Search

Bellah's 'Civil Religion in America' (1967) caught a moment in the American academy. It quickly became a much debated concept and although interest in the concept has periodically waxed and waned, the explication and contention continue fifty years later. It was both a great success and an albatross for Bellah himself, as the debates about the concept frustrated him to the point where he stopped using the phrase. In his consideration of Bellah's work, including civil religion, Bortolini's book provides a useful case for thinking about the dynamics of authorial intention, scholarly debates, and public interpretations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the idea of sociological film that encourages sociological imagination, which refers to the capability to recognize the intersection of biography and history. The paper identifies six key dimensions of sociological film through a thematic analysis of different classic approaches to sociological imagination: sociological life, structure-actors relationship, critical perspective, academic awareness, fluidity of meaning, and promotion of sociological imagination. This paper provides concrete examples to demonstrate the distinctive features of sociological film and how it relates to, and differs from, other films that address social issues, including documentary films. The paper argues that sociological film is essential in fostering sociological imagination by offering a unique lens for analyzing and understanding social phenomena. Sociological film has the potential to inspire social change by increasing awareness about significant social issues and promoting critical thinking and reflection. The paper concludes by emphasizing the significance of collaboration between sociologists and filmmakers in advancing sociological imagination through the medium of sociological films. It highlights the importance of actively engaging with the public in visual research methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article considers the too-often limited reach of public sociology, focusing on the case of “Christian nationalism.” Despite growing media attention to Christian nationalism, partly reflecting current events along with considerable efforts to engage in public sociology on the topic, I anticipate public awareness of the term is concentrated in theoretically predictable ways. Given the growing conservative skepticism toward academics (particularly sociologists) and increasingly siloed media consumption, I theorize Americans most familiar with “Christian nationalism” would be sociologists’ “choir,” namely, those who are more educated, less religious, more liberal/Democratic, and who trust more liberal news sources. Drawing on two representative surveys fielded in mid-September and November/December of 2022, findings affirm the strongest predictors of Americans hearing/reading more about “Christian nationalism” were being more liberal, educated, being non-Christian (in one survey), and trusting more liberal news sources (in another survey). Interactions show exposure to the term among liberals, Democrats, and those who trust liberal news sources increases substantially with educational attainment. Despite the considerable amount of sociological research and public sociology addressing “Christian nationalism,” those most aware of the term in late 2022 were educated, liberal/Democratic, seculars most likely to already be exposed to and trust the work of sociologists. In other words, to the extent public sociologists have sought to inform the public about “Christian nationalism,” they have likely been “preaching to the choir” more than to those most susceptible to embracing the ideology (less educated, conservative/Republican, Christians). I conclude by discussing implications for sociology’s public impact as a discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent essays have raised once again the issue of the “long-standing divide between sociology as an activist discipline vs. sociology as a science” (Turner in The American Sociologist, 50, 456–487, 2019: 456; House in Annual Review of Sociology, 45, 1–29, 2019). In this presentation, I would like to consider this issue in both its current form and its manifestations during what was perhaps the most tumultuous period in the history of American sociology, i.e. the decade from 1968 to 1977. I will first revisit the earlier period of conflict and turmoil and then turn the focus to sociology and some of the problems it faces today, not the least of which has been a decline in the number of members since the end of President Obama’s first term. Although there are indeed certain similarities between these two periods, I will argue that the differences far outweigh those commonalities which, I believe, is a result of an increased democratization within our profession. An important bridge connecting sociology’s past with our present era exists in the collective memory of the post-war, or “baby boom” generation of sociologists. Many of that generation experienced first-hand the tensions and tumult surrounding the Vietnam War and changes within the ASA that led to the eventual election in 1976 of Alfred McClung Lee as the ASA’s 67th President. As a generation, those born between 1946 and 1964 are a diverse group but the research and scholarship produced by this group has been marked largely by the ideal of the scientific pursuit of knowledge of important sociological issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In plotting the course for the discipline of sociology, sociologists over the past two decades have called for the practice of "public sociology" (Burawoy in American Sociological Review, 70(1), 4–28, 2005), for disciplinary convergence around a critical methodology (Carroll in Canadian Review of Sociology, 50(1), 1–26, 2013) and the devotion of our scholarly efforts to issues of social justice (Romero in American Sociological Review,85(1), 1–30, 2020). While public, critical, and social justice-oriented work is important, these disciplinary