In 1959, one of sociology’s iconic figures, Charles Wright Mills, published perhaps his most famous work, The Sociological Imagination. Passing away a mere three years later in 1962, Mills left with us a sociological framework that continues to influence our discipline, and that is frequently taught in introductory sociology courses. In this post, with help from a group of sociology students, David Mayeda explains the sociological imagination, and stress its ongoing importance in contemporary society.
“Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both” (Mills, 2007, p. 1).
If you’ve ever thought you lived a completely independent life, fully in control of your own destiny, C. Wright Mills would likely ask you to think again. Considered one of sociology’s preeminent thinkers, Mills taught at Columbia University in the mid-twentieth century. The above quote by Mills offers a snippet of insight into what he terms the sociological imagination.
As students from The University of Auckland describe in the above video, the sociological imagination is an important instrument that provides us with a particular “quality of mind,” an approach to viewing our individual lives as part of a larger story, one that is driven by history and a constellation of interconnected social structures that afford us varied life chances.
Personal Troubles and Public Issues
As individuals we are typically preoccupied with what Mills termed personal troubles. These are problems that we tend to view within a smaller, interpersonal social context. Thus, we frequently comprehend our personal problems in limiting fashion, connecting those troubles only to our own actions and those who we see immediately around us (e.g., friends, family members, co-workers).
Let’s take the example of employment. Think about a time when you, a friend or family member wanted to secure a job that she or he could probably do well enough, but didn’t have the minimal educational qualification to even apply for that job. Perhaps the job required a bachelors or masters degree from an accredited university, something the person you’re thinking of didn’t have.
A knee jerk understanding of this personal trouble might be to blame the individual, assuming perhaps she or he didn’t study hard enough to advance his or her education. Or one might attribute this problem to the individual’s family, citing a lack of family support to help the individual secure a higher educational degree.
Indeed, these individualized explanations could be pieces of the social puzzle that contribute to this personal problem. However, Mills would encourage us to think with greater depth and explore how this personal trouble of unemployment could also be a reflection of wider public issues. As Mills wrote, “When, in a city of 100,000, only one is unemployed, that is his personal trouble, and for its relief we properly look to the character of the individual, his skills and his immediate opportunities. But when in a nation of 50 million employees, 15 million people are unemployed, that is an issue, and we may not hope to find its solution within the range of opportunities open to any one individual. The very structure of opportunities has collapsed” (p. 4).
In short, we need to look at the structure of society, at the interdependent institutions within society (family, education, government, work, media, religion, etc.) that present individuals from different demographic backgrounds with unequal opportunities.
Structure, History, and Varieties of Men and Women
Along with connecting our personal troubles to public issues, Mills argued that we must understand our personal lives as lives that are shaped across three social dimensions. The first dimension is one we’ve already covered – structure. As noted above, there are symbiotic institutions in all societies, and it is critical that we situate our personal circumstances within those structural contexts. Mills might ask, how one’s occupational life chances are influenced by governmental decisions, educational opportunities, family assistance, and media influences?
The second dimension to be considered is history, for the structural composition of society as it stands now reflects a particular time period. In dissecting our personal lives, we need to reflect on the key features of the time we live in, and connect these features to years past. Some of today’s key social features include the war on terror, climate change, social media, and mass migration. Yet it is important to recall that these contemporary features of society were impacted by features from the past. In fact Mills wrote, “The history that now affects every man[/woman] is world history” (p. 1), so you may ask yourself how global trends are influencing your personal life.
The final consideration Mills stressed was the “varieties of men and women” who “prevail in this society and in this period” (p. 3). Mills suggested we identify how men and women from different backgrounds within our society are oppressed, emancipated, privileged and so forth.
To summarize, the sociological imagination is a mindset which allows the individual to locate him or herself within the broader society. It is a mindset that helps the individual see how one’s personal conditions do not stand in isolation and cannot be attributed strictly to the self. One’s personal troubles (or personal privileges) are connected to an array of social patterns grounded in structure, history and the varieties of women and men that society constructs.
- Think about your family, and not just those who you consider your immediate family. How has your family history shaped your current life circumstances?
- Identify and explain how certain social institutions are currently enhancing or limiting your life chances.
- One of society’s key features today is digital technology and social media. In what ways is social media an extension of prior time periods? How does social media impact your daily life, including the ways you work, study, build relationships, and craft an identity?