Union
Foreign Policy
Gender and Politics
Human Rights and Politics
Indian Politics
International Relations
International Organization (Politics)
International Political Economy
Irish Politics
Latin American Politics
Middle Eastern Politics
Political Methodology
Political Communication
Political Philosophy
Political Sociology
Political Behaviour
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Theory
Politics and Law
Public Administration
Public Policy
Quantitative Political Methodology
Regional Political Studies
Russian Politics
Security Studies
State and Local Government
UK Politics
US Politics
Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
African Studies
Asian Studies
East Asian Studies
Japanese Studies
Latin American Studies
Middle Eastern Studies
Native American Studies
Scottish Studies
Browse content in Research and Information
Research Methods
Browse content in Social Work
Addictions and Substance Misuse
Adoption and Fostering
Care of the Elderly
Child and Adolescent Social Work
Couple and Family Social Work
Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
Emergency Services
Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
International and Global Issues in Social Work
Mental and Behavioural Health
Social Justice and Human Rights
Social Policy and Advocacy
Social Work and Crime and Justice
Social Work Macro Practice
Social Work Practice Settings
Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
Welfare and Benefit Systems
Browse content in Sociology
Childhood Studies
Community Development
Comparative and Historical Sociology
Economic Sociology
Gender and Sexuality
Gerontology and Ageing
Health, Illness, and Medicine
Marriage and the Family
Migration Studies
Occupations, Professions, and Work
Organizations
Population and Demography
Race and Ethnicity
Social Theory
Social Movements and Social Change
Social Research and Statistics
Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
Sociology of Religion
Sociology of Education
Sport and Leisure
Urban and Rural Studies
Browse content in Warfare and Defence
Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
Land Forces and Warfare
Military Administration
Military Life and Institutions
Naval Forces and Warfare
Other Warfare and Defence Issues
Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
Weapons and Equipment

Perception: An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge

late Spalding Professor of Eastern Religions and Ethics and Fellow

Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions

This book is a defence of the form of realism which stands closest to that upheld by the Nyāya–Vaíṣsika school in classical India. The book presents the Nyāya view and critically examines it against that of its traditional opponent, the Buddhist version of phenomenalism and idealism. This reconstruction of Nyāya arguments meets not only traditional Buddhist objections but also those of modern sense-data representationalists.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]
Google Scholar Indexing

Personal account

Sign in with email/username & password
Get email alerts
Save searches
Purchase content
Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institutionâ€™s website and Oxford Academic.

Click Sign in through your institution.
Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institutionâ€™s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see â€˜Sign in through society siteâ€™ in the sign in pane within a journal:

Click Sign in through society site.
When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Rights and permissions
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary Essay

Introduction, the theoretical approach, understanding the concepts by georg simmel and edward said, similarities and differences in the concepts, works cited.

The classical and contemporary theorists have been attributed to sociological theories, each with different concepts in their arguments. The classical theorists emerged in the mid 19 th century, and they have helped shape the course of sociology to what it has become to date. One of the most outstanding classical theorists was Georg Simmel. Contemporary theorists, on the other hand, took over in early 1935, with one of the proponents being Edward Said. Though the theoretical concepts proposed by the classical theorist Georg Simmel and contemporary theorist Edward Said seem to contrast, certain similarities can also be traced.

Both theorists have different approaches in their theoretical orientation relating to the action-order spectrum. Born in German in 1868, Georg Simmel played a big role in defining the concept of sociology. He tries to understand how individuals interact with each other socially in matters pertaining to social conflict and domination (Appelrouth and Edles, 233). He further draws attention to the inconsistencies experienced in modern life by individuals. Simmel argues that in modern life, individuals draw away from each other and form social groups to which they identify themselves with.

Edward Said, on the other hand, supports the present-day global societies. Born in 1935, Edward concentrates on the aspects of social life and how they are globally entrenched. He argues that this global interconnection is responsible for any activity that takes place in a particular geographical zone. His theory proposes that in modern culture, a nation cannot function on its own self without help from other nations. This he attributes to the uncontrolled economic flow of capital between nations (Appelrouth and Edles 815).

Simmel’s theory is based on certain concepts such as interdependent duality, social distance, and the ‘stranger’ to which he draws his classical theoretical approach. Simmel’s theory seems to concentrate on all forms of individual association. The individual and association duality is well expressed and discussed in Simmel’s theory. He argues that modern society cultivates some kind of independence to individuals by giving them the freedom to make use of their unique talents and interests. He goes ahead to explain that a society can only be formed by individuals coming together for certain purposes (Appelrouth and Edles 239).

Society allows individuals to interact with each other through various forms socially. One form of this interaction is through an exchange that Simmel views as the most significant and purest form of individual interaction. The exchange, in most cases, involves economic gains between individuals. The other form is by the conflict, which tends to resolve conflicting dualisms in the society even though one party stands to be aggrieved. Simmel argues that a purely harmonious society that is not characterized by individual conflict is not real. The last form of interaction that seems to interest Simmel is domination. He argues that individuals need to have some kind of authority over each other. Domination acts as a form of interaction between individuals in society. In defining social distance, Simmel argues that individuals need to be close to each other so as not to be labelled strangers.

A ‘stranger,’ according to him, is somebody who is not considered part of society. Edward, on the other hand, criticizes the concept of orientation by arguing that “Orientalism is prejudiced against the people from the East and their culture.” He states that the false information about the people in the Middle East and Asia as regards their attitudes have been used to serve as just the acts of the Western culture. According to him, orientation promotes general bias generalizations characterized by religious and racial discriminations. Instead of evaluating the differences between the West and East, the dynamic human characteristics of the people from this culture should be studied (Appelrouth and Edles 818).

The arguments posed by the two theorists seem to have some similarities. They both believe in individuals being part of a society and a culture. Simmel’s argument on interdependence duality and the fact that society cannot operate without individuals seem to support the idea of rejecting orientalism for the sake of the individuals in the East. Edward argues that individuals should be made part of other cultures and society without being judged.

Further, they seem to be on the same page regarding the discriminations of ‘strangers’ in society. Both theorists contend that certain people from certain cultures are isolated from society. As regarding social distance and the concept of orientalism, both seem to argue that there is a drift in the way individuals in society relate to each other. Edward argues that the people in the West have distanced themselves from those in the East due to the differences in their racial and cultural backgrounds.

