The Social Atomic PEN Structural Theory of Change
Dr. Mustapha Bintube
Specific Objectives: This research examines the following research questions to achieve the overarching objectives of the research: i) What are the conflicting forces which Montesquieu called vis a tergo? ii) What are the social energies which drive society gradually to emerge from its previous form ? iii) What energized change in social structure from point-to?point, it’s classification, structure and elementary form? iv) Can we also make classificatory and/or categorization of the basic constituents of force that drives social structure? V) Whether or not the force which moves the society has classification, structure and elements? vi) How can social PEN structural theory of change explain Covid-19 pandemic and it’s consequential effects? vii) Can we test the efficacy of the Social PEN structural theory of change to examine suicide as a social phenomenon among the subcultural Pluralist in the society?
Social PEN Theory; Basic Assumption: The Sociological theory of Atomic PEN Structural change typically holds that every change is by social PEN structures made up of three powerful but independent human elements. They have shape and space within them and are mutually connected to enable change for social progress. When one of this social elements changes in behaviour, i.e. P, E and N, it informs structural change at social PEN level and when social PEN level interaction takes place with other structures, that structure will transit to Personian middle principle of structural change to inform macro structural change of functionalism to bring about a system due to changes at different levels of social PEN-micro-middle range-macro system chain of structural changes. Within this context, any kind of change takes place in the socio-economic and political life.(Olu Ogunika, 2008).
Corollary to this, the first level stage is so crude to ordinarily conceive or notice as social PEN invisible and are indivisible. The fact that sociologists construct sociological theories utilising natural, physical, phenomenon to explain human social actions and interactions and to give sufficient description of the phenomenon in sociology connotes ‘sociological transplant’ of natural phenomenon to interpret social behaviour as social phenomenon to see aspects of human life; Durkheim and Mauss, M, 1703), (August Comte, 1986), (Popper, 2005). Oftentimes, people wonder why institutional change is difficult to be achieved in most fragile societies of African. There is seemingly no commensurate structural change for money expended.
For instance, in Africa where a nation appropriates Trillions of Protoneous (P+) capital funding for the execution of policies and projects that should bring about structural modifications with recurrent expenditure to ensure credible population with sound electroneous (E-) human resource for building capacity among other things and yet could hardly account for desired structural change upon appropriation of such protoneous (P+) element of the social PEN for change to the next stage in progressive change chain. (Putnam R. 1983), (Emile Durkheim 1938).
This is because such activities are handled and managed by public trustees who are electroneously (E-) drained, socially fractured and reckless in the administration of public trust and who could hardly understand the working of the system, its complexes and dynamic structures to bring about development nexus and the failure of the social neutroneous (N) to calibrate the system for change. Most societies end up swinging and sieving resources for no commensurate structural effect for social value and utility and hardly can one see an output that is social PEN equivalent in structural change around social economic and political circles.
This quagmire would continue unless and until the social Protoneous (P+) element of social PEN are managed by electroneously (E-) empowered citizens devoid of being protoneously reckless or incapacitation of those who were entrusted with public offices as managers and leaders to guarantee and improve on social neutroneous (N) for perfect calibration of the normative cultural standard to checkmate excess and shortcoming of human in the society for change. (Blumer H. 1962) (Blummer, 1969), (Talcot Parsons, 1937).
The social PEN structural theory of change assumes that individuals create structures with pattern around them. (Talcot Parsons, 1951). These structures oftentimes, affect the individuals’ lives and consequently, amplify their behaviour and that of others.
The social PEN Structure is inherently built in our everyday lives and it allows series of social actions to enable interactions and subsequently form patterns of interpersonal relations to take place within social structure. (Mills J.S and Taylor H. 1974, [1869) (Robert K. Merton, 1968). Individuals consciously or subconsciously create series of social PEN structures through interaction on daily basis. Such structures, in their inverse form affect, shape and control their lives.(Haralanbus and Holborn, 2008)(Mead, G. H. 1934)(Marx Weber 1947). This social PEN structure has pattern, behaviour, shape, size, orbit and the strength of relationship with other forms of social existential in their respective classes of configuration to ensure building patterns to define the social nucleus which rests on the social orbit in our social relations with others. (Karl Marx, 1964, [1840]). The theory also assumes that, since those Atomic structures have patterns, they could have the capacity to define any social phenomenon. Any phenomenon, with the characteristics of an Atomic PEN structure is fit for scientific investigations and hence the discovery of the social PEN structural theory of change.
The theory also assumes that it has the social energy and strength (+-n) to determine possible direction of change and it can cause upper level change in man’s life. (Haralanbus and Holborn, 2008), (Mead, G. H. 1934) and (Marx Weber 1947).
When the social PEN structure of social protoneous (P+) capital disintegrates, and the social energy of the Electroneous (E-) human resource diminishes or in a state of extinction, then it is practically impossible for the social Neutroneous (N) norms to calibrate the social system to suggest change in the directions of the society.
