Sociological Imagination the Importance and

¶ … Sociological Imagination The importance and utility of Mills' theorizing on the sociological imagination is undeniable. Budding sociologists and those interested in the field of social sciences understand the fundamentality of this work. But indeed, what is sociological imagination all about? For Mills, sociological imagination is one's capacity to "understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and the external career of a variety of individuals" (Chapter 1, par. 8).

To imagine is to see beyond the confines of the mundanity of life; to transgress the very limited spheres that we live in and the limited options that we have - this is the gist of sociological imagination. Further extending, it can be said that in order to apply sociological imagination, we have to understand the interrelatedness of history and biography (par. 10) - of our personal situations and constructions in the light of the larger and more dynamic scheme of things.

It is to understand that our present-lived realities are influenced by the underlying dynamics and principles of the society that we live in. Mills breaks down sociological imagination into several components: the structuralist / social order standpoint, or the understanding of the way the society is structured; social change, or the mechanism by which a particular society is undergoing change; human nature, or the understanding of the kind of varieties of men and women living in the particular society (par. 11).

More importantly, one must be able to shift from one particular perspective to another (par.12) - this entails one's understanding and acceptance of the multiplicity of perspectives. The dichotomy between issue and trouble also occupied a fruitful and significant discussion in Mills' work. A trouble is something that occurs within the immediate, inner environment of the individual while an issue occurs beyond that. Either way, both issue and trouble occurs because cherished values are being threatened (par. 15-16).

Having said that, this discussion now turns to the introduction of three concepts / theories on sex / gender and later on the application of sociological imagination in this domain will be demonstrated. According to Gilligan (in Clifton et al., 2008, p.

686), females "are more likely to define themselves in terms of interpersonal relationships with others and to be concerned in with social discourse, intimacy, and care-giving, while males are more likely to define as autonomous from others and to be concerned with individual attainment and status." Still in line with gender differential, Durkheim's sexual division of labor maintains that the reproductive role of women confines them to the home, or the private sphere.

Hence, they are perceived to be nurturing, obedient, and submissive because of the socialization process that they go through. (Entwistle, 156-158). On the other hand, current empirical studies have shown that there has been a significant departure from traditional gender roles, particularly in the American society (Miller & Stark, p.1408). Miller and Stark's theory was a result of a cross-cultural empirical study which showed that "gender socialization [in the United States] tends toward the equalitarian [while in] Japan [it] is very traditional" (p. 1415).

What could be of great utility from Miller and Stark's theorizing is the understanding of how gender socialization varies among societies, among nations.

It aligns itself with classical thinking which states that women are more care-giving and more reserved because of the sexual division of labor (as seen in the results of the study in Japanese society where traditional gender roles persists) and at the same time it departs from this thinking when it said that more liberal, non-traditional roles can now be seen in other societies as well (as demonstrated by the results of the study in American society).

As Mills has posited, it is important for us to be able to swiftly shift from one perspective to another. In this case, to shift from the classical Durkheimian sociology of sexual division of labor to the modernist perspective of Miller & Stark, which incorporates how gender roles have changed over the years - to see how a particular society is situated in its history.

Moreover, we can look at the differences of men and women in Western and Asian society to understand why gender roles in these two societies are of stark difference. This accounts for Mill's "human nature" tool. This in turn leads us to adopt a structuralist standpoint and see how a particular society is shaping the people's gender identity. We can then say that probably, the society's economy leads women to stay in the house and do domestic chores.

Changes in the economy can be hypothesized as probable determinants as to why gender roles have changed over the years. Particular economic conditions must have prodded women to massively enter the formal labor force. Relating these theories on sex / gender and sociological imagination, I can now understand why I was able to enter the fitness.