The Social PEN structural theory of change is constructed on the very foundation of (Karl Popper’s, 1959) deduction method of social scientific theorizing. The theory is derived from the reflection of properties of an Atom. It has been tested and proved to be sociologically stable and ontologically rooted for the explanation of change in human behaviour in the society through social PEN Structural analysis that is highly social PEN invisible, visible and PEN indivisible. The theory shows how to notice social PEN structures through sociological lens with contemporary examples on the context of Socio-economic and political fundamentals of our everyday lives. The social PEN structural dynamics take place in our offices, homes and in our cars. Individual member of the society creates social PEN structures every day, everywhere and at all time and it is a social phenomenon suigeneris. The social PEN theory has established a three class model as its nomological network. The theory is highly parsimonious-Ockham Razors theory for practice. The cardinal principle of the Social PEN structural theory of change has provided an opportunity for its utilization in Social investment and utility. The theory emerges from the weaknesses of structuralism and as reflection of the properties of an Atom and the method utilized in the discovery is an enhanced exploratory deductive method that is Sociologically elastic to allow the elements of inductive method as mixed or triangulation such as Focus Group Discussion (FGD) to illicit data for comparison, contraction and to cover pitfalls or chasms to enable sufficient explanation, description and prediction of human life. The theory has concepts and variables to allow phenomenal classification and for credible definition, explanation and predictions thus; Social PEN invisibility, social PEN visibility and social PEN indivisibility. Furthermore, this thesis has captured introduction, the Social PEN theory balancing natural, social phenomenon, a sociological handshake with chemistry in social scientific theorizing. Compelling sociological questions are presented to achieve both specific and overarching objectives. Problematic statements and justifications for the discovery of the social PEN theory of change are presented. The basic assumption, the social PEN theory and power outage and man in the dark spot are examined to notice change in behaviour of human in darkness. The social PEN theory argues that, humans produce social PEN structures and those structures are Atomic in nature and men continue to do so everyday and everywhere. Those structures are around them and they create them on daily basis through social interactions in their homes, offices, cars and everywhere. The transformation of those structures is determined by the individual members of the society’s activities and their relations to those structures produce tremendous meaning as social facts, some are seen while others are not very apparent, but have the social strength to migrate to the PEN visible stage provided there is perfect interplay of the PEN social energy of (+-n) for change. The social PEN structural theory of change has with it the characteristics of social PEN visibility, PEN invisibility and social PEN indivisibility of giving description of a structural change and they exist as we relate with members of the society in our everyday social life to produce meaning with consequential effects on other possible social relationship to cause change or modify individual behaviour. The thesis has presented analytical examination of array of sociological thoughts: what necessitates structural change. To simplify and improve on comprehension for better understanding of the theory, a discourse and operational definition of basic components of the theory has been highlighted as follows: social PEN protoneous (p+), (ii) social PEN electroneous (E-), (iii) social PEN neutroneous (n), social PEN energy (+-n); Social PEN invisibility and its inverse relations to PEN visible structures and social PEN structure. More so, the cardinal principles of the social PEN theory has been highlighted. The thesis has captured deduction as a process of reversal of existing phenomenon only, the one discovered through systematic step-by-step stages of Induction and methodological design has been highlighted. Also examined here is the social PEN structural theory of change at a glance and a standard view of social PEN structural theory of change with examples on suicide phenomenon in the context of subcultural pluralism and presented five classification of suicide as (i) PEN Lone-Pathological suicide, (ii) PEN molecular suicide, (iii) PEN elementary suicide, (iv) PEN composite suicide and PEN indivisible suicide. To gauge the strength of the theory, the following were interrogated and discussed thus; the social PEN theory; socio-economic and Political Fundamentals of everyday Life, social utility and investment, the Social PEN theory and its relations to objects around us while citing example with the Interior of a car, social PEN structural approach; interagency collaboration and change, specimen grounding; logical deductive approach of abstraction; discovering