Sociological imagination has been a subject of debate for many scholars. C. Wright Mills coined this concept in 1959 in a bid to offer insight into various aspects of sociology. Over the years, sociologists have differed in their understanding of this concept with several definitions of social imagination emerging. According to Mills, sociological imagination is an outlook of the society we live in (Haralambos, et al. 2013, p.32). The concept involves a deep understanding of the fact that an individual’s biography is part of their historical process. Furthermore, it involves imaginatively asking and answering an array of sociological questions.
For Wright Mills, the failure of a sociological thought rests upon imagination which is not only limited to professors of sociology but an exercise that ought to be attempted by all people. Sociologists today agree that Wright Mills defined sociological imagination as being aware of the connection between personal experience and the entire society. Furthermore, sociologists use this concept to realize patterns of behavior of different individuals (Giddens 2013, p.23). This paper intends to discuss the rationale behind C. Wright Mills definition of sociological imagination. The analysis will be done by exploring the foundation and the principles used to develop this concept. Also, the essay will attempt to relate whether this definition is applicable in today’s day and age.
The Rationale Behind Sociological Imagination
As per Mills, sociological research has become heavily guided by administrative requirements rather than intellectual concern. As a matter of fact, sociological research has become important in making administrative decisions. However, in order to fulfill the promise of sociology, we ought to focus on substantial problems and connect them to historical and structural requirements of the sociocultural system. Wright Mills felt that social sciences are supposed to bring reason to bear on human affairs. As such, bureaucratization should be a reason behind sociological research (Haralambos, et al. 2013, p.32).
In order to fulfill the promise of substantive social science, humans need to focus on substantive and relevant problems. In a bid to relate to these difficulties, we need to evaluate the different aspects of the sociocultural system. This system has features which contain meanings for individuals. As such, the sociocultural system has the ability to affect values, character and people’s behavior (Lloyd, 2005). The social science brings reason to bear and handle human affairs. This role also requires us to stop enhancing the bureaucratization caused by reason and discourse. Thus by addressing ourselves to the underlying issues and troubles through formulating them as problems brought about by social science, we develop the ability to enhance the relevance of democratic human affairs in the society (Giddens 2013, p.26).
Mills explanation of social imagination was basically a critique of the postmodern social theory presented by Michel Foucault. He emphasizes that individuals should regain control of their decisions by shunning any forms of bureaucratic power through reasoning and using the knowledge they possess on social structures. This was a direct contrast to Michel Foucault notion that knowledge cannot influence social decisions. He believed that power heavily influenced decisions and that it was not only in the hand of the elite but also the rest of the society. However, scholars have agreed that Foucault’s approach to power has paralyzing effects to the society (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p.11).
Mills sets and explains how social scientists should do their work. He does this by conveying a sense of what creates and builds a successful intellectual. Through social imagination, he develops the guidelines which if followed, would equip a person with intellectual craftsmanship. First, a good scholar should not separate work from life as both of these aspects are part of a crucial building block of unity. Secondly, a good intellectual must adopt the culture of keeping files which act as a compendium of not only personal but profession intellectual experiences (Abercrombie and Ward 2000, p.33). A good intellectual can also come across a truly bad book which appears to be intellectually stimulating causing him or her to take it as a good book. One also needs to have an attitude of playfulness when dealing with phrases, words and even ideas.
The adoption of this attitude should also be combined with a fierce drive that helps a person make sense out of this inconsistent world. This imagination is also stimulated and enhanced by the assumption of the willingness to see and approach the world from the perspective of other people. A person should not be afraid during the preliminary stage of speculation. In fact, they should think in terms of their different imaginative extremes. Finally, a person should not hesitate to express their ideas by using a language that is simple and direct (Fulcher and Scott 2007, p.10). This is because an imagination which is enclosed in a deadening language will result in a deadened imagination.
According to C. Wright Mills, there exist five social problems affecting the American society. These include alienation, threats to democracy, moral insensibility, threats to human freedom and the clash between bureaucratic rationality and human reason. As per Mills, alienation deeps coins with the modern society idea of work (Doane 2003). It is not only a result of capitalism but also because of today’s division of labor. According to him, the contemporary society lacks faith in the leadership and thus quite apathetic. This aspect is a spiritual condition which is the root of most of the problems in the society. As a matter of fact, this condition gives rise to Moral insensibility (Elliott 2008, p.19). He further relates the moral insensibility directly to the rationalization process by arguing that barbaric and cruel human actions are a result of guidance from others rather than the human conscious. As such, an individual’s action is not inhumane due to the degree of its cruelty but due to the impersonal aspect and the fact that it is performed without emotions.
Mills had a firm belief that the political indifference, alienation, and fixation on economic and political power contributed immensely to the threat on democracy. Furthermore, he was concerned that this aspect will lead to the menace of both human freedom and reason. He argued that some of the trends that threaten these fundamental human values are coextensive the normal trends of the modern society. These trends include giving a small portion of the elite a lot of power and authority and the enlargement of massive bureaucratic organizations (Abercrombie and Ward 2000, p.32). For any individual, these companies are not only alienating but also destructive to the concept of autonomy as they cut off people from conscious control of their behavior and ultimately emotions. Individuals are thus forced to act according to prescribed roles and rules of the firm hence Mills argues that this concept is termed as rationality without reason and is the ultimate destroyer of freedom. He cautions that a society run by bureaucratic organizations lack intelligence and goodwill that results to modern day tyrants who manipulate and deny their subjects opportunities (Elliott 2008, p.18). This approach was in contrast to Talcott Parson’s argument that societal organizations help in solving problems. Mills ridiculed this concept as he saw it as one that legitimized the social status quo. Furthermore, Mills argued that Parson’s social system theory gave power to the small group of elite leading to power conflict.
