By Haruna Salami
Dr. Mustapha Bintube, renowned researcher and contemporary criminologist in Nigeria, founder of Classical Social Tripodal Insurgency Model, STIM, staff of the National Assembly, Senate Directorate of Journals, Fellow European Centre for Research Training and Development, ERCTD, United Kingdom says he has discovered a social Atomic PEN Structural Theory for Change.
According to Dr. Bintube, the theory was discovered by him for the first time in Sociology to explain social behavioural change to improve on theory construction in the general field of social sciences. The theory is deductive of the Dalton Atomic theory balancing, natural, physical and human, social phenomenon, a sociological handshake with Chemistry. Dr. Bintube deductively reverses the theory to explain social change. This discovery is phenomenal and a new vista in the field of Sociology in particular and the social sciences in general.
“The social Atomic PEN structural theory of social change assumes that everything has its original form, shape, size and structure to define its existence in the human society. The way things appear to us, ab-initio is not their original dispositions (structures), but their second, third or fourth level layer stage of progressive development. All defends on invariable succession of their progressive stages, enabled by the cardinal principles of the social Atomic PEN structural synthesis. For instance, in sociology, we have a number of theories to explain social change and its fundamental principles. Perhaps, the first level stage of change, associated with Atomic PEN structure which ought to have been explored but, until Dr. Bintube’s discovery was projected to social and intellectual community for scientific proof and falsification. He has conducted an extensive cutting edged research of applying deductive approach leading to a discovery of Social Atomic PEN Structural theory of change for practice in the field of social sciences. He theorized that natural, physical phenomenon can explain human social phenomenon, with potency to provide change and its incisive lines of philosophical thoughts in theorizing is summarised as follows:
“The Sociological theory of Atomic PEN Structural Change was constructed on the very foundation of Karl Popper’s deduction approach of social scientific theorizing. The theory has been tested and proved to be sociologically stable and ontologically rooted for the explanation of human behaviour in the society through Atomic PEN Structural analysis. The framework has provided support for sufficient contemporary examples of Atomic PEN structures with the strength of (+- and n) to determine change and to indicate possible direction of individual behaviour in the society and its causal effects to other social Atomic PEN structural fundamentals”.
Bintube’s social theory of Atomic PEN Structural change “provides description of both ‘social-visibility’ and to some larger extent, ‘social invisibility and social indivisibility Atomic structures and their interpretations, explanations and descriptions are possible in their inverse form through social interactions among members of a society as well as their relation to objects within the ecosystem.
“Luke (1973) also, quoted Durkheim, while saying that there are forces which objectified and projected things into another thing. Similarly, he could not also bring to our sociological notice the social energy of Atomic PEN structure of the (+-n) as the forces which change human society from one form to another and from time to time. Durkheim has done classical work as evolutionist and as structuralist who believes in the logical positivism. However, he did not as well provide the strength (+-n) which he should have ideally told us the periodic change in direction of mechanical to organic society but ended up by giving it’s caricature (distinguishing features) as the society changes from simple to more complex one.
“Again, he also failed to tell us the basic and elementary constituents of the previous form of the pole on which mechanical solidarity stand, but he characterizes what he discovered to be known as mechanical society and what actually projected that society to see the light of the day and its sociological fundamentals to provide the strength to determine the direction of change as (+-n) as social energy which moves mechanical society to an organic solidarity was not provided by Durkheim until the Atomic PEN structural theory of change provided it. And as its elementary forms and basic constituents which differentiate the end to end classification. After all, his theory is also limited to the explanation of change associated with an end to end theoretical description. Like Durkheim, “Montesquieu, also called what moves the society as vis a tergo, (as a force which moves the society forward); but couldn’t tag sociological definition and classification as the Atomic PEN structural social energy is the force which ignites change and it is inherently built in any social relationship in the society as it forms and combines the social capital of (P+,E-, and N) and has the capacity of collective representations of the Atomic PEN structure as a social phenomenon to form the basic and the most primary form of Atomic PEN structural change and its constituent was discovered by the sociological theory of Atomic PEN structure for change to be synonymous to what Montesquieu referred to as (the vis- a-tergo).
