ABSTRACT
I have claimed that Pannenberg's anthropology is built on individualist and rationalist foundations, and that he has invoked only partial aspects o f biology and psychology in order to support this. If this is true, it might be expected that Pannenberg would experience some difficulties in accounting for the social and communal dimensions o f human life, or at least, he would have to adopt a very reductionist approach to sociology. There are a number o f positions within social theory from which Pannenberg might be criticised. From the many perspectives available in social theory, I shall use the work of Margaret Archer, because o f its methodological transparency and relevance to science, to illustrate the unsatisfactory nature of Pannenberg's use o f social science.
