Search

Sociological production is a situated and embodied activity carried out by individuals inserted in actual social relations. Considering that this feature has an influence upon the content of scholarly literature and that it can be revealed in the scientific text itself, I propound a new interpretation of the writing process of Robert E. Park's "The City," the famous paper he published initially in 1915. Customarily depicted as a manifesto for an autonomous urban sociology, I argue on the contrary that its general economy has to be linked to Park's biographical background. When he affiliated with the Sociology Department at the University of Chicago, Park was brought to teach a course on the social survey. "The City" was to be the academic expression of his point of view on the topic. Park's biographical encounters with some active promoters of the social survey approach are evidenced and their influence on his 1915 essay is carefully analyzed, showing notably that curious intellectual omissions in "The City" can be traced back to these previous encounters. Park's latter texts, and the 1925 revised version of "The City" in particular, are shown to provide the interwar sociologists with a peculiar narrative about the history of sociology: Park's predecessors are deliberately confined in a pre-scientific stage of the discipline and Park's original essay is presented as a seminal research program destined to be later fulfilled by the newly established urban sociologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In view of the revanchist ideology that often passes under the rubric of sociobiology, a perspective that insists on the learned nature of social behavior is welcome. Undoubtedly, a search for the causes and careers of human behavior is a legitimate enterprise in sociology, but in the context of Molm's paper, a different question must be raised regarding behaviorist sociology. The root criticism of behavioral sociology, it seems to me, is the one she attributes to symbolic interactionism. The view that human emit behavior, Molm contends, is not a mechanistic theory at all because operant behaviors are not automatically elicited by any prior stimulus, they simply occur not elicited by a stimulus. If something that is yet to happen is the cause of the behavior that is about to be emitted, then surely it is the anticipation of receiving the reinforcement that is causing the behavior. I am sure Molm is correct that the argument about behavioral sociology is really about behavioral sociology is really about the goals and aims of science.

This article presents a commentary on an article about the protection of human subjects in field social science research. The paper raises some important questions regarding limitations place on field researchers in the form of policies concerning the protection of human subjects. Most social scientists would agree that field research strategies occupy an important role in attempts to explain and predict human behavior. The paper does little to enlighten readers about the reality of any such threats by such policies regarding human subjects protection in general, and policies concerning approval of field studies in particular. One common misconception held by many sociologists is that researchers must routinely obtain signed statements of informed consent. Alternatively, the requirement of informed consent may be waived when the existence of a signed consent document would be the only record linking the subject and the research and that the only significant risk would be potential harm resulting from breach of confidentiality. The protection of human subjects is a difficult and complex task. However, the importance of such issue for the discipline requires a careful examination of the facts and acquaintance with various procedures on a first-hand-basis.

Each moment of the sociological enterprise may be rightly regarded as a turning point, that is, a place of choosing among options that have consequences for the field. The papers in the September, 2003 issue of the journal "American Sociologist" share a theme of revisiting for the sake of new departures. Sociologist Neil J. Smelser begins with a broad overview of a century's travels that affirms the value of the sociological endeavor and looks optimistically ahead to new developments. Sociologists Douglas Hartmann, Paul R. Croll and Katja Guenther focus on past definitions of the race-relations problematic in order to articulate emergent understandings. Sociologist Michael DeCesare reconsiders the relationship between earlier choices of theoretical orientation and later pedagogical practices. Sociologists Joel Best and David Schweingruber cast a critical eye toward the established terminology in sociological textbooks, asking whether one should continue this way of teaching the profession's language. Sociologist Patrick D. Nolan offers a similar reflection on standardized stories and rhetorical strategies in the textbooks that represent the field to most undergraduates.