“Atomic PEN structure is the most fundamental secret behind the elementary forms of dynamic density of the society and it is the same Atomic PEN social energy which enables Comteam Theoleological stage to move to Metaphysical and later provides pathways to the discovery of the Positive (scientific stage). All of these stages are built on the very foundation of the Atomic PEN structural social energy which are inherently built on all structural changes that take place in the society and it is everywhere and exist at all times. It also serves as the social coherence as well as the social fibre to enable elements of the society to form and combine for social mobility to suggest any form of change in the society.
Bintube’s theory of social Atomic PEN structural change stands to explain the “changing nature of social behaviour to inform change in some similar manner to that of an atom; a natural phenomenon. This is the dream of the logical positivist school and what was envisaged by August Comte, the father of logical positivistism. The logical positivist school or the Comtean as it may be called, has clamoured for building a social system in theorizing, utilizing such incisive line of thoughts (‘thinking’ and ‘reasoning’) to establish causal relations among variables to discover newer theories in sociology to solve complex human social problems in the society”. Hence, the discovery of the Social Atomic PEN structure theory of change by Dr. M. Bintube. The postulation of the theory is an attempt to serve as bridge builder to facilitate scientific maturity of social science to attain that of the natural science as advocated by the logical positivist such as August Comte, Karl Popper, Emile Durkheim and John Rex who had pointed out this claim in his book “the key problems of Sociological theory” about the essence of discoveries in both social and natural-physical sciences to enhance social-scientific investigations and sociological credentials which August Comte dreamt for sociology and now left in our hands and sociology as a discipline in general to take the centre stage and make an attempt like this one. Consequent upon that, Robert K. Merton had achieved by theorizing on the second middle range theory.
“Luke (1973) quoted Durkheim in his thesis on “the sociology of knowledge” as he advocated the need for classification such as providing categories of unknown phenomenon (x) in the social science into its very composition with causal effects on other structures to effect further change of the society as a result of social interactions which enable them to construct their own society by themselves to ensure positive change as consequential effects.
“August Comte, though, inductivist who was more or less not attractive to the logical process of deduction compared to Karl Popper’s process of deduction has reasoned on the concept of classification of variable contents in a socially coherent theory of Atomic PEN structural change such as social Protoneous (P+), social Electroneous (E-) and the social Neutroneous (N) as the necessary forces which drive sociological priorities for change in behaviour. Classification here represents the elementary form of the theory of social Atomic PEN structural change to project human society or any social phenomenon from its simpler form into another form characterised by complexity.
Durkheim has also consistently acknowledged the fact that, “human society has its very first source” but he could not explain further to the level of its social and objective constituents, including the dynamic density of how Atomic PEN structure can transform the human society, but he strongly maintained that “society has its very first source”. We have attempted to discover the very first source of the society by employing deductive approach which subsequently provides a pedestal for theorizing on the sociological theory of Atomic PEN structural change. Corollary to the above, Durkheim has also acknowledged that there are collective forces which move the society to inform change, but he did not provide categories of their social disposition such as social (P+,E- and N) which August Comte has also considered as the basic thing a social scientist should do while postulating a sociological theory.
“August Comte based his sociological thesis on ‘Positive science of empiricist traditions drawn from a posteriori understanding of the society from experience and sense perception’. Durkheim called it social facts, (as things which exist independent of an actor’s views and his interpretations of social world). Charles Darwin drew his argument from ‘evolutionism-bilogizing the human society’. Herbert Spencer had done classical work on ‘Social Contract, homogeneity and heterogeneity’. However, none of these philosophers was quick to notice or particular about the basic constituents and elementary form of the P+, E- and the N components of the Atomic PEN structural social energy which are inherently built into and can provide adequate descriptions of what Montesquieu called “vis a tergo” in Montesquieu’s connotations, especially in relation to its structure, shape, uniformity, constituent elements or variable content, composition and strength to describe any social phenomenon in the society. Until the sociological theory of Atomic PEN structural change was discovered through deduction, there was no explanation to the effect of its deduction of being an objective reality of the social Atomic PEN structural theory of change.
