Summary
Chapter I states the case for the distinctive, though interacting, functions of histories of sociological theory on the one hand, and formulations of currently utilized theory on the other. Current theoretical sociology clearly rests upon legacies from the past, but there is value in examining the intellectual requirements for a genuine history of sociological thought as more than a chronologically arranged series of summaries of doctrine. Equally, it is useful to consider how contemporary theory draws upon antecedent theory.
Chapter II reviews the character and workings of sociological theory of the middle range, especially in light of its uses and criticisms during the past decade.
Chapter III suggests a framework for functional analysis. It centers on a paradigm that codifies the assumptions, concepts, and procedures implicit (and sometimes explicit) in functional interpretations developed in sociology, social psychology, and social anthropology. These elements were “discovered,” in the sense of being drawn from the work of others and from reexaminations of my own studies of social structure, rather than invented outright.
Chapters IV and V summarize the reciprocal relations between theory and research.
- Chapter IV distinguishes the related but distinct kinds of inquiry encompassed by the term “sociological theory”: methodology, general orientations, analysis of concepts, ex post facto interpretations, empirical generalizations, and theory in the strict sense. It emphasizes both the limitations and the usefulness of general orientations, as well as the transitional nature of empirical generalizations. These, through codification, can become instances of broader general rules.
- Chapter V explores how empirical research affects the development of sociological theory. Research does not merely test preestablished hypotheses—a necessary but limited role—but also initiates and reformulates theory, playing a much more active part in sociological inquiry than is often assumed.
Empirical inquiry not only tests theory but also refocuses and clarifies it. Insofar as empirical research fructifies theory, it is evident that the theoretical sociologist who remains remote from actual investigation—learning of it only secondhand—runs the risk of becoming insulated from the very experiences most likely to lead toward new and fruitful directions. Without direct engagement, the mind is unprepared for the serendipity that often characterizes empirical work: the discovery, by a prepared mind, of findings not originally sought. Here, serendipity is understood as a fact of research practice, not as a guiding philosophy.
Max Weber was correct in affirming that one need not be Caesar in order to understand Caesar. Yet theoretical sociologists sometimes act as though it is unnecessary even to study Caesar in order to understand him. In reality, the interplay of theory and research is what produces both a deeper comprehension of specific cases and a broader expansion of general rules.
Acknowledgment is due to Barbara Bengen, who applied her editorial talents to the first two chapters; to Dr. Harriet A. Zuckerman, who criticized an early draft; and to Mrs. Mary Miles, who transformed a palimpsest into clear typescript. The preparation of these introductory chapters was also aided by a grant from the National Science Foundation.
Robert K. Merton, 1968
Author
Robert K. Merton (1910–2003) was an influential American sociologist whose work shaped modern social theory.
Born in Philadelphia, he studied at Temple University before earning his Ph.D. at Harvard under
Pitirim Sorokin. Merton became known for developing “middle-range theory,” a framework bridging
abstract grand theory and empirical research. His landmark book Social Theory and Social Structure
(1949) introduced key concepts such as manifest and latent functions, the self-fulfilling prophecy,
and reference group theory.
He elaborated on Émile Durkheim’s concept of anomie, linking it to
social structure and deviant behavior. A long-time professor at Columbia University, Merton trained
generations of sociologists and influenced fields beyond sociology, including communication and
science studies. His concept of the “Matthew Effect” highlighted unequal recognition among scholars.
Merton’s legacy endures as one of the most creative and rigorous minds in 20th-century sociology.
