Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This introduction serves to set the stage for a special issue of The American Sociologist, a festschrift in honour of the career and ongoing influence of Dorothy Pawluch. A festschrift is a collection of reflections in honor of a scholar, and this issue includes reflections of how Dorothy Pawluch came to inspire, through her teaching and supervisory guidance, a particular legacy that continues to inform her former students, their own students, and the wider academic community. The festschrift also includes papers which have the goal of advancing social problems theory and taking constructionism in new, exciting directions. As such, they are also geared to honor Dorothy’s career. While readers will no doubt be reminded by many of the contributors about the huge impact of Dorothy’s influential article, Ontological Gerrymandering, written with Stephen Woolgar, what also shines through are recollections of Dorothy’s kindness, altruism, and general decency. PubDate: 2022-04-19
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The main purpose of this paper is to provide a biographical sketch of the late Hans L. Zetterberg and a historical background to a translation of an essay based on a lecture given by Zetterberg in Stockholm in 1995. In it, he recounts his time at the Department of Sociology at Columbia University in the years 1953–1964. This essay is full of insights into an inspiring and formative period for Zetterberg in the United States, particularly in the stimulating milieu that was Columbia, at this time the center of American sociology led by Robert K. Merton and Paul Lazarsfeld. In the introduction to this translated essay, I give a brief overview of the establishment of sociology as a discipline in Sweden, and the transfer of knowledge between the United States and Sweden (and Europe, more broadly), embodied in Hans Zetterberg. In the post-WWII years, American sociology, which had a strong positivistic imprint, played an important role in shaping the beginnings of Swedish sociology. However, the transfer of knowledge went both ways, with Zetterberg, a semi-central and often neglected figure, being both a significant contributor to sociology at Columbia in its period of greatest prominence, and in his native Sweden. PubDate: 2022-03-29
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This article addresses the sociological approach and political engagements of the early twentieth century sociologist, Herbert Adolphus Miller (1875–1951). He is now largely forgotten, but he had deep connections within the Chicago milieu of pragmatist sociology and social reform activities through both the Settlement movement and the Survey movement. In 1914 he wrote a volume in the Cleveland Survey on Immigrant children in the school system and in 1918 was appointed to head the division on Immigrant Contributions in the Carnegie Corporation’s project on ‘Methods of Americanization’, in which Robert E. Park was head of the division on Immigrant Press and Theater (Park in The Immigrant Press, 1922). If Miller’s name is recognized at all it is as author with Park of Old World Traits Transplanted (1921), a work subsequently attributed to W. I. Thomas. We examine the nature of Miller’s research on immigrant populations from subject nationalities in Europe, undertaken in Cleveland and as part of the Carnegie project. He left the latter project mid-way through to become part of a small group that drafted the Czechoslovakian Declaration of Independence in November 1918. We show how Miller developed a distinctive approach to ‘Americanization’ through his idea of ‘proportional patriotism’ that challenged the dominant discourse of assimilation that became entrenched in the years after the end of the first world war and which was largely accepted by Park and by Thomas. He was dismissed in 1932 from Ohio State University because of his views on race mixing and his criticisms of the British and Japanese empires. PubDate: 2022-03-19
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract It is not possible to think altruism as a concept in itself suggests E. Mangone, because it does not exist without egoism. Hence the necessity to break their dualism. The aim of this review is to explore the nature of the relationship central to the production of altruist action. In doing so, it addresses few major aspects of this relationship: the individual and the social context, the macro and the micro levels. It also examines, even if briefly, the mediating layers, such, lifeworld and the subject, that allow the emergence of altruism. PubDate: 2022-03-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09495-z
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract In the book, the connections between altruism and selfishness are brought to light in a systematic way, facilitating the reader’s understanding of the centrality of the subject for the social sciences. The author, investigating this theme in the history of the social sciences, provides a framework for capturing the urgency of providing a view on altruism that can lead us beyond the dilemma of selfishness or altruism. In the sense indicated, the book has a double relevance: a theoretical one in terms of offering an alternative way to think about altruism/egoism, and about social relationships and the urgency of building altruistic ties to overcome the current global situation. The current review is structured around two components: a) some axes of each chapter of the book are selected and emphasized, and b) the challenge posed by the book is taken up from the vector of the centrality of the other as a crucial horizon for building more egalitarian and fairer societies. It ends by insisting on the need to accept the opening of a space for the elaboration of the common within the framework of a critical reflection on altruism. PubDate: 2022-03-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09505-0
