Jones J P, Natter W, Schatzki T R (eds.) 1994 Postmodern

Contentions: Epoch, Politics, Space

.

Guilford Press, New

York

Massey D 1991 Flexible sexism. En

Šironment and Planning D:

Society and Space 9

: 31–57

Massey D 1994 Space, Place and Gender. University of

Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN

Massey D, Allen J, Sarre P (eds.) 1999 Human Geography

Today

. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK

McDowell L 1993 Space, place and gender relations: Part II:

Identity, difference, feminist geometries and geographies.
Progress in Human Geography 17

: 305–18

Olsson G 1980 Birds in Egg, 2nd edn. Pion, London
Peet R 1998 Modern Geographical Thought. Blackwell, Oxford,

UK

Pickles J (ed.) 1994 Representations in an Electronic Age:

Geography, G.I.S., and Democracy

. Guilford Press, New York

Pile S 1996 The Body and the City: Psychoanalysis, Space and

Subjecti

Šity. Routledge, London

Pile S, Thrift N 1995 Mapping the Subject: Geographies of

Cultural Transformation

. Routledge, London

Rose G 1993 Feminism in Geography: The Limits of Geographical

Knowledge

. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN

Scott A J 1988 Metropolis: From Di

Šision of Labor to Urban

Form

. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA

Soja E W 1986 Taking Los Angeles apart: Some fragments of a

critical human geography. En

Šironment and Planning D:

Society and Space 4

: 255–72

Soja E W 1989 Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of

Space in Critical Social Theory

. Verso, London

Soja E W 1996 Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other

Real-and-imagined Places

. Blackwell, Oxford, UK

Watson S, Gibson K (eds.) 1995 Postmodern Cities and Spaces.

Blackwell, Oxford, UK

E. W. Soja

Postmodernism in Sociology

Prominent fields of postmodernist research have been
work and organizations, political action, science and
technology, commodification, consumption, gender,
media, and popular culture. Classical sociological
topics like symbolic consumption have been further
explored and enriched. Sociological postmodernism
has also pioneered domains like computers and the
Internet. It is to be expected that in the future
postmodernist research will evolve in the direction of
concrete field studies, with an emphasis on the cultural
forms induced by computers and the Internet.

In sociology, postmodernism designates (a) a cluster

of theoretical and meta-theoretical approaches; (b) an
analysis of postmodernity, understood as encom-
passing the social and cultural features of late capi-
talism; (c) an extension of sociological inquiry to new
domains; and (d) new forms of sociological expression.
Sociological postmodernism is thus a form of so-
ciological analysis, a kind of sociological sensibility,
and a sociologists’ social and intellectual condition at
the same time. Its varieties share a series of theoretical

and methodological premises, but differ in their
conclusions and research programs. Core common
elements are: (a) avoiding recourse to a set of uni-
versally valid assumptions as theoretical and methodo-
logical foundations, together with (b) the key role
ascribed to notions like subject, identity, text, and
symbol in the analysis of society.

1.

Origins of Postmodernism

The term ‘postmodernism’ has been used in Latin-
American literary criticism since the 1930s, and in
Anglo-American debates since the 1940s, in order to
designate new forms of expression in their relationship
with the aesthetic of modernism. In history, the term
was used by the British historian Arnold Toynbee in A
Study of History

in 1947 and designated the latest

phase of Western civilization. In sociology, it was
introduced by Amitai Etzioni’s book The Acti

Še

Society

in 1968. Starting with the early 1970s, the term

appeared more and more frequently in sociological
texts in France, North America, and the UK. At that
time, it was already common stock in literary theory
and criticism. An essay written by the French phil-
osopher Jean-Franc

: ois Lyotard, The Postmodern Con-

dition

: A Report on Knowledge (1979) played a seminal

role in making this term widely known and used in the
social sciences. Therefore, postmodernism was par-
tially a conceptual import; its diffusion in the 1970s
was part of a wider innovative movement in the
discipline, marked, among others, by the rise of social
constructivism and feminism. At the same time, it
continued and reformulated a series of topics already
present in sociology.

The intellectual roots of sociological postmodern-

ism can be identified in the works of some key
nineteenth and early twentieth century philosophers,
sociologists, and linguists. Karl Marx’s critique of
capitalism, Georg Simmel’s analysis of modernization
processes, Friedrich Nietzsche’s critique of epistem-
ology, and Ferdinand de Saussure’s theory of language
play here a prominent role. The French structural-
ist movement (Claude Le

! vi-Strauss’s anthropology,

Roland Barthes’s semiotic theory, Jacques Lacan’s
psychoanalysis), and the poststructuralist one (Michel
Foucault, Jacques Derrida), Ludwig Wittgenstein’s
later works, and Clifford Geertz’s anthropology have
also played a considerable role. Among other in-
fluences there are the Frankfurt School (Walter
Benjamin, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and
Herbert Marcuse), symbolic interactionism, ethno-
methodology, and phenomenological sociology.

