Georg Simmel
I am writing a practice essay for tomorrow's final exam in social theory. This one is on Georg Simmel.
Georg Simmel was born and raised in 19th century Berlin Germany. Living in the bustling city caused Simmel to be curious about the interactions of people in small and large groups. He saw Social groups unlike many of the sociologists of his time. Simmel thought that could not separate society from an individual's mind. He also thought that you could study the influence of a society on the individual by observing the effect of social groups on the individual's behavior.
Georg Simmel was a symbolic interaction theorist. He saw society as the creation of daily interaction between individuals to define the social group. Simmel was of a jewish background and was a victim of discrimination in academic circles, even though he was not a practicing jew and his father had converted to christianity. He would find it difficult to become a full professor. He was employed by the University of Berlin as a lecturer. Lecturers at the time were paid poorly, depending on what the University could afford and sometimes that was nothing at all. Simmel loved to teach and luckily he had an inheritance from his father's chocolate factory to support him.
Simmel experienced discrimination, by being passed over for a full professorship at The University of Berlin, because of his jewish background. This may have caused him to wonder about dominance. He theorized that in many social relationships there are leaders and followers. Leadership by one person in a monarchy, a priest who leads a congregation, and a professor with students are all examples of domination by one and submission by many. Government officials, police enforcement, and discrimination of minorities are all examples of domination of a group. Domination by a principle such as store policies of no shirt or shoes equals no service are more acceptable to people in modern times because people do not feel that it is personal. For example someone attempting to enter a place of business without a shirt can be stooped by a store employee and informed of the rule. The store clerk can say, "Hey man it is not me that is so harsh, its just the rules".
Simmel also thought that in a dominant and submissive relationship, both parties have a choice to influence the interaction. Subordinates do not have to follow the commands of the leader. They can choose to obey or not to obey, even if there are dire consequences. For example in 17th century England it was expected that lower class men tip their hat to their betters in public. George Fox and many early Quakers felt that all people were equal, and refused to give the hat honor to other equals. They made their choice and dealt with some harsh consequences, some even died in prison for refusing to tip their hats. Others were thrown in dungeons because they refused to swear an oath on the bible because the very book they were asked to swear on said not to swear oaths. They made their choice not to obey the dominant social group.
Another area that Simmel had theories about was conflict. People can see all kinds of negative consequences to conflict, but Simmel saw some positive aspects to conflict. Conflict solves some problems, such as addressing the harmful actions of group leaders and members. Conflict unites people against a common enemy. For example, people in America after the 9-11 destruction of The World Trade Centers came together and a sense of patriotism washed over the country. People displayed American flags more than before, and many volunteers went to New York to give aid.
Simmel was had a micro-sociological focus and was interested in the behavior of people in small groups. The smaller the group, the more intimate, creative and expressive the members would be. The smallest of the social groups is one made up of only two people, called a Dyad. Simmel theorized that the two members in a dyad had the most intense type of relationship because if one member of the Dyad left it would no longer be a group. We can see this intensiveness in marriages and romantic relationships. After the breakup of a marriage or a romance, what was once love and affection turns to hate and spitefulness. Because the relationship is so intense, the feelings of investment cause a certain feeling of betrayal if the one member of the Dyad fails to meet expectations of the other.
The other small group interaction that Simmel identified was the three person group, called a Triad. Triads have a different group dynamic than Dyads. In a Triad two members can form a majority to influence the weaker member. A Triad will survive as a group if one member leaves the Triad it will become a Dyad relationship. Usually a Triad relationship that loses a member will seek to replace that member. For example an older couple who raises a son that leaves the family home will experience empty nest syndrome and get a pet dog or cat to reform the Triad.
Simmel also observed the differences in large group and small group behaviors. Small groups are more intimate and expressive. Small groups are based on a more fluid interaction and are therefore more creative. Large groups are less intimate and are less expressive, based on more formal rules. Large groups cause people to be less responsible and act more slowly to help others. There is a diffusion of responsibility. People in a large group who witness a violent attack will be slower to act to help the victim or call police because they feel someone else will do it. People in group projects do not work as hard as they do on their own. This is called social loafing.
Simmel was in a marginalized group of friends who did not have any interest in money or political situations. They were artists, educators and creative enthusiasts. There pursuit of money was secondary to cultural and artistic pursuits. Simmel noted that money was also a symbol. Money has no worth in itself, but is a symbol for what ever you can exchange it for. Money causes people to act more with intellect than with emotion. People must calculate the value of the goods and services that they spend money on. Money also causes decreased interaction between people. We do not engage in as much interaction with money as people did in the barter system. To trade goods for each other caused an agreement to be made by traders. My corn for your handmade chair would entail a great deal of conversation. Paying for the chair with money simply involves a direct exchange and little interaction.
Simmel saw many things from life in a large city. He observed daily interactions between people and witnessed exchanges that would prove that we are a society of people made up of many small groups. He demonstrated that you can not see the individual or the group without each others influences.