“Durkheim has strong conviction of the fact that all societies and hitherto existed ones have their very first source. But he did not provide further explanation on their composition and directions for change and why.
“The social theory of Atomic PEN structural change has been able to give sufficient description of that first source by providing its constituent components as the social protoneous P+, social electroneous E- and the social Neutroneous N as the elementary form of anything that is said to have existed and its basic constituents of social energy of determining its directions as (+- and n) which drive the society forward at the very beginning as it is the first source to enable evolution from one stage to another. Now, the compelling questions are these: What are these conflicting forces which Montesquieu called, vis a tergo? What push the society to gradually emerge from its previous form? What is the description of that previous form?
“Albeit, Montesquieu was also apt to the point to notice that society emerge from its previous form and that is reminiscent of the Atomic PEN structural level synthesis to inform further level change. For instance, the Germeinscheft to form a society as we have given example on students behaviour of asking questions as; “any NEWS on results? No NEWS. No news because, the results are undergoing an Atomic PEN structural synthesis of invisibility, until it transforms to the next level of progression by the dynamic density and interplay of the social P, E and N to cause further change to the level of students notice via the notice board.
“Again, when the Atomic PEN structures are collectively represented in the form of social webs, the social Atomic PEN energy will cause it to initiate transition which enables what is referred to as “social nobility’ to suggest further change and at that stage, the Atomic PEN structure of social protoneous (+), social electroneous (-) and the N catalytic values will appear in their complex and heterogeneous outlook with different forms which resemble, for instance, the mechanical society characterized as simple, later society as its previous form and its constituent, while in comparison to the former organic society that is more complex and heterogeneous stage of change and that transition was enable by Atomic PEN structural social energy. The former would have more complex characteristics which are diversified in their newer Atomic PEN structural breeds as elements for the definition of the system (society) due to the hetrogeneous Atomic web of coiling themselves to explain the later which formed and combined.
“The sociological belief which Herbert Spencer acknowledges as society is not static but rather dynamic. The Atomic PEN structural webs which according to Montesquieu description is ‘meaning’ (conflicting forces and/or vis a tergo) which are formed and further coil to one another to enable social dynamic situations to come into play and possibly cause further change in the society.
Some changes are positive while others are negative, and all of these happen because the Atomic PEN structure carries (+-) values of social protoneous and social electrneous and the N elements to calibrate and recalibrate the society to context and social equilibrium to define change and its direction as it plays catalytic role of a stabilizer for calibration and recalibration of the social energies to bring about structural change in the society. In that case, the Atomic PEN structure is the vehicle which drives the society forward and it can be described as the force which enables change in the society and institutions for social progress of man and his society, in some instances.
“To have an all encompassing understanding of structural change, individual members of the society are to identify not only the PEN structures, but should also establish the strength of the (+-) to enable the direction of the society to discover facts about any existing social phenomenon in it.
“We hear of mechanical and organic society and/solidarity as well as the Gemeinscheft and Gaselscheft, but we never heard of their possible directions in terms of their strength. This is a huge sociological Lacuna (gap) in structural change for the development of the society and measuring the strength as (-+n) values until the theory of Atomic PEN structural change emerged from the weaknesses of the structural functionalist perspective.
“Theory of social Atomic PEN structural change presents three components to define any progressive stage in the history of man and they are represented by the social (P+), the social (E-) and the social (N). These structural components rest on their very orbit and held together by social nucleus to define the characteristics of social actions and negative situation to inform further change within a social context. It is the most primary level change to allow for mechanical changes to take place and they have a disposition of being independent with the capacity of interdependence because they can neither be created nor destroyed but contain in them the capacity for + or – structural change to affect the society just like the Durkhemian ‘social facts’ but Atomic PEN structural change contains the social energy for social transformation and has properties, structures, space and behaviour for studies.
