You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
While some thinkers have embraced postmodernism and argued that we have moved beyond the modern era, others have argued that we remain within modernity — albeit a transformed or radicalised version of it. The most important figures in this debate are Anthony Giddens and Ulrich Beck, whose work on structuration theory, late modernity, and risk society offers a sophisticated alternative to both traditional structural theories and postmodernism. For AQA A-Level Sociology, these thinkers do double duty: Giddens' structuration theory is the leading attempt to resolve the structure–agency debate that runs through the whole course, while the late-modernity thesis is the principal sociological rival to postmodernism. Mastering them gives you a powerful concluding move for almost any theory essay — a way of dissolving the either/or oppositions (structure or agency; modernity or postmodernity) that weaker answers simply restate.
Key Definition: Late modernity (also called reflexive modernisation or high modernity) is the idea that contemporary society represents not a break with modernity (as postmodernists claim) but a continuation and intensification of modern processes, particularly individualisation, globalisation, and reflexivity.
This material is assessed in the Theory and Methods sections of Paper 1 (Education with Theory and Methods) and Paper 3 (Crime and Deviance with Theory and Methods). Structuration theory is the key reference for the structure–agency debate, which underpins evaluation across every perspective. The late-modernity / risk-society thesis is examined as the main alternative to postmodernism, and it feeds the substantive topics: in beliefs (Giddens on reflexivity and the questioning of tradition; Beck on the loss of certainty), in the family (the "reflexive project of the self", individualisation, "liquid"/negotiated relationships — a strong link to Beck and Beck-Gernsheim's individualisation thesis), in globalisation (disembedding, the global scope of manufactured risk), and in crime and deviance (late-modern accounts of insecurity and risk management). It also informs the methods and science debate, since Beck's account treats scientific expertise as both indispensable and a source of new risks.
Track the relationships as you read. Structuration theory positions itself between the structural theories (functionalism, Marxism), which it criticises for determinism, and social action theory, which it criticises for neglecting structure — Giddens, like Weber before him, seeks to bridge the two through the "duality of structure". The late-modernity thesis is defined against postmodernism: Giddens and Beck accept the empirical changes postmodernists describe (individualisation, the questioning of tradition, fluid identities) but interpret them as a radicalisation of modernity rather than a break with it. There are links to feminism (individualisation and the renegotiation of gender roles and relationships) and to Bourdieu, whose habitus is a parallel attempt to combine structure and agency. Methodologically, Beck's "risk society" raises the status of, and the public trust in, scientific expertise — a direct connection to the "is sociology a science?" debate. These contrasts are exactly the synoptic moves examiners reward.
Giddens developed structuration theory as an attempt to overcome the traditional divide between structure and agency in sociological thought. Rather than choosing between structural theories (which see individuals as shaped by external forces) and action theories (which emphasise individual meaning and choice), Giddens argued that structure and agency are two sides of the same coin.
The central concept of structuration theory is the duality of structure. This means that social structures are both the medium and the outcome of human action:
In other words, structure does not exist independently of human action, and human action always takes place within a structural context. The two are inseparable. Giddens' favourite illustration is language: the rules of grammar exist before and beyond any individual speaker (structure), yet they exist only because speakers continually use them, and speakers can also bend, stretch and gradually change them (agency). Society, on this view, is like a language that is endlessly spoken into existence. The diagram below shows the resulting cycle — the "duality" by which knowledgeable agents draw on structure to act, and in acting reproduce (or transform) the very structure they drew on.
flowchart TB
A["Social structures: rules + resources (the medium of action)"] --> B["Knowledgeable agents draw on rules & resources to act"]
B --> C["Routine action mostly reproduces existing structures"]
B --> D["Reflexive / creative action can modify or transform structures"]
C --> E["Structures reproduced (the outcome of action)"]
D --> E
E -. becomes the medium for the next round of action .-> A
B --> F["Unintended consequences feed back beyond the actor's control"]
F -.-> A
The dotted feedback arrows are the heart of the theory: structure is never simply "out there" but is continually re-made by action — and yet action is never wholly free, because it is shaped by inherited structures and produces consequences no individual intended. This is how Giddens claims to dissolve the structure–agency dichotomy.
