Focus as a dimension is closely linked to attention as a balancing dimension but specifically emphasizes how sociologists have examined people’s ability to direct and organize their attention. Attention must be directed toward the functioning of systems and their interactions, rather than toward individual actors. Focus, as a sociological dimension, thus highlights the tension between specialization and a holistic view/systematic approach, as well as how governance issues in modern societies shape and limit people’s ability to prioritize and manage their attention in an increasingly complex world. This dimension examines where social actors’ zones of interest lie, which may, for example, be limited to the self, where self, interest takes precedence over the public interest (Zerubavel, 2015).
Specialized systematics: where there is a blend of systematics and specialization in how one acts, thinks, and seeks the good. Specialized systems thinking is a focus that is divided between the specific and the general at the systems level. Society requires most people to be specialized, as this is what the economy generally rewards. Society is also structured in such a way that one must be specialized in one’s focus on self, interest (Smith, 2008). Specialization and systematic thinking can take many different forms: the relationship between the individual and the collective; the focus on the actor’s own survival and what is best for the collective; what one focuses on and learns about; and how one’s thoughts are shaped. Enlightened self, interest can be seen as a balancing of specialized systematic approaches. Enlightened self, interest is such a higher form of balance, where one acts in one’s own interest but in ways that benefit the collective to which one belongs, which, in turn, makes things even better for oneself. Enlightened self, interest limits and directs the practices through which the actor can act. It becomes a way of choosing between two activities that can both bring pleasure in the present, but one of which also benefits others.
Specialized systems thinking also involves seeing how one’s own specific actions can contribute to the system and the broader context functioning better. An example of specialized systems thinking is Fullan’s concept of professional capital (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2013): a combination of human, social, and decision, making capital, in which one builds strength within the networks of which one is a part, where networks, knowledge/skills, and decision, making ability reinforce one another in a positive spiral. As a teacher, one is specialized, yet at the same time contributes to shaping the broader functioning of the profession; the focus is not solely on one’s own human and social capital. Another important counterbalance to specialized systems thinking is maintaining a deep focus on the specific in order to contribute creativity and innovation that can benefit the broader context. This deep focus means that, for the moment, the broader picture is set aside. The problem arises only when the person never looks up from the specific or fails to see how the specific relates to the whole. For example, a researcher who never asks themselves about the ethics of developing a new technology.
Imbalances
Below are various imbalances in this dimension.
Unspecialized systems thinking
Unspecialized systems thinking refers to someone who is merely a generalist and thinks only in terms of systems without delving into the specifics or getting into the nitty, gritty of anything. Being a generalist is a good thing, but a generalist who knows nothing about the specifics loses touch.
Specialized non, systems thinking
Specialized non, systems thinking refers to those who are specialized without looking up. One form of this is “work, centered citizenship,” where there is an overconfidence that good citizenship stems from a one, sided focus on one’s paid work.
Another form of specialized non, systems thinking can be described as “survivalism.” It is a one, sided focus on the actors’ own survival and gain. “Survivalism” in a school setting (Hiltunen, 2017), or a politician who focuses solely on their own survival even if it comes at the expense of democracy (Levitsky, 2023). It is a narrow, minded, unenlightened self, interest that can lead to the brutalization of others in the attempt to survive oneself.
Over, specialization takes other forms, such as the “narrow, minded expert”, someone who knows a great deal about a single field but lacks the broader education needed to connect this knowledge to other areas and view it within a larger context. Such a person often has an excessive confidence in their own competence and understanding of the world. Psychologist Teltock has demonstrated in experiments that experts are worse at making predictions about the future because they tend to overcomplicate and overestimate the knowledge they have access to in order to understand the present and the future (2015). The uneducated person is the norm, and the ideal rediscovered in 19th, century Germany has remained an ideal that few live up to (Bohlin, 2018). John Stuart Mill argued that education was important for making one’s knowledge more useful. Mill argues that a well, educated lawyer becomes a better lawyer because they can make connections, interpret information, and be more well, rounded in their reasoning (Bohlin, 2018). Having a highly specialized interest, being a “nerd”, but lacking the intellectualism and education that come with it leads one to overestimate, much like experts do, how one’s domain knowledge can help society (Kelly, 1999). An example of this is engineers with extensive knowledge in a specific field who believe they can make the world a better place, and that any risks that may arise are trivial and easy to manage (Kelly, 1999; Hughes, 2026).
Altruistic self-harm
Altruistic self-harm is an imbalance in which the public interest takes precedence over one’s own to the point of being harmful. Altruistic self, harm can take a specialized form when it involves trying too hard to help a specific person, in a form of “compulsive kindness” (Alvesson, 2019), or trying to help someone who is harming you in your private life, for example, someone who subjects you to physical abuse. Altruistic self, harm can also be directed toward the greater good, where one tries to help society so much that one sustains excessive harm. Heroic citizenship, for instance, involves sacrificing oneself, such as one’s time, resources, and energy, to help others. But when this is taken to extremes, such as sustaining excessive harm through trauma or even dying, it has gone too far. There may be certain situations where altruistic self, harm is the only course of action, such as resisting a dictatorship or going to war. Altruistic self, harm occurs above all when altruism fails to help but instead causes harm. It is, therefore, a misguided goodwill that can even be exploited.
The pseudo-generalist
The generalist may have other shortcomings, such as a lack of education, and above all, the generalist is a figure associated with the professional world. The generalist as a consultant who can step into various companies and take the reins is one example, though this role should really be viewed as overspecialized. Consultants have been involved in numerous scandals linked to the most influential firms, such as McKinsey. Consultants are generalists but are used as specialists, as was the case, for example, when they worked to get the drug OxyContin approved by the FDA in the U.S. Here, specialization in the pursuit of individual interests had gone so far that McKinsey was prepared to engage in corrupt behavior. Corruption and selfish behavior can be seen as the ultimate form of overspecialization, you have specialized in focusing solely on your own interests.
Tribalism
The film and book The Zone of Interest, in which we follow Rudolf Höss (commander of Auschwitz) and his family by author Martin Amis, alludes to the fact that people often have a narrowly limited zone of interest for their moral reflections, often focused on their own lives, and are capable of rationalizing away and looking the other way when it comes to the violence they are complicit in, participate in, or even instigate. This narrow zone of interest protects us. It borders on a blasé attitude of indifference, but adds that we are not indifferent to our own lives; there, we have a great many thoughts about how things could be improved (Simmel, 1971). Cognitive sociologist Zerubavel has theorized that this narrow sphere of interest arises because people are socialized to recognize what is noticed and what is not (2015). Our moral perspective and horizon are shaped by others. This is combined with a human tendency toward in, group favoritism and self, absorption. This reflects research in psychology on how empathy can be a double, edged sword, with increased empathy for the in, group competing with empathy for the out, group (Bloom, 2016).
Unspecialized unsystematic thinking occurs when one learns neither about anything specific nor about the general. Ideas may arise occasionally, but they lack direction. Some people do not specialize at all and do not become particularly knowledgeable or competent in any field. They face the world without the tools to contribute to a highly specialized workforce or to society at large. Knowledge is either nonexistent or fragmented, covering neither specific nor general topics. The unfocused mind engages in multitasking and maintains a low level of focus on anything, neither the specific nor the general (Newport, 2016). The deep focus required to help solve difficult problems is not available as a tool.