A comparison of the classical and contemporary sociological views with reference to social change and consumer behavior (information from perplexity.ai)
My question 1: "What are the differences of ideas and thinking between classical sociology and contemporary sociology?"
The reply: "The differences between classical sociology and contemporary sociology lie primarily in their ideas, theoretical focus, methodologies, and the social contexts they address.
Classical Sociology
Classical sociology, developed mainly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, is framed by foundational thinkers such as Karl Marx, Max Weber, and Emile Durkheim. Its core concern was to understand the transition from traditional to modern societies and the consequences of this transformation on social structures and individual behavior12
Focus on Social Structures and Modernity: Classical sociologists analyzed how social institutions, class relations, and economic systems shaped society. Marx emphasized historical materialism and class conflict as driving forces of social change. Weber highlighted the role of ideas and culture (e.g., Protestant ethic) in shaping capitalism. Durkheim focused on social cohesion and the evolution from mechanical to organic solidarity through division of labor1.
General Principles and Laws: Classical theory sought to establish universal principles explaining social phenomena, often using simplified models. For example, Durkheim’s theory of social solidarity aimed to explain social order broadly across societies13.
Historical Context: The classical sociological perspective emerged during rapid industrialization, urbanization, and nation-state formation, reflecting the challenges of modernity such as alienation, social integration, and rationalization12
Emphasis on Macro-Level Analysis: Classical sociology largely focused on large-scale social structures and processes, such as capitalism, religion, and social order12
Contemporary Sociology
Contemporary sociology, developing mainly after World War II to the present, builds on classical foundations but adapts to new social realities, incorporating more diverse topics, theories, and methodologies45.
Broader and More Diverse Topics: Contemporary sociology studies a wide range of issues including family dynamics, identity, social movements, globalization, poverty, violence, and cultural processes. It reflects the complexity of modern societies and global interconnections4.
Theoretical Pluralism and Multidisciplinarity: Contemporary sociological theory is more diverse, integrating multiple perspectives such as symbolic interactionism, structuration theory (Anthony Giddens), world-systems theory (Immanuel Wallerstein), critical theory, phenomenology, and postmodern approaches. It often combines micro-level (individual and interaction) and macro-level (structures and systems) analyses45.
Contextual and Dynamic Understanding: Contemporary sociology emphasizes the complexity, context, and fluidity of social phenomena, recognizing that social realities are shaped by multiple interacting factors and are constantly evolving. Theories are open to revision and reflect current socio-political conditions43.
Focus on Agency and Structure: Unlike classical sociology’s emphasis on structures, contemporary sociology often explores the interplay between individual agency and social structures, as seen in Giddens’ theory of structuration, which mediates between micro and macro perspectives4.
Responsive to Socio-Political Changes: Contemporary sociology is closely linked to socio-political movements and addresses issues of power, inequality, identity politics, and globalization in ways classical sociology did not fully engage with4.
Summary Table of Differences
|
Aspect |
Classical
Sociology |
Contemporary
Sociology |
|
Historical
Context |
Industrialization,
rise of nation-states, modernity |
Post-WWII,
globalization, multiculturalism |
|
Key
Thinkers |
Marx,
Weber, Durkheim |
Giddens,
Wallerstein, Bourdieu, Habermas, Goffman |
|
Focus |
Transition
from traditional to modern societies; social structures and institutions |
Diverse
topics including identity, social movements, globalization |
|
Theoretical
Approach |
Universal
principles, macro-level analysis |
Theoretical
pluralism; micro and macro; dynamic and contextual |
|
Methodology |
Empirical
research focused on social facts and laws |
Mixed
methods; interpretive, critical, and structural approaches |
|
View of
Society |
Emphasis
on social order, cohesion, conflict |
Emphasis
on complexity, agency-structure interaction, power dynamics |
|
Adaptability |
More
fixed, foundational theories |
Evolving,
multidisciplinary, responsive to contemporary issues |
My question 2: "How do classical and contemporary sociology differ in their view of societal change?"
The reply: "Classical and contemporary sociology differ significantly in their views on societal change, reflecting their distinct historical contexts, theoretical frameworks, and emphases.