Giddens distinguished between two types of structural elements:
Power, in Giddens' framework, is the ability to draw on resources to influence events and the actions of others.
Giddens argued that human beings are knowledgeable agents — they possess a practical understanding of the social world that enables them to navigate everyday life. He distinguished between:
Practical consciousness: The tacit, taken-for-granted knowledge that people use in everyday life without being able to articulate it explicitly. For example, we know how to greet someone, queue in a shop, or navigate a social gathering, even if we cannot explain the rules we are following.
Discursive consciousness: The knowledge that people can articulate and reflect on. For example, a sociologist can explain the unwritten rules of a job interview, whereas most people simply follow them intuitively.
The distinction between practical and discursive consciousness is important because it shows that social reproduction is not automatic or unconscious — people actively (if often unreflectively) produce and reproduce social structures through their everyday actions.
Giddens acknowledged that human action often has unintended consequences that extend beyond the actor's knowledge or control. These unintended consequences can feed back into the conditions of future action, creating outcomes that no individual intended or foresaw. This means that while individuals are knowledgeable agents, they are not all-powerful — their actions are always shaped by circumstances that are not of their own making.
Evaluation (AO3):
In later work, Giddens developed a theory of late modernity (or high modernity) as an alternative to postmodernism. He argued that contemporary society does not represent a break with modernity but rather its intensification.
Disembedding: Social relations are "lifted out" of local contexts and restructured across time and space. For example, money and expert systems (such as banking, air travel, and medicine) allow people to interact without face-to-face contact, extending social relationships across the globe.
Reflexivity: In late modernity, all aspects of social life — including tradition, identity, and personal relationships — are subject to constant examination and revision in the light of new information. Nothing is taken for granted; everything is open to question.
Ontological security and insecurity: Reflexivity creates both opportunity and anxiety. People in late modern societies must constantly make choices about their identity, lifestyle, and relationships, without the guidance of tradition. This can create a sense of ontological insecurity — a feeling of existential anxiety about the self and one's place in the world.
The reflexive project of the self: Giddens argued that identity in late modernity is not given but must be actively constructed and maintained as a coherent narrative — a process he called the reflexive project of the self. We are constantly asking, "Who am I?" and "How should I live?" — questions that were largely answered by tradition in earlier periods.
Life politics: In late modernity, political engagement shifts from emancipatory politics (struggles for freedom from oppression) to life politics (personal choices about lifestyle, identity, body, and ethics). Issues such as environmental sustainability, gender identity, reproductive rights, and animal welfare become central political concerns.
Giddens explicitly rejected the postmodernist claim that we have entered a new era of fragmentation and relativism. He argued that:
Beck's theory of the risk society is one of the most influential accounts of late modernity. In Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (1992), Beck argued that modern societies are increasingly organised around the production, distribution, and management of risks — particularly the large-scale, manufactured risks created by modern technology and industrialisation.
Beck distinguished between pre-modern risks (natural disasters, famine, plague) and manufactured risks — risks that are the product of human activity and technological development. Manufactured risks include:
Risks are global: Unlike pre-modern risks, manufactured risks are not confined to particular places or social groups. Climate change, nuclear fallout, and financial crises affect everyone, regardless of class, gender, or nationality. In this sense, risks are "democratic."
Risks are invisible: Many manufactured risks (radiation, chemical pollution, financial instability) cannot be directly perceived by the senses. They must be identified and interpreted by experts — scientists, economists, public health officials. This gives experts enormous power but also creates a crisis of trust when experts disagree or get things wrong.
Risks are reflexive: The risks of modern society are not accidents or natural events; they are the unintended consequences of modernity itself. The very technologies and institutions that were designed to create progress and security have generated new, potentially catastrophic dangers.
Individualisation: In risk society, traditional social structures (class, family, gender roles, occupational communities) weaken. Individuals are increasingly responsible for managing their own risks — choosing insurance, pension plans, career paths, and health strategies. This creates both freedom and anxiety.
Beck used the term reflexive modernisation to describe the process by which modernity becomes aware of its own risks and limitations and begins to transform itself. Reflexive modernisation involves:
Evaluation (AO3):
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.