The Nature of Theory

In his 1990 article Metatheorizing in Sociology, George Ritzer identifies three forms of metatheoretical activity (theorising or thinking about theory): first, metatheorizing as a means of better understanding existing theory; second metatheorizing as a prelude to development of new theories; and third, metatheorizing as a source of overarching social theory. Consideration of the second kind of thinking about theory alerts us to the notion of theory development as a teleological— end-oriented — process in its own right: a teleological procession to perfection of understanding with homo-sociologicus in the van. Earlier I suggested that Marx’s work could be seen as a development from the work of Hegel, and Comte’s work as a natural product of engagement with the flaws of natural law and early functionalist theory, thus suggesting a linear process of development of theory by dialectic engagement with past theory. I wish to suggest that there are problems with this way of thinking about the development of new theory. A significant contemporary figure subscribing to this developmental process in theory making is Randall Collins, while a vocal critic of metatheorising (Collins 1986a), his own theoretical method relies heavily on what we might term a dialectic of social theoretical progress.