Distinctiveness of Simmel’s Sociology

Running head: DISTINCTIVENESS OF SIMMEL’S SOCIOLOGY
Distinctiveness of Simmel’s Sociology
Name of the University:
Name of the Student:
Author Note:

Distinctiveness of Simmel’s Sociology
1
Georg Simmel, a German Sociologist, had changed the structure of the discourse and
made the subject looking at the world in a different way. He is regarded as the ‘father of
Sociology’, as he was the first person to include the everyday life in the discourse and looked
at everything from a sociological perspective. He had incorporated a micro approach into his
orientation, and is regarded as a Neo-Kantian, for he was the first of his generation who
found the concept of ‘Antipositivism’ and that is posed in a direct opposite to Kant’s
approaches (Goodstein. 2017). Chiefly known for his contribution on the sociology of
structures, Simmel pioneered the concept of fragmentation and social individuality. His
approach to sociology was from the individualistic approach, opposed to many classical
sociologists and reflected upon the culture as being a form that cultivates individuals by the
influences of the objective external factors. He was also a phenomenologist in his orientation
and introduced the concepts of forms” and “contents”, in order to describe cultural
phenomenon stating that, they share a transient relationship, whereby, forms become contents
and vice-versa, depending upon the cultural context (Weber. 2017). However, in the
following essay, the major works and contribution of Simmel will be discussed and the
distinctiveness of his work will be evaluated and understood.
Works of Simmel:
Simmel was essentially a philosopher, but his contributions were mostly in the
discourse of Sociology. Simmel had introduced new ways of thinking in the discourse. The
methods that Simmel had included in his approach were Structuralism and Interpretivism
(Kivisto. 2014). He viewed the discourse from the micro approach, taking into account the
everyday conversations that people indulge into. However, in order to reflect upon the
contributions of Simmel, it is essential to understand the way he had viewed the society. He
differentiated the society as per the types of individuals, and he stated the each if the society

Distinctiveness of Simmel’s Sociology
2
is characterised by the kind of relation and expectation the people share. He further gave four
basic presuppositions,
 People provide meanings to the contents that are infinite, and thus make sense of the
situations and socially codify the contents.
 There are opposed categories present in the works and thus the world and the
phenomenon can be best understood.
 Society and the social forms grows gradually entailing social distances, incorporating
enlarging secrets and reducing conflicts.
 Lastly, not everything has a fixed, intrinsic meaning, the meanings of the same
context can be shared and transferred with the negotiation between two people who
are involved in the situation (Kivisto. 2014).
Theory of Sociability:
Before viewing the contributions that Simmel had made, it is essential to understand
the way he viewed the society. As have been mentioned before, Simmel was interested in the
forms of conversation that took place in the everyday life. However, it was not the contents of
the conversation that he was interested in, rather it was the context and the relationship
between the individuals involved in the system of conversation, that he was interested in.
Therefore, he viewed that the individual interaction taking place in two ways, in the form of
Dyad, where, the interaction takes place between two people, and both of the individuals
exercise equal sense of individuality (Denzin. 2017). The other form of conversation is in the
form of Triad, where there is a chance for formation of a firm of Dyad Relationship, within
the Triad conversation pattern, which threatens and endangers the sense of individuality and
of the third person of the group. He further viewed, that, as the size of the group enlarges, the
individuals, forming the group, becomes isolated and fragmented, and thus the social

Distinctiveness of Simmel’s Sociology
3
structure is formed, as according to Simmel. Further, he had included the concept of ‘The
Stranger’. This concept entails that the role of a person depends and varies with the proximity
of a person to a social group. If a person is at a distance from the group, then he or she is
considered to be a stranger to the group (Scott and Staubmann. 2013). However, the distance
is no regarded as the physical distance of the person, rather it is the emotional or personal
distance of the person from the group. According to Simmel, a stranger is far enough from
the group that he is unknown to the group, but the person is close enough, to the same, so that
the members of the group can get to know him (Schermer and Jary. 2013). This concept holds
his theory of Sociation or Sociability.
Form and Content:
Another significant contribution of Simmel is his dialectical work on the concepts of
‘forms’ and ‘contents’. One of the major themes of his work is the concepts of forms and
concepts and a major portion of his works are basing upon this. The concept of ‘form’, a
claimed by Simmel, is the social codes or socially coded identity that are universal and
legitimate all through the society and the knowledge of these coded identities are known and
shared by all. In this concept, Simmel had used the methods of phenomenology, where he had
identified the social phenomenon and the social interaction with the concept of ‘form’ that are
universal and general all through the society and shares the similar coded identity (Frisby.
2013). However, the ‘content’ that is the theme or the context, where the phenomenon or the
interaction processes take place. He has shown that the forms are present across the society
but involve different contents. For example, he said that the concept of war involves
involvement and cooperation of two groups, but the content or the context of these form is
different in different society, and that, according to him is the content. However, he had
further mentioned that the forms and the contents can be used, interchangeably, that is,