2.

The Tenets of Postmodernism

There are two main tenets, mirroring the distinction
between postmodernism and post-modernity: while
the latter designates the social and cultural features of

11865

Postmodernism in Sociology

late capitalism, distinguishing them from earlier
phases (modernity), the former designates a theoretical
and methodological program, as distinct from earlier
(modernist) ones.

2.1

The Analysis of Postmodernity

The analysis of postmodernity developed at the
beginning of the 1970s, continuing a preoccupation
already found in the works of Georg Simmel,
Thorstein Veblen, and the Frankfurt School. Post-
modernity is a late phase in the evolution of the
capitalist system, seen either as a continuation and
intensification of modernity, or as a substantially new
stage. It is characterized by the transition from
manufacture to a decentralized services economy;
science and complex technological systems play a
key role here. Decentralization, together with the per-
vasiveness of expert and technological systems in all
domains of everyday life lead to a fragmentation and
diversification of social identities. The electronic media
(television, computers, video) are prominent in the
constitution and presentation of social reality; visual
and linguistic symbols become pervasive, while popu-
lar cultural forms diversify and expand. Society is
therefore fragmented and heterogeneous; social order
is always local and contextual, and works as an
assemblage of symbolic codes. Production and con-
sumption, social stratification, as well as personal and
collective identities become dependent on such codes.
They are understood as a support, a medium for, and
an outcome of social action. This notion becomes a
general explanatory paradigm: every domain of so-
cietal organization can be seen as a symbolic system
and analyzed accordingly.

Consequently, sociology (an outcome of modernity

itself) should take fragmentation, decentralization,
relativization, and the mediated character of social
reality into account; it should adapt its own tenets,
claims, as well as its own modes of analysis and
representation to these changes. Starting from these
premises, Zygmunt Bauman (1992) has argued that
notions like sociality, habitat, self-constitution, and
body are better suited for the analysis of contemporary
social processes than the traditional concepts of
society and order.

2.2

The Critique of Modernist Sociology

During the 1980s, a second theme made its way from
philosophy and literary theory into sociological
debates. It was a critique of the status of sociological
theory as a modernist product, and it drafted a new
methodological program. This debate raised a series of
questions about the validity claims of scientific
theories, the nature of scientific truth, and the status of
the knowing subject, arguing that: (a) all knowledge is
contextual and local; (b) the validity claims of any

scientific theory are not to be found in some abstract,
universal criteria, but are rather the results of either
negotiated consensus or power struggles; and (c) as a
consequence, the knowing subject does not dispose of
universal criteria to ascertain the validity and truth of
his or her knowledge. The subject should not be seen
as autonomous with respect to an objective, given
world, but rather as the product of social circum-
stances. Since knowledge has a contextual and local
character, it follows that scientific theories are re-
interpreted according to local conditions: they are
open-ended and cannot be controlled by their authors.
Scientific theories are not determined by external
validity and truth criteria; they work as systems of
symbols enabling certain courses of social action and
promoting a certain worldview. On these grounds,
there should be a structural similarity between texts
and social order: both are locally determined,
network-like, open-ended systems of symbols requir-
ing certain kinds of action from the actors embedded
in them.

Notions like text and performance should occupy a

prominent place in the analysis of social phenomena.
Sociology should focus on investigating and describing
how symbol systems work in particular social contexts,
instead of producing all-encompassing theories. This
claim, together with the one that the knowing subject
is the product of social circumstances, have sometimes
been described in a more radical form as ‘the end of
sociological theory’ and the ‘death of the author,’
respectively. A corollary of these arguments is that
sociological theories should acknowledge the frag-
mentation and diversity inherent in the local character
of knowledge; they should explore their consequences
for the world we live in, and should experiment with
new modes of representation—like poetry, or dia-
logical forms. To some extent, these epistemological
claims overlap with those of the first strand of
postmodernist sociology. However, we encounter an
important difference: while the first strand derives the
fragmentation, relativization, and diversification of
knowledge from social changes, the second one takes
them as stemming out of a number of epistemological,
universally valid first principles.

At the end of the 1980s and in the early 1990s, such

meta-theoretical topics were intensely debated in
sociology and, for a short time, even eclipsed the first
strand of postmodernism. However, the acceleration
of globalization processes brought social analysis to
the forefront again.

3.

