Pluralism and relationalism in social theory

lessons from the Tarde–Durkheim debate

David Toews

pp. 85-99

in: François Dépelteau (ed), The Palgrave handbook of relational sociology, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2018

Abstract

In this chapter I present an original conception of relational analysis and aim to show how this conception can account for and further sociological pluralism while potentially increasing the unity of the field. Critiquing Caillé and Vandenberghe's recent attempt to rally sociologists around Mauss's gift concept, I argue for affirming a problems-oriented field that does not privilege any particular social problem. The test of a strategy of unification should not be merely the agreement of like-minded scholars but should rather be whether the framework is able to accommodate diverse approaches, particularly ones that are opposed to each other on issues of social ontology. To that end, I discuss the classical debate over the correct formulation of social ontology that took place between Emile Durkheim and Gabriel Tarde. Keying on the notion of emergence, I show how the latter can be re-thought as a common concern in relational analyses that can be extracted from works such as theirs. I argue that a relational analysis oriented via emergence to social problems can accommodate both of their approaches to social ontology. Such a scheme represents the best hope for unifying sociology without sacrificing its valuable diversity.

Cited authors

Durkheim Emile

Tarde Gabriel