For many social theorists, the word 'class' has and continues to play a privileged role in the analyses of human societies. There is no consensus as to what the word should mean--and the debates rage on. However, on one score there is an extraordinary implicit consensus. Whatever the word actually means, almost all analysts claim that the determinants they have choosen stand in a special causal relationship to the non-class aspects of society. This dissertation is conceived as a critical examination of these two basic unsettled areas within social theories. One additional issue is of great concern to this dissertation. We will argue that the different meanings of the word 'class' and the causal privilege assigned to it are not mere semantic disputes. They are also disputes about the desirability of existing social structures and the possibility of new ones. We define and identify three broad traditions within theoretical approaches to analysing human societies: a class tradition, a non-class tradition, and a composite tradition that combines elements from the first two. This thesis uses a particular reading of Marx's work to analyse some representative contemporary efforts that attempt to settle the arguments over what class should mean and how its privileged status should be understood. We have choosen major texts that have appeared in the last thirty years by four important social theorists who have devoted significant analytical attention to the problems of class and causation. Key texts by Ralf Dahrendorf, Anthony Giddens, Nicos Poulantzas, and Eric Olin Wright are critically examined. The first two authors are influential representatives from the non-class tradition, and the latter two are from the composite tradition. Based on a particular non-essentialist Marxist class theoretic perspective this dissertation demonstrates the superiority of our approach vis-a-vis the alternative texts. We spell out the advantages both for analyses of contemporary societies and the strategic political advantages of employing our approach. It is in these senses that the alternative texts are considered to be seriously flawed in their respective attempts to solve these two basic problem areas in social theory today.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UMASS/oai:scholarworks.umass.edu:dissertations-7347 |
| Date | 01 January 1985 |
| Creators | OLSON, WILLIAM CHARLES |
| Publisher | ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst |
| Source Sets | University of Massachusetts, Amherst |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Source | Doctoral Dissertations Available from Proquest |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds