C Wright Mills | Encyclopedia.com (2024)

WORKS BY MILLS

SUPPLEMENTARY BIBLIOGRAPHY

C. Wright Mills (1916-1962) was at his death professor of sociology at Columbia University and one of the most controversial figures in American social science. He considered himself and was considered by his peers something of a rebel against the social science “establishment,” and he attracted both admirers and critics for this role.

Shortly after his death, a series of essays, The New Sociology, was published in his honor. A central theme of these essays was the notion that Mills exemplified that spirit of social concern which he himself saw as the fundamental duty of the modern intellectual, in particular the social scientist—a duty, be it said, which he felt was not fulfilled by the majority of contemporary American social scientists (Horowitz 1964). His writings represented an attempt to open up paths of inquiry and analysis that would enable men to combat what he called the “main drift” of modern society to “rationality without reason,” that is, the use of rational means in the service of substantively irrational ends. He found Marx and Weber to be the most helpful classical theorists, but he wanted to go “beyond” both of them to a new comparative world sociology that would seek to understand our time in terms of its historical specificity and by so doing renew the possibility of achieving human freedom. He thus set himself a large task, requiring research on the whole canvas of human (and particularly modern) history, but he died before he could present a full synthesis of his ideas.

He saw the present as a transition from the modern age to a postmodern period which he called the Fourth Epoch. If throughout his work there is a current of ultimate hope, it is equally suffused with pessimism about the more immediate future. He spoke of the “moral uneasiness of our time,” a consequence throughout the Western world (including the Soviet Union) of what he called the “higher immorality,” immorality encrusted in the structures and norms of the society, which he saw as particularly prevalent in the United States.

The basic problem of this era was that, unlike the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, rationality no longer produced freedom, and since the two central ideologies which were developed in the modern West, liberalism and Marxism, assumed that it did, they no longer sufficed to explain and thus to control social change. Liberalism, being more heavily dependent on this assumption, was, he said, now irrelevant, and Marxism was inadequate.

What was even more unsettling to Mills was the “default” or “defeat” of the free intellectuals, especially deplorable at a time when the power of the intellectual had become potentially very great. His emphasis on the role of the intellectuals, on their failure, derived from his basic assumption that there is a great difference between the range of action possible to what he called “elites” and the range of action possible to the “masses.” Men make their own history, but some are freer to do so than others. If the relatively free intellectuals fail to assert their moral leadership, other members of the elite, less qualified and less disinterested, will inevitably do so in their stead. This is in fact what had happened, according to Mills.

This failure is indicated by the nature of the problems studied by social scientists, and even more by the inadequate theory and methodology that underlie their work, an inadequacy he attributed to their deliberate abdication of social responsibility. Social theory, to be usable for Mills, had to deal in categories whose level of abstraction was not so high as to deprive them of all historical content or relevance. It should involve the search for causes of specific historical sequences and thereby explain shifts in the importance of and relations between the various “institutional orders” (politics, economics, the military, religion, and kinship). Mills took a strong stand against “principled monism or pluralism” and stated that the simple view of economic determinism must be “elaborated” by political and military determinism.

But more than theory was involved. Mills felt that the way in which the theory is used—the methodology of social research—is central to the results. He was not opposed to empirical research (indeed, he conducted a considerable amount of it), but he was against “abstracted empiricism,” to which he contrasted the ideal of “craftsmanship.” Craftsmanship is at once an ethos and an ideal which is only possible in a “properly developing society” but which also brings such a society into being. While Mills constantly called for such a conception of the role of the intellectual, he preferred to exemplify the skill rather than give an operational definition of it. It is perhaps as a result of this lack of definition that discussion of Mills’s criticisms of his colleagues sometimes resembles a theological debate.

Mills’s intellectual fathers in macrosociological theory were clearly Marx and Weber, as he himself acknowledged, and Freud and Mead in social psychology. It is sometimes said that he was the heir of Veblen. But while he called Veblen “the best social scientist America has produced,” he was clearly critical of him, even in the introduction he wrote to The Theory of the Leisure Class (see Mills 1953). Mills called Veblen’s views “over-simple” and “inadequate” and found the substance of his work less useful than the style. It is indeed in style and populist bias that Mills most resembles Veblen.

In his own research, he was more concerned with restating and advancing the Marx-Weber tradition than the Freud-Mead one. He accepted what he considered to be Weber’s two most important revisions of Marx—the broadening of the concept of economic determinism to a wider social determinism and the “sophisticating” of the idea of class by the addition of the category of status or prestige. Mills thought that Marx’s major political expectation about advanced capitalist societies—the progressive role of the proletariat—had “collapsed,” and he railed against a “labor metaphysic,” a faith in the progressive role of the working class (1960a), although an early monograph of his, The New Men of Power (1948), may be thought to exhibit this very view.