Classical Sociology’s View of Societal Change
Deterministic and Structural Focus: Classical sociologists like Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim viewed societal change largely as a result of structural forces and broad social dynamics. Marx emphasized economic and class conflict as the primary engine driving historical change, seeing society evolving through stages defined by modes of production and class struggle. Durkheim focused on changes in social cohesion and solidarity, such as the shift from mechanical to organic solidarity, as societies modernized.
Linear and Evolutionary Perspective: Classical theory often portrayed societal change as a relatively linear, evolutionary process moving from traditional to modern forms of social organization. This progression was seen as somewhat inevitable and governed by overarching social laws or dynamics.
Macro-Level Emphasis: Societal change was understood mainly at the macro level, focusing on large-scale transformations in social institutions, economic systems, and social orders rather than individual actions or micro-level processes.
Contemporary Sociology’s View of Societal Change
Complex, Non-Linear, and Multi-Dimensional: Contemporary sociology views societal change as more complex, contingent, and multidimensional. Change is not seen as inevitable or linear but as shaped by multiple interacting factors including culture, identity, politics, globalization, and technology.
Agency and Structure Interaction: Contemporary theorists emphasize the interplay between individual agency and social structures in producing change. For example, Anthony Giddens’ structuration theory highlights how social practices are both constrained and enabled by structures, and how individuals can actively transform these structures.
Focus on Diversity and Multiple Modernities: Rather than a single path of modernization, contemporary sociology recognizes multiple modernities and diverse trajectories of social change across different societies and groups, reflecting varied cultural, political, and economic contexts.
Attention to Power, Inequality, and Resistance: Contemporary perspectives often highlight how societal change involves struggles over power and resources, including social movements, identity politics, and resistance to dominant structures, which classical sociology addressed less explicitly.
Global and Transnational Dimensions: Contemporary sociology incorporates the effects of globalization and transnational processes, viewing societal change as influenced by global flows of capital, information, and people, which complicates traditional nation-centered models of change.
Summary of Differences in Views on Societal Change
|
Aspect |
Classical
Sociology |
Contemporary
Sociology |
|
Nature
of Change |
Linear,
evolutionary, structural |
Complex,
non-linear, contingent |
|
Drivers
of Change |
Economic
class conflict, social cohesion, institutions |
Interaction
of agency and structure, culture, politics, globalization |
|
Level of
Analysis |
Macro-level
social structures and institutions |
Micro
and macro interplay; individual and collective agency |
|
Pathways
of Change |
Universal
stages of development (e.g., traditional to modern) |
Multiple
modernities; diverse social trajectories |
|
Role of
Power and Resistance |
Less
explicit focus on power struggles and resistance |
Central
focus on power dynamics, inequality, social movements |
|
Global
Context |
Focus on
nation-state and industrial society |
Emphasis
on globalization and transnational influences |
In summary, classical sociology views societal change as a largely structural, linear process driven by economic and social forces shaping modernity, while contemporary sociology approaches change as a complex, dynamic, and multi-faceted process involving agency, power struggles, and global interconnections.
My question 3: "How does social change as perceived from the contemporary sociological lens over the past 10 years in Hong Kong affect consumer behaviour of gen y and z?"
The reply: "Over the past decade, contemporary sociological perspectives on social change in Hong Kong highlight the profound political, social, and demographic transformations that have significantly influenced the consumer behavior of Generation Y and Z.
Context of Social Change in Hong Kong (Past 10 Years)
Political Repression and Civil Society Crackdown: Since the imposition of the National Security Law in 2020 and intensified political crackdowns, Hong Kong has experienced a sharp decline in freedoms, civil society activism, and political dissent. Key pro-democracy figures have been arrested or exiled, independent media outlets shuttered, and public protests largely suppressed125.
Brain Drain and Population Shift: These political pressures, combined with the COVID-19 pandemic, have triggered a notable exodus of young professionals and skilled workers, shrinking the labor force and domestic consumer base3.
Cultural and Identity Reconstitution: The government’s efforts to reshape Hong Kong’s political identity and integrate it more closely with Mainland China have created tensions around local culture, identity, and autonomy, especially among younger generations46.
