Talk:Social structure

message: I think this view could be added to this article:
http://www.n4bz.org/gst/gst12.htm
It's about social systems and what Niclas Luhmann thought about them.
The term "modern world-system" is a valid entry for Wikipedia and if it isn't in Wikipedia, it should be.  It's very distinct from "social structure," which is someting of a catch-all term in the social sciences.  Social structure, when it is operationalized into its various subcomponents, includes basic human universals.  I can find citations if someone really wants them.  
This article should contain a redirect to "society," (which is closely related to the term "social structure" in both anthropology and sociology) and to "social system" and "world system."  The latter two terms refer more to political and economic bonds (a subset of social structure), as viewed in history (rather than in particular communities, although obviously regions, cities and states are used in world system analysis as units of analysis).  In world system analysis, cities and states are treated as historic givens (Paris exists), whereas Durkheim and others began the study of "what are the components of Paris" (social structural studies) that are enduring.  Criticisms of what's missing from traditional social structural analysis have included:  ecology and physical geography.  I'll try to find a cite for that.  Levalley (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  THE WORLD AS A SOCIAL SYSTEM 

message: It seems to me that there is a rather large difference between Social system and social structure:
* The concept of social structure has a longer history in the social sciences, going back for example to the functionalism of figures such as Herbert Spencer, the class structure analysis of Karl Marx, or the work of 19th century German sociologist Georg Simmel on social structure as abstract patterns underlying human interaction.
* The concept of social structure is related to structuralism 
On the onther hand:
* The concept of a social system is more recent related to Talcott Parsons, Eric Trist and Niklas Luhmann.  
* The concept of social systems is related to systems theory
See also:
* :Category:Social systems
* :de:Soziales System
* Sociotechnical systems theory
External links:
* The world a social system by Niklas Luhmann.
Now, because we make a diffences between structuralism and systems theory, I think we also should make a difference between Social structure and Social system . - Mdd 12:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split into [[Social system]] and [[social structure]] 

message: Most cultural anthropologists (and perhaps it should say "cultural anthropology" in the article, I just put in "anthropology" and am thinking about what to do next) are required to take a course in social structure, at the graduate level.  Sometimes it's combined with kinship as a topic, often it has its own separate course, but is heavily involved with kinship and other enduring social relations among humans, relationships, bonds and connections that transcend the individual and transcend generations.  I disagree (very much) that it is not a well-defined concept, it's as well defined as most concepts in science.  Naturally, there are always ways to improve it.  However, the two citations in the lead paragraph are not from anyone I've heard of, and there are many experts in social structure.  By the 1930's, the concept was well defined and the core concept of many important books, particularly in sociology (Robert Merton's Social Structure and Anomie -1938- is still considered fundamental in both anthropology and sociology, taking Durkheim into the next century).  
Stinchcombe's 1965 book went far to clarify the concept and is still in use and considered a major reference (it's often in the reference section of university libraries).  Blau's work in the 70s follows on Stichcombe's, by the time Blau wrote, the term had become commonplace in anthropology to refer to these kinds of relationships, which could include ethnicity, voluntary associations, peer groups, gender based relationships, prestige based structures, and occupational structures.  It is used in sociology, but a quick perusal of introductory texts in sociology vs. introductory texts in anthropology will show that cultural anthropologists consider the term essential for the beginning anthropologist to know, whereas sociologists stress it far less.  That's probably because sociology itself has taken the concept to new heights.  In the modern industrial societies so often studied by sociologists (yes, I realize they study other kinds of societies too), there are multiple overlapping kinds of social structures (always including kinship, but as sociologists documented early on:  in industrial societies, kinship weakens as a social system and other kinds of systems arise, ones that are sometimes very unexpected).  So "social structure" in anthropology is a more managable topic for the beginner, because it focuses so much on human universals (kinship for example) and not on the complex ways that modernity has invented new kinds of social structure.  
Frankly, I think all of this needs to be said (note that I have sources to cite) in the lead paragraph.  Why start out an article with saying, essentially, "there's not much reason for this article to exist as people in the fields don't know what it is?"  I will look up the two referenced authors, but I suspect that what they are saying is that, in modern times, social structure itself is in flux, and therefore, the concept has to be one that incorporates this fluctuation (which it does), not that the concept lacks definition.  It has agreed upon core definitions.  In addition to the two luminaries mentioned above, one can go to google Scholar and type in "Social Structure" and you'll see that there are hundreds of articles using the term over the past 100 years, without feeling the need to puzzle over it - it's that standard.  It's like "kinship" or "culture" - if you're even vaguely familiar with either sociology or anthropology (and probably any other social science), you know what the word means (and if you're actually studying the field, should be able to give a few citations, at least).
Lots of room for improvement here.Levalley (talk) 19:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social structure in anthropology 

message: Please see the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sociology#Society,_social_class,_social_structure_of_Foo_country_-_separate_or_same_topics?. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:30, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Society, social class, social structure of Foo country - separate or same topics? 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Sozialstruktur and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 12#Sozialstruktur until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  ~~~~User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:58, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sozialstruktur" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: — Assignment last updated by OnMyThirdLife (talk) 20:47, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Self and Society