Emily Delaney
Research Paper
Sociology
Sociological Imagination
Bauman states that sociology is “first and foremost, a way of thinking about the human world” (Bauman 1990, p. 8). And all the material for sociological discoveries is made from the ordinary human experiences. “Anything sociology talks about was already there in our lives” (Bauman 1990, p.10). Bauman proves the impossibility to study sociological miracles with complete fairness, as a sociologist at first, part of this ordinary human world. And he also emphasizes the fact that “sociological discourse” is “wide open”. Bauman believes that thinking sociologically would make us more “sensitive” to our lives and the lives of other people to help us understand the different aspects of human experiences in happiness, sadness, desire, disappointments, misery etc. This essay is an attempt to understand what thinking sociologically really is by reviewing Zigmunt Bauman’s book “Thinking sociologically” which was first published in 1990. The sociological imagination is the concept of being able to “think ourselves away” from the familiar routines of our daily lives in order to look at them anew. Mills defined sociological imagination as “the vivid awareness of the relationship between experience and the wider society” (Crossman 1991, p.1). I am going to summarize the first couple chapters of the book to further see the qualities of a human’s everyday life experience. Hopefully this will create an interest to read this book, because it is easy to understand and carries a lot of depth to help a student of sociology to understand what thinking sociologically is all about. “Sociology not only helps us analyze current and existing patterns of social life, but it also helps us to see some of the possible futures open to us”(Crossman 1991, p.1).
First let me briefly summarize one main point Bauman talks about which I found very interesting. While reading the book, one of the key points, which seemed to be screaming out to me, was his concept of ambiguity. Ambiguity is something with a doubtful meaning. For example the doubt of the grey area between the black and the white in human interaction, the space between which makes it difficult to draw the line between two extremes. Bauman in almost every chapter explains how much of human interaction occurs within this space and how hard we have to try to classify them in to a controllable and predictable category. Therefore, we don’t want anything in between the seemingly opposing, different categories, and try as much as we could to eliminate any. Bauman explains how all such attempts are in worthless because there is no escape from this ambiguity, which is an attempt to end one, which would certainly lead to another.
Bauman starts his discussion on the first topic observing that “being free” and “unfree” at the same time is maybe the “most common” and “most confusing” of our experiences. Bauman states that, “freedom means the ability to decide and choose” (Bauman 1990, p. 20). Many aspects form our sense of freedom. Generally others “right to freedom put constraints on ours.” “I may find out that freedom to act on my wishes depends not on what I do, or not even on what I have, but on what I am” (Bauman 1990, p. 22). Bauman says that the process of socialization in order to belong to a particular group would make me dependent on it to experience my freedom. Our sense of dependency puts limits on our freedom. For an example, the values and norms (for instance; gender roles, and the ways of which we addressing people.) we learn through time, through the socialization process, would be different to those who live in another country. When someone is left alone in a different environment, people may feel rather uncomfortable and be unable to understand these value systems quickly, which the people within that particular society take for granted so easily. In such a situation like being in a different society may put limitations on us from being ourselves. We could definitely say that we are dependent on our own culture and society to feel free and be who we are. This explains why we sometimes go about doing things we may not like to do, because we are dependent on them to find something else.
Bauman explains the concept of “us” and “them” as not just two separate groups of people, but as “the distinction between two totally different attitudes between emotional attachment and antipathy, trust and suspicion, security and fear, cooperativeness and pugnacity” (Bauman 1990, p. 40). Bauman compares this difference between “us” and “them” to that between “in-group” and “out-group” in sociology. Bauman says that these two groups are joined together and that this “mutual conflict” states their existence. Bauman talks about the importance of the idea of an “out-group” for the “cohesiveness”, “integration”, “solidarity”, “self identity” and “emotional security” of the in-group. “There must be an “out” for the “in” to be truly appreciated” (Bauman 1990, p. 42). Our feelings towards the “out group” are generally surrounded with bias and anger. Bauman’s definition of a stranger is quite interesting. In usual terms we would think a stranger is a person we no nothing about. But Bauman states that a stranger is person we know a little of, a person who is “bound to come time and again, uninvited, into my field of vision” (Bauman 1990, p.54). Bauman says if we didn’t know anything about them, then they wouldn’t be “strangers”, but “nobodies” (Bauman 1990, p.55). Bauman states that because we “note their presence”, and since we know so little about them it is hard “to make sense of them”. “They are, as it were, neither close nor distant. Neither a part of “us” nor a part of “them.” For this reason, they cause confusion and anxiety” (Bauman 1990, p.55). “With enemies we fight, friends we like and help; but what about people who are neither? Or who can be both?” (Bauman 1990, p. 56). Bauman talks about the discomfort that people feel when things or people are not in the places that are originally located to them, and even more upsetting when ambiguity makes placing them in the social and physical world difficult.
In this final chapter Bauman talks about sociology as a science and its package to the social sciences. Reminding us once again his words at the beginning of the book he says that sociology simply provides us with a “commentary” to our daily experiences; a “refinement of that knowledge we possess and employ in our daily life” (Bauman 1990, p.214). Bauman says that it has been said “the best service sociology may offer is to “prod sluggish imagination‟ by showing apparently familiar things from unexpected angles” (Bauman 1990, p. 215). Bauman says that sociology can evoke a scientific investigation of social aspects, leading to descriptions, explanations and even predictions, as is expected of “scientific knowledge”. He also stresses on the instability of the subject matter under study in sociology, and says that “sociology goes further than science”, as it recovers the meaning of the reality it studies” (Bauman 1990, p. 224). Concluding his final chapter Bauman emphasizes the greatest examination of sociology to human life, which is “the promotion of mutual understanding and tolerance as a paramount condition of shared freedom” (Bauman 1990, p.232). Bauman believes that “sociological thinking helps the cause of freedom” (Bauman 1990, p.232).
Therefore, we see how Sociological Thinking is useful to describe and explain aspects of human world, and to make us appreciate things we take for granted and make bearable the things we take far too seriously in everyday life. This article that we read in class is indeed a must read for all who are interested in sociology, and also everyone else because it makes us understand clearly the ambiguities in classifications and generalizations of social aspects. It reminds us again and again the irregularity of the subject matter under study, and how that every fact makes it so interesting to try and understand. But just as Bauman states in the introduction, sociology identifies and explains problems to widen our understanding of it, rather than give a solution for it. I believe we all have to think about are we supposed to find the solution and fix it, or just understand it and accept things as they are?
Works Cited
Beamish, Rob. The Promise of Sociology: The Classical Tradition and Contemporary Sociological Thinking. Toronto: University of Toronto, 2010.
Chope, Christopher. "Realsociology." Realsociology RSS. EDU Blogs, 6 Aug. 2010. Web. 02 Dec. 2013
