No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A nation by any other name: A failure to focus on function
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 April 2025
Abstract
Moffett's interdisciplinary definition of society seeks to distinguish itself from the prevalent, political understanding of the term. Through engagement with international relations literature, we outline how Moffett's proposed “society” results in a recapitulation of the definition of a nation-state. We suggest that this tension could be addressed by adopting a functional, rather than identity-based, approach.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Anderson, B. R. O. (1990). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (6th impr). Verso.Google Scholar
Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society. Macmillan Education https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-24028-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerth, H. H., & Mills, C. W. (Eds.). (2014). From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203759240Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, P. (2021). Other minds: The octopus and the evolution of intelligent life. William Collins.Google Scholar
Griffiths, I. (1986). The scramble for Africa: Inherited political boundaries. The Geographical Journal, 152(2), 204. http://doi.org/10.2307/634762Google Scholar
Hurrell, A. (2007). On global order: Power, values, and the constitution of international society. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233106.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197752791.001.0001Google Scholar
Reus-Smit, C. (2017). Cultural diversity and international order. International Organization, 71(4), 851–885. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818317000261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walby, S. (2003). The myth of the nation-state: Theorizing society and polities in a global era. Sociology, 37(3), 529–546. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380385030373008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Target article
What is a society? Building an interdisciplinary perspective and why that's important
Related commentaries (24)
A nation by any other name: A failure to focus on function
Belonging to a community of moral values as a key criterion of society
Beyond biology: A sociological stance on what is society
Collective memories and understandings of human societies
Definitions and cultural dynamics in understanding “societies”
Do boundaries matter so much for societies?
Group identity without social interactions?
How an interdisciplinary study of societies can develop a comprehensive understanding of the function of deceptive behavior
Identity groups, perceived group continuity, and schism
Identity is probably too complicated to serve as a useful criterion for defining society
Multi-species societies
Philosophy or science of societies?
Psychological mechanisms for individual recognition- and anonymous-societies in humans and other animals
Revisiting the spaces of societies and the cooperation that sustains them
Societal inferences from the physical world
Societies have functions for individuals and collectives
Societies of the open ocean without territories
Societies, identities, and macrodemes
Society: An anthropological perspective
The family as the primary social group
Understanding the jaggedness in social complexity is more important
Vocalizations are ideal identity signals
What is a society in the case of multilevel societies?
Why societies are important and grow so large: Tribes, nations, and teams
Author response
A society as a clearly membered, enduring, territory-holding group