Milkimian Theoretical-Conceptual Construction and its Application in the Analysis of Iran's Social Problems

Mirzaei, Jamshid

doi:10.61882/jspi.16.3.279

Milkimian Theoretical-Conceptual Construction and its Application in the Analysis of Iran's Social Problems

Author

Jamshid Mirzaei

PhD in Social Problems of Iran, Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.61882/jspi.16.3.279

Abstract

Iran's most important social problems (poverty, unemployment, Inequality, etc.) can be analyzed with the help of different approach. Hegemonic individualistic-reductionist approach with a set of narrow and psychological explanations (with an emphasis on blaming the individual) have found a dominant position in the field of analyzing Iran's social problems. On the other hand, we can talk about the possibility of creating an alternative and innovative approach. Here we are talking about an analytical conflict field. Therefore, the main problem is: What are the criticisms of reductionist individualistic approach, and what practical and capable alternative can be designed and construct suitable for the analysis of Iran's social problems? In terms of methodology Here we have used the dynamic combination of analytical descriptive methods, secondary analysis and critical. Research findings show that in Iran, the users of individualistic-reductionist approach have focused on the "person" and analyzed social problems with reference to the individual, and on the other hand, they have exonerated trans-individual variables and socio-political structures. Our alternative approach here is to construct a theoretical conceptual of "Milkimian" which is derived from Mills (sociological imagination) and Durkheim (explanation of social reality). The steps of Milkimian approach are: 1. identifying the position as a "social problem" and not an "individual problem", 2. analyzing it in the form of sociological and not psychological expression and 3. Providing social and not psychological solutions. Empirical evidence (secondary analysis of global and domestic data) supports Milkimian approach. Our view of Milkimian in the analysis of social problems is: Adopting a social and trans-individual view, emphasizing the criticism of defective structures, adopting a critical sociological view and exposing the weaknesses of reductionist approach.

Extended abstract

1. Introduction

In the last few decades and today, issues such as poverty, social inequalities, discrimination, unemployment, job dissatisfaction, class gap and distance, environmental pollution, road accidents, increase in working and street children, indiscriminate migration to metropolises, dropout, job burnout, social despair, etc. have become the most important social issues in Iran, which can be analyzed from different angles and with the help of different theoretical traditions.

A theoretical tradition that can be called the reductionist-individualistic approach has put a set of micro-analytic, psychological, and conservative explanations on its agenda in analyzing social problems and has found a hegemonic position in the field of social sciences by emphasizing "blaming the individual." On the other hand, we can talk about the possibility of proposing an alternative and innovative approach. Here we are talking about an “analytical conflict field”. That is, the issue is basically a kind of confrontation between popular-ideological analyses on the one hand and scientific-specialized social analyses on the other. Therefore, our problematic is how, while adopting a critical lens, we can reveal the analytical incapacity and inherent shortcomings of the reductionist-individualistic approach, and how, through innovative theorizing and sociological conceptualization, we can devise an alternative and appropriate theoretical conceptual construction for analyzing Iran's social problems. In other words, the main problem and focal question of the present study is what criticisms can be made of the reductionist-individualistic approach and what practical and capable alternative can be conceptualized, designed, and constructed to appropriately analyze Iran's social problems?

2. Methodology

In terms of research methodology, in the present study, we have used a dynamic combination of three analytical descriptive methods, secondary analysis (data from national and global surveys), and critical method (by to put aside superficial and apparent layers, trying to reach the underlying and hidden layers of social reality).

3. Findings

In Iran, a wide range of experts, practitioners, researchers, and various individuals use a reductionist-individualistic approach in analyzing social problems. What they all have in common is that, with their conservative and reductionist approach, they have focused on the "individual" and analyzed social problems with reference to the individual. On the other hand, they have exonerated trans-individual and institutional variables and political and social structures, and have advanced their work by De-responsibility from political, economic, and social structures, as well as the established political and legal order.

Our alternative approach here is to construct a theoretical concept of “Milkymie”, which is a constructed and combined concept of Mills + Durkheim. In other words, the Millkymie approach is derived from two legacies left by Mills (sociological imagination) and Durkheim (explanation of social reality). In short, the three steps of the Millkymie approach are: 1. Identify the social situation that has arisen as a “social problem” and not an “individual and personal problem”, 2. Express it in the form of sociological analysis and explanation rather than psychological explanation and 3. Finally, present social and sociological solutions rather than psychological and reductionist solutions.