The shift in focus and methodology of Mills’s empirical work over his life reflected his increasing discomfort with his peers in American sociology. The New Men of Power and The Puerto Rican Journey (Mills et al. 1950) rely in large part on survey data, especially the latter. They were both done under the aegis of the Bureau of Applied Social Research of Columbia University and under the methodological influence of Paul Lazarsfeld. Nonetheless, even in these works Mills used the data to deal with problems of social change of the larger society, the United States; this was a feature of all his books, whatever their particular problems. In White Collar (1951), interview data became minor and government statistical data more important; he explicitly sought to locate the problems of the individual (in this case, the “new middle class”) within the trends of the epoch, thus illustrating a methodological orientation he was later to insist upon in The Sociological Imagination (1959). The Power Elite (1956) represented a further evolution of this trend. The problem here was to explain the over-all power structure of the United States, not the role of out-groups that are relatively more accessible to being studied (labor leaders, migrants, white-collar workers). In this task, Mills asserted, national surveys are useless, and he relied upon “reasoning together.” The data were largely historical, and the objective of the research was to explain the “moral uneasiness of our time.”

In the three books that followed, The Causes of World War Three (1958), The Sociological Imagination (1959), and Listen, Yankee (1960b), Mills had moved one stage further. There was no question here of survey methods. There was even little question, as there still was in The Power Elite, of the systematic collection of data or the use of a research design and a research organization. These three books were historical interpretations—of the contemporary world system, of the evolution of the social sciences in the United States, of social revolution in Cuba—in the form of polemical essays. By then, Mills seemed to feel that methodological rigor was a trap which would prevent him or other scholars from dealing with significant problems. Thus, despite his critical view of Marxian theory, he grew more and more interested in Marxism as a “method of work,” as his last published volume, The Marxists (1962), indicates. This was undoubtedly largely because he grew more and more unhappy with what he regarded as the ideological uses other scholars made of the Weberian critique—to defend an established order. And he came to fear the emphasis on science less as an illusion than as a diversion.

Mills ended as he began, a moralist preaching to his peers, the community of social scientists, throughout the world but especially in the United States. While he continued to accept the fundamentals of the Weberian modifications of Marx, he refused to accept Weber’s “pessimistic world of a classic liberal.” He thought the dominant apolitical or “value-free” bias of contemporary American sociology was an ideological mask, hiding value preferences which he did not share. In a basic sense, he was a Utopian reformer. He thought that knowledge properly used could bring about the good society, and that if the good society was not yet here, it was primarily the fault of men of knowledge.

Immanuel Wallerstein

[See alsoAssimilation; Elites; Knowledge, sociology of; Leadership, article onsociological aspects; Marxist sociology; Political sociology; Power; Social problems; and the biographies ofFreud; Marx; Mead; Veblen; Weber, Max.]

WORKS BY MILLS

1948 The New Men of Power: America’s Labor Leaders. New York: Harcourt.

1950 Mills, C. Wright; Senior, C.; and Goldsen, R. K. The Puerto Rican Journey: New York’s Newest Migrants. New York: Harper.

1951 White Collar: The American Middle Classes. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. → A paperback edition was published in 1956.

1953 Introduction. In Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions. New York: New American Library.

1953 Gerth, Hans; and Mills, C. WrightCharacter and Social Structure: The Psychology of Social Institutions. New York: Harcourt.

1956 The Power Elite. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

1958 The Causes of World War Three. New York: Simon & Schuster.

1959 The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

1960a Mills, C. Wright (editor) Images of Man: The Classic Tradition in Sociological Thinking. New York: Braziller.

1960b Listen, Yankee: The Revolution in Cuba. New York: McGraw-Hill.

1962 The Marxists. New York: Dell.

Power, Politics and People: The Collected Essays of C. Wright Mills. Edited and with an introduction by Irving Louis Horowitz. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1963.

SUPPLEMENTARY BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aptheker, Herbert 1960 The World of C. Wright Mills. New York: Marzani & Munsell.

Horowitz, Irving Louis (editor) 1964 The New Sociology: Essays in Social Science and Social Theory, in Honor of C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

Weber, Max (1906-1924) 1946 From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. Translated and edited by Hans H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

C Wright Mills | Encyclopedia.com (2024)

FAQs

What was C. Wright Mills best known for? ›

Wright Mills known for in sociology? C. Wright Mills is known in sociology as a conflict theorist who advocated for social reform and pushed for greater social responsibility by intellectuals. His most famous work was The Power Elite.

