The Structure of Sociological Theory

Jonathan Turner, Anthony Giddens and Randall Collins are three of the best modern sociological theorists. One of the reasons they are so great, is due in large part to their understanding of classical and contemporary sociological theory. The Structure of Sociological Theory is one of the finest and has strong chapters on Critical Theory, Exchange Theory, Neo-Conflict Theory and Sociological Theories of Emotion. Perhaps the strongest chapter of all however is the first with his masterful synthesis of what sociological theory should be and how to construct sound theory. If every sociologist read this book, our discipline might improve by an order of magnitude.

'The Structure of Sociological Theory' is now out of print for its content is so out of date that it would rather write whole other book than update. to keep up with the current, the volume of book should be too bulky to be used on class, thou it was very concise and adaquately structured account on theoretical edifice. for instance, he took Dahrendorf as example to conflict theory. it should have some appealing point in '70s but now could u find anyone to read him? this kind of example are the major problem arising from it aging. as the title implies this book not intended to focus on individual theorist. but I read this book twice on undergraduate and graduate courses as introduction to not only theoretical schools but also theorists.

The book has an introduction examining sociological theory at a meta-level (ie; studying the structures of the theories rather than the theories themselves) and then goes on to a comprehensive overview of the schools of thought in sociology. There are too many chapters to list (32 in all) but the major sections are functional theorizing, conflict theorizing, exchange theorizing, interactionist theorizing, structural theorizing, and assessment and synthesis of sociological theory.The book would suit a beginning graduate student wanting an overview of the subject at a serious level or the curious and able undergraduate student or lay reader.I dont have the sociological background to comment on the merits of the discussions from an academic perspective except to say that they seem well written and clearly argued.Summary: Comprehensive and well written.