The Methodology of Postmodernist Sociology

One important methodological aspect is the anti-
positivist and antiverificationist stance: there is no
totalizing explanatory model and no universally
valid verification procedure. Postmodernist sociology
stresses the role of qualitative methods in the analysis
of contemporary social phenomena, as a consequence

11866

Postmodernism in Sociology

of the prominence of visual and linguistic symbols.
While some authors (Richardson 1997) emphasize
interpretation and subjectivity, others (Lemert 1997)
argue that methodology must preserve objectivity and
logical consistency. There has been an increased
sociological interest for discourse analysis, understood
as a cluster of techniques for grasping the emergence,
functioning, and context-boundedness of symbolic
codes. Ethnographic methods, earlier reserved for the
study of ‘exotic’ societies or of marginal social
phenomena, also play an important role. This has
increased the interest for texts and writing processes as
sources of conceptual enrichment in sociology. Poetry,
drama, or dialog are promoted as legitimate comple-
ments to the established, academic expository modes.
Hybrid forms of sociological expression have ap-
peared too—for example, in works combining aca-
demically written texts, poetry, and artwork (Haraway
1997).

4.

Fields of Postmodernist Research

Postmodernist analyses have been prominent in
domains like work and organizations, political action,
science and technology, commodification and con-
sumption, gender, media, and popular culture. George
Ritzer (1993), for example, has examined the new
forms of work which emerge in the knowledge-based,
global economy: they are characterized by fragmen-
tation, local specialization, flexibility, and mobility,
on the one hand, and by global dispersion and
typification, on the other. Under these circumstances,
the temporal and spatial conditions of work change
substantially: while the lifespan of products shortens,
they need to be replaced faster, and worktime expands.
Tensions arise between requirements for flexibility and
mobility, on the one hand, and typification, on the
other. New directions in commodification and con-
sumption complete this picture. Commodification is
understood as the unrelentless expansion of market
exchange, which reshapes social relationships accord-
ing to its own logic; the pendant of this process is the
increased social significance of the act of consumption.
Jean Baudrillard (1972), for example, has argued that
symbolic consumption becomes one of the main social
mechanisms through which individual and collective
identities, as well as social relationships are defined
and reproduced.

In political sociology, the analysis has focused on

political discourses and symbolisms, on the spectacu-
lar form taken by political events, and on the role of
television as a medium for political action. Another
direction has been to examine the strains put on
democracy by the media-induced forms of political
action, and by the globalized economy. Authors like
Chantal Mouffe (1992) have asked whether the new
economic and political conditions do not require
devising new forms of democratic participation and of
political action.

With knowledge lying at the core of the postmodern

society, science has been a domain of sustained
investigation. The focus has been on the changes
brought about by the new information and biomedical
technologies in social life, as well as on the role and
effects of complex technological systems. Bruno
Latour (1991) and Donna Haraway (1997), among
others, have argued that such systems are so pervasive
and deep-reaching, and that social life is dependent on
them to such an extent that new forms of social
symbiosis have emerged; these are described with the
help of notions like the cyborg society, hybrids, or
networks of human and nonhuman actors. These
authors have called for a revision of the conceptual
apparatus of sociology on the grounds of the
relationships between human actors and technical
systems.

A further domain of investigation, situated at the

crossroads between feminist and postmodernist so-
ciology, has been that of gender and sexuality. Post-
modern diversification brings forth a fragmentation
and multiplicity of gender and sexual identities. The
distinctions between genders become blurred; some
forms of sexual identity formerly considered marginal
gain a new significance, and new sexual identities
emerge (e.g., transsexuality). Owing to the local and
contextual character of knowledge, the gender
specificity of knowledge and experience has to be
taken into account. Several authors (e.g., Smith 1990)
have explored the ways and the implications of gender-
specific knowledge in the workplace, the field of
politics, popular culture, and the public sphere.

One of the key domains in which the impact of

postmodernist sociology has been felt is that of the
electronic media and communication. Since the social
changes brought about by computers and television
have been considerable, questions arise about new,
media-induced forms of social life and organization.
According to Jean Baudrillard, among others, large
portions of the social world are now media generated,
and whole series of political and social events have a
media-supported existence: they exist as simulacra, as
symbolic codes which can be reproduced endlessly,
without making recourse to an original. Other
domains of investigation have been computers in the
workplace, or the media-induced forms of social life,
like those arising in and around the Internet (Turkle
1995). Finally, postmodernist sociology has also con-
siderably influenced the subfields of cultural and urban
studies, reinvigorating a research tradition which goes
back at least to the Chicago School of sociology.

5.

The State of Postmodernist Research

Postmodernist sociology has been around for approx-
imately three decades; while controversial and con-
tested for some of its more radical theoretical stances,
many postmodernist ideas have made inroads into
mainstream sociology. At the same time, it has

11867

Postmodernism in Sociology

continued and enriched a series of themes already
present in classical sociology—like the sociology of
consumption, or the study of popular cultures. It has
also pioneered some new domains of research—the
study of Internet cultures, of the media, or (together
with ethnomethodology) that of the impact of com-
puters. Together with feminist sociology, it has had a
considerable influence on the sociology of gender and
sexuality. Its empirical, domain-oriented impact has
been more significant than that of its pure theoretical
tenets.

