Sociological imagination has become an important aspect in today’s society. Predominantly, the concept pertains to the awareness of the connection that exists between personal experience and the general society. Noteworthy, it is not a theory but an viewpoint of society that tries to drive people into thinking away from the routine life and look at their life from a new perspective. The concept was first introduced by Wright Mills in 1959 (Crossman, 2018). Also, Karl Marx contributes to the concept by helping society understand the way people behave and their reasoning behind various social, political and cultural aspects. It is important to point out the fact that social imagination plays an important role in the society and has influenced industrialism, globalization and capitalism.
Sociological imagination played a critical role during the industrial period. Specifically, it brought changes and transformed society as the system drew employees away from the rural family economy to urban areas. In turn, it brought about changes and transformed agricultural way of life into a commercial and modern industrial society. In the same way, sociological imagination played an important role in globalization (Gouthro, n.d.). The concept has allowed people to make connections both locally and globally. As such, sociological imagination has allowed people to change their perception from a local point of view to a global one. Also, the concept played a critical role in capitalism (Seybold, 2016). Specifically, it allowed for a shift to private ownership from communal ownership of property.
Crossman, A. (2018). Definition of the Sociological Imagination and Overview of the Book. ThoughtCo. Retrieved 6 June 2018, from https://www.thoughtco.com/sociological-imagination-3026756
Gouthro, P. Understanding Local and Global Contexts: The Importance of the Sociological Imagination for Adult Education. Retrieved 6 June 2018, from https://www.thoughtco.com/sociological-imagination-3026756
Seybold, P. (2016). Sociology, Capitalism, Critique. Socialism and Democracy, 30 (1), p. 208-211