Sociology 303
Sociological Theory
Fall 2002
Dr. Scott Schaffer

Second Paper Assignment - Weber and Durkheim

Due Date: To my office or via email no later than Weds October 23/2002 at 302pm. Absolutely no late papers will be accepted without a compelling and well-documented excuse provided in advance of the due date.

Criteria: This paper is to be a minimum of 5 (five) full and complete pages; there is no maximum length for the paper, so you should write until your paper is fully developed. Your paper must be typewritten, double-spaced, on 8 1/2" by 11" paper in 10- or 12-point font with 1 1/4" left and right margins and 1" top and bottom. Your paper must have a cover page, on which a creative title ("Second Paper Assignment" is simply not creative enough), your name, the topic number to which you're responding, and any other pertinent information should appear; your name should not appear anywhere else in the paper.

Your paper must be spell- and grammar-checked; papers that have copious errors will be lose two full letter grades, and may be returned for editing; if it is returned, you have up to three calendar days to make revisions, and after that, your paper will not be accepted.

You should follow all guidelines in the "How to Write a Schaffer Paper" handout. And finally, no direct quotations are permitted in this paper, and no outside sources are permitted (including Giddens or my lecture notes); any materials you use to support your argument must be paraphrased and cited following the guidelines in the paper-writing handout.

Assignment: You are to develop an argument in response to one of the two following topics. Ensure that your paper is not limited to a recitation of the writings of Weber or Durkheim or my lectures, but that you use those materials to develop an argument that clearly expresses your thoughts on the matter and clearly responds to all the issues in each topic.

Please note that each paper contains an outline within it. You should not think of the latter two questions as "one sentence" questions; rather, your response to them should be an argumentative statement supported by paraphrased evidence from the book. In any case, be sure to fully explicate your reasoning behind the claims you make and to provide all the material that went into your thought process.

The Topics:

1. Using Sewell's definition of agency as a filter, discuss both Weber and Durkheim's statements regarding agency within the modern social structure. Then, extend their arguments to discuss each author's ideal version of agency (the version they would want to see in existence), how each author would change the social order to bring about this type of agency, and what the economic order would look like with each version of agency in it. Whose version of the economic order best reflects the kind of ideal agency you would like to see in existence, and why?

2. Using Sewell's definition of structure as a filter, outline both Weber and Durkheim's arguments on the structure of current society. Then, extend their arguments to discuss the justness of the current social and economic structure, making sure to show how you develop each author's idea of justness. Whose analysis of the justness or unjustness of the current social structure (as filtered through Sewell’s concept of structure) do you find comes closest to how you think the economy should operate, and why?