Search

The article presents responses of the author on his books published in the 1985 issue of the journal "Human Studies." He holds that both scholarly and biographically significant point behind his work A Bergsonian Bridge to Phenomenological Psychology is the following, in 1924, before starting this endeavor, sociologist Alfred Schutz had looked at sociologist Edmund Husserl's early phenomenological writings but found that they had nothing to contribute to what he had planned to do namely, to give Max Weber's sociology of understanding a pheno-psychological underpinning which, in his opinion, they needed in order not only to be made consistent but also in order to provide them with a justification deeper than that which could be provided by sociological reasoning. The author confesses that his book Phenomenology of Consciousness and Sociology of the Life-World is his favorite. He agrees with his critics who have pointed out the book does not cover, or at least does not emphasize evenly all topics which should be treated in an advanced and reasonably sophisticated introduction to the areas of its thematic concerns.

In this volume, Wolff-Michael Roth provides a critical but partial reading of Tony Brown's book Mathematics Education and Subjectivity. The reading contrasts Brown's approach with Roth's own conception of subjectivity as derived from the work of Vygotsky, in which Roth aims to 'reunite' psychology and sociology. Brown's book, however, focuses on how discourses in mathematics education shape subjective action within a Lacanian model that circumnavigates both 'psychology' and 'sociology'. From that platform, this paper responds to Roth through problematising the idea of the individual as a subjective entity in relation to the two perspectives, with some consideration of corporeality and of how the Symbolic encounters the Real. The paper argues for a Lacanian conception of subjectivity for mathematics education comprising a response to a social demand borne of an ever-changing symbolic order that defines our constitution and our space for action. The paper concludes by considering an attitude to the production of research objects in mathematics education research that resists the normalisation of assumptions as to how humans encounter mathematics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several philosophers have recently claimed to have discovered a new and rather significant problem with virtue ethics. According to them, virtue ethics generates certain expectations about the behavior of human beings which are subject to empirical testing. But when the relevant experimental work is done in social psychology, the results fall remarkably short of meeting those expectations. So, these philosophers think, despite its recent success, virtue ethics has far less to offer to contemporary ethical theory than might have been initially thought. I argue that there are plausible ways in which virtue ethicists can resist arguments based on empirical work in social psychology. In the first three sections of the paper, I reconstruct the line of reasoning being used against virtue ethics by looking at the recent work of Gilbert Harman and John Doris. The remainder of the paper is then devoted both to responding to their challenge as well as to briefly sketching a positive account of character trait possession. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shikake is a design approach that proposes solving problems by inducing spontaneous behavior, rather than by relying on the use of extensive resources or expertise. This paper contributes to the study of Shikake principles and examples by describing a methodology for their formalization in the declarative, logic-based language of Answer Set Prolog (ASP). Modeling qualitative theories and principles such as Shikake in the precise language of ASP can play a significant role in indicating possible areas for their future refinement and improvement, as shown here. Our formalization is used in creating a system, ShAsp, that can automatically determine if a design is a Shikake or not, as illustrated by two examples and one counterexample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many sociologists believe that behavioral sociology is alien to traditional sociological thought, and some have questioned its legitimacy as a sociological perspective. This paper takes the position that behavioral sociology is very much in accord with basic tenets of sociology. The belief that it is not results from misunderstanding and confusion about the foundations and practice of behavioral sociology. Three key concerns about behavioral sociology are addressed: (1) the subject matter of behavioral sociology and its distinction from behavioral psychology; (2) the unexplained "givens" of behavioral sociology (the origins of existing reward systems), and (3) the concern that behaviorists view human behavior as mechanistic and unfeeling. The paper concludes that many differences between behavioral sociology and other sociological perspectives have been exaggerated, that behavioral sociology does exhibit most traditional characteristics of the discipline, and that the concern with the legitimacy of behavioral theory in sociology has obscured the one significant difference that does exist disagreement over the goals and conduct of a science of human behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years several approaches-philosophical, sociological, psychological-have been developed to come to grips with our profoundly technologically mediated world. However, notwithstanding the vast merit of each, they illuminate only certain aspects of technological mediation. This paper is a preliminary attempt at a philosophical reflection on technological mediation as such-deploying the concepts of 'transparency' and 'opacity' as heuristic instruments. Hence, we locate a 'theory of transparency' within several theoretical frameworks-respectively classic phenomenology, media theory, Actor Network Theory, postphenomenology, several ethnographical, psychological, and sociological perspectives, and finally, the 'Critical Theory of Technology.' Subsequently, we render a general, systematic overview of these theories, thereby conjecturing what a broad analysis of technological mediation in and of itself might look like-finding, at last, an essential contradiction between transparency of 'use' and transparency of social origins and effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Structural equation modeling (SEM) has been widely used in psychology and sociology for testing validity of measurement instruments. However, this statistical technique has so far played minor role in quality-of-life research. The main objective of this paper is to demonstrate the potential of SEM for constructing and testing the validity of a Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptics (SWN) index for patients with schizophrenia. For these purposes, data from the GEO study (Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluation von Olanzapin in Deutschland; Health economics study of olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia in Germany) were used. The GEO is a prospective, comparative, noninterventional, observational study. A total of 646 participants treated with either olanzapine (n = 416) or haloperidol (n = 230) were enrolled in the study; 360 patients were available for factor analyses. The short (20-item) form of the SWN scale was administered to assess patients' perspectives on their quality of life. The structural equation models (SEMs) were then applied to construct 5- and 10-item indexes based on SWN. The data indicate that the 5-item index is the most time-saving approach for evaluating perceptions of well-being (and thus, quality of life) among patients with schizophrenia. The application of SEM showed no appreciable loss of validity of this index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although there is a very large literature concerning Karl Marx's theory of alienation, there is unfortunately little agreement about even precisely what the theory is, let only how best to use it in empirical research. The purpose of the present paper is to try and identify the major issues concerning the theory. On a highly abstract level of generality, Marx's conception of alienation as it applies to individuals entails a separation between their person and their activity in general and their labour in particular, the products of both, which include such aspects of social structure as classes and the state as well as the immediate physical products of labour, other people in general and certain classes of them in particular, and themselves, including their future, fully developed selves. The problem with comparative-quantitative research into Marx's theory of alienation is not that non-Marxists have undertaken it. Nor is it that they have used the wrong unit of analysis, since Marx's theory has everything to do with individuals and much with their psychology. However, their equation of alienation with consciousness of it is grossly inappropriate, and their claim to have refuted Marx's theory in their own research is preposterous.

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.

Behavioral sociology has developed unique features which have caused controversy and confusion in the discipline. In this paper, we briefly describe the history of behavioral sociology, and show how its major forms have been applied to behavioral analysts in complex organizations, laboratory experimental analysis of social exchange and social process, and behavioral macrosociology and theoretical extensions We also briefly examine criticisms of behavioral sociology on grounds of tautology, reduction, the omission of internal states as relevant data, and behavior control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents information on the comments of the editor for the journal "Human Studies." This special issue began with an idea proposed by George Psathas over lunch an intentionally open and broad call for papers to all contributors, editors and friends of "Human Studies." The present volume displays the many different ways that call was answered. As a sociologist have generally found it advisable to reject what in traditional academic circles is called interdisciplinary but in practice seems a way for one discipline to steal, and often distort in the process, ideas from other disciplines and claim them as their own. When, for instance, sociologists make use of psychological theories to explain children, rather than displaying interdisciplinarianism, they, from perspective, simply fill in gaps neglected by sociologists by stuffing in handy ideas from psychology, doing justice to neither.