Both theorists seem to support the concept of interaction, though in similar ways. Whilst Simmel concentrates on individual interaction, Edward concerns himself with social interaction. Simmel seems to argue that it is the individuals who make society what it is. However, Edward seems to differ with this concept by insisting society itself transforms its people to operate in a particular manner. Simmel further argues that a conflict is a form of interaction, a concept that is vehemently rejected by Edward. Edward argues that the conflict between the East and West has caused the two regions not to interact with each other.

Appelrouth, Scott and Edles, Laura. Classical and Contemporary Sociological Theory: text and readings . Los Angeles: Pine Forge Press, 2008. Print.

Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity . New York: Routledge, 2006. Print.

Collins, Patricia. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consiousness and the Politics of Empowerment. New York: Routledge, Chapman and Hall Inc., 1991. Print.

Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, June 6). Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sociological-theorists-classical-vs-contemporary/

"Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary." IvyPanda , 6 June 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/sociological-theorists-classical-vs-contemporary/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary'. 6 June.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary." June 6, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sociological-theorists-classical-vs-contemporary/.

1. IvyPanda . "Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary." June 6, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sociological-theorists-classical-vs-contemporary/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary." June 6, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sociological-theorists-classical-vs-contemporary/.

A Sociological Essay “The Stranger” by Georg Simmel
E. Durkheim and G. Simmel's Sociological Theories
Georg Simmel' Views on Individuals and Social Structures
Georg Baselitz’s Orange Eater
Simmel’s Metropolis Ideas and New Forms of Consciousness
“The Metropolis and Mental Life” by Simmel
Georg Hegel: Self-Consciousness and Desire
Sociological Theories of Durkheim and Simmel
Urban Sociology: Does City Makes Us Better People?
Johann Sebastian Bach and Georg Handel Biographies
Social Environments: Subjectivism and Objectivism Relationship
Social Life Order: Erving Goffman and Michel Foucault' Views
Merton’s Role Theory Definition
"Sociology. Fourteenth Edition" by John J. Macionis
Class and Social Theory: Qualitative Research' Role

Introduction

Aims and goals.

There are many excellent introductory readers to sociological theory out there. Why another one? The primary reason is that this is an Open Access textbook, free to you, the student, thanks to Oregon State University. We know that textbooks can be very expensive, and we think it is particularly problematic to charge students for access to work that has been published, in its original form, several decades ago. If you wanted, you could find all of the work included here in your local library, although you would have to put together many different books and articles. That is the second reason for this textbook – important passages have been collected for you, assembled here in one handy volume.

There are a few features unique to this particular selection of texts. First, when not originally published in English, they have been freshly translated for the 21 st century student. Some license has been taken in making these translations, as described in more detail below. All work, even that originally published in English, has been represented for contemporary eyes. For example. although some may find this an editorial overreach, masculine pronouns have been changed whenever doing so does not detract from the original intent of the authors. Also, many passages have been shortened and ideas presented more simply than may be the case in the original. It is best to read the selections as very loose translations. More advanced students are welcome to read other more exact translations (or the original), and suggestions for finding these are included at the start of each passage.

Another unique feature of this volume is the inclusion of a section on early American sociological theory. It is often thought that American sociological theory did not really begin until well into the twentieth century. Although it is true that what we consider “classical” sociological theory came almost exclusively from Europe, there were quite a few American sociologists struggling with similar issues as those Europeans. More importantly, they read those Europeans. By including these early American sociologists here, we hope to provide you a better understanding of the context in which sociological theory was first advanced. It is hoped that a better understanding of the “greats” of classical sociological theory can be achieved by reading these Americans alongside Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, and Max Weber.

Why read classical sociological theory at all? There are a few reasons. First, knowing the “classics” in many ways makes one a sociologist. The concepts of Marx, Durkheim and Weber are our shared language, our common heritage as sociologists. Second, an introduction to classical sociological theory will help you think differently about the world. It disciplines the mind to see the world in a particular way, using the concepts and approaches of the sociologist. This new disciplined way of thinking is essential for conducting sociological research. As one of our eminent contemporary sociologists points out, “Questions are not generated simply by curiosity and imagination encountering the empirical world; they are generated by curiosity and imagination, organized by theoretical assumptions and animated by normative concerns , encountering the empirical world.” [1] Without theory to guide us, we are likely to be overwhelmed with the complexity of empirical reality. Knowing theory is like carrying a vial of magic solution we can lay out on the ink of the world to see its hidden messages.

It is for this last reason, helping to shape our vision of the world so that we can conduct sociological research, that key passages in which these early sociologists discuss what sociology is and how it should be done are included and foregrounded. So, this textbook is more than just a bunch of outdated ideas from some nineteenth century Dead White Guys. It is a living and breathing repository of concepts and approaches that still to this day guide the conduct of all sociologists. If you read and pay attention, you too will be a sociologist, whether or not you ever go on to graduate training in the field. Trust me, this stuff stays with you for a very long time. Treasure it.

Organization Overview

Outline of the textbook.

The textbook is divided into four primary sections three of which correspond to a key theorist (Marx, Weber, Durkheim) and the fourth being a compendium of selections from early American sociologists. Each of the four sections begins with a descriptive biography (or set of biographies in the case of the American sociologists) and concludes with a “blank” index of key concepts.

As you read, take note of passages in which key concepts are discussed and fill in the index for your use. Between the biography and the index, you will find between ten and fifteen key passages, arranged chronologically for each theorist. Your instructor may point you towards which passages are most important for your particular course of study. It is not supposed that all passages have equal importance. Furthermore, your instructor may ask you to read these in a different order than that which is presented here. Think of this book as a reference from which your actual readings may be derived. Each passage includes a brief overview, an explanation of the original source and how to find it, and a set of questions to guide the reading.

Translating Passages

Each passage that you read has been translated by the author from its original text. These translations are not often literal (word for word) translations, but are meant to be concise and appropriate for college students today. Although the meanings have never been altered in these translations, sometimes the examples have been updated for a contemporary audience. This is especially true in cases where monetary units are employed. Line numbers are included on each selected passage page so that students and teachers can easily locate appropriate sections of the text. Original headings and subheadings have been retained so that the reader can easily move from this translation to any other translation, or the original.

There are a few other things to know about the way the translations are presented here. Because these are not literal translations, omitted words and sections are not always indicated by an ellipsis (…). Ellipses are only used when it is important to the meaning of the text that something has been omitted. In general, readers should always remember that this is an abbreviated non-literal translation. Sometimes, whole sections are summarized in the words of the translator, and these will be indicated by italicized font in brackets. You should never mistake these sections for the original text!

