Search

Among the founders of sociology, it was Georg Simmel who provided the most thorough analysis and theory of space. This paper aims to reconstruct Simmel's spatial theory and his observations of spatial relations. The German sociologist engaged with spatiality in a threefold way. First, he tried to provide a systematic social theory of space; second, analyzing spatial relations was important for his diagnosis of modernity; third, he dealt with the subjective constitutions of space in his shorter, essayistic writings. This paper argues that the importance of the third strand for a sociological understanding of space has seldom been recognized in sociology. In addition, it also shows that despite the diversity in perspectives, there is an underlying coherence to Simmel's theory of space. As a result, it becomes evident that Simmel was not only ground-breaking in conceptualizing space from a sociological point of view, but that his theory of space continues to be inspirational and relevant to this day for interpreting the entanglement of social and spatial relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following reflections by Talcott Parsons and Niklas Luhmann, this paper is concerned with the changing meaning of the profession as a sociological category for analyzing modern society. Professions are practical academic occupational groups oriented to certain social values, to which a special significance for society was attributed in the social sciences for a long time, thus marking a connection between professions' research and theory of society. This paper now describes that the causal relationship between profession and society is limited to a historically relatively early period. In the transition to modern society, this close network of relationships begins to dissolve, and now professions operate in the context of some function systems of society whose task is the professional assistance of single clients, such as in the fields of health, law, and pastoral care. However, the professions' highlighted position in the knowledge and action structure of single function systems seems to dissolve more and more today so that one can ask whether we can speak here already of an end of the social form profession. This would correspond with the observation that actually the professions no longer appear at all in the newer theories of society and therefore their function as an important mechanism of social structure formation is no longer attributed to them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Charles Thorpe argues sociology lacks a "language of society as a whole." He holds that positivist sociologists de-legitimated holistic theories or broad normatively oriented "social theories," leaving the discipline without discursive means to critically assess and deliberate its overall directions and those of society. Thorpe does not address holistic theory directly or explain how it differs analytically from standard "sociological theory." My intent is to clarify these matters by extending facets of his argument to illuminate the interdependence between holistic theorizing and empirical-historical social science, which is necessary to create the type of "reflexive sociology" that Thorpe argues would make sociology more cosmopolitan and capable of addressing the turbulent sociopolitical conditions in the interregnum after neoliberalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay uses the life of Robert Bellah to pose questions about the unfolding of ambition in academic settings with explicit, quasi-universalistic ranking. A crucial moment in all careers is the moment when one recognizes that there are many more talented than oneself. This moment is likely to come earlier for those in elite tracks, which enables such people to prepare various defensive strategies, which can prove advantageous at later and possibly more significant competitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay responds to three reviews of my book (The Intellectual Property of Nations), by Damon Mayrl, Meredith Hall, and Danielle Lucksted & Nicholas Hoover Wilson. In responding to these reviews I reflect on the extent to which reviews are intellectual gifts, stimulating new lines of inquiry. Building from fruitful suggestions in the reviews by Mayrl and Hall, and linking these to new sites of interest for me in the U.S. legal tradition, I trace the extent to which early forms of U.S. sociology were embedded in an extended series of "restatements" of U.S. common law, focusing particularly on the "sociological jurisprudence" of Roscoe Pound. Responding to Lucksted & Wilson's proposal for a Bourdieusian counter-narrative to the one I offered in my book, I very briefly sketch my reasons for preferring a Weberian approach. Lucksted & Wilson claim that my approach is consensualist, but I argue that the more important difference is over the ways that sociological theories account (or not) for human purposiveness in law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay has the purpose of underlying how an analytic approach about traces, marks and footprints is an important contribution to sociology at digital era. To achieve this goal, the essay takes the central idea of the book "What People Leave Behind Marks, Traces, Footprints and their Relevance to Knowledge Society", like sources to show a first presentation of a sociology of vestiges to elaborate one vision of experience in the sociology of emotions endeavours. We have followed the ideas of this book as an open door to understand how absences, symptoms and messages are the possibility of constitution a sociology of vestige in a digital world. The main argumentative structure is (a) we briefly present the place of trace on social analysis, (b) the epistemic power of etymology of the terms is synthesized, (c) we show the use of traces in classical social research, (d) vestiges as absences, symptoms and messages are schematized, and finally a door towards a sociology of experience through vestiges is open. This essay is an opportunity to draw attention to the importance of elaborating an analysis of the vestiges to understand the human experience in the framework of a sociology on digital emotions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the circulation of knowledge in sociology through a case study based on the transnational exchanges between North-American sociologist Irving L. Horowitz and Latin American sociologists and intellectuals in the sixties. We explore his letters with three figures who played pivotal roles in the institutionalization of sociology in Latin America: Gino Germani, an Italian born sociologist who became a pioneer figure for establishing scientific sociology in Argentina; the Mexican sociologist Pablo González Casanova, who performed a similar role in his country; and Arnaldo Orfila