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Sociology is par excellence the science of the other since relationality is the object of its approach. It is precisely from the relationship that is established with the other that various dynamics develop, which can be pro-social or counter-social, generating forms of altruism and selfishness, generosity and appropriation, acceptance and rejection, collaboration and competition. Altruism, in particular, has been the object of attention by Comte and Spencer in a universalistic perspective very different from the contemporary forms assumed by the phenomenon of globalization. Perhaps, it is only through the analysis of the modalities of altruism that we can understand well enough the reasons that produce attitudes and behaviours that are more or less favourable towards others. If we then combine altruism with the peculiar processes of the exercise of empathy, the sociological problem in its complexity becomes even more intriguing. It is not by chance that Daniel Batson has started a rather articulate discussion that tends to show how altruism is motivated by empathy. PubDate: 2022-03-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09496-y
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The main purpose of this article is to provide some guidance and inspiration for the teaching of the classics in sociology by taking a close look at the way in which Robert K. Merton taught this topic at Columbia University. The course was entitled “History of Sociological Theory (Sociology 150)” and was given between 1958 and 1968. With the help of archival material, the article reconstructs what Merton said during his lectures, which texts he assigned, what kind of tests he gave, and what type of paper the students should write. Merton did not want the students to only study the texts of the classics but also try to figure out how these went about their research and were able to formulate their theories. This meant that he emphasized how the classics approached such activities as problem-finding, problem-solving and looking for strategic research sites. In the concluding section, the broad approach to theory in Merton’s teaching is contrasted to the more narrow one he presented in Social Theory and Social Structure. Positive and negative aspects of Merton’s approach to the classics are also discussed. PubDate: 2022-03-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09506-z
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract A careful look at the international development of Sociology highlights the centrality that the study of social problems and the approach to possible solutions to them have had in the history of this discipline, not infrequently for the sake of better social integration, stability, development, social change or even modernity. Recent approaches suggest shifting this focus of attention, arguing about the deficit in sociological research and practice concerning theor etical frameworks that pay attention to the positive aspects. This text reflects on the contributions that altruism, solidarity, and collective responsibility can have to improve the quality of life in contemporary societies and face humanitarian emergencies with a certain degree of success. For instance, the so-called refugee crisis or the current COVID-19 pandemic poses significant challenges for societies. This article also explores briefly new roles of data science in connection with responsibility and altruism. The text invites us to revisit sociology, thinking about the lights more than the shadows. PubDate: 2022-03-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09504-1
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This paper seeks to uncover the modes of justification by which sociological theorists legitimize the “canon” of sociological theory in practice, through the stories they tell to students in sociological theory textbooks. Specifically, we ask: how do textbook authors rationalize their decisions to include and exclude some theorists' Further, what are the modes or “rules of the conceptual game” underlying these justifications' To address these questions, we undertake a rhetorical examination of a corpus of 250 English-language editions of sociological theory textbooks. Focusing on their Introductions and Conclusions, we highlight texts that presume the canon is a social fact and investigate the justifications they provide for assenting to this fact. We articulate and illustrate three forms of legitimation: functionalist, historicist, and humanist. Functionalist justifications legitimate the canon by appealing to its capacity to generate disciplinary unity and integrity. Historicist justifications legitimate the canon by appealing to its members’ foundational and influential role in defining the direction of the field. Humanist justifications legitimate the canon through appealing to the intrinsic qualities of its texts and authors. Identifying these pathways is the primary empirical contribution of this paper, which in turn contributes to the collective project of disciplinary self-reflection. PubDate: 2022-02-28 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-022-09529-0