the social PEN theory of structural change, social PEN theoretical approach and organisational fundamental, social PEN theory as a driver for the enhancement of interactive situation and the social PEN structural theory of change; students’ life and then concluded with critique. When social PEN are entrenched to play role equivalent to suggest invisible structural issues are reasoned, identified, tackled and to be dealt with to achieve desired change and for a society to experience social progression to the uppermost structural stage while rescuing individual members who are less empowered from being lone-pathological (E-) drain incapacitated members of the society. The social PEN structural theory of change also, holds the belief that our quest for better description and prediction about the social world should be as ‘inside outside sociological’. Concrete concepts are discovered in social PEN structures as sociological concepts viz; social Protoneous (+) with positive social value of capital resource element, social Electroneous (E-) with negative social value of human resource element and social Neutroneous with (N) social value of societal norms for calibration and recalibration of any situation to change to context and relative equilibrium and constructs were formulated to enable description of elements of social phenomena. Logical deduction process of theorizing applying a theory founded on the basis of induction utilized the specimen and inferred on ‘Atomic properties’ for sociological study. Another feature which makes the social PEN structural theory of change formidable is its characteristics of ‘invisibility of the visible stage of phenomenal investigation and the capacity to change from one form to another to inform subsequent change at macro stage of a social phenomenon. This suggests classifications of social life as containing structures that are socially PEN invisible, visible and PEN indivisible with social energy (+-n) of PEN to synthesis social phenomenon. It explains much of social bonding to enhance harmony of the social PEN structure to reproduce social capital in the process of change chain. The theory carves its niche based on the reversal of an empiricist phenomenon of an atom in relation to social life which characterizes sociological handshake with natural physical phenomenon in chemistry in social scientific theorizing. Constructs, variables and concepts are presented to ensure the social PEN structural niche for sociological theorizing. The social equation has ensured theoretical saturation by logical deduction process of abstraction. The social theory of Atomic PEN structural change shouldn’t be misconstrued for symbolic interactionism of Herbert (Blumer and George Mead), which emphasises the production of meaning out of interacting with symbols, but the social PEN structural theory of change sees change from the perspectives of Atomic properties in relations to social structures, which are socially PEN visible, invisible and social PEN indivisible.The interactionist perspective provides dichotomy which suggest classification of self along the theoretical plane of ‘the me’, ‘the I’ and the generalised ‘others’ point of view. However, beyond that, the social theory of Atomic PEN structural change has provided concrete variables as PEN structure of P+, E- and N for better description and prediction of a phenomenon. The theory has nexus with other social theories as the (Charles Right Mills,) Sociological Imagination but significantly different from the social thoughts of Mills in many respects.Mills sociological imagination sees change from the perspectives of others’ opinion with variables such as social economic and political antecedents of the demography for change which have been over flogged by previous researches, but the social PEN structural theory of change argues that change is driven by social energy of (+-n) spectrum and it is inherently built in all mega structure at the Atomic level change with the strength of coiling to form and combine social webs of relations with elements of a phenomenon to cause change to inform upper level stage in change series. The social PEN structural theory of change is not the learning modeling of (Evans Pavlov and B.F Skinner’s) operant and classical conditioning theory, nor the cognitive mapping theory of imagination, but it’s a social theory, which contains the social P+, the social E- and the social N to serve as societal norms as calibre to calibrate and further recalibrate the social system to context and relative equilibrium, ensuring peace for developmental activities to take place. The social PEN theory is also not the Maxwell Atkinson theory of ‘coroners’ of suicide deductive of ethnomethodolog of (Harold Garfinkel and Zimmerman,) driven by ‘mind as the reflections of the pattern reflexive’ but the social theory of PEN argues that humans produce social PEN structures and those structures are Atomic in nature and they are around them created on daily basis through interactions in their homes, offices, cars and everywhere. Lastly, further illustrations and discussions on social PEN structural theory of change has been presented alongside a Critique.