Social structures, power and resistance in monist sociology: (New) materialist insights

Nick J. Fox, Pam Alldred

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Though mainstream sociological theory has been founded within dualisms such as structure/ agency, nature/culture, and mind/matter, a thread within sociology dating back to Spencer and Tarde favoured a monist ontology that cut across such dualistic categories. This thread has been reinvigorated by recent developments in social theory, including the new materialisms, posthumanism and affect theories. Here we assess what a monist or 'flat' ontology means for sociological understanding of key concepts such as structures and systems, power and resistance. We examine two monistic sociologies: Bruno Latour's 'sociology of associations' and DeLanda's ontology of assemblages. Understandings of social processes in terms of structures, systems or mechanisms are replaced with a focus upon the micropolitics of events and interactions. Power is a flux of forces or 'affects' fully immanent within events, while resistance is similarly an affective flow in events producing micropolitical effects contrary to power or control.
LanguageEnglish
Pages315-330
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Sociology
Volume54
Issue number3
Early online date11 Sep 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

social structure
ontology
sociology
event
micro-politics
system structure
sociological theory
social process
interaction

Cite this

@article{47d7b959318f4137a54c472326340794,
title = "Social structures, power and resistance in monist sociology: (New) materialist insights",
abstract = "Though mainstream sociological theory has been founded within dualisms such as structure/ agency, nature/culture, and mind/matter, a thread within sociology dating back to Spencer and Tarde favoured a monist ontology that cut across such dualistic categories. This thread has been reinvigorated by recent developments in social theory, including the new materialisms, posthumanism and affect theories. Here we assess what a monist or 'flat' ontology means for sociological understanding of key concepts such as structures and systems, power and resistance. We examine two monistic sociologies: Bruno Latour's 'sociology of associations' and DeLanda's ontology of assemblages. Understandings of social processes in terms of structures, systems or mechanisms are replaced with a focus upon the micropolitics of events and interactions. Power is a flux of forces or 'affects' fully immanent within events, while resistance is similarly an affective flow in events producing micropolitical effects contrary to power or control.",
keywords = "monism, new materialism, ontology, posthumanism, power, resistance, social structure",
author = "Fox, {Nick J.} and Pam Alldred",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1177/1440783317730615",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "315--330",
journal = "Journal of Sociology",
issn = "1440-7833",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "3",

}

Social structures, power and resistance in monist sociology : (New) materialist insights. / Fox, Nick J.; Alldred, Pam.

In: Journal of Sociology, Vol. 54, No. 3, 09.2018, p. 315-330.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Social structures, power and resistance in monist sociology

T2 - Journal of Sociology

AU - Fox, Nick J.

AU - Alldred, Pam

PY - 2018/9

Y1 - 2018/9

N2 - Though mainstream sociological theory has been founded within dualisms such as structure/ agency, nature/culture, and mind/matter, a thread within sociology dating back to Spencer and Tarde favoured a monist ontology that cut across such dualistic categories. This thread has been reinvigorated by recent developments in social theory, including the new materialisms, posthumanism and affect theories. Here we assess what a monist or 'flat' ontology means for sociological understanding of key concepts such as structures and systems, power and resistance. We examine two monistic sociologies: Bruno Latour's 'sociology of associations' and DeLanda's ontology of assemblages. Understandings of social processes in terms of structures, systems or mechanisms are replaced with a focus upon the micropolitics of events and interactions. Power is a flux of forces or 'affects' fully immanent within events, while resistance is similarly an affective flow in events producing micropolitical effects contrary to power or control.

AB - Though mainstream sociological theory has been founded within dualisms such as structure/ agency, nature/culture, and mind/matter, a thread within sociology dating back to Spencer and Tarde favoured a monist ontology that cut across such dualistic categories. This thread has been reinvigorated by recent developments in social theory, including the new materialisms, posthumanism and affect theories. Here we assess what a monist or 'flat' ontology means for sociological understanding of key concepts such as structures and systems, power and resistance. We examine two monistic sociologies: Bruno Latour's 'sociology of associations' and DeLanda's ontology of assemblages. Understandings of social processes in terms of structures, systems or mechanisms are replaced with a focus upon the micropolitics of events and interactions. Power is a flux of forces or 'affects' fully immanent within events, while resistance is similarly an affective flow in events producing micropolitical effects contrary to power or control.

KW - monism

KW - new materialism

KW - ontology

KW - posthumanism

KW - power

KW - resistance

KW - social structure

U2 - 10.1177/1440783317730615

DO - 10.1177/1440783317730615

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 315

EP - 330

JO - Journal of Sociology

JF - Journal of Sociology

SN - 1440-7833

IS - 3

ER -