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Reflecting on the centenary of the publication of Robert E. Park and Ernest Burgess’s Introduction to the Science of Sociology (1921), this article attempts to add a new dimension to how that legacy might be construed. It has been a widely accepted view that the book was a landmark in the early history of American sociology, its major contribution revolving around its specification about what it meant to be a science of society. This sets the stage for the claim advanced in this article, which is that it also attempts to outline a perspective on how democracy might be achieved within the parameters of the pluralistic character of modern societies. It sets out to accomplish three things. First, it argues that in the book’s lengthy introductory chapter–authored by Park and published during the same year in the American Journal of Sociology–lays out a theoretical perspective that is primarily influenced by John Dewey, Émile Durkheim, and Georg Simmel. The article proceeds to examine in broad strokes how the following thirteen chapters fit together and add up to a cogent statement not only of the sociological enterprise intended to stimulate empirical research, but as elements of the differentiated and complex character of modernity that a democratic society must confront in establishing the bases for a new form of solidarity. This leads to an analysis of the chapter on assimilation, which should be read as the place where one finds the contours of a perspective on solidarity that while parallel to Durkheim’s work, goes beyond by offering more in terms of a perspective on democracy and inclusion in racially and ethnically diverse societies. PubDate: 2022-02-07 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-022-09527-2
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The assimilation of the theoretical and methodological constructions of Western sociology into the investigation of primarily reform oriented social research problems of twentieth century China, is the background to the work done by most of the pioneering Chinese sociologists such as Fei Xiaotong. The aim of this paper is to analyse the movement of ideas and research methods in the global circulation of knowledge and the formulation of distinct traditions of academic enquiry, in this case, Chinese sociology. This article uses the chronology of Fei’s life to present the interactions between American (Robert Parks and the Chicago School), British (Malinowski and social anthropology of 1930s), Russian (Shirokogoroff) and Chinese (Wu Wenzao and Yenching school) sociological traditions and their influences in Fei’s works, primarily his most famous work, From the Soil. Fei’s indigenous concept of Chaxugeju, presents a clear distinction between Chinese and Western societies. In this article, we apply Chaxugeju in some of the fairly common social research questions on family structure, gender and state- society relations to bring out the nuanced distinctions in the American and Chinese theoretical traditions. We also look into the problems in Fei’s theorising in the use of community studies, in tackling the colonialism aspect and with respect to the cultural context in Chinese sociology and its similarities in its challenges with Chicago school. PubDate: 2022-01-31 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09526-9
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This paper reflects on the origins and subsequent reception of the paper “Ontological Gerrymandering: The anatomy of social problems explanations”, published in 1985. It describes the circumstances of my turning up at McGill University as a Visiting Professor in Sociology and meeting Dorothy, then a graduate student and the TA assigned to an undergraduate course on Social Problems which I was asked to teach. The paper reflects on the twin benefits: of an interloper, from Europe and from Science and Technology Studies (STS), entering the exotic and heady fray of North American social problems; and of Dorothy’s steady and resolute guidance in introducing me to a new field. The paper suggests some reasons for the endurance of the paper’s arguments, more than 35 years after its publication, drawing on some parallel developments in Social Problems and STS. It asks why has there been rather little mutual interaction between these disciplines, given their common concern with questions, among others, about values, effects and interventions in academic scholarship. The paper concludes that many more of us might have done well to pursue the path of strident agnosticism. PubDate: 2022-01-26 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09524-x
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This article explores the tensions between ideals about sociology (and what it ought to be) transmitted during university socialization and the everyday working activities among Argentinean sociologists. It focuses on an extreme case: that of the graduates who, lacking the opportunity or the desire to join the professoriate, became market researchers. The case is extreme because while university training provided these individuals with a set of methodological and analytical skills that proved to be useful (and profitable) when studying consumers and markets, it also encouraged a critical, world-rejecting, view of the discipline which was at odds with their professional activities. Not surprisingly, they encountered a distressing moral puzzle: were they betraying sociology’s progressive values, values to which they were seriously committed' Building on E. Hughes’ concept of “dirty work”, this paper examines how these individuals navigated an occupation that was, at least initially, seen as morally objectionable, and the ways by which they came to imbue it with new and edifying “sociological” value. This article is based on interviews with sociologists working in market research and a socio-historical account of the School of Sociology at the University of Buenos Aires, the nation’s most important program, where all our interviewees were trained. This study has implications for understanding situations in which actual professional practices are in sharp contrast with the ideals presented during university socialization, and the identity repair processes that university-trained workers undertake when dealing with deviant careers. PubDate: 2022-01-10 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09525-w