mandates can serve to marginalize other types of sociological work that are valuable as well. In this climate, work coming from perspectives that are not as left leaning politically, or that does not seek to advance any political agenda may be seen as less valued or legitimate, and scholars who choose to separate their political agendas from their research may experience marginalization (McLaughlin in Canadian Journal of Sociology, 30(1), 1–40, 2005; Pawluch in The American Sociologist,50, 204–219, 2019). Inspired by the work and doctoral mentorship of Dorothy Pawluch, this paper seeks to both understand the historical development of the field of Canadian sociology and consider the value and place of the interpretive tradition within it. Through reflecting on the research of others and my own experiences as a graduate student, I argue that the "chilly" climate Dorothy (Pawluch in The American Sociologist,50, 204–219, 2019) alludes to for scholars who operate outside of a politically informed "social-justice agenda" does exist, but that mentorship can help mediate this chill for interpretive leaning students. Finally, I suggest that the branch of the interpretive tradition which asks researchers to suspend their own perspectives and privilege the position of others still has value for Canadian sociology. It can both produce deep, meaningful research contributions and provide students with tools for engaging in productive intellectual debate and transformative encounters with difference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociology has played an important role in Italy, although its centrality in public debate has fluctuated, and it has been supported or opposed by political power at different historical moments. Contemporary Italian sociology has developed since the 1950s and has been influenced in various ways by European and American sociological theories. Sociology has played an important role in Italian public debate and has offered a critical and scientific perspective on the country’s social reality. However, this role should be understood in the context of the different stages of development that have accompanied the academic growth of the discipline and the presence of sociologists in ‘policy making’ processes. In the latter sense, Italian sociology has played an important role in the formation of public policies, as it offers a scientific analysis of social problems and proposes solutions based on empirical research. Within this framework, the training processes also need to be situated within what has been defined—albeit with conceptual ambiguity—as ‘professional sociology’, which involves important figures such as social workers, psychologists, and health workers. However, sociology has also played an important political role both in supporting the actions of policy makers and in analysing the contradictions of the capitalist system. This article also analyses the emergence of a ‘transformative’ positional sociology alongside the traditional public sociology. The goal of this transformative approach is to counteract the public role of Italian sociology, which seems to have lost its critical-explanatory vocation without ever having truly acquired a propositional function in the social context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Where do public sociology and the study of natural resources meet? One promising intersection is at community-based natural resource management. At this juncture there are multiple opportunities for rural sociologists to embrace the tenets of public sociology, as espoused by Michael Burawoy. By working with an active, thick, and local 'civil society', rural sociologists have the opportunity to improve livelihoods as well as contribute to the sustainability of the natural resource base that so many depend upon. This article examines these possibilities by discussing three domains for rural sociologists to apply public sociology to community-based natural resource management: participation, empowerment, and knowledge coproduction. This article makes an explicit call for rural sociologists to 'go public,' and by doing so challenge the underlying structures of marginalization and inequity that have characterized public involvement in natural resource management through the contemporary era of resource management in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been much recent debate within sociology regarding academic versus applied approaches, as well as how to integrate these during a career. Sociologists interested in such issues might find both inspiration and an exemplar in social psychologist Gordon W. Allport. Well known for his leadership role in both personality and psychological social psychology, Allport has still not gained widespread recognition for his sociological contributions, especially his "public sociology." As an undergraduate, Allport embraced the tradition of "social ethics" as taught at Harvard, which focused on social problems and social policy, and on individual engagement. Over the first two decades of a half-century career, Allport adapted to his "hard science" organizational and professional contexts and earned a tenured position primarily by building up a naturalistic psychology. But beginning in the early 1940s, he increasingly re-engaged with social ethics and overt reform efforts, with a focus on the social psychology and sociology of rumor, prejudice and racial and religious discrimination. Though a key architect of the interdisciplinary Department of Social Relations, he came to see that project as excessively value-neutral and he lobbied to revive a clear ethical commitment. Fittingly, Allport ended his career as the first incumbent of the Richard Clarke Cabot Professorship of Social Ethics. In this way, he bridged naturalistic psychology, sociology and social ethics in order to create an integral science oriented toward social justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research has examined various elements of Twitter; however, no scholarship has explored