Information on the original source of each translated passage can be found at the beginning of each section. Readers interested in reading the full passage in context should follow the recommendations found in this paragraph.

Modernizing the Text

In keeping with contemporary practice, male pronouns have been changed throughout the text – “he,” “she,” and “they” have been substituted whenever such substitutions do not damage the original intention of the author. Thus, when Durkheim discusses the typical worker and uses the word “he,” the reader may instead find “she” in its place. On the other hand, when Weber discusses a typical Protestant entrepreneur of the seventeenth century, “he” is retained. Another modernization comes when referring to humans as “human animals” as distinct from “non-human animals.” This usage undercuts prior usage (humans vs. animals) which reinforced a false dualism between the two.

Some Useful History

All of the passages here were originally written in the nineteenth or early twentieth centuries. Although the language has often been updated to make the meaning clearer to a contemporary reader, the historical examples used remain. Further, the theorists were trying to make sense of the world they saw around them – its origins and its current manifestations. So, it is important for you to know a little history before delving into the material. In some cases, the introductory passage to a given selection may provide relevant historical detail. A big picture understanding of major historical shifts, however, is needed as well. This section will supply an abbreviated overview of some of the historical events you will need to know to properly understand classical sociological theory. You may also refer to the included “Timeline” that shows the overlap between the lives of the theorists and major historic events. Also included are suggestions for further reading.

Ten Things Marx, Weber and Durkheim Took for Granted about the History of the World that You Might Want to Read More about

The land mass of Europe became a configuration of European “nations” only several centuries after the Roman Empire first brought it together under a shared governance in the years in the first centuries of the millennium. After a period of “dark ages,” from the fall of the Roman Empire in the 5 th century CE to around the 14 th century, a viewer would find only scattered instances of political authority and little evidence of the existence of “nations” as we know them. During this time, feudalism emerged as the dominant economic system: most people (operating in family units) were legally bound to work for a lord or master, whose power was close to absolute over his territory.
Beginning with Charlemagne in the 8 th century but continuing up until the 18 th century CE, European nations emerged as distinct political entities, with rulers that we would consider “monarchs” through a system of hereditary succession. The monarch was often chief member of the aristocracy (rule by “the best”), a group whose power was ascribed by birth and whose property was passed on through hereditary succession. Feudalism continued to be the predominant economic system, although trade and commercial ventures slowly brought into being a new class, neither lord nor serf, housed in the new urban centers (“cities,” from which we derive the term citizen ).
For many of these years, the aristocracy shared powers with the Catholic Church, whose presence preceded the rise of the new nations and monarchs. As the primary landowner on the European landmass, the Church was wealthier and more powerful than local rulers. The Church was also the primary educational institution, training young men in the arts and sciences of the Roman civilization, as well as theology.
There were many critiques of the power, wealth, and administration of the church, but none of them were as threatening as that which emerged from the priest Martin Luther , who famously nailed a list of grievances to the door of his local cathedral in 1517. Luther accused the church of literally selling salvation and forgiveness and he argued that the Bible should be translated into local languages so that people could read it for themselves. Lutheranism and Protestantism (those protesting the church) became known for advocating a personal relationship with God, without the interference or reliance on third parties (priests).
As nations emerged as distinct political entities with control over defined territories and wealth derived from increased trade, some monarchs began to chafe at the power of the Pope and the Catholic Church. King Henry VIII (Tudor) of England was the first to split from the church in 1532 when he was denied permission to divorce his first wife and remarry Anne Boleyn. As the Protestant Reformation swept Europe, civil and national wars broke out everywhere between monarchs and peoples who wanted to remain within the Catholic Church and those that wanted to follow Henry VIII’s path. By 1700, most of Northern Europe was “Protestant” while most of Southern Europe was “Catholic.”
All of these changes were taking place in a society that was increasingly commercial. In 1492, Christopher Columbus had stumbled upon the West Indies in his attempt to forge a trading route East to China and India. This precipitated a scramble by European rulers to seize land in the Americas, precipitating the creation of a global trading system based on slave labor and expropriation of land and goods from non-European peoples. Although initially led by Spain and Portugal, the Protestant Netherlands and England under the Tudors (beginning with Henry VIII but accelerating under his daughter, Elizabeth I) eventually dominated global trade .
As money poured in from the Americas, especially to the ports of Amsterdam and London, large-scale industrial enterprises were constructed to put the money to work, employing workers in large numbers to produce goods that could be sold to other global regions (such as China and India). Thus, nations, capitalism, Protestantism, slavery, and global trade emerged at a similar time in a similar place (15 th -16 th century Northern Europe). As the need for workers in these large “factories” increased, feudalism slowly passed into capitalism . Serfs were no longer tied to the land but moved to where they could find work. English landowners began using their land as sites for factories or as places to raise large bodies of sheep whose wool could be processed in the emerging factories.
Historians call all of these changes in the 15 th and 16 th century the emergence of “ modern society. ” Later changes, such as the industrial revolution of the late 17 th and early 18 th centuries merely exacerbated the trends already in progress. There is currently some debate about whether we have moved beyond modern society to something “post-modern”, but we have yet no identifying name for this period. This is important to note, as Marx, Weber, and Durkheim were all seeking to describe what we now refer to as “modern society,” which, on a grand scale, may still be what you are living through now.
By the late eighteenth century, new political strains began to emerge. Monarchical rule was suited well to feudalism, but it did not seem as suited to this new global capitalism. Capitalists and traders were often not part of the aristocracy and did not feel represented by aristocratic rulers. There were many more people living in towns and cities who felt they should be politically represented. Some colonies, such as those in North America, also felt excluded from political representation . Hereditary succession seemed increasingly irrational, particularly in a society in which hard work and merit was leading to possibilities of social mobility. This led to a series of political revolutions (American in 1775, French in 1789) to create new democratic political systems.
At the time Marx was writing, these democratic political revolutions had stalled, at least in Europe. France wobbled between monarchy and republic (see more in the Eighteenth Brumaire introduction). German princes fought back attempts at instituting a popular vote. And yet, the writing on the wall appeared clear. Representative democracy was on the horizon. The world we now inhabit, capitalist and democratic, was the world in which Weber and Durkheim would grow up. Both would live to see the 1918 execution of one of the last ruling aristocratic families, the Romanovs. Today, “noble” families are largely titular, without real power.