Reynal, a prestigious editor in the region, who headed two of the most powerful publishing houses in the Latin American market for the social sciences and humanities in the 1960s and 1970s - Fondo de Cultura Económica (FCE) and Siglo XXI. We argue that while these exchanges happened under unequal conditions produced by the structural inequalities of the global system of knowledge production that emerged after World War II, the works of Latin American intellectuals were relevant for Horowitz's project of critical sociology for two main reasons: they provided intellectual sources for radical theorization on development and modernization, and they represented strategic assets for Horowitz present himself as a mediator between Third World problems and North-American audiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the perspective of revolutions, utopias and/or optimism, the logic of transforming the future has been one of the axes at the beginning of the social sciences of the 19th and 20th centuries. If hope is understood as a practice of anticipating the future, in the sense that Ernest Bloch gave it, it is easy to see how these actions that perform and "pre-form" the connection between past, present and future acquire a special interest for sociology. In this article, we will take as a platform for reflection the thought of Harriet Martineau (1802–1876) and Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1860–1935). The two, from different perspectives, thematize hope as an emotion, social practice and behaviour pattern, which offers an unbeatable possibility for reflection on hope today. The objective of the article is to reconstruct the notion of hope from the perspective of the women who originated sociological theory, taking up the thought of the aforementioned authors and presenting some central topics needed to build a sociology of hope. To achieve this objective, the following argumentative strategy has been followed: (a) it is established what constitutes a sociological 'classic', and in what sense Martineau and Perkin Gilman are such; (b) hope according to Harriet Martineau is presented; (c) the concept of Hope according to Charlotte Perkins Gilman is synthetized, (d) some clues for sociology of hope are developed, based on the thoughts of Martineau and Perkins Gilman; and (e) some notes for a sociology of hope are summarized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the peripheral position and future of historical consciousness in sociology. While many sociologists consider meta-historical research to be purposeless and self-indulgent, I argue that preserving the historical imagination can improve sociology by fostering disciplinary coherence, avoiding intellectual regurgitation, and understanding the previous intellectual battles out of which current scientific discourse came. Despite these advantages, meta-historical knowledge is severely undervalued in contemporary sociology and, as I demonstrate by presenting data from both the American Sociological Association (ASA) and department websites, such knowledge will likely continue to dissipate more than it already has. Some scholars have taken note of the current lack of historical curiosity in sociology, though this observation has only been grounded in impression. For this reason, this article provides this impression with an empirical basis, and presents indicative support for the expectation that historical consciousness will further deteriorate in sociology's future. This unpromising future for the history of sociology has received little attention in recent discourse, though this article gives reason for sociologists to deliberate over the potential consequences that would come along with the continued withering of historical consciousness. Disciplinary implications concerning the death of the historical imagination are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Though sociology has explored many facets of mental illness, discussions of psychotherapy have been largely underdeveloped. By examining published and "grey" literature in the sociology of mental health, I identify three significant eras of research. The first period of sociology of mental health (1880s–1960s) focused on etiologies of mental illness. The second era (1960s–1990s) critiqued many issues related to the diagnosis of illness. The current era explores the treatment of mental illnesses. Despite almost thirty years of research, the sociological discussions of psychotherapy have been dismal at best. I explore the primary reasons for this neglect, identifying major trends across several eras, and outline research limitations in this literature. I conclude by proposing a research agenda for a sociology of therapy that focuses on theoretical integration, methodological application, and a focus on therapeutic work. Four primary benefits to sociology are proposed, focusing on accuracy, triangulation, richer theorizing, and better applied sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Paul Siu's dissertation on the experience of Chinese laundry workers in the United States is a hallmark study in the Chicago sociology of migration. Siu joined the Chicago sociology program in 1932, defended his dissertation in 1953, and had it published as a book in 1987. This article identifies Siu's key contributions and discusses the relationship between Siu's work and the Chicago sociology of migration. An immigrant himself, Siu offered an approach to migration that was closer to the migrants: an immediate and often intimate window into the subjective dimension of migration. While Siu's closeness to the migrants allowed him to collect the kind of firsthand data associated with Chicago sociology, it also revealed elements of the migrant experience that stretched the boundaries of Chicago's analytical framework. Siu's understanding of migration as temporary, in particular, departed from Chicago sociology's emphasis on immigrant assimilation. This article seeks to reexamine Siu's contribution and underline its value for current and future research on migration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article develops an integrative perspective on the nexus between power and sociological research methods. By reflecting upon two of the most widely used methodological approaches in sociology – standardized survey research and qualitative interview research – we develop a comprehensive heuristic framework for examining the ways in which the use of sociological methods affects and intersects any social scientific practice: (1) the power effects that societies and institutional settings exert on methods and the use of methods, (2) power in the use and implementation of methods, and (3) the power effects that methods and the use of methods exert on societies and institutional settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]