Download One of the most important aspects about sociology is what a man

One of the most important aspects about sociology is what a man named C. Wright Mills called
the “sociological imagination”.
“Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without
understanding both. Yet men do not usually define the troubles they endure in terms of
historical change and institutional contradiction. ... The sociological imagination enables its
possessor to understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and
the external career of a variety of individuals. ... The first fruit of this imagination--and the first
lesson of the social science that embodies it--is the idea that the individual can understand his
own experience and gauge his own fate only by locating himself within this period, that he can
know his own chances in life only by becoming aware of those of all individuals in his
circumstances. ...We have come to know that every individual lives, from one generation to the
next, in some society; that he lives out a biography, and that he lives it out within some
historical sequence (The Sociological Imagination, 1959:3-10).”
Okay, so what does that mean? Well, it is really the essence of sociology. Sociologists see the
world as made up a intricate webs of connections. Where everything impacts, or potentially
impacts everything else. It is kind of like that movie (which I haven’t seen, but my students
keep telling me about) called The Butterfly Effect. We don’t know when something we do will
impact another person, another institution, maybe the whole world. It sounds grandiose, but
the point is, to sociologists, we are all, always, impacting the world around us.
At the same time, we are also being impacted by the world in which we live. I was just reading
something about Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie (okay, junk food reading!). There was a picture
of the two of them with her kids, one from Cambodia and the other from Ethiopia. If either one
of the those kids had not been adopted by her (them) their lives would be drastically different
than they are now. In 20 years, how different will think and act than if they were raised in their
countries of origin?
While these may be drastic examples, it is also true that whoever we are has been deeply
shaped by the society in which we have grown up. It is interesting to think about ~ how would
you be different if you had been born 200 years ago? What would your life be like? As a man
or a woman, would you be treated differently? What is your ethnicity? Would that have made
a difference? Supposing you grew up very, very rich, like Paris Hilton? How would your life we
different then?
These are questions that looking at the world through the lens of the sociological imagination
can help us to understand.
Now, you may be thinking, “Well, what difference does the sociological imagination make if all
it helps me to do is fantasize about what life might have been like for me if I was rich or born
200 years ago? I can do that anyway!” But, the real purpose of the sociological imagination,
according to C. Wright Mills, is that it helps us to become more empowered.
Mills believed that in the modern world we were often very overwhelmed by the enormity of the
social structures in which we live. Mills was writing in the 1950’s. He was an American
Sociologist and was seeing first hand how the changes that were occurring and had occurred in
the world were impacting people. The 1950’s often gets portrayed as a time of happy homes
and stable communities. But in fact, that wasn’t really the case. The country was still
recovering from WWII and all the changes that had brought. The first nuclear weapon was
detonated in 1945. By the 50’s, kids were getting practicing air raid drills my climbing under
their desks, just in case the Soviet Union dropped a bomb on us. (Exactly what protection a
desk was going to provide from an atomic bomb was not a question we were allowed to
ask.) The truth about Nazi Germany was beginning become very clear and that was very
scary. While the Soviet Union was portrayed as the big baddy “over there”, 35% of people in
the US were of German descent. So evil was potentially on our own doorsteps, and in our own
blood. The witch hunts of the McCarthy were going on. People who had known people who
were Communists in the 1950’s were losing their jobs, their friends and their families. The first
civil rights action took place in 1954. In 1955, Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white
man and the institution of segregation began to crumble. Divorce was on the rise. Women
were entering colleges at a never before seen rate. The world was changing quickly.
Mills believed that the powerful sources of social change were everywhere and that the average
Joe and Jane felt powerless and hopeless in the face of these changes. That may be even
more true today. We are engaged in a war in Iraq that only 385 of the military continues to
support. Yet no one seems real clear about how to get out of there. Global warming is scaring
people a lot! The average worker is working more hours per day since the 40’s and with
commute time, who sleeps. Yet what be done about these issues? So feelings of
powerlessness continue today.
Mills did not have all the answers to this either, but he did propose that it was important for
people to sort out the difference between personal troubles and social issues if they were going
to be successful in solving social problems.
One of Mills main ideas, is that there is the difference between personal troubles and social
issues. But before we talk about the differences between personal troubles and social issues I
want to explain what they both have in common. Both personal troubles and social issues
result in some form of human suffering. In both cases, someone is experiencing some form of
problem. However personal troubles and social issues vary in three ways.
First they vary in terms of the numbers involved. When something is a personal trouble, only
a few people are involved. When something is a social issue many people are involved. Now
the question you may be asking is at what point does something move from being a personal
trouble to a social issue? That’s a good question and there is no exact answer. All that
sociologists can say is that when many social structures are involved human suffering has
moved from being a personal trouble to a social issue.
Second, personal troubles and social issues vary according to their causes. The cause of a
personal trouble lies within the individual. The cause of the social issue lies within the social
structures.
Third, the solutions to personal troubles and social issues are also different. If one wants to
solve a personal trouble one what has to change one’s own life. If, however, one wants to
change a social issue, then one has to change as a social structure. Changing social structures
requires group action. Therefore it is always more difficult to resolve social issues than it is to
resolve personal troubles.
Here are some examples of the difference between a personal trouble and a social issue. Let’s
say that Boeing is currently in a hiring phase. Let’s say that Boeing is hiring a lot of
machinists. Mary loses her job as a machinist at Boeing. This may be an example of a
personal trouble because other machinists are not losing their job. Perhaps Mary drinks on the
job. Perhaps Mary has a bad temper and gets into fights with people at work. Perhaps Mary is
a kleptomaniac and she is stealing tools. In any or all of these cases, the problem lies with
Mary not in the social structure. It merely wants to change her situation she needs to deal with
her personal problems. She may need to join alcoholics anonymous. Or she may need to get
some therapy. In either case the problem lies with Mary and can only be solved by Mary
changing her own life.
However, let’s say that Mary is one of 10,000 machinists that are laid off at Boeing. And let’s
say that Mary was an excellent worker, very conscientious, got along well with others, never
drank on the job etc. etc.. In this situation, the problem is not located in Mary. The problem is
located in some social structure. Perhaps the source of the problem is the globalization of the
economy. Perhaps Mary has lost her job because Boeing a shipping more jobs
overseas. Perhaps the problem is that not enough people are buying airplanes. Perhaps Mary
lost her job because Boeing is losing contracts. In any of these situations, the problem does
not lie with Mary and even if Mary changes her personal behavior it probably won’t mean that
she keeps her job. Changing her personal behavior is not going to change the larger social
structures that have led to her unemployment. Therefore marry is experiencing a social issue
not simply a personal trouble.
Many times when we are experiencing social issues we have to make changes in our personal
behavior as well. For example, Mary probably needs to go back to school and get more
education so that she can get a different kind of job. Mary will also have to be where of
potential problems that are associated with the unemployment. For example, Mary may be
more at risk for alcohol problems or family fights or depression. The point I’m trying to get at
here is that social issues can also lead to personal troubles. So the two are often very
intertwined.
I hope this helps you to understand the difference between personal troubles and social
issues. Please be sure to ask me any questions that you may have about this reading when we
are in class together.
DISCUSSION QUESTION
Take an issue, like employment and analyze from the perspective of the sociological
imagination. Describe when it is s personal trouble and when a social issue. Show what needs
to be done to solve this problem when it is both personal and social.