Major Themes

There are a few major themes that come up over and over again during the course of classical sociological theory’s development. All three classical theorists were writing at a time when sociology was a new and emerging discipline. This new discipline was called forth by momentous social changes taking place in European (and American) society during this time period. These changes were related to the rise of capitalism, industrialization, and new political representation for the majority of people (or, at least, a desire for such by many). Calls for socialism emerged as a response to recognition of new social divisions. Each of the three theorists you will read here weighed in on these historical changes, theorizing the contours and dynamics of this new “modern” society.

The first theme that clearly emerges from the theorists is the theme of modern society itself. Each of our theorists has a different name for this new society, one that exemplifies what the theorist thought was distinct and novel about it. For Marx, the new society is a bourgeois society , one in which class relations between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are particularly fraught and stark. Marx calls this modern mode of production capitalism . For Durkheim, the new society is a result of increased population and contact between people (through advanced forms of transportation and communication). He calls this modern society an organic solidarity society, or sometimes a “segmented” society. Its distinguishing feature is an increased specialization and division of labor, apparent in every aspect of social life. For Weber, modern society is characterized by its hard-nosed rationality, bureaucratic authority structures, and a general dreariness of life. The American sociologists of this time drew inspiration from all three of these visions as well. Veblen, for example, characterized modern society as one of intense “conspicuous consumption,” where people jockeyed for position by the houses they bought, clothes they wore, and vacations they took. For Ross, the modern era was one of intense class conflict, brought about by advanced capitalism.

The second theme that emerges is related to the first. Rather than merely describe this emerging society, each of our theorists offered explanations for how it arose in the first place. Thus, classical sociological theory was as much about offering theories of historical change (what, at the time was noted as social dynamics ) as it was about describing how society works. Weber has a very famous explanation for how capitalism and bureaucracy came to rule in the West, which you will read all about in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism . The explanation advanced there is cultural and institutional – things change and develop the way they do because of previous institutional and cultural patterns. Weber’s explanation is in contrast to the materialist explanation offered by Marx, who saw history advance through conflicts over economic resources and power. According to Marx, history is a succession of modes of production , particular configurations which work for awhile until the class conflict they generate becomes too much to tolerate. In contrast to the idealist and materialist theories of change, Durkheim explained historical change as largely an unintended byproduct of demographic shifts and technological advances. As populations grow more dense, pressure is put on them to adapt in ways that minimize conflict.

The third theme that emerges is how theorists described and explained divisions operating within society. We have already seen that Marx saw class conflict as endemic to just about every society that has ever existed heretofore (an exception being early humankind, prior to the advent of agricultural settlements). For Marx, the conflict between those who own and monopolize profit-generating resources and those who must work for a living was the fundamental driver of historical change. It was also the explanation for much that happened in any given society. Our ideas, culture, law, norms, practices – you name it – were merely epiphenomena resting on the base of material distributions. Weber’s ideas in this area could not be further from Marx’s. He very clearly dismissed the idea that money, economic power, and material distributions were at the root of all social divisions. For Weber, class was but one axis of stratification, and, in many societies, the least important one. People found other ways to distinguish themselves from each other. One’s status could be based on birth (a noble family, a particular racial or ethnic group identity), honor (martial prowess), or profession/occupation. People also stratified themselves politically, by party affiliation. Durkheim, while recognizing the importance of class generally, believed that advanced specialization and division of labor pushed modern society away from class conflict and towards individualization. To the extent that we discriminate against people or favor some people based on skin color, biological sex, gender identity, or social background of their parents, we are preventing the division of labor from functioning properly. In a perfect world, the only social divisions would be those that correctly mirror natural inequalities.

These contrasting beliefs about the relative tractability and source of social divisions have a lot to do with how each classical sociological theorist thought about the politics of his day, particularly the question of socialism. For it must be understood by today’s reader that the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was an era where capitalism was fiercely debated, and socialism was offered as a real potential alternative. There had as yet been no Russian Revolution, no rise of Stalin, no fear of a totalitarian state. There wasn’t even a welfare state as we have come to understand it. Taxes were low or non-existent, public education was scarce, and there was very little public assistance on offer. Giant corporations went largely unregulated. It wasn’t until the publication of Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle in 1904 that the public began clamoring for some regulation and oversight of the food industry. It may be fair to say that a majority of intelligent thinkers during this period thought something should be done to rein in the depredations of capitalism. Marx obviously went the furthest in this regard, co-authoring the Communist Manifesto which called for the immediate overthrow of capitalism and private property. Today’s reader might be surprised to see what is actually advocated in the Manifesto – free public education, a federal postal system, and a few other things that we now take for granted. Both Weber and Durkheim also weighed in on the possibilities of socialism and reformation of capitalism, as did many of the American sociologists.

The final and perhaps most important theme for our purposes is that of sociology itself , and this is related to what has been said about the political views of the early sociologists. The connection between the aims and goals of this new discipline and political reform is most visible in the work of Durkheim (and French sociology in general). Durkheim believed sociology could be the science of society – like a physician, it could literally diagnose its ills and tell us what we should do to improve its health. Thus, description of how society worked was connected, for Durkheim, with how society could and perhaps should be improved. This makes reading Durkheim exciting and at times controversial. In contrast, Weber (and German sociology in general) did not see sociology as an ameliorative science in this way. Instead, sociology was about understanding how individuals made decisions in society and with what consequences, for the purpose of predicting future behavior and actions. The two approaches to sociology could not be more different. Where Durkheim focuses on social facts , Weber focuses on social action . Marx, writing before the origin of sociology as a term, has little to say in this regard, although we can see his descriptions and analyses made for change in a similar light to Durkheim. The connection of sociology to social reform versus sociology as a predictive science can also be seen in the differences among American sociologists during this era. As sociology was literally being defined into existence during this time, how particular sociologists defined its subject matter and its goals have had lasting effects on the work sociologists do today.

These five themes – describing and naming “modern” society, theorizing historical changes and the rise of this modern society, explaining social divisions, weighing in on the promise (and perils) of the socialist alternative, and proposing parameters for the new emerging field of sociology – recur throughout the readings chosen for this textbook. If you get lost in the reading, return to these five themes to find your way through. Pay attention to the similarities and differences in how each of the theorists frame and develop the theme. In this way, you will find your own path as a sociologist. I wish you a very good journey!

