Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis

By Anthony Giddens

Book Overview

In this new and brilliantly organized book of essays, Anthony Giddens discusses three main theoretical traditions in social science that cut across the division between Marxist and non-Marxist... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0333272943
• ISBN13: 9780333272947
• Release Date: September 1979
• Publisher: Red Globe Press
• Length: 304 Pages
• Weight: 0.85 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.7" x 5.5" x 8.5"

Customer Reviews

great for theorists, not for lazy sundays

Giddens' approach to theory takes functional-structuralism and gives it a diachronic facelift. One of the greatest flaws in structuralism (sorry LS) is that it does not address problems related to social change in context of time and place. Giddens' attempts to do this, albeit with a few flaws, but all in all is a sound theoretical base from which to pull from when creating models. Kind of repetitive at times, considering it is a collection of articles rather than one manuscript.

Philosophy and Sociology

It seems unneccessarily complicated riddle to solve to us, sociologists. actually Giddens's writing style in this title is not that easy to grasp judging from sociological convention. and worse he cited too many names like Saussure, Hegel, Levi-Strauss, Heidegger, Husserl and even Derrida and Wittgenstein! those that makes readers wandering around jargons from philosophy. because this book stem from the controversial atmosphere of 70s when French Structuralism prevailed over intellectural map. Giddens wanted to conter their assertions. we can see he was right at 80s when structurism collapsed into trendy postmodernist jargons. Anyway I recommend to read this title if u read 'The Constitution of Society'. which title is not that hostile to reader like this title. but something lacks on it. You can find what miss in later masterpiece. This title is somewhat earlier endeavor to clarify his theory of structuration. so thorems were not that clearly founded. it makes it the way to hostility to readers but sometimes this kind of imperfection is more valuable to portray one's image of theory.