World of Philosophy

Author(s): Christopher Key Chapple, Intaj Malek, Dilip Charan, Sunanda Shastri, Prashant Dave
Publisher: Shanti Prakashan

Page 139

tivated to cooperate. For Coleman, however, people do not enter into social networks of trust and cooperation with the intention of generating social capital. Instead, social capital is a bi-product of the pursuit of self-interest, in compliance with Rational Choice Theory.
Robert Putnam (1941 - ) of Harvard University has brought the discussion of social capital to its current state. As mentioned above, Putnam is the author of the widely admired Bowling Alone which documents the decline of voluntary social networks in the United States. This decline, he argues, is bad for any society because it brings with it a decline in social capital. Putnam's early research on the benefits of social networking was done in Italy, where he documented how the political stability and economic prosperity of northern Italy can be explained by the relative abundance of social capital compared with the south. Subsequently, Putnam went on to do extensive research on social networking in the United States. His research suggests that a lack of social networking, and thus a deficit in social capital, leads to panoply of social problems. Putnam's research and Varshney's research come to similar conclusions about the significance of the social capital provided by civil society.
Putnam and Varshney move beyond Bourdieu and Coleman in two ways. First, Putnam argues that social networks promote the flourishing not only of individuals, but of society as a whole. This observation will be crucial later in this essay for getting a more concrete understanding of why intercommunal civil society helps to prevent violence as documented by Varshney. In Putnam's view, social networks contribute to the flourishing of society at large, not only individuals, by promoting social cohesion, reciprocity and trust. Similarly, Varshney believes that he has documented the fact that inter-communal civil society provides a basis for cooperation, the suppression of rumors, and communication in times of inter-communal stress. Here, the utility of the metaphor "capital" is evident. Putnam recommends that we "invest" in social networks, much as we invest in economic ventures, in the hope that our investment pays off. Crucial for Putnam, however, is that the payoff is not only for individuals, but for society as a whole. Varshney's research bears this out.
There is a second way in which Putnam moves beyond the work of Bourdieu and Coleman. Putnam factors social capital into two types: bonding social capital and bridging social capital. Bonding social capital reinforces exclusive identities and maintains homogeneity within a group. This form of networking entails strong in-group loyalty. Bridging social capital is produced by networks created out of groups that are heterogenous, be it socially, economically, ethnically, racially, politically, or religiously. Extended families or organizations based on ethnicity would be examples of bonding social capital. Often, but not necessarily, religious organizations are examples
90