Allison L. Hurst December 31, 2018, Corvallis, Oregon

Erik Olin Wright, ed. 2005 Approaches to Class Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pg. 180. ↵

Classical Sociological Theory and Foundations of American Sociology Copyright © 2018 by Allison L. Hurst is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Forgetting the Founders? The Uses of Classical Theory Today

Original Article
Published: 17 July 2023
Volume 60 , pages 722–732, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

Anthony Albanese ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6686-8759 1 ,
Elise Wolff 1 &
Alan Sica 1

270 Accesses

5 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

It is commonly held that the most laudable research is constructed around a healthy interplay among theories, methods, and data. Despite this long-standing consensus, many scholars have voiced concerns that theoretical frameworks are too often given inadequate attention and are generally underdeveloped. This impression has yet to be expressed with an empirical basis. For this reason, we evaluate this apparent disciplinary situation by creating a dataset made up of 217 articles from general sociology journals, as well as 22 US graduate-level classical theory syllabi. Through various means, we assess how often and to what extent sociologists apply classical theory in their research. Rather than intensive theorizing and/or earnestly striving to elevate historical consciousness, we find that sociologists typically reduce the theoretical dimensions of their analyses to thin commemorations of foundational texts. To our knowledge, this is the first empirically based assessment of the degree to which classical theory is used and cited in sociological research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

The potential of working hypotheses for deductive exploratory research

Mattia Casula, Nandhini Rangarajan & Patricia Shields

Thematic Analysis: Making Values Emerge from Texts

Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory: Its Development, Core Concepts, and Critical Issues

Related discussions can be found in several Issues of the Swiss Journal of Sociology (e.g., Camic 1997 ; Sica 1998 ; Kaesler 1999 ).

We are here describing what Stinchcombe ( 1982 ) refers to as the “developmental task.” According to Stinchcombe, the developmental task is one of the six distinct functions that sociological classics serve. The other functions are touchstones or models of aesthetic excellence, the small coinage function to indicate the tradition in which one is working, sources of fundamental ideas, the routine science function that provides sources for empirical puzzles, and the ritual function that serves to help realize disciplinary solidarity. For concerns of both space and thematic uniformity, we do not here explore each of these functions.

If in the earlier history of empirical social research it was an article of faith that sound analysis could rely on the three-legged stool of theories, methods, and data, this confidence has been shaken by more sophisticated inquiries into the mechanics of research—how it is actually carried out, and the interrelation (as opposed to separation) between these three realms (Cartwright and Montuschi 2014 ).

The most recent U.S. News rankings were from 2017 when this project began.

Issues from 2018 were omitted for journals that publish considerably more articles per Issue in order to avoid an overly disproportionate representation of a particular journal.

The final reference count simply represents the number of times that one of the classical theorists was cited. For example, if one article were to reference two of the classical theorists, then two cases would be added to the reference count. In the scope of this analysis, 34 of the 161 research articles cited at least one of the classical theorists, producing a final reference count of 51.

For example, an article that cites Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism as well as Economy and Society is considered to reference Weber once. On the other hand, a situation in which an article cites two separate theorists (e.g., Weber’s Economy and Society as well as Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations ) would result in the addition of two cases to the reference count.

These sentences did not need to be consecutive, nor did they need to contain a citation to the given theorist in order to be considered a sentence that discusses said theorist. However, the theorist needed to be cited at least once somewhere in the article for any of the sentences to have been counted. An article’s discussion of two distinct works by the same theorist would be combined rather than separated in the production of this sentence count.

The atheoretical orientation of the discipline may be more of a problem in the USA than in Europe (see indicative findings in Gartrell and Gartrell 2002 ), though more research is needed to assess this point of speculation. To this point, Camic ( 1997 ) makes a related observation when comparing the USA and France in terms of interest and knowledge in the history of social thought. In contrast to sociologists in France, who demonstrate great interest in sociology’s past, the American sociologist, according to Camic ( 1997 , 228), “knows virtually nothing of his or her discipline’s history.”

Abrutyn, S. and A.S. Mueller. 2014. The socioemotional foundations of suicide: A microsociological view of Durkheim’s suicide. Sociological Theory, 32 (4), 327-51.

Article Google Scholar

Adamczyk, A., J.D. Freilich, and C Kim. 2017. Religion and crime: A systematic review and assessment of next steps. Sociology of Religion , 78 (2), 192-232.

Albanese, A. 2023. The future of historical consciousness in sociology. The American Sociologist, 54 (1), 147-75.

Alexander, J.C. 1982. Positivism, presuppositions, and current controversies . Vol. 1 of Theoretical logic in sociology . Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Google Scholar

Bernard, L.L. 1932. Sociological research and the exceptional man. Publication of the American Sociological Society , 27 , 3-19.

Besbris, M., & S. Khan. 2017. Less theory. More description. Sociological Theory , 35 (2), 147-53.

Bornmann, L., & H.D. Daniel. 2008. What do citation counts measure? A review of studies of citing behavior. Journal of Documentation , 64 (1), 45-80.

Burawoy, M. 2019. Empiricism and its fallacies. Contexts, 18 (1), 47-53.

Camic, C. 1981. On the methodology of the history of sociology: A reply to Jones. American Journal of Sociology, 86 (5), 1139-44.

Camic, C. 1997. Uneven development in the history of sociology. Swiss Journal of Sociology, 23 (2), 227-33.

Cartwright, N., & E. Montuschi. 2014. Philosophy of social science: A new introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Collins, R., & M. Makowksy. 2010. The discovery of society . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Collins, C.S., & C.M. Stockton. 2018. The central role of theory in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 17 (1), 1-10.

Comte, A. 1988. Introduction to positive philosophy . Edited by Frederick Ferré. Indianapolis: Hackett.

Crapanzano, V. 1986. Hermes’ dilemma: The masking of subversion in ethnographic description. Pp. 51-76 in Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography , edited by J. Clifford & G.E. Marcus. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

Chapter Google Scholar

Dayé, C. 2018. A systematic view on the use of history for current debates in sociology, and on the potential and problems of a historical epistemology of sociology. The American Sociologist, 49 (4), 520-47.

Douglas, J.D. 1971. The rhetoric of science and the origins of statistical social thought: The case of Durkheim’s suicide. Pp. 44-57 in The phenomenon of sociology: A reader in the sociology of sociology , edited by E.A. Tiryakian. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Duncan, O.D. 1984. Notes on social measurement: Historical and critical . New York: Russel Sage.

Ellwood, C. 1933. Methods in sociology: A critical study. Durham: Duke University Press.

Erikson, K.T. 1970. Sociology and the historical perspective. The American Sociologist, 5 (4), 331-38.