“Durkheim said more about social facts but he did not explain the structure of that ‘social fact’ neither did he explains its composition and behaviour nor the Neo-Durkhemian describe the movement and the directions of that ‘social facts’ until now that the theory of social Atomic PEN structural change has been able to see through sociological lens the social phenomenon that informs the atomic structural change of the society. Marx Weber too, was silent on the structure of an action altogether, while Herbert Spencer was able to identify that observation and reasoning are combined, but neither has ex-rayed the Atomic patterns and structures and forms in which they exist i.e. either observations or the reasoning until the facts behind it was explored by the sociological theory of Atomic PEN structural change to present as observations or reasoning contain the social energy which depict the P,E and N and they are dynamic actions, reasoning and the fact behind social facts or any global social phenomenon, all are the product of the atomic PEN structural changes which inform us of their very existence as objective reality.
“Therefore, the justification for the discovery of the social Atomic PEN structural theory of change is to promote the frontier of intellectual crusade of the logical positivism to follow the trend of scientific progression of Sociology as a science of society to attain maturity of natural science such as physics and chemistry, as advocated by August Comte and Emile Durkheim, (1897), corollary to that, Sociologists were left with no option but to use the ‘positivistic approach in social scientific theorizing.
“Durkheim held so strongly to his conviction on ‘social facts’ to develop his polemics against August Comte, while challenging Herbert Spencer, Weber inclusive on the ground that their Sociological approach was not scientific enough and argued that ‘social facts’ like ‘natural facts’ should be treated as ‘thing’ and the two sciences can be alternated to explain human social action and interactions, John Rex (1961). Structural functionalist such as Durkheim who consistently stands on the belief of Comtean school of thought with the application of scientific techniques for discovery and explanation of social phenomenon, largely did structural but macro analysis, taking social system as their subject matter of scientific inquiry and investigation and not Atomic PEN structural analysis that could provide the discovery of social phenomenon driven by social energies of PEN structure with (+-n). The theory argued that the social energy of (+-n) also facilitates social interaction and contained in human social actions and interactive situation to further determine change and its possible direction in behavioural pattern and its strength”. Bintube noted that, to avoid methodological errors in the design for theorizing, he applied an enhanced deductive but sociologically elastic method to enable discovery, spacing niche for empirical testing and falsification for scientific checks and proof. The discovery of social Atomic PEN structural theory of change by Dr. Bintube as three class model is highly parsimonious social theory with Ockam Razor’sdisposition as three class model for change. The theory has employed deductive method as design to contain integrated elements with fewer elements of induction such as FGD to illicit data for comparison and possible ‘transplant’ of natural phenomenon to explain human phenomenon deductively as the method to enable its discovery and generalisation of same as scientific process of social investigation as he posits in his sociological theorizing. Keat etal (1982) in “Haralambus and Holbon; themes and perspectives” p, 850, noted that scientific theorizing should come in the form of “postulate the existence of entities which have not been observed”. He further added that magnetic fields also form part of scientific theory. Karl Popper in his book “the logic of scientific discovery” (1959), affirms that, “natural science produces causal explanations and describe them in terms of structures, mechanism and processes. Karl popper urged social scientific researchers especially, sociologists to demonstrate their dexterity to specify which factors or variables determine what and at what instance and whether these mechanisms operate or not” and to provide variable content and their classification as proof of what was observed.
