While neorealism and world-system theory both claim to be “structural” theories of international relations, they embody very different understandings of system structure and structural explanation. Neorealists conceptualize system structures in individualist terms as constraining the choices of preexisting state agents, whereas world-system theorists conceptualize system structures in structuralist terms as generating state agents themselves. These differences stem from what are, in some respects, fundamentally opposed solutions to the “agent-structure” or “micromacro” problem. This opposition, however, itself reflects a deeper failure of each theory to recognize the mutually constitutive nature of human agents and system structures—a failure which leads to deep-seated inadequacies in their respective explanations of state action. An alternative solution to the agent-structure problem, adapted from “structuration theory” in sociology, can overcome these inadequacies by avoiding both the reduction of system structures to state actors in neorealism and their reification in world-system theory. Structuration theory requires a philosophical basis in scientific realism, arguably the “new orthodoxy” in the philosophy of natural science, but as yet largely unrecognized by political scientists. The scientific realist/structuration approach generates an agenda for “structural-historical” research into the properties and dispositions of both state actors and the system structures in which they are embedded.

/pdf/the-agent-structure-problem-in-international-relations-xrm8vlqru1.pdf

The agent-structure problem in international relations theory

The ongoing retreat from class analysis can be attributed to the declining appeal of aggregate representations of class coupled with the virtual absence of any disaggregate alternatives. When local solidarities are ignored, the weakness of conventional aggregate models is easily misinterpreted as evidence of generic destructuration, and standard postmodernist formulations are accordingly difficult to resist. Although local structuration is often regarded as sociologically trivial, the available evidence suggests that such class analytic processes as closure, exploitation, and collective action emerge more clearly at the level of disaggregate occupations than conventional aggregate classes.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/231351

Can class analysis be salvaged

This paper provides a theoretical and methodological framework for a "social constructionist" analysis of the role of gay communities in the "urban renaissance." We suggest that this is important both because as a substantive area of research the role of gays in the "urban renaissance" has been neglected, and because it highlights the need to overcome the structure versus agency debate in social theory. Structuralists have tended to regard the role of cultural identity in the "urban renaissance" asepiphenomenal, while voluntarists have regarded it as indicative only of personal choices in "lifestyles." An analysis of the social construction of the gay identity is stipulated, and an argument is made that gay involvement in the "urban renaissance" constitutes part of a spatial response to a historically specific form of oppression. An enumeration of what needs to be done to more fully implement our approach is provided.

Toward an analysis of the role of gay communities in the urban renaissance

This article investigates occupational identity construction among contemporary Canadian professional visual artists. Through in-depth, semi-structured interviews I draw on the perceptions and subjective experiences of 80 Toronto visual artists to explore how individuals consciously articulate and act upon an occupational identity that they have carefully and deliberately chosen. I demonstrate how the informal nature of artistic occupational definitional parameters can render the title ‘professional artist’ an empty signifier. Given the limited means of clearly distinguishing between professional and amateur, and the lack of recognition attributed to artistic labour as ‘real’ work, I argue that professional status comes largely from drawing on a repertoire of shared myths and stereotypes to help create an artistic identity and project it to others.

Constructing an artistic identity

Reviews the history of the early development of the accountancy profession in the UK and the USA and describes the organization of professional accountancy bodies in both countries, concentrating particularly on events in the post‐formation period. Identifies the persistent struggle of UK and US accountants with the conflicting phenomena of economic self‐interest and public duty. Shows how professional accountancy in the UK and the USA evolved from internalized disputes to externalized defences of the professional mission. This evolution caused the actions of UK and US accountants to be scrutinized increasingly in public. Researched evidence of recent institutional reaction to such scrutiny is consistent with earlier behaviour associated with formation events. The economic self‐interest of accounting professionals appears continuously to have motivated their actions to protect the public interest.

The professionalization of accountancy

The Sociology of Occupations

Erving Goffman and Modern Sociology

Social Interaction and Consciousness

This paper suggests that Marxist analyses in general, and those underpinned by a rationalist philosophy of science in particular, evince great difficulty in accounting for the relationship between individuals and the social systemic constraints which influence their behaviour and consciousness. This is because of the assumption that such an account would necessarily be reductionist and empiricist. This paper argues that this is not the case and that a theorization of this relationship is a necessary correlate of a true science of the social. 1. THE INDIVIDUAL AND SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINTS A recent tendency in thought inspired by a rationalist philosophy of science has been to deny the validity of any analytic approach which either concentrates on, or accedes any freedom of will to, individual subjects. For example David andJudith Willer state: The claim that man's 'free-will' messes up prediction in social science involves both a colossal egotism which assumes that luan's will is somehow independent of his existence and an empiricist concentration on individuals which preclude the development of general knowledge. Given the assumption of empiricism, scientific knowledge can never be obtained . (My emphasis) ' The claim seems to be that to engage in the analysis of individuals and their interactions no matter how this is done precludes the possibility of a rationalistically grounded science2 based on external, supra-individual (structural) concepts of the 'social'. This is so because a 'concentration on individuals' is (according to the argument) ipso facto 'empiricist', an epistemological position which mistakes the objects of knowledge to be given in experience rather than in the rationally constructed conceptual objects of scientific theory itself. This kind of criticism is further BritishJournal of Sociology Volume30 Number 2 June s979 (<)R.K.P. 1979 ooo7 1315/79/3002-0149 $1 50/

Derek Layder

Papers

The Sociology of Occupations

Erving Goffman and Modern Sociology

Social Interaction and Consciousness

Problems in Accounting for the Individual in Marxist-Rationalist Theoretical Discourse

Understanding Social Theory@@@Modern Sociological Theory