Then the society would begin to experience dysfunction and as a result human society is bound to face failure of its basic constituents; its laws and rules because the social P+ is lone and incapacitated to form and combine social capital by way of collective conscience and representation of the social system due to insufficient, total absence or diminishing state of the social electroneous E- manpower as social energy and driver for change.
The society and its constituents that were built on the basis of mutual consensus transit from its normal stage to a gradual and lone- pathological and in another sense push society to what (Durkheim) called Anomie conditions with the aid of PEN social energy of (+-n) to experience failure: (Robbert D. Putnam, etal 1995), (Emile Durkheim 1957).
This change is relative to the group’s social bonding reflective of social PEN structure and this viewpoint has been corroborated by (Putnam R. 1983) and no further friction or anomie will take place. This is what (August Comte, 1986), (Spencer H. 1971) (Darwin, C. 1968) (Douglass, J.D. 1967), refer to as structural ‘disintegration’ to cause ‘differentiation’ and transformation as by-product of social dynamic density of the P, E and N.
All of these conceptual variable contents of social change will take place within a structure called social PEN structures that are Atomic in nature with the social energy to cause change in the activities of man in relations to other social phenomenon for further change of the society.(Emile Durkheim, 1934), (Hogan, M. O. 2006), (August Comte, 1986). The social PEN structural theory of change provides context for explanations of these social activities and it remains the framework for the explanations of structural and social integrations.
The social PEN structural analysis gives sufficient descriptions of an informer for structural transformation everywhere, irrespective of where you are, who you are and it takes the form of social context, but relative to system of analysis at anytime. It facilitates change at Atomic PEN structural level and has inherently built-in mega structures; social institutions (socio-economic and political life) to suggest further stage of development of the society or social system as the structural functionalist want us to believe.
Theorizing on social PEN structure of change has provided a means to give sufficient descriptions of other social phenomena and their behaviour, which are potent enough to cause further changes in social life. It also gives more reasons for why and how a society changes, as well as offering an explanation on its complexities and dynamic density conditions for the changing nature of man and his environment as an influencer to inform upper layer progressive changes within the ecosystem. (Emile Durkheim, 1938)(Spencer H. 1971) (Darwin, C. 1968) (Douglass, J.D. 1967)(Putnam R. 1983).The social PEN structural theory of change argues that every individual contains social energy within him which denotes (+) and (-) to facilitate and define the directions of social actions to inform social relations and pattern for social relationship to happen and they are built through social conversation. Man consciously or subconsciously builds patterns upon patterns every day to suggest structural change in the society. See examples below: Social PEN Theory; Power Outage and a Man in the Dark Spot
In our subconscious mind we get into dark places such as rooms, throw an object, say on the bed, and in our subconscious mind, we know where exactly that object would get to drop despite the fact that the room is dark and objects are invisible in darkness.
We hold the belief that they are sociologically visible and we can relate with those social PEN structures that are Atomic in nature and conveniently so in their existence as social reality, (Emile Durkheim, 1938). Conversely, a stranger may not notice such structures that are highly Atomic to allow social relations due to their invisibility as the stranger lacks relations to those structures which you have socially constructed over time and sustained with perfect relations on daily basis through social interaction simply because, the stranger was not part of the active construction of those social PEN structures which you had constructed around you or in your house, office or inside your car.
They are invisible to the eye, but they exist as real and the mind can imagine them sociologically: (Mills, J.S. and Taylor H. 1974). Also, they are inherently built, in fact the social Atomic PEN energy of (+-n) is to determine the directions of such structures and as well indicate perfect change due to the social forces which they fused into mega structures and they sustain them.
The room, as a social system of relation to man, enables building structures that is Atomic and interacting with objects around you. Eventually we construct social PEN structures for changes to happen in our rooms and around us. That makes social PEN structural social forces of (+-n) as a social phenomenon. (Mills, J.S. and Taylor H. 1974),
The structures cannot be seen with eyes for apparent lack of light, especially in darkness, but we still relate to pick anything kept in that room which a stranger cannot and as support for sense perception to enable such physical interaction in spite of the fact that your stimulus are active. Because of the social forces of (+-n) of such structure as it exists even in darkness (invisible with its existence as indivisible), yet our eyes which cannot see in darkness recognizes such social PEN structure around us and allow interactions with them. You may conveniently get into your room when there is power outage and when the room is dark and pass through to get to your bathroom and even get to pick your tooth brush but a stranger may not achieve such relations with objects in your room.
All these happened because you had constructed invisible structures with relations on daily basis and you sustained them to produce tremendous meaning and to continue to exist as real even in darkness. (Rex J. Tomlinson S. 1979), (Zimmerman, D. H 1971), (Zimmerman, D.H and Wieder, D.L. 1971), (Spencer, H. (1971)
