Therefore, for Simmel Sociology is more than just the study of "natural laws." Simmel also emphasized the study of small groups. This differed for the classical theorists like Durkheim and Marx. The primary contemporary interest in Simmel's work stems from the analysis of individual action within the ambit of the structural approach. An essential difference between Simmel's view of sociological analysis and other major theorists is that while theorists like Durkheim considered the aim of sociology to be the creation of logical and inclusive overarching theoretical constructs, Simmel viewed society, as it were, from the bottom up: with the focus on the way that smaller groups and individuals interact. This approach is more in line with contemporary phenomenological and existential theories.

It is in this light that a reassessment of the work of Simmel is suggested. While theories like Durkheim and Weber criticize much of Simmel's work, they also acknowledge a debt to his sophisticated and ingenious insights into societal function and reality. It is enlightening to note that Durkheim, for example, criticizes Simmel's work on the grounds that it lacks "material content" and is reductionist in that, " No connection can be discovered among the questions to which he draws the attention of sociologists; they are topics of meditation that have no relation to an integral scientific system. " (Durkheim E.) the early modernist bias in Durkheim's critique becomes clear in the reference to the lack of a "scientific system" and the predilection for meditative thinking. The desire to move way from 'master narratives' and concepts such as scientific objectivity towards a more inclusive, discursive and subjective analysis of society that was characteristic of Simmel's work, is more...

It therefore becomes clear why a reassessment and re-evaluation of Simmel's work has been called for from many quarters.
A further reason for the reassessment of Simmel's work in terms of the Sociological canon is that he influenced many of the central works in that canon - including Weber's major work, the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Weber in fact notes the brilliant analysis of social action in the works by Simmel.

Simmel also influenced many modern American theorists, such as Robert Park. However, it is also true that his work has been largely ignored by American sociology as a whole - which is a further incentive to reappraise his contribution to the discipline.

In the final analysis, it is difficult to state categorically whether Simmel's sociological vision is more appropriate than Durkheim or Weber's theories to describe and understand society and social phenomena. What is however very clear is that a reassessment of his work is needed, not only in terms of his influence on theorist's like Weber, but also in terms of the value of his work to modern Sociological theory. The particular insight and the discursive and "mediaitve 'nature of Simmel's analyses is interesting in terms of the origins of postmodern Sociological mindset that interrogates scientific rationalism, objectivism and logocentric thought. As referred to, a reassessment of Simmel's oeuvre would also initiate an in-depth assessment of the status and parameters of the discipline of Sociology.

Bibliography

Durkheim E. " Sociology and its Scientific Field, in K.H. Wolff (editor), Essays on Sociology and Philosophy by Emile Durkheim et al., New York: Harper and Row (1964). pp. 354 -75.