Gans, H. J. 1992. Sociological amnesia: The noncumulation of normal social science. Sociological Forum, 7 (4), 701-710.

Gartrell, C.D. & J.W. Gartrell. 2002. Positivism in sociological research: USA and UK (1966-1990). British Journal of Sociology, 53 (4), 639-57.

Healy, K. 2017. Fuck nuance. Sociological Theory 35(2), 118-27.

Husserl, E. 1970. The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology: An introduction to phenomenological philosophy . Translated by D. Carr. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

Jacobs, J.A. 2016. Journal rankings in sociology: Using the H index with Google Scholar. The American Sociologist 47(2-3), 192-224.

Jones, R.A. 1977. On understanding a sociological classic. American Journal of Sociology, 83 (2), 279-319.

Jones, R.A. 1981. On Camic’s antipresentist methodology. American Journal of Sociology, 86 (5), 1133-38.

Jones, R.A. 1985. Second thoughts on privileged access. Sociological Theory, 3 (1), 16-19.

Kaesler, D. 1999. Guardians of canonical wisdom: Why some of us care for the history of sociology. Swiss Journal of Sociology, 25 (2), 149-59.

Merton, R.K. 1968. Social theory and social structure: Toward the codification of theory and research . Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

Merton, R.K. 1996. On social structure and science . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Parsons, T. 1950. The prospects of sociological theory. American Sociological Review, 15 (1), 3-16.

Reed, I.A. & M.N. Zald. 2014. The unsettlement of communities of inquiry. Pp. 85-105 in Theorizing in social science: The context of discovery , edited by R. Swedberg. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Seidman, S. 1985. The historicist controversy: A critical review with a defense of a revised presentism. Sociological Theory, 3(1), 13-16.

Sica, A. 1988. Weber, irrationality, and social order. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Sica, A. 1998. The dire need for history: Amnesia and sociology in the U.S. Swiss Journal of Sociology, 24 (2), 191-98.

Sica, A. 2016. Book matters: The changing nature of literacy. New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.

Sica, A. 2019. Classical sociological theory. Pp. 3-20 in The Wiley Blackwell companion to sociology , edited by G. Ritzer & W.W. Murphy. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

Sorokin, P. A. 1965. Sociology of yesterday, today, and tomorrow. American Sociological Review, 30 (6), 833-43.

Stinchcombe, A.L. 1982. Should sociologists forget their mothers and fathers. The American Sociologist , 17(1), 2-11.

Sullivan, J.W.N. 1933. The limitations of science . New York: The Viking Press.

Swedberg, R. 2016. Before theory comes theorizing or how to make social science more interesting. The British Journal of Sociology, 67 (1), 5-22.

Swedberg, R. 2017. Theorizing in sociological research: A new perspective, a new departure? Annual Review of Sociology, 43 , 189-206.

Swedberg, R. 2021. Theorizing with the help of the classics. Journal of Classical Sociology, 21 (3-4), 296-306.

Tavory, I. 2019. Beyond the calculus of power and position: Relationships and theorizing in ethnography. Sociological Methods and Research, 48 (4) 727-38.

Taylor, B.J., B. Cantwell, & S. Slaughter. 2013. Quasi-markets in U.S. higher education: The humanities and institutional revenues. The Journal of Higher Education, 84 (5), 675-707.

Timmermans, S., & I. Tavory. 2012. Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30 (3), 167-86.

Turner, J.H. 2006. American sociology in chaos: Differentiation without integration. The American Sociologist, 37 (2), 15-29.

Turner, S.P. 1985. Weltgeist, intention, and reproduction: A code. Sociological Theory, 3 (1), 23-28.

Turner, S.P. 2007. Defining a discipline: Sociology and its philosophical problems, from its classics to 1945. Pp. 3-69 in Philosophy of anthropology and sociology , edited by S. Turner & M. Risjord. New York: Elsevier.

Turner, S.P., & J.H. Turner. 1990. The impossible science: An institutional analysis of American sociology. London: Sage Publications.

Vico, G. 1990. On the study methods of our time . Translated by E. Gianturco & D.P. Verene. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

Warner, R.S. 1985. Sociological theory and history of sociology: Autonomy and interdependence. Sociological Theory, 3 (1), 20-23.

Weber, M. 1948. Science as a vocation. Pp. 129-56 in From Max Weber: Essays in sociology , edited by H.H. Gerth & C. W. Mills. New York: Oxford University Press.

Weber, M. 2011. ‘Objectivity’ in social science and social policy. Pp. 49-112 in Methodology of the social sciences , translated and edited by E.A. Shils & H.A. Finch. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Whitehead, A.N. 1917. The organization of thought : Educational and scientific . London: Williams and Norgate.

Book Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Sociology, Pennsylvania State University, 211 Oswald Tower, State College, PA, 16801, USA

Anthony Albanese, Elise Wolff & Alan Sica

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Anthony Albanese conceived of and designed the analysis, collected the data, performed the analysis, and wrote parts of the paper.

Elise Wolff organized the raw data and performed the analysis along with Anthony Albanese.

Alan Sica provided general supervision and wrote parts of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony Albanese .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval.

Not applicable

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Albanese, A., Wolff, E. & Sica, A. Forgetting the Founders? The Uses of Classical Theory Today. Soc 60 , 722–732 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-023-00873-6

Download citation

Accepted : 27 June 2023

Published : 17 July 2023

Issue Date : October 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-023-00873-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Classical theory
Sociological theory
Sociological canon
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Structure & Outlining

Classical essay structure.

The following videos provide an explanation of the classical model of structuring a persuasive argument. You can access the slides alone, without narration, here .

