|
Introduction 13-32
p.21 In most cases, when entering a new area of experience, one is simply faced with a lack of concepts appropriate to the types of forces and relationships encountered there.
p.24 Despite science-fiction nightmares, machines have no will of their own. They can neither invent nor produce themselves, and cannot compel us to serve them. All decisions and activities they carry out are human decisions and activities. We project threats and compulsions on to them, but if we look more closely we always see interdependent groups of people threatening and compelling each other by means of machines.
1: Sociology - the questions asked by Comte 33-49
p.34 Comte is considered to be not only the father of sociology, but also the father of philosophical positivism... The word 'positive' was used by Comte as a synonym for 'scientific', by which he meant the acquisition of knowledge by means of theories and empirical observations.
2: The sociologist as a destroyer of myths 50-70
p.52 scientists are destroyers of myths.
p.57 The idea that people can discover a method or a tool of thought, independently of their conception of the subject matter about which knowledge is to be gained is, however, a product of the philosophical imagination.
p.68 Chains of interdependence become more differentiated and grow longer; consequently they become more opaque and, for any single group or individual, more uncontrollable.
p.69 The development of ever longer chains of human interdependence makes it increasingly obvious that it is inadequate to explain social events in pre-scientific terms, signaling out individual people as their originators.
3: Game models 71-103
p.74 Balances of power… form an integral element of all human relationships… balances of power are always present wherever there is functional interdependence between people… Power… is a structural characteristic of human relationships – of all human relationships.
p.77 It is not possible to explain the actions, plans and aims of either of the two groups if they are conceptualized as the freely chosen decisions, plans and aims of each group considered on its own, independently of the other group. They can be explained only if one takes into account the compelling forces the groups exert upon each other by reason of their interdependence, their bilateral function for each other as enemies.
p.80 Each side tries to weaken the other by any means. Here one is indeed confronted with a continuous interweaving, move upon move, in which every single person is totally involved... even this case of the interdependence between violent enemies locked in a life-and-death struggle is a process of interweaving. The sequence of moves on either side can only be understood and explained in terms of the immanent dynamics of their interdependence. If the sequence of actions of either side were studied in isolation, it would appear without rhyme or reason.
p.82 Imagine that the differential between A's strength and B's strength in the game diminishes... The more the differential between A's and B's strength decreases, the less power will either player have to force a particular tactic on the other. Both players will have correspondingly less chance to control the changing figuration of the game; and the less dependent will be the changing figuration of the game on the aims and plans for the course of the game which each player has formed by himself. The stronger, conversely, becomes the dependence of each of the two players' overall plans and each of their moves on the changing figuration of the game - on the game process. The more the game comes to resemble a social process, the less it comes to resemble the implementation of an individual plan. In other words, to the extent that the inequality in the strengths of the two players diminishes, there will result from the interweaving of moves of two individual people a game process which neither of them has planned.
p.84 The intertwining of moves made alternately by each player... builds up to form a certain kind of order, which can be defined and explained... The order in question is a specific kind of order, an ordered network or figuration, within which no action by either side can be regarded as the action of that one side alone. It must rather be interpreted as continuing the interweaving process and forming a part of the future interweaving of actions made by both sides.
p.84-85 Lacking such a [mental] picture [of the course of the game and its figuration], he [the player] may become disorientated. He needs a fairly clear picture of the course of the game and of its general figuration, which changes constantly as the game proceeds, so that he may plan his next move accordingly. The figuration of interdependent players and of the game which they play together is the framework for each individual's moves. He must be in a position to picture this figuration so that he may decide which move will give him the best chance of winning or of defending himself against his opponents' attacks. But there is a limit to the span of the web of interdependence within which an individual player can orient himself suitably and plan his personal strategy over a series of moves. If the number of interdependent players grows, the figuration, development and direction of the game will become more and more opaque to the individual player. However strong he may be, he will become less and less able to control them. [JLJ - clarification added in brackets from previous sentences]
p.87 the figuration of game and players already possesses a degree of complexity which prevents any one individual from using his superiority to guide the game in the direction of his own goals and wishes.
p.91 It becomes clear how much the course of the game - which is the product of the interweaving moves... of players, between whom there is a diminished and diminishing power differential - determines in its turn the structure of the moves of every... player.
The conception players have of their game will change accordingly - that is their 'ideas', the means of speech and thought by which they attempt to assimilate and master their experience of the game.
p.92-93 the problem of power. In part its neglect can be traced back to the simple fact that the social phenomena to which this concept refers are extremely complex. To simplify the problem... this simply conceals the problem. The difficulties encountered in reflecting on problems of power stem from the polymorphous nature of sources of power... A more adequate solution to problems of power depends on power being understood unequivocally as a structural characteristic of a relationship, all-pervading and, as a structural characteristic, neither good nor bad. It may be both... all relationships - like human games - are processes.
p.94 because we feel the pressure of 'power', we always invent a person who exercises it, or a kind of superhuman entity like 'nature' or 'society' in which we say power resides.
p.94 intentional interactions have unintended consequences.
p.95 the basic experience of the nascent science of sociology - the experience that out of the interweaving of many people's actions there may emerge social consequences which no one has planned.
p.95 a game process, which comes about entirely as a result of the interweaving of the individuals moves of... players, takes a course which none of the individual players has planned, determined or anticipated. On the contrary, the unplanned course of the game repeatedly influences the moves of each individual player.