Effects on Consumer Behavior of Gen Y and Z
Heightened Political and Social Awareness: Gen Y and Z consumers have grown up amid political unrest and social uncertainty, fostering a more cautious, value-driven, and politically conscious consumption pattern. They tend to support brands and products that align with their social values or express identity and resistance subtly.
Shift Toward Localism and Identity-Based Consumption: Younger consumers increasingly favor local brands and products that reflect Hong Kong’s unique identity as a form of cultural preservation and subtle political expression, reacting against perceived mainland influence46.
Digital and Social Media Influence: With traditional media constrained, Gen Y and Z rely heavily on digital platforms and social media for information and community, shaping their consumption through peer influence, trends, and online activism.
Economic Uncertainty and Conservative Spending: The political instability and economic uncertainties have led many young consumers to be more financially cautious, prioritizing essential and value-for-money purchases over luxury or non-essential goods3.
Emigration and Global Exposure: The migration of many peers abroad exposes remaining youth to global consumer trends and alternative lifestyles, influencing their preferences and expectations, sometimes creating a hybrid consumption culture blending local and international elements3.
Environmental and Social Responsibility: Reflecting global generational trends, Hong Kong’s younger consumers increasingly demand corporate social responsibility, ethical production, and sustainability, aligning with broader contemporary sociological emphases on agency and values in consumption.
Summary
From a contemporary sociological lens, the social change in Hong Kong over the past decade—characterized by political repression, social identity struggles, demographic shifts, and global influences—has led Gen Y and Z consumers to adopt more politically aware, identity-conscious, digitally connected, and economically cautious consumption behaviors. These patterns reflect their navigation of a complex social reality marked by uncertainty, cultural contestation, and a desire for meaningful expression through consumption123456."
My question 4: "How does social change as perceived from the classical sociological lens over the past 10 years in Hong Kong affect consumer behaviour of gen y and z?"
The reply: "From a classical sociological perspective, social change in Hong Kong over the past 10 years would be understood primarily through the lens of structural forces, social institutions, and broad historical processes, which in turn shape the consumer behavior of Generation Y and Z.
Classical Sociology’s View on Social Change in Hong Kong and Its Impact on Gen Y and Z Consumer Behavior
Structural and Economic Forces as Drivers: Drawing on Marxist ideas, the political and economic transformations in Hong Kong—such as the tightening control by Beijing, economic uncertainties, and shifts in labor markets—would be seen as fundamental forces reshaping social relations and consumer patterns. The class dynamics and economic inequalities intensified by these changes influence Gen Y and Z’s purchasing power and consumption priorities, often pushing them toward more pragmatic, value-conscious consumption267.
Social Cohesion and Anomie: Emile Durkheim’s concept of social cohesion and anomie can be applied to understand how rapid political and social upheavals, including the erosion of civil liberties and community disruptions, create feelings of normlessness or disconnection among young people. This can manifest in consumer behavior as either withdrawal from mainstream consumption or seeking identity and solidarity through niche or local brands that symbolize community and belonging256.
Rationalization and Bureaucratization: Max Weber’s ideas about rationalization and the increasing bureaucratic control of society help explain how institutional changes—such as government policies and urban redevelopment projects—shape consumer environments and choices. For instance, urban renewal efforts that displace communities may disrupt traditional consumption patterns and foster resistance through consumer activism or support for alternative, community-based economic practices25.
Linear and Macro-Level Change: Classical sociology tends to view social change as relatively linear and driven by large-scale structural shifts. Thus, the consumer behavior of Gen Y and Z would be interpreted as a response to these macro-level changes in economy, governance, and social order, rather than primarily individual agency or cultural fluidity emphasized in contemporary sociology26.
Summary
In sum, from the classical sociological lens, the social change in Hong Kong over the past decade—characterized by economic restructuring, political shifts, and social disintegration—affects Gen Y and Z consumer behavior mainly through structural constraints and transformations. These young consumers’ behaviors reflect adaptations to changing class relations, social cohesion challenges, and institutional rationalization, leading to more cautious, identity-seeking, and community-oriented consumption patterns shaped by broader social forces rather than individual agency alone2567."
A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.
No comments:
Post a Comment