ABSTRACT

What idea, what image do we have of society? What is the structure of society like? Does it have different elements, and if so how do they hang together? For a Durkheimian sociology there are two general answers to questions like these. The first is provided by sociology’s developing corpus of knowledge; this is a professional answer. The second is rooted in and provided by the society to which the sociologist belongs; this is a directly social or everyday answer. The relationship between the two answers has rarely been explicitly addressed from within a Durkheimian framework. That is, the professional answer is scientific and detached, a view which tries to distance itself from the prevailing ideas, analogies, metaphors and classifications which play an important part in sustaining a particular form of social organisation. However, the Durkheimian sociologist also recognises the difficulty and partiality of the professional answer. The scientific account must be shaped by the prevailing stock of ideas, notions of possible mechanisms, patterns and so forth. In other words, this stock of ideas constrains the imagination of the theorist. Equally, the same set of images and metaphors will to some degree influence the public and professional reception of new theories. But for Durkheimian social science to be conceivable there must be the possibility of a distinction between professional and everyday answers.