What is the sociological imagination theory by C. Wright Mills? ›

In The Sociological Imagination, Mills attempts to reconcile two different and abstract concepts of social reality: the "individual" and the "society." Accordingly, Mills defined sociological imagination as "the awareness of the relationship between personal experience and the wider society."

What is the conflict theory of C. Wright Mills? ›

Wright Mills is known as the founder of modern conflict theory. In his work, he believes social structures are created because of conflict between differing interests. People are then impacted by the creation of social structures, and the usual result is a differential of power between the ” elite ” and the “others”.

Why was C. Wright Mills controversial? ›

C. Wright Mills put himself outside the mainstream of American social comment by his support for Castro and his critique of what he saw to be US imperialism. He was also critical of what passed for contemporary sociology.

What was Mills famous for? ›

What is John Stuart Mill known for? John Stuart Mill was an English philosopher, economist, and exponent of utilitarianism. He was prominent as a publicist in the reforming age of the 19th century and remains of lasting interest as a logician and an ethical theorist.

What did Mills believe in sociology? ›

In other words, Mills claimed that the discipline of sociology is the study of the connection between individuals and society, between personal troubles and public issues. Understanding both the life of an individual, and the history and structure of a society, requires the sociological imagination.

What American sociologist C. Wright Mills was especially critical of? ›

C. Wright Mills was a prominent American sociologist who is best known for his critical analysis of the power structures in modern society.

What is the promise C. Wright Mills about? ›

The Promise by C. Wright Mills addresses sociological imagination and modern-day men feeling that the privacy of their lives are continuous traps. Men struggle with the ability to cope with personal conflicts given that they lack the understanding of the connections between their own lives, society, and history.

Who is the father of sociology? ›

Auguste Comte (1798-1857)

French philosopher Auguste Comte is known as the father of sociology. He initially studied to become an engineer, but one of his teachers, Henri de Saint-Simon, made such an impression on him that he turned to social philosophy.

What is the sociological perspective according to C. Wright Mills? ›

C. Wright Mills defined the sociological imagination as the ability to see the impact of social forces on individuals' public and private lives. He believed we need to overcome our limited perspective to understand the larger meaning of our experiences.

What is the power elite according to C. Wright Mills? ›

Mills describes the power elite as a small group of individuals who make all the decisions that really matter. They are concentrated in corporations, the military, and the government. These three have come to eclipse and control all other spheres of power.

What is the theory of C. Wright Mills about the relation between the personal problem and the public issue? ›

Mills felt that many problems ordinarily considered private troubles are best understood as public issues, and he coined the term sociological imagination. Wright Mills, the realization that personal troubles are rooted in public issues. to refer to the ability to appreciate the structural basis for individual problems ...

Is C. Wright Mills a Marxist? ›

He considered himself a "plain Marxist", working in the spirit of young Marx as he claims in his collected essays: "Power, Politics and People" (Oxford University Press, 1963).

What did C. Wright Mills believe? ›

C. Wright Mills argues that the sociological imagination is a promise to individuals that they have the power to understand their place and their private issues' place in the broader historical and sociological context.

Why did C. Wright Mills create the sociological imagination? ›

Wright Mills in his famous book of the same title, where he states, "The sociological imagination enables us to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society. That is its task and its promise." The concept is to understand the distinction between a person's troubles and public issues.

What was Florence Mills known for? ›

Florence Mills, whose name is now almost unknown, reigned over the 1920s as one of the most popular and sensational African American performers of the Jazz Age. When she sang, her beautiful, birdlike voice momentarily transcended the era's racial barriers and left audiences of all colors enthralled.

What is the power elite theory by C. Wright Mills? ›

Power Elite Definition

Mills describes the power elite as a small group of individuals who make all the decisions that really matter. They are concentrated in corporations, the military, and the government. These three have come to eclipse and control all other spheres of power.

Who is the father of The Sociological Imagination? ›

The father of sociological imagination, C Wright Mills, founded this field of thinking in the mid-20th century. At the time he wrote, “Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both.” Just the same, it's also important to put Mills' theories into context.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Manual Maggio

Last Updated:

Views: 5283

Rating: 4.9 / 5 (69 voted)

Reviews: 92% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Manual Maggio

Birthday: 1998-01-20

Address: 359 Kelvin Stream, Lake Eldonview, MT 33517-1242

Phone: +577037762465

Job: Product Hospitality Supervisor

Hobby: Gardening, Web surfing, Video gaming, Amateur radio, Flag Football, Reading, Table tennis

Introduction: My name is Manual Maggio, I am a thankful, tender, adventurous, delightful, fantastic, proud, graceful person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.