ABSTRACT

There is a clear paradigm shift going on in sociology. More and more, the central theoretical task of sociologists seems to consist in the specification of micro mechanisms that trace the relationship of individual action to macro phenomena. The question is: what theoretical base should be used for this task? The general answer that has emerged is: rational choice. But this answer is only satisfactory as a first approximation. Within the broad confines of what may be called ‘rational choice sociology’ there are important differences. Maybe the most important difference is how far you go in the introduction of cognitive limitations into rational choice theory. In this chapter this question will be pursued with a discussion of the central substantive issue of sociology: social order. There is no room to go into a general discussion of how social order has been treated in sociology: nor would this address the central issue. Rather, two positions within the rational choice camp will be contrasted. First, there is Coleman's argument about the relation of social structure to the requirements of social theory. Second, there is my own argument about the convergence of sociology and economics and its consequence for social theory. In the following, three crucial questions confronting any champion of a particular paradigm shift will be discussed: first, how can a shift be distinguished from a temporary fashion? second, in what way must the new paradigm be different from older paradigms? and, third, what is the direction of development of the paradigm? Given the limited space, it will be impossible to do full justice to either position; the interested reader is invited to take this exposition more as an invitation to help him or her through some of the rational choice literature.