p.96 the course of the game is not in the power of any one player... the course of the game itself has power over the behaviour and thought of the individual players. For their actions and ideas cannot be explained and understood if they are considered on their own; they need to be understood and explained within the framework of the game. The model shows how people's interdependence as players exerts constraint over each of the individuals bonded together in this way; the constraint stems from the particular nature of their relatedness and interdependence as players. In this instance, too, power is the structural characteristic of a relationship.
p.96 as power differentials lessen between interdependent individuals and groups there is a diminishing possibility that any participants... will be able to influence the overall course of the game.
p.97 Game models are an excellent way of representing the distinctiveness of the forms of organization which are met with on the level of integration represented by human societies.
p.97 When complex patterns of interweaving are encountered, it is usual to try to explain even these in terms of the same categories of cause and effect and the same picture of unilinear sequences.
p.97 the twelfth move in such a game [where both players are equally strong] can no longer be adequately explained in terms of short, unilinear causal sequences. Nor can an explanation be based on the individual character of one or other player. This move can only be interpreted in the light of the way the preceding moves of both players have intertwined, and of the specific figuration which has resulted from this intertwining... Only the progressive interweaving of moves during the game process, and its result - the figuration of the game prior to the twelfth move - can be of service in explaining the twelfth move. The player uses this figuration to orientate himself before making his move.
p.98 Sociologists, especially when they are working empirically, often use a theoretical framework and conceptual tools which are mostly quite well suited to the distinctive character of the particular kind of order produced by human interweaving, and to the character of societies and changing figurations made up of interdependent people.
p.100-102 Table 1... enables us to see how quickly it becomes impossible for individual people who make up a network of interrelationships to comprehend it and see their way through it, let alone to control it. It also enables us to understand more readily the fact that such webs of relationship perpetually effect their own development, relatively independently of the intentions and goals underlying the actions of the individuals who form the web... This index of complexity is a simple aid. It shows how the possible number of relationships grows as the number of people increases.
p.102 We have not yet taken into consideration the ways in which they may be patterned in the figuration, especially the fact that the balance of power in each of the possible relationships we have considered may vary greatly.
p.103 The immediate concern here is to make it easier to understand what the task of sociology is. This cannot be done without drawing attention to the opacity and consequent uncontrollability of the intertwining networks of relationships which people form.
4: Universal features of human society 104-133
p.109 human behaviour is directed less by inborn drives and more by impulses shaped by individual experience and learning than is the behaviour of any other living creature. Thanks to their biological constitution, not only is it true that people are better able to learn to control their behaviour than any other creature, but also that their behaviour must bear the imprint of what they have learned.
p.109 'Behaviour' means adjustment to changing situations.
p.110 The distinguishing features of human social life cannot be understood... without taking cognisance of the adaptation of human biological organization for learning.
p.116 power denotes a relationship between two or more people, or perhaps even between people and natural objects, that power is an attribute of relationships, and that the word is best used in conjunction with a reminder about more or less fluctuating changes in power.
p.121 We cannot possibly understand the problems of sociology until we are able to perceive ourselves as people among other people, and involved in games with others.
p.127 We can never think of people singly and alone; we must always think of them as people in figurations.
p.130 The concept of figuration therefore serves as a simple conceptual tool to loosen this social constraint to speak and think if 'the individual' and 'society' were antagonistic as well as different... By figuration we mean the changing pattern created by the players as a whole - not only their intellects but by their whole selves, the totality of their dealings in their relationships with each other. It can be seen that this figuration forms a flexible lattice-work of tensions. The interdependence of the players, which is a prerequisite of their forming a figuration, may be an interdependence of allies or of opponents.
p.130-131 It becomes quite apparent that two groups of opponents, who have a 'we' and 'they' relationship to each other, form one single figuration. We can only understand the constant flux in the grouping of players on one side if we see that the grouping of players on the other side is also in constant flux.
p.131 At the core of changing figurations - indeed the very hub of the figuration process - is a fluctuating, tensile equilibrium, a balance of power moving to and fro, inclining first to one side and then to the other. This kind of fluctuating balance of power is a structural characteristic of the flow of every figuration.
p.131 the concept of figuration... can be applied to relatively small groups just as well as to societies made up of thousands or millions of interdependent people… But the inhabitants of a village, a city or a nation also form figurations, although in this instance the figurations cannot be perceived directly because the chains of interdependence which link people together are longer and more differentiated. Such complex figurations must therefore be approached indirectly, and understood by analysing the chains of interdependence.
p.131 the game is an aspect of a particular figuration of players.
p.132 The concept of figuration draws attention to people's interdependencies
5: Human interdependencies - problems of social bonds 134-157
p.134 The concept of figuration puts the problem of human interdependencies into the very heart of sociological theory.
p.146 Planned actions in the form of government decisions may have unanticipated, unintended consequences... these unplanned consequences of planned human actions arise from their repercussions within a web woven by the actions of many people.
6: The problem of the 'inevitability' of social development 158-174
p.161 In many if not all cases, the figurations formed by interdependent people are so plastic that the figuration at any later stage of the figurational flow is in fact only one of the many possible transformations of an earlier figuration. But as a particular figuration changes into another, a very wide scatter of possible transformations narrows down to a single outcome.
Notes and Reference 175-182
p.176 What we call 'figuration' with reference to the constituent parts is identical with what we call 'structure' with reference to the composite unit. If we speak of the structure of societies and of the figuration or pattern of bonding of the individuals who form these societies, we are in fact speaking of the same thing as seen from different angles.
p.182 in sociology, as in other sciences, every later theory develops both as a continuation of earlier theories and yet as a critical departure from them.
|