Composition II. Authored by : Alexis McMillan-Clifton. Provided by : Tacoma Community College. Located at : http://www.tacomacc.edu . Project : Kaleidoscope Open Course Initiative. License : CC BY: Attribution

Signup for G K Online test for 2 years
1 lakh+ Questions

General Knowledge practice
Current Affairs Q & A in Quiz format

Daily Current Affairs News
Get Instant news updates

Anthropology notes
Management notes

Current affairs Digest

Sociology App

Basic Concepts
Anthropology
Automation Society
Branches of Sociology
Census of India
Civil Society
Dalit Movement
Economy and Society
Environment and Sociology
Ethnomethodology
Folkways And Mores
Indian Society
Indian Thinkers
Individual and Society
Industrial and Urban Society
Introduction To Sociology
International Economy
Market as a social institution
Marriage, Family & Kinship
Nation Community
Neo Positivism
Organization and Individual
People's Participation
Personality
Phenomenology
Political Modernization
Political Processes
Political System
Post Modernism
Post Structuralism
Public Opinion
Research Method & Statistics
Rural Sociology
Science, Technology
Social Action
Social Change
Social Control
Social Demography
Sociology of Fashion
Social Inequality
Social Justice
Social Mobility
Social Movements
Sociology News
Social Pathology
Social Problems
Social Structure
Social Stratification
Sociology of Law
Sociology of Social Media
Sociology of Development
Social Relationship
Theoretical Perspectives
Tribal Society
Interest and Attitude
Neo Functionalism
Neo-Marxism
Weaker Section & Minorities
Women And Society
Symbolic Interactionism
Jurisprudence
Sociology Of Environment
Sir Edward Evans Pritchard
Ruth Benedict
Margaret Mead
B. Malinowski
Alfred Schultz
Herbert Marcuse
Edmund Leach
Ralph Linton
Peter M. Blau
Auguste Comte
Emile Durkheim
Herbert Spencer
Karl Mannheim
Sigmund Freud
Pitirim Sorokin
Talcott Parsons
Ferdinand Tonnies
Thomas Hobbes
Sir Edward Burnett Taylor
Karl Polyani
Alfred Louis Kroeber
Erving Goffman
James George Frazer
Ralph Dahrendorf
Raymond Firth
Radcliffe Brown
Thomas Kuhn
Poverty Line Debate
UN Summit on Non- Communicable Diseases
UN Summit on Non- UN Report on Domestic Violence
New Women of Tomorrow:Study by Nielsen
World Population Projections
Status of Healthcare Services in Bihar
HIV/AIDS and Mobility in South Asia- UNDP Report 2010
Levels and Trends in Child Mortality
India's Development Report Card vis-a-vis MDG
Sex Ratio in India
Urban Slum Population
Short Notes
Chicago School of Sociology
Harriet Martineau(1802-876)
Power of Sociology
Why we need sociology
The Sociological Imagination ( 1959)
Theories of Socialization
Street Corner Society
Research Tools
The social construction of Reality
Feminization of Poverty
The Politics of Information
Global Stratification
Population and Urbanization
Sociological Perspectives on Health and Illness
Sociological Perspectives
Scientific Method in Sociological Research
Research Designs in Sociology
What we need to know about the Gender
Statistics and Graphs in Sociology
Mass Media and Communications
Rites and Secularization
Caste System
Communalism and Secularism
Social Institution

Elite Theory
Classical Elite Theory
Power Structure
Unorganized Masses
Political Parties
Functions Party
Voting Behaviour
Political Participation
National Community
Political Socialization
Dehumanization
Political Culture
Influence and Power

Home >> Political System >> The Classical Elite Theory

The Classical Elite Theory

Like Pareto Mosca believed that rule by a minority of elite would be an inevitable feature of social life and societies in history were divided into two classes- A class that rules and a class that is ruled. The first class always the less numerous performs all political functions, monopolies power and enjoys the advantages that power brings whereas the second the more numerous class is directed and controlled by the first. Like Pareto Mosca believed that the ruling minority is superior to the most of the population because they possess certain qualities that give them material, intellectual and moral superiority. The content of these qualities may vary from society to society in some societies courage and bravery in battle provided access to the elite. In others the skills and capacity needed to acquire wealth were valued. For both Pareto and Mosca democracies are merely another form of elite rule.

IMAGES

Classical Theories of Management Free Essay Example
Classical essay structure
8+ Argumentative Essay Examples
Lesson 6 Essay Classical And Operant Conditioning
Classical argument essay example
Theory practice sample essay

VIDEO

Classical Theory Of Employment And Output #economics
1 A Brief Review of Classical Test Theory 3 2014 09 29
Classical theory of employment and output-Business economics//Bbs 2nd year
1 A Brief Review of Classical Test Theory 2 2014 09 29
Classical Conditioning Theory
1 A Brief Review of Classical Test Theory 1 2014 09 22