6.

New Research Directions

The cultural forms induced by the electronic media
(e.g., the culture of software programmers, of Internet
users) have not been studied in depth until now. The
changes in consumption patterns and market rela-
tionships brought about by the Internet, the rapid rise
of popular electronic exchanges, the Internet’s role in
the globalization processes are topics which await
deeper exploration too. It is to be expected that
postmodernist sociology will evolve more and more in
the direction of empirical, concrete field studies,
focusing on these phenomena.

See also

: Culture; Consumption, Sociology of;

Cultural Relativism, Anthropology of; Feminist Epis-
temology; Feminist Theory: Postmodern; Globali-
zation, Anthropology of; Identity: Social; Modernity;
Political Discourse; Postmodern Urbanism; Post-
modernism in Geography; Postmodernism: Method-
ology;

Postmodernism:

Philosophical

Aspects;

Relativism: Philosophical Aspects; Sociology, Epis-
temology of; Structuralism, Theories of

Bibliography

Baudrillard J 1972 Pour Une Critique de l’E

n conomie Politique du

Signe.

[For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign].

Gallimard, Paris

Bauman Z 1992 Intimations of Postmodernity. Routledge,

London

Etzioni A 1968 The Acti

Še Society: A Theory of Societal and

Political Processes

. Collier-Macmillan, London

Haraway D 1997 Modest Witness

! Second Millenium:

FemaleMan

2 Meets OncoMouse4; Feminism and Techno-

science

. Routledge, New York

Lash S (ed.) 1991 Poststructuralist and Postmodernist Sociology.

Elgar, Aldershot, UK

Latour B 1991 Nous n’A

Šons Jamais EnteT Modernes. [We HaŠe

Ne

Šer Been Modern]. La De!couverte, Paris

Lemert C 1997 Postmodernism Is Not What You Think.

Blackwell, Cambridge, MA

Lyotard J F 1979 La Condition Postmoderne: Rapport sur le

Sa

Šoir. [The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge].

Editions de Minuit, Paris

Mouffe C 1992 The Return of the Political. Verso, London
Richardson L 1997 Fields of Play. Rutgers University Press,

New Brunswick, NJ

Ritzer G 1993 The McDonaldization of Society: An In

Šestigation

into the Changing Character of Contemporary Social Life

. Pine

Forge Press, Newbury Park, CA

Smith D E 1990 Texts, Facts, and Feminity. Exploring the

Relations of Ruling

. Routledge, London

Toynbee A 1947 A Study of History. Oxford University Press,

London

Turkle S 1995 Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the

Internet

. Simon and Schuster, New York

A. Preda

Postmodernism: Methodology

If methodology is defined as referring to the foun-
dations of knowledge, as how we perceive and under-
stand reality, as well as how we study it, then there is
not only a single implicit postmodern methodology.
There are several. But all challenge the methodological
assumptions associated with rigorous, modern social
science inquiry, be it qualitative or quantitative
(Dickens and Fontana 1994). Indeed, there are serious
philosophical differences between postmodernism and
the enlightenment norms of traditional science. Some
postmodernists are uninterested in generalization,
definitive explanation, replication, validity, reliability,
etc. Neither prediction nor theory building are a major
concern. They look to deconstruction as method.
Deconstruction tears a text apart, revealing its con-
tradictions and assumptions. Other postmodernists
criticize modern methodology and seek to revise it, to
build upon it. They look for alternatives to what they
call the old, past, closed conventional social science
methods inherited from the natural sciences. But they
do so without entirely rejecting reason, consistency
and coherence of argument. Although they abandon
foundations, they retain what they call preferences.

Many postmodernists see the need for new stan-

dards for evaluating knowledge. Their criteria are
likely to be subjective in nature, including, for ex-
ample, flexibility, sensitivity, and interactivity. They
look for beauty, strength, or force in a text. Some
value elegance of expression and style, and seduc-
tiveness of content while others say that such criteria
are community specific and so cannot be enumerated.
Still other postmodernists willingly employ more
direct valuations, such as negation of oppression,
exploitation, and domination, or the affirmation of
liberation, freedom, insubordination, and resistance
as key standards (Rosenau 1992).

1.

A Postmodern Methodological Focus

Postmodern methodology focuses on the margins and
postmodern social scientists highlight the unique
and the unusual. They concentrate on the enigmatic

11868

Postmodernism in Sociology

Copyright

# 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences

ISBN: 0-08-043076-7