“Social Atomic PEN Structural dynamics explain change in individual behaviour and its effects on other possible structures to modify our attitude and social relationships in the society”. Bintube’s social theory of Atomic PEN Structural Change is “profiled with the basic assumption, theoretical content; methodology and critique. Various theories of social change were reviewed to show social Atomic PEN Structural link with them. Diverse Sociological thoughts were examined and compelling Sociological inquiries were made on what ab initio necessitates structural change and hunched to challenge existing thoughts. The theory argues that any social change, irrespective of its classification, contains social energy and is deeply and inherently rooted in any possible change, both apparent and invisible, to inform further change in behaviour. Sociological theory construction, especially the one applying Karl Popper’s deduction approach, involves reversal of an existing theory founded on the basis of systematic process of Durkhemian induction. Emphasis is placed on better understanding of social structures to enable social relations and its consequential effects on other Sociological fundamentals to cause change in social Atomic PEN Structures. The Atomic PEN Structural theory of change has concrete variables as the basic components for classification and enumeration for definition of social situations and integration of complexities of social dynamic density of social interactions in the society, especially the one involving Atomic PEN Structures”.
Thus, Dr. Bintube “deductively abstracts the social energy of Protoneous (P+) with positive social value (+), the social energy of Electroneous (E-) with negative social value (-) and the social energy of Neutroneous (n) with neutral social value of calibrating the society to context specific and equilibrium. The theory can explain any social phenomenon with its characteristics for definition and description of human social actions and interpretation of social world in social problem, investments and utility. Thus, (Bintube 2020), Social Atomic PEN Structural theory of change has the strength to define social division of labour because the PEN structure performs different functions and are assigned +-n cogitations to suggest social Atomic PEN change, especially the N in PEN structure, is to calibrate and further recalibrate any social system to context and equilibrium in the event of chaotic situation and help show direction for positive social change to rescue society from quagmire. The strength for social mobility means the PEN structure rotates on its social orbit firmly supported by its configuration and is steadily moving in its likewise progressive manner. Bintube has discovered a new vista of social phenomenon in social science for study with enormous characteristics that are sociological. The theory is a social phenomenon with the capacity of socially homogenizing because the social PEN structure possesses the characteristics to form and combine to enable social webs of relationship among individuals in the society and then to combine and disintegrate to further blend and mix with other elements to inform upper layer change of social structure and to give adequate description of a complex social dynamic density of the society. So, the PEN structure has power of social heterogeneity and ability for coexisting with individual members of the society as the social Atomic PEN structure relate with other variables for better understanding of the society sociologically. The theory has been discovered to have ability to socially cohere because the PEN structure is ordered, independent as to their social inequality and interdependent with one another as to their mutuality and social consensus of social energies of (+-n) to combine to enable social harmony and consensus to form and combine from simple state of development to a more complex, heterogeneous form of society and enable social mobility as well as stratified in their respective class of PEN and well configured on their configuration supported by the social orbitous. The theory has presented a standard view of social Atomic PEN structure as ‘Sociological translat’ which is galvanized to view any social system as phenomenal and that is reminiscent of the natural one. The social PEN approach is better described as ‘inside outside alternated and multifaceted sociology’ to imagine back forward social world from the reflection of a natural phenomenon, though, it differs significantly from the C.R. Mills’ perspectives on Sociological imagination.
“The Atomic PEN Structural theory of change is potent for Sociological interrogation of any social relationship or social change in the society; a dream which August Comte dropped to rest in peace and Durkhem, the empiricist who stand on the scientific pedestal of the Comtean logical positivist school of theoretical development of sociology. Logical positivism has encouraged the examination of social life periscoping natural phenomenon to explain human social action and interpretation of social life which the social theory of Atomic PEN Structural change has discovered for the first time in the field of social sciences. Problematic statements have been drawn and justification was made for the discovery of the theory of Social Atomic PEN structural change. Concrete concepts, variables and constructs were deductively discovered in Atomic PEN Structures as potent sociological fundamentals in theory construction were formulated to describe social world. A number of themes, including sub-themes for Sociological theorizing were flagged through grounded approach. Logical deduction process of theorizing applying a theory founded on the basis of inductions utilized the “Dalton Atomic Theory” as the Comteam specimen and inferred in the discovery of the Social Atomic PEN theory for Sociological study. Another feature which makes the theory of social Atomic PEN structural change socially formidable is its characteristics to allow for differentiation, integration, ‘visibility of the invisible and the capacity to change from one form to another to inform subsequent change at macro stage of a social phenomenon. This suggests classifications of social life as invisible, visible and its indivisibility with social energy of PEN to synthesis social phenomenon for projection to the upper level change with possible direction for change. It explains much of social bonding to enhance harmony of the PEN structure to reproduce social capital in the process of change chain that is the reintegrative capacity of the Atomic PEN structural theory of social change.