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This article is the introduction to the special issue of The American Sociologist on the theme ‘Pragmatism and/or/versus Hermeneutics.’ As such, the article presents the overall perspective of this special issue, focusing on the general overview of the possible debates between those two orientations in sociology. Some of the epistemological and theoretical positions of pragmatism and hermeneutics are presented, in order to orient the possible debates between the two orientations. With respect to the historical background of their respective developments, this introduction invites the reader to the questionings that are being renewed in the context of the more recent encounter between pragmatism and hermeneutics in contemporary sociological analyses. PubDate: 2021-12-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09522-z
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The sociological study of political culture has made important headways. Scholars have demonstrated the significance of background culture, symbols and narratives as well as of the shared patterns of conduct. Yet, the relationship of those to ordinary people, how they become meaningful, has not been effectively explored. This paper argues that to comprehend this relationship we must understand political languages as concerning questions of being. I will show how the philosophical resources of Mead’s pragmatism and Taylor’s hermeneutics can enlighten the link between political languages and self, demonstrate its significance, and suggest ways in which the study of political cultures can be extended to integrate meaningful selfhood. Comparing and complementing pragmatism and hermeneutics, I will argue that political languages become meaningful along two intertwined dimensions: First, practical self-insertion in coordinative patterns, which involves the expression of concerns and senses of being. Second, self- and world clarification. Here, political languages become important when they articulate concerns and intuitions and bring moral sources into proximity. Moreover, by foregrounding Taylor’s hermeneutics of self-expression and articulation, which is yet to be integrated in the social sciences, I will show how both dimensions are connected in an hermeneutical cycle and thus ought to be analysed in their relationship. PubDate: 2021-12-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09514-z
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Unmasking is a rhetorical device that involves exposing another’s true motives. But in effect, it often entails imputing motives and imposing a caricature of the mask behind which one allegedly hides—hence its reputation as a hyperbolic style. Despite these dangers, unmasking plays a central role in Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s methodology, as well as those of Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx. In this article, I identify three concepts necessary for the style’s emergence: the pre-social individual, hypocrisy and autonomy. These concepts are not unique to modernity. As such, I show how their evolution from antiquity to modernity makes unmasking possible; in so doing, I also explain why the ancient and Christian moral frameworks preclude it. More precisely, I will demonstrate how Rousseau constructs his social theory—the very same one that Claude Lévi-Strauss regards as the “foundation” of the social sciences—from these concepts, and thus gives birth to the unmasking style. Peter Baehr’s claim that Rousseau fired “the opening salvo in the unmasking war” is therefore substantiated. While I do not intend to argue that unmasking is part of the basic foundation of the social sciences, this article should at least permit us to consider its pervasiveness. PubDate: 2021-12-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09519-8
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The book Beyond the Dichotomy Between Altruism and Egoism (Mangone in Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc., 2020a) raised compelling comments by distinguished scholars. Some of them were, in my opinion, particularly poignant, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses of the elements addressed in the book. I aim to answer the remarks by Roberto Cipriani, Estrella Gualda, Ratiba Hadj-Moussa, Adrian Scribano, and Nikolay Zyuzev. I will leave the strengths aside and focus instead on the aspects that most attracted the reflections of the commentators, which I can summarise in three macro areas: 1) the centrality of the relationship; 2) responsibility and choices; and, finally, 3) the role of sociology. I will attempt to get to the heart of these areas with a theoretical systematization, providing a general answer to the remarks as well as addressing the specific points raised by each commentator. PubDate: 2021-11-09 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09523-y
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Emiliana Mangone's book is a largely successful attempt to provide a new perspective on the theory of altruism. She presents a comprehensive overview of the sociological interpretations of altruism and then offers her own version of the theory in the form of ethics of responsibility. There is certain ambiguity in her argumentation concerning the applicability of the rational choice theory to explaining and justifying altruism as a feasible and practically efficient idea. However, this uncertainty can be resolved in favor of rationality as an essential part of altruistic behavior. Altruism as an organized practice involving large groups necessarily includes rational deliberation as a key factor to its success. For instance, Elinor Ostrom uses the "prisoners' dilemma" framework in her analysis of how various communities across the world tried to deal with the common-pool resources problem. In successful cases, as her findings show, communities acted in the manner close to Mangone’s ethics of responsibility. PubDate: 2021-10-30 DOI: 10.1007/s12108-021-09521-0
Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