The science of sociology cannot be indifferent to social problems or give the wrong direction with its reductionist analyses. Of course, it should be noted that our emphasis on social institutions and structures does not mean determinism and ignoring the role of individuals and removing agency and eliminating agency from actors. Rather, the fundamental core of the Milkimi approach is that in analyzing problems such as poverty, inequality, income gap, unemployment, school dropout, etc., firstly, we should not see the situation and problem as individual, small and personal and expand the scope of our vision (because many people are affected by it) and secondly, we should not fall into the trap of reductionism and consider the role, share and weight of trans-individual factors and social variables (political-social structures) to be more important and prominent than individual variables (desire, will, motivation, spirit, perseverance, etc.) And thirdly, the proposed solutions should be social and societal, avoiding psychological and conservative projections.

Empirical evidence, such as secondary analysis of data from global surveys and two national surveys, supports Milkemi's theoretical conceptual construction. Global surveys asked about two concepts: "government responsibility to citizens" and "essential indicators of democracy," and we explained the relationship between these two issues with "social problems" because, firstly: "Considering the role of political and social structures as influential on people's lives" is one of the important foundations of the Milkemi approach, so the state or governance structure is understood as the supreme symbol of political and economic structures. Therefore, the responsibility of the government and the governance structure towards the lives of the people cannot be absolved.

Second: We understand democracy as the social and beyond the political. In other words, we have not considered democracy as a limited meaning of participating in elections every four years, and we have integrated the value and very important social justice (on the one hand, collecting taxes from the rich and on the other hand, paying subsidies to the poor) into the concept of democracy, and therefore we have understood democracy not only as a political matter but also as the social.

National surveys also analyzed the "factors affecting poverty in the poor" as the most acute social problem. The result is that the majority of Iranians believe that institutional trans-individual, social, and structural factors have caused poverty and destitution among the poor, and a small number have emphasized micro, individual, and non-structural factors.

4. Conclusion

Our perspective and attitude as the originator and supporter of the Milkimi approach in analyzing and studying social problems (poverty, inequality, discrimination, unemployment, immigration, etc.) is: Adopting an institutional, social, and trans-individual perspective, Emphasizing criticism and condemnation of flawed, diseased, and problematic political and social structures, Adopting a critical sociological perspective, and also questioning and challenging the analytical power of individualistic and reductionist approaches in the field of studying Iran's social problems. The Milkemi approach considers most social problems not as natural and inevitable phenomena, but as social products. In our sociological and Milkemi approach, by rejecting the naturalness of social problems, it is possible to recognize, criticize, change, and combat them. We emphasize that this unequal, problematic, and problematic society is the product of unequal structures, unjust, and inhumane relationships, so it must be changed and can be changed.

Keywords

Social problems

Milkimian theoretical-conceptual construction

Individualistic-reductionist approach

Secondary Analysis

Critical

20.1001.1.24766933.1404.16.3.7.5

Archer, M. S. (1996). Culture and agency: The place of culture in social theory. Cambridge University Press.

بیکر، ترزال (1392). نحوه انجام تحقیقات اجتماعی. ترجمۀ هوشنگ نایبی، تهران: نشر نی.

Barnes, B. (2008). The macro/micro problem and the problem of structure and agency. In G. Ritzer, B. Smart (Eds.) The macro/micro problem and the problem of structure and agency (pp. 339-352). SAGE Publications Ltd, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608351.n26.

تورن، آلن (1400). بازگشت کنشگر؛ نظریه اجتماعی در جامعه پساصنعتی. ترجمۀ سلمان صادقی‌زاده، تهران: نشر ثالث.

Barcan.S. (2015). Social Problems: Continuity and Change, university of minnesota libraries publishing edition.

دفتر طرح‌های ملی وزارت فرهنگ و ارشاد اسلامی (1395). سومین پیمایش نگرش‌ها و ارزش‌های ایرانیان. تهران: انتشارات پژوهشگاه فرهنگ، هنر و ارتباطات.

Becker, H. S. (2008). Writing for social scientists: How to start and finish your thesis, book, or article. University of Chicago Press.

دورکیم، امیل (1398). قواعد روش جامعه‌شناسی. ترجمۀ هوشنگ نایبی، تهران: انتشارات آگاه.

Carville, J. (1996). We're right, they're wrong: A handbook for spirited progressives. New York, Random House.

ذاکری، آرمان (1400). همبستگی اجتماعی و دشمنان آن. تهران: نشر نی.

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.