“The Atomic PEN structure enables social disintegration and so, it has the tendency of ‘social differentiation and integration to explain social world. The social theory carves its niche based on the reversal of an empiricist theory for social life which characterizes sociological handshake with natural physical phenomenon in chemistry. Constructs, variables and concepts are presented to ensure the Atomic PEN structural niche for sociological theorizing. The social equation has ensured theoretical saturation by logical deduction process of abstraction substituted “Dalton Atomic Theory” for “Social Atomic PEN Structural Theory of Change”, a Comteam approach later popularized by Durkhemian school of thought. Also presented in this text are how to notice Atomic PEN structures through Sociological lens with contemporary examples on the context of Socio-economic and political fundamentals of our everyday lives. The social Atomic PEN structural dynamics take place in our offices, homes and in our cars. Individual member of the society creates Atomic PEN structures every day, everywhere and at all time and it is a global social phenomenon. The discovery and subsequent construction of the social Atomic PEN structural theory of change, has established a three class model as its nomological network. The cardinal principle of the social Atomic PEN structural theory of change has been presented. The theory has provided an opportunity for its utilization in Social investment and utility. The social theory of Atomic PEN structural change shouldn’t be misconstrued for symbolic interactionism of Herbert Blummer and George Mead, which emphasise the production of meaning out of interacting with symbols, but the Atomic PEN structural theory of change, sees change from the perspectives of an Atomic properties in relations to social structures which are visible, invisible and indivisible. The interactionist perspective provides dichotomy which suggest classification of self along the theoretical plane of ‘the me’, ‘the I’ and the generalised others’ point of view. However, beyond that, the social theory of Atomic PEN structural change has provided concrete variables as PEN structure of P+, E- and N for better description of a phenomenon, reminiscent of R. K. Merton’s mode of adaptation as expansionist to Durkhemian ‘Anomie’. The social Atomic PEN structural theory has nexus with other social theories as the Charles Right Mills, Sociological Imagination but significantly, different from the social thoughts of Mills in many respects. Mills sociological imagination sees change from the perspectives of others opinion with variables such as social-economic and political antecedents of an individual tells more as opinion are sample from the demography for change which have been over flogged by previous researches, but the Atomic PEN structural theory of change argues that change is driven by social energy of (+-n) spectrum and it’s inherently built in all mega structure as a social fibre to inform Atomic level change with the social strength of coiling to form and combine social webs of relations with elements of a phenomenon to cause change to inform upper level stage in change series. The Atomic PEN structural theory of change is not the learning modeling of Evans Pavlov and B.F Skinner’s operant and classical conditioning theory, nor the cognitive mapping theory but it’s a social theory, which contains the social P+, the social E- and the social N to serve as calibre to calibrate and further recalibrate the social system to context and equilibrium ensuring peace for developmental activities to take up. The theory is also not the theory of ‘coroners’ deductive of ethmomethodology of Harold Gafinkel and Zimmerman, driven by ‘mind as the reflection is the pattern reflexive’ but the social theory of Atomic PEN argues that humans produce Atomic PEN structures around them on daily basis through interactions in their homes, offices, cars and everywhere. The transformation of these structures is determines by the individual members of the society and their relations to those structures which produce tremendous meaning. Some are seen while others are not very apparent, but they are there as objective reality and have the social strength to migrate to the visible stage provided there is perfect interplay of man and the PEN social energy of (+-n) for change. The theory of social Atomic PEN structure has with it the characteristics of social visibility, invisibility and social indivisibility of giving description of a structural change and they exist as we relate with individual members of the society in our everyday social life to produce meaning with consequential effects on other possible social relationship to cause change or modify individual behaviour. Lastly, further illustrations and discussions on Atomic PEN structural theory of change has been presented alongside Critique.”
