It is pretty obvious that culture is a web of causes and effects, big and small, and society is a web of groups and institutions, organized and chaotic, yet I still read texts that peddle a specific theory to be the answer to anything social/cultural. I'm currently in a state of becoming an anti-solo theory. I just cannot force myself to just be Marxist or Postmodernist to really understand oppression and power. A web of theories is what is needed to get to the center of any matter that is problematic.
Studying corruption has made me realize that even weather, climate, or season can be a factor for corruption to happen and the corrupt to operate. Corruption has to be mapped out thoroughly using multiple lenses and analyses if we are to understand the entirety of its anatomy. Maybe, just maybe, including the psychology of lying and thieving or the evolutionary biology of hoarding, competition, and self-gratification can give us ideas that drafting and passing anti-corruption bills/laws alone will not really eradicate corruption.
What do you think?
What interests me about your web of theories approach, M, is that it may be closer than most academic theories to how people think. In particular, how does memory function when we encounter something? I think of my own as a ganglion, a living web of tissue with linked nodes of varying size. If some new impression lights up a part of it, it may trigger off other parts, including some of the really big nodes. Then it is likely to find a place in my mind for future use.
Just using the word "corruption" already implies a singularity that dismisses all other possibilities.
Cross cultural analysis is like surgery.
It takes a fine meticulous hand.