Definition Pure Theory of Theory

Scientific theory is the most scientific science. Only theory can attain the highest degree of testability, generality, simplicity, and so on. Only theory can be revolutionary. For this reason the most acclaimed scientists in history-- such as Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin, and Albert Einstein-were theorists. And the most scientific sciences have the most theorists: About half of all physicists, for instance, are fulltime theorists (Traweek 1988: 3). The least scientific sciences such as sociology and psychology have few full-time theorists, and few of these produce theories that meet the highest scientific standards such as testability, generality, and simplicity. Moreover, because scientific theory is the most scientific science, the pure theory of scienticity implies a theory of scientific theory (see generally Black 2000a). The social structure most conducive to scienticity in general-neither too close nor too far from the subject-is most conducive to scientific theory in particular. Classical sociology is thus more theoretical than modem sociology because the distant subjects of most classical sociology attract more theory than the close subjects of most modem sociology. Classical sociologists were largely full-time theorists who subsisted on the findings of researchers and others too intimate with their subjects to be theoretical themselves. Closeness undermines theory. 

But too much distance undermines theory as well. Many theoretical sociologists ignore the findings of sociological and other researchers (such as anthropologists and historians), and are otherwise too far from their subjects to be highly scientific. Examples are Talcott Parsons (e.g., 1951) and Niklas Luhmann (e.g., [1984] 1995), both of whose work is primarily conceptual rather than factual. Although general and original, their ideas are extremely complicated and almost entirely untestable. Virtually nothing they published can ever be called true or false, and their writings are mostly useless to those who do research. Still other theoretical sociologists primarily study the classical theory of the past (e.g., Poggi 1972; Lukes 1973). They have no scientific subject at all. 

Most sociologists are too close to their subject, then, and some are too far. Few believe that sociology can be truly scientific. They blame the complexity of human behavior, the mysteries of human subjectivity, and the unpredictability of free will. They say people are essentially different from other scientific subjects, and that a highly scientific theory of social life applicable across the social universe is impossible. But the problem is the social structure of their own sociology: They study only themselves, or nothing. 

Rewrite from Contemporary Sociology 29. 5 (Sep 2000): 704-709.