This is the synopsis of the theory, the full bulletin is underway.
Speaking with Newsdiary in Abuja, Dr. Mustapha Bintube said “as a social scientist, since the industrial revolution of the 19th century many theories were propounded by the early philosophers and between that time and now (about 200 years), structures and human lives are changing, the society is gradually improving and changing. We need scholars to pay attention to those changes. There are so many research institutes, they need to be funded to improve on their researches and link those institutes to national development priorities for outcome need to be connected to ministries, departments and agencies, MDAs of government to improve on policy thrust of the government to actualize their vision and mission and the organizational goals and that will actually benchmark the entire policies for global standard. At the end of the day, whatever new discovery during their research will be integrated into the existing policies within the ecosystem to positively affect the socio-economic condition of the individual members of the society.
When you look at the 19th century postulations of Sen Simon, David Hume, August Comte, Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, Montesque, John Stuart Mills etc, these are theories that explain social actions, interaction and the behaviour and between 19th century and 21st century, we have more than 200 years. We need to come up with newer discoveries.
Once you pass through the Post Graduate School, you are supposed to reason and think to come up with original to improve on the philosophy of ideas that will improve the living standard of the citizens within your country and elsewhere.
August Comte coined Sociology, but Emile Durkheim introduced the scientific methods, the same methods used in Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry, they are called logical positivist school of thought (positivism). They believe in analysis that is highly scientific, regressional and quantitative method or nomothetic method as opposed to idiographic methods, poteriori as opposed to aposteriori, something from experience and something that you can just draw from the fundamentals of things around you as they exist.
In support of Durkheim said Dr. Bintube started looking at natural; physical phenomenon with a view to explaining human; social phenomenon side by side and deductively reason that, there is gap in knowledge in the sense that, in social science people say social change has been the crux of social science. In physical; natural science as well, what they look at is change. “So, we both look at change, one from the social perspective and the other from the natural, physical perspective. Durkheim said a social scientist can use what they use in physical, natural science in social science. If that is the case, what informed that change in the first place, forget about whatever classification you are going to give. What informed that change should be our concern and that has not been discussed. Emile Durkheim is talking of social facts as things which exist independent of the actor’s view point and his interpretation of the social world. Anything/everything is social fact provided you have no influence over it; like you have no influence over the laws that govern your life in the society. It is a social fact and phenomenal, but what we are saying is, what is the composition or shape of that social fact? What is the elementary form of that social fact? Does it have a shape; is it mobile or static, akin to Herbert Spencer’s social static and social dynamics? Whether it is homogenous or heterogeneous? That has not been actually looked into by scholars. So, I decided to come out with a new finding or discovery of what I refer to as ‘ the social Atomic PEN Structural change’, a change informed by social proteneous (P+), social electroneous (-) and social nuteneous (n), (PEN) deductive of Dalton Atomic theory as a social phenomenon in social science discipline with the characteristics and so it has classifications of the social PEN structure of invisibility and in divisibilility, a natural phenomenon reverse to be discovered as social phenomenon in sociology as a multifaceted and multidimensional discipline which study man and his society. The social atomic PEN structure theory of change exist and it’s a social phenomenon suigeneris. It exists, it changes form, it has shape, configuration and orbit that allow social mobility. It is highly stratified because it has social proteneous, social electroneous and social nutreneous on its configuration; they are well ordered and they also allow things to change, yet they cannot be seen. If they cannot be seen, then they will be at the level of the social atomic PEN structural change to form and combine a kind of web i.e. social heterogeneity as opposed to social homogeneity. Once the social atomic structures homogenize in their numbers they will come up with a form of structure resemblance of the previous as complex heterogeneous structure distinct from the simple homogeneous one. The full bulletin of the theory is underway.
(Editor’s note: Will be great to receive readers’ reactions)
