▁distinguished ▁two ▁" mean ings " ▁or ▁modes ▁of ▁the ▁term ▁general ▁theory . ▁He ▁sometimes ▁wrote ▁about ▁general ▁theory ▁as ▁aspects ▁of ▁theoretical ▁concerns ▁of ▁social ▁sciences ▁whose ▁focus ▁is ▁on ▁the ▁most ▁" const it utive " ▁elements ▁of ▁cogn itive ▁concern ▁for ▁the ▁basic ▁theoretical ▁system at ization ▁of ▁a ▁given ▁field . ▁Par s ons ▁would ▁include ▁the ▁basic ▁concept ual ▁scheme ▁for ▁the ▁given ▁field , ▁including ▁its ▁highest ▁order ▁of ▁theoretical ▁relations ▁and ▁naturally ▁also ▁the ▁necessary ▁specification ▁of ▁this ▁system ' s ▁ax iom atic , ▁ep ist em ological , ▁and ▁method ological ▁found ations ▁from ▁the ▁point ▁of ▁view ▁of ▁logical ▁imp lications . ▁All ▁the ▁elements ▁would ▁sign ify ▁the ▁quest ▁for ▁a ▁general ▁theory ▁on ▁the ▁highest ▁level ▁of ▁theoretical ▁concern . ▁ ▁However , ▁general ▁theory ▁could ▁also ▁refer ▁to ▁a ▁more ▁fully / oper ational ▁system ▁whose ▁imp lications ▁of ▁the ▁concept ual ▁scheme ▁were ▁" sp elled ▁out " ▁on ▁lower ▁levels ▁of ▁cogn itive ▁struct ural ization , ▁levels ▁standing ▁closer ▁to ▁a ▁perce ived ▁" emp ir ical ▁object ". ▁In ▁his ▁speech ▁to ▁the ▁American ▁Soci ological ▁Society ▁in ▁ 1 9 4 7 , ▁he ▁spoke ▁of ▁five ▁levels : ▁ ▁The ▁General ▁Theory ▁level , ▁which ▁took ▁form ▁primarily ▁as ▁a ▁theory ▁of ▁social ▁systems . ▁ ▁The ▁theory ▁of ▁motiv ation ▁of ▁social ▁behavior , ▁which ▁especially ▁addressed ▁questions ▁of ▁the ▁dynamics ▁of ▁the ▁social ▁system ▁and ▁naturally ▁pres upp osed ▁theories ▁of