Is Wright Mills’ Sociological Imagination Rationale still valid?
Mills take on sociological imagination is valid in today’s lives. The most outstanding example of sociological imagination pertains to unemployment. Jobless individuals often feel depleted and discouraged and are likely to blame themselves for this problem. However, according to Wright Mills, an individual’s problem bears a connection to the history of the society. As such, individuals ought to stop focusing on themselves alone and include the wider society in solving the problem (Bilton T et al. 2002). This approach is still applicable as in most instances, thousands of people face the same struggles; a sign that these struggles are rooted in the society as a whole. Given his broad pair of lenses, Mills argument that all people should work together in solving a societal problem is still valid today.
When considering the aspect of social media today, it suffices that Mills sociological imagination is still valid. Although most people might view social media as a 21st-century phenomenon, it is a result of human history as it must have taken root somewhere. Looking at this concept in wider lenses, everything experienced today has a connection to some prior period of our lives (Giddens 2006, p.12). Taking Mills approach into consideration, social media evolved from something else and did not just land into laps of millennials. Furthermore, what people post on social media is not only connected to personal experience but also to the society. Evidently, Mills believes that individual experiences go hand in hand with current societal aspects is still valid today.
Nowadays, marriages also possess the aspect of sociological influence. People not only marry due to individual’s decision but also due to societal guidelines. Marriage is not strictly based on fairy tale love but also the norms that the society considers right. As such, it is not a singular experience but a combination of individual wants and those of the society (Oakley 2005, p.20). This concept goes hand in hand with Wright Mills sociological imagination.
Social ills such as murder, drug abuse, robbery, and violence also relate to sociological imagination. It does not matter if we view it on television or experience it on real life, deviance is rampant in today’s society. Gangs make cruel decisions all over the world. Looking at this situation in a wider context, it suffices that some gang members became criminals due to the effects of the society on their lives. These effects could range from abuse by parents to influence by peers. As such, deviance could be due to historical issues or current societal influences; a concept that C. Wright Mills developed (Payne 2006, p.20). It is vital that sociological imagination doesn’t excuse someone’s position in life. Individuals ought to account for their choices and actions. However, the concept of sociological imagination explains that life is not always a solitary situation because individuals’ choices are rarely untouched by the variable in the society (Abbot, Wallice, Tyler 2005, p.13).
Unemployment, education, marriage and other aspects of today’s life are not singular situations as they affect thousands if not millions of people all over the world. As per Mills, these situations are not only connected to the society today but also from the history of the society (Pierson, 2009). Therefore, Mills rationale that every situation evolved from a past way of living is still valid today.
Conclusion
Scientists today agree with Mills’ explanation of sociological imagination. Social problems emanate from the history of the society. As such, it is vital to identify the roots of the societal structure in order to achieve any form of individual success. Problems such as political inefficiencies, discrimination and exploitation cannot be solved by individuals. Thus, it is crucial to use sociological imagination in order to change a personal situation and ultimately solve some of the most scathing societal problems. Mills argued that sociological research should show us the problems affecting the humanity (Abbot, Wallice, Tyler 2005, p.13). He further argued that the primary task of this research should be to transform personal problems to public issues in order to find the solutions.
Seemingly, sociological imagination helps us to differentiate between personal and public issues. Therefore, it is important for scientists to consider the entire society in their research rather than specializing in only one area of social science. This step will go a long way in demonstrating the causes of some of the most popular sociological problems and thus enable people to understand how public history links to their biography (De Maio 2013). Furthermore, this approach will empower individuals to connect their personal unease to the public issues; this factor will go a long way in facilitating the much needed social change. It is also important to note that the concept of sociological imagination should be an avenue to achieve success rather than an excuse for individual failure. It is therefore important for individuals to integrate sociological imagination in solving personal problems.
References
Abbot, P , Wallice, C, Tyler, M. (2005) An Introduction to Sociology: Feminist Perspectives. London. Routledge
Abercrombie, N and Ward, A. (2000) Contemporary British Society. Cambridge: Polity.
Abercrombie, N and Ward, A. (2000) The Contemporary British Society Reader. Malden: MA Polity Press.
Bilton, T et al. (2002) Introductory Sociology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
De Maio, F. (2013). Regression Analysis and the Sociological Imagination. Teaching Statistics, 36(2), pp.52-57.
Doane, R. (2003). RALPH ELLISON'S SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION. The Sociological Quarterly, 45(1), pp.161-184.
Elliott, A. (2008) Contemporary Social Theory: An Introduction. London: Routledge.
Fulcher, J " Scott, J. (2007) Sociology 4th Edition Maidenhead: Oxford University Press.
Giddens, A. (2013) Sociology. 7th Edition. Cambridge: Polity
Giddens, (Ed) (2006) Sociology; Introductory Readings. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Haralambos, M et al. (2013) Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. 8th Edition. Collins.
Lloyd, M. (2005). An Introduction to Contemporary Political Theory. Contemporary Political Theory, 4(3), pp.356-359.
Oakley , A (2005) The Ann Oakley Reader: Gender, Women and Social Science. Bristol: The Policy Press.
Payne, G (Ed) 2006) Social Divisions. London. Palgrave : Macmillan.
Pierson, J. (2009) Tackling Social Exclusion. London: Routledge.
