In the article “Holy Men and Big Guns: The Cannon in Social Theory” by Joey Sprague, Sprague discussed the canonization of social theorists, and how it leaves out a lot of other important people and views. The author brings up three critiques, which are: The hierarchy of the social, problematic analytic categories, and the social role of social theory.
The hierarchy of the social is described as selective attention. This means who gets included, who does not, and what we do not choose to study. It makes it seem as though the macro level is more important than the micro level. Sprague is saying that the experiences are important. The second is problematic analytic categories which are described as logical dichotomies, and abstract individuation. Logical dichotomies are seen as the either or boxes. They are comparative, at the surface level to make work much easier. Abstract individuation means to decontextualize. People, objects, and places are all separate. People become isolated from the environment. Sprague says, “Logical dichotomies and abstract individuation create distinctions that distort the lived experiences of many people. The disciplinary division of ‘work’ and ‘family’ hides the work of caring for a family” (93). The third is, the social role of social theory, which is the chain of ideas. Once one learns something they teach that to other people. People are influenced by their experiences and their background. This means that objectivity is not possible. Sprague’s suggests that people emancipate. People need to be more engaged, and challenge what they are learning.
An example that fits into all three of these critiques is transgender people, or people who do not fit into a certain gender. People are usually born male, or female. Gender refers to the status of a person. How feminine or masculine one is. When thinking about people who are transgender and the history of the social, people usually focus on male and female, as being the two, and only two genders. Those are at the macro level, but they ignore the micro level and the people who do not fit in. When thinking about problematic analytic categories, there is definitely always a dichotomy when it comes to sex and gender. A person is either one thing or the other. However, there is no box or place for those that do not fit in one of the two choices. Most likely the people who do not fit into these boxes feel separated, like they are not a part of the world. The way Sprague would define it, is not only the physical aspects of gender but the emotional aspects of feeling separate from the world. The emotional and every day interactions is what is missing in these theories. The role of social theory, deals with how people have been raised, and the ideas that they have been taught, which leads to their acceptance of people who are different from them. People do not challenge, or come up with their own conclusions. Rather, they believe that the ideas that were taught are static. Using Sprague’s perspective, no matter what people were taught or grown up with, learning about transgender people, or people with different gendered experiences, people should come up with their own conclusions.
The hierarchy of the social is described as selective attention. This means who gets included, who does not, and what we do not choose to study. It makes it seem as though the macro level is more important than the micro level. Sprague is saying that the experiences are important. The second is problematic analytic categories which are described as logical dichotomies, and abstract individuation. Logical dichotomies are seen as the either or boxes. They are comparative, at the surface level to make work much easier. Abstract individuation means to decontextualize. People, objects, and places are all separate. People become isolated from the environment. Sprague says, “Logical dichotomies and abstract individuation create distinctions that distort the lived experiences of many people. The disciplinary division of ‘work’ and ‘family’ hides the work of caring for a family” (93). The third is, the social role of social theory, which is the chain of ideas. Once one learns something they teach that to other people. People are influenced by their experiences and their background. This means that objectivity is not possible. Sprague’s suggests that people emancipate. People need to be more engaged, and challenge what they are learning.
An example that fits into all three of these critiques is transgender people, or people who do not fit into a certain gender. People are usually born male, or female. Gender refers to the status of a person. How feminine or masculine one is. When thinking about people who are transgender and the history of the social, people usually focus on male and female, as being the two, and only two genders. Those are at the macro level, but they ignore the micro level and the people who do not fit in. When thinking about problematic analytic categories, there is definitely always a dichotomy when it comes to sex and gender. A person is either one thing or the other. However, there is no box or place for those that do not fit in one of the two choices. Most likely the people who do not fit into these boxes feel separated, like they are not a part of the world. The way Sprague would define it, is not only the physical aspects of gender but the emotional aspects of feeling separate from the world. The emotional and every day interactions is what is missing in these theories. The role of social theory, deals with how people have been raised, and the ideas that they have been taught, which leads to their acceptance of people who are different from them. People do not challenge, or come up with their own conclusions. Rather, they believe that the ideas that were taught are static. Using Sprague’s perspective, no matter what people were taught or grown up with, learning about transgender people, or people with different gendered experiences, people should come up with their own conclusions.