COMMENTS

Classical Conditioning
The classical conditioning paradigm can be seen to contain two important attributes which are: the conditioned stimulus (CS) and the conditioned response (CR). In Pavlov's example, after the pairing of the food and the ringing of the bell, a presentation of the bell alone will result in the unconditioned response of salivation from the dog ...
Essay Writing #4: The Classical Argument
The second essay format I teach my students is the classical argument. It is more advanced than the simple argument for a number of reasons.. To begin with, the thesis in a classical argument is debatable in a consequential way, meaning there is something at stake.That something might be political, social, religious, or any number of things that affect the broader world.
Classical Argument
The classical argument is made up of five components, which are most commonly composed in the following order: Exordium - The introduction, opening, or hook. Narratio - The context or background of the topic. Proposito and Partitio - The claim/stance and the argument. Confirmatio and/or Refutatio - positive proofs and negative proofs of ...
Aristotelian (Classical) Argument Model
Aristotelian Argument. The Aristotelian or classical argument is a style of argument developed by the famous Greek philosopher and rhetorician, Aristotle. In this style of argument, your goal as a writer is to convince your audience of something. The goal is to use a series of strategies to persuade your audience to adopt your side of the issue.
What is Classicism?
Classicism aims to represent things in their most beautiful, most ideal state. "Classic," "classical," and "classicism" may seem like slightly different ways to say the same thing, however, each term has come to have a distinct definition. If something is "classic," we usually mean it is archetypal of that thing; a classic car ...
Aristotelian Argument
Aristotelian Argument. The Aristotelian or classical argument is a style of argument developed by the famous Greek philosopher and rhetorician, Aristotle. In this style of argument, your goal as a writer is to convince your audience of something. The goal is to use a series of strategies to persuade your audience to adopt your side of the issue.
4.2 Classical Philosophy
Ancient Greek Philosophy. Classical philosophy emerged in ancient Greece, following a procession from what are known as the Presocratics; to the three great philosophers, Socrates (470-399 BCE), Plato (c. 428-347 BCE), and Aristotle (384-322 BCE); and then to later schools of thought, including the Epicureans and Stoics.As is the case with all ancient societies, knowledge of these ...
Why is classical theory classical? Theorizing the canon and canonizing
Connell RW (1997) Why is classical theory classical? American Journal of Sociology 102(6): 1511-1557. Crossref. ISI. Google Scholar. Du Bois WEB (1915) The African roots of war. ... [1940]) Dusk of Dawn: An Essay toward an Autobiography of a Race Concept. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Google Scholar. Du Bois WEB (2007 [1911]) The ...
Classical Conditioning by Pavlov
Classical Conditioning by Pavlov Essay. Classical conditioning is considered to be the learning model based on dogs' experiments conducted by Pavlov. This associative learning form is based on the neutral stimulus presentation; the theory includes several forms, such as eyeblink conditioning, fear conditioning, and Hermissenda crassicomis.
PDF The Classical Essay: Based on Ancient Oratorical Structuring
An 18th Century Example of a Classical Oration in the Form of a Written Essay: "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathon Swift -Introduction: Background on the overcrowded situation in the country, the beggars, and the children.-Narration: The children are a hindrance on the working population.-Partition: In order to solve the problem of overpopulation, we ought to sell the children for food and use the
The Classical Conditioning Theory of Learning
The Classical conditioning theory is based on the idea of gaining or learning a new behavior through a process called association. Moving forward, Ivan Pavlov sees that the environment plays an important role influencing the learning process. In addition, the theory emphasized that our behaviors are shaped and formed by the environment.
Classical Literary Criticism: Role & Theories
Classical Literary Theories. Classical literary criticism and its theories can be traced to classical Greek and Roman philosophy. Greek philosopher Plato's literary theory can be found in his ten ...
Perception: An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge
Abstract. This book is a defence of the form of realism which stands closest to that upheld by the Nyāya-Vaíṣsika school in classical India. The book presents the Nyāya view and critically examines it against that of its traditional opponent, the Buddhist version of phenomenalism and idealism. This reconstruction of Nyāya arguments ...
Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary Essay
The classical and contemporary theorists have been attributed to sociological theories, each with different concepts in their arguments. The classical theorists emerged in the mid 19 th century, and they have helped shape the course of sociology to what it has become to date. One of the most outstanding classical theorists was Georg Simmel.
Introduction
Second, an introduction to classical sociological theory will help you think differently about the world. It disciplines the mind to see the world in a particular way, using the concepts and approaches of the sociologist. This new disciplined way of thinking is essential for conducting sociological research. As one of our eminent contemporary ...
Forgetting the Founders? The Uses of Classical Theory Today
This analysis relies on several sources of data. First, we requested classical theory syllabi from the top 40 sociology programs in the USA (as determined by U.S. News) and received a response from 22 universities. Footnote 4 With these 22 syllabi, we identified the most frequently taught classical theorists in these graduate programs. We selected eight classical theorists for the scope of our ...
PDF Classics, Archaeology & Ancient History (CAAH) Essay Guidelines
The essay will answer the question(s) clearly and concisely. 2. The essay will argue using scholarly evidence (secondary sources) and ancient sources (sources written at the time) or commonly known as "primary sources". 3. The essay will "stick to the point" i.e. discuss the question and not go off topic.
Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning Theories
WRITE AN ESSAY THAT ANALYSES AND EVALUATES PAVLOV'S WORK ON CLASSICAL CONDITIONING AND SKINNER'S WORK ON OPERANT CONDITIONING. Behaviourism is a psychological approach that focuses on observable behaviour. The theory behind behaviourism is that all humans are born 'tabula rasa', a blank slate, with only the capacity to learn.
Classical Essay Structure
Classical Essay Structure. The following videos provide an explanation of the classical model of structuring a persuasive argument. You can access the slides alone, without narration, here.
A Study On Classical Conditioning Psychology Essay
Classical conditioning is a type of learning in which an organism learns to transfer a natural response from one stimulus to another, previously neutral stimulus. This is done by manipulating reflexes. Operant conditioning is a type of learning in which the likelihood of a behavior is increased or decreased by the use of reinforcement or ...
PDF Classical Writing
maxim theory and analysis ethos, logos, and pathos types of paragraphs Analyze and imitate whole classical speeches or essays (Seneca, Franklin, Shakespeare, Churchill, Erasmus, etc.) Writing Project concepts : Standard Outlines Paragraph writing Writing thesis statements Writing introductions and conclusions Modern 5 paragraph essay
The Classical Elite Theory, Political system
The Classical Elite Theory. Pareto places particular emphasis on psychological characteristics as the basis of the elite rule. He argues that there are two main types of governing elite which he calls Lions and Foxes. Lion achieve power because of their ability to take direct and decisive action and as their name suggests they tend to rule by ...
Child Behaviour And Development In Classical Theory Psychology Essay
Vygosky (1978), a socio-cultural theorist, paid attention to the influence of socio-culture on children's development. How children interact with parents, teachers, and peers facilitates cognitive development. He viewed the zone of proximal development (ZPD) as the transitional state between "actual development" and "potential ...

A Classical Teacher's Journal

PART ONE – THE INTRODUCTION AND THESIS STATEMENT

PART TWO – THE NARRATION

PART THREE – THE CONFIRMATION

PART FOUR – THE REFUTATION AND CONCESSION

PART FIVE – THE CONCLUSION

A REMINDER ABOUT PROCESS

Share this:

Classical Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

A (Very) Brief History of Rhetoric

The Rhetorical Appeals

Components and Structure

Propositio and Partitio

Confirmatio and Refutatio

60 Aristotelian (Classical) Argument Model

Sample Essay

Share This Book

4.2 Classical Philosophy

Egyptian Origins of Classical Philosophy

Egyptian and Babylonian Mathematics

Akhenaten’s Metaphysics

The Egyptian Origins Controversy

Write Like a Philosopher

Ancient Greek Philosophy

The Presocratics

Prominent Monists

The Paradoxes of Zeno

Connections

Presocratic Theology

Socrates and Plato

Roman Philosophy

Rhetoric and Persuasion in Politics

Academic Skepticism

Neoplatonism

The Classical Conditioning Theory of Learning

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Essays on Theory

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

Perception: An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge

Signed in as

Personal account

Institutional access

IP based access

Sign in through your institution

Sign in with a library card

Society Members

Sign in through society site

Sign in using a personal account

Viewing your signed in accounts

Signed in but can't access content

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sociological Theorists: Classical vs. Contemporary Essay

Introduction

Organization Overview

Translating Passages

Modernizing the Text

Some Useful History

Suggested Further Reading

Major Themes

Share This Book

Forgetting the Founders? The Uses of Classical Theory Today

Cite this article

Access this article

Similar content being viewed by others

The potential of working hypotheses for deductive exploratory research

Thematic Analysis: Making Values Emerge from Texts

Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory: Its Development, Core Concepts, and Critical Issues

Author information

Contributions

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article