TOWARD A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF ROLE

The Frankfurt School distinguishes role as a sociological concept from role as a phenomenon, and the question becomes what role as a phenomenon may be like. On the basis of an argument adapted from Simmel and Schutz, the hypothesis is raised that roles are everyday schemes based on processes of typification and ideal-ization. It is argued that the latter allows for the intrusion of power into role struc-tures, and, in fact, the use of roles as the expression of political control. Thus, not only role theory (as traditional theory in Horkheimer's terms) but also society's role structures invite the criticisms of critical sociologists who want to contribute through their conceptual work to the liberation of individuals from the constraints of their re-pressive society. The topic of role is debated in ideological terms in present-day sociology. It is claimed that this concept is apt to conceal rather than reveal features of the phenomena envisaged (Furth, 1971; cf. Habermas, 1963: 173). It has been proposed that the role concept be abandoned (Coulson, 1972: 128; cf. Dewey, 1969: 309 ff.). This proposition has been rejected on the grounds that the role concept is needed because sociologists have to account for "aggregate phenomena on as general