رابینگتن، ارل و واینبرگ، مارتین (1400). رویکردهای نظری هفت‌گانه در بررسی مسائل اجتماعی. ترجمۀ رحمت‌الله صدیق سروستانی، تهران، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.

Harrington, Michael (1963). The Other America: Poverty in the United States. New York: Macmillan.

شورای اجتماعی کشور (1396). وضعیت اخلاقی، اجتماعی و فرهنگی جامعه ایران، تهران، انتشارات پژوهشگاه فرهنگ، هنر و ارتباطات.

ISA (1998). https://www.isa-sociology.org/en/about-isa/history-of-isa/books-of-the-xx-century/

غفاری، غلامرضا و حبیب‌پور گتابی، کرم (1397). سیاست اجتماعی: بنیان‌های مفهومی و نظری. چاپ سوم، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.

Spicker, P. (2008). Social policy; Themes and approaches. Bristol: Policy

کانرتون، پل (1399). جامعه‌شناسی انتقادی. ترجمه حسن چاوشیان، تهران: نشر اختران.

Thurow, Lester (1995). THE RICH; Why Their World Might Crumble, New York Times Magazine, (November,19)pp.79-78.https://www.nytimes.com/1995/11/19/magazine/the-rich-why-their-world-might-crumble.html?smid=url-share.

کلاین، نائومی (1389). دکترین شوک: ظهور سرمایه‌داری فاجعه، ترجمۀ مهرداد شهابی و میرمحمود نبوی، تهران: انتشارات کتاب آمه.

WVS (2005). World Values Survey Wave 5 (2005-2009)Iran, Study # WVS-2005.

میلز، سی. رایت (1381). بینش جامعه‌شناسی. ترجمۀ عبدالمعبود انصاری، تهران، شرکت سهامی انتشار.

WVS (2017). World Values Survey Wave 7 (2017-2020)Iran, Study # WVS-2017.

Archer, M. S. (1996). Culture and agency: The place of culture in social theory. Cambridge University Press.

Baker, Terzal (2013). How to Conduct Social Research, translated by Houshang Naibi, Tehran, Ney Publishing. (In Persian)

Connerton, Paul (2010). Critical Sociology, translated by Hassan Chavoshian, Tehran, Akhtaran Publishing House. (In Persian)

Barcan.S. (2015). Social Problems: Continuity and Change, university of minnesota libraries publishing edition.

Durkheim, Emile (2019). Rules of Sociological Method, translated by Houshang Naibi, Tehran, Agah Publishing. (In Persian)

Becker, H. S. (2008). Writing for social scientists: How to start and finish your thesis, book, or article. University of Chicago Press.

Ghaffari, Gholamreza and Habibpour, Karam (2018).Social Policy, Conceptual and Theoretical Foundations, Tehran University Press. (In Persian)

Carville, J. (1996). We're right, they're wrong: A handbook for spirited progressives. New York, Random House.

Klein, Naomi (2010). The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Catastrophe Capitalism, translated by Mehrdad Shahabi and Mir Mahmoud Nabavi, Tehran, Ame Book Publishing House. (In Persian)

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.

Mills, C. Wright (2002). Insights into Sociology, translated by Abdolmaboud Ansari, Tehran, Sahami Enteshar Company. (In Persian)

Harrington, Michael (1963). The Other America: Poverty in the United States. New York: Macmillan.

National Projects Office of the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance (2016). The Third Survey of Iranian Attitudes and Values, Tehran, Culture, Art and Communication Research Institute Publications. (In Persian)

ISA (1998). https://www.isa-sociology.org/en/about-isa/history-of-isa/books-of-the-xx-century/

Robington, Earl and Weinberg, Martin (2011). Seven Theoretical Approaches to Investigating Social Problems, translated by Rahmatullah Sedigh Sarvestani, Tehran, Tehran University Press. (In Persian)

Spicker, P. (2008). Social policy; Themes and approaches. Bristol: Policy

The Social Council of the Country (2017). The moral, social and cultural status of Iranian society, Tehran, Culture, Art and Communication Research Institute Publications. (In Persian)

Thorne, Alan (2011). The Return of the Activist; Social Theory in Post-Industrial Society, translated by Salman Sadeghizadeh, Tehran, Sales Publishing. (In Persian)

WVS (2005). World Values Survey Wave 5 (2005-2009)Iran, Study # WVS-2005.

Zakeri, Arman (2011). Social Solidarity and Its Enemies, Tehran, Ney Publishing. (In Persian)

WVS (2017). World Values Survey Wave 7 (2017-2020)Iran, Study # WVS-2017.