how sociologists currently use the platform. This empirically driven paper explores how individuals that self-identify as sociologists on Twitter use the popular micro-blogging social media site. A total of 152,977 tweets from Twitter profiles of 130 sociologists were collected and examined using qualitative media analysis. The potential use of Twitter allows the sociologist to become both the generator and interlocutor of dialogue with publics. We frame our data analysis and discussion around the core theme of expertise - namely, the role that expertise plays in the use of Twitter by sociologists. Our findings indicate that when sociologists used Twitter as sociologists (i.e., drawing upon their stated research expertise) little direct engagement with publics occurred. Thus, while sociologists appear to be using Twitter as a space for public sociology, the use of this interactive platform is mostly limited to the generation of content, a finding consistent with Burawoy's traditional form of public sociology. Suggestions for future research are noted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study demonstrates that the path of the 'organic public sociology' (proposed by Michael Burowoy in his famous call of the 2004) as the dominating mode of sociological practice in the national context can be menacing with the serious pitfalls manifested in broad historical perspective. We reveal the four pitfalls basing on the analysis of the Russian experience through the last 150 years. First, the over-politicization and ideological biasness of sociological activities; second, the 'personal sacrifice' of sociologist as a romanticized practice, potentially harmful for the discipline; third, the difficulties of the professional sociology institutionalization; fourth, the deprivation of the policy sociology development. Analyzing the history of Russian sociology in the context of the current international discussions, we give particular reference to the idea of the 'Scientized Environment Supporting Actorhood' elaborated by John Meyer. We suggest the mode of communication between sociology and society, which, in our view, could be helpful for improving their interactions in various local, national and global contexts in the XXIst century. This mode escapes the political emphasis and ideological claims but rather concentrates on the more fundamental ethical issues. It also tries to overcome the limitations of the contemporary professional mainstream (instead of idealizing it). Finally, it presents itself to the publics in the understandable way, while remaining properly scientifically validated (however, avoiding the exaggerated accent on the statistical procedures and fitishization of the natural science' principles ('numerology' and 'quantofrenia')). The public activities of the prominent sociologist Pitirim Sorokin in the American period of his career are a good example of this approach to the interactions with society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Now that public sociology is beginning to move into mainstream sociology, it is necessary to understand the vital if indirect part the general public plays in the creation of public sociology. Although that sociology requires sociological work which is relevant and useful to sectors of the general public and is written in non-technical language, presenters are needed to propose that the work is eligible to become public sociology. Still, the public makes the final decision about whether it will literally become public sociology. This article hypothesizes about the process by which sociological works are transformed into public sociology, focusing particularly on the journalists, publishers, social media participants and other presenters. Empirical studies are needed to test these hypotheses, for a better understanding of the production of public sociology is needed so that it can contribute to the vitality of the discipline in the years to come. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This reflection offers considerations of a career in policy sociology. The author reflects on the role of the policy sociologist and the research produced for policy. Three examples of sociological practice focus on the sociologist as offering actionable evidence for nongovernmental organizations, as evaluator of prison and substance abuse treatment programs, and as watchdog for government accountability. Thoughts are offered on training for a career in policy sociology, as well as caution to remain reflexive and critically aware of bias sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the participation by sociologists in several major conferences, mostly held in New York, that focused on issues related to science, democracy and faith between the late 1930s and the early post-World War II period. These events offered sociologists an opportunity to showcase the discipline to leading scholars, public figures, and other intellectuals and public audiences outside the discipline. Amidst widespread uncertainty and a quest for answers to significant social and economic problems, sociologists revealed that they were no more adept than other intellectuals to provide definitive pathways out of potential catastrophe. At the same time, the conferences and related events demonstrated that sociologists had analytical tools and insights that could be useful in framing questions and orientations that were of interest not only to scholar bodies, but also served as potential reference points for social policy and community development. These activities, in helping to legitimize the discipline and reinforce the boundaries within which it operated, did so in a manner that also separated and privileged sociologists, as professionals or experts, from broader publics in ways that narrowed the discipline's main foci and lessened its capacity to adopt more democratic public roles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many sociologists have discussed the pros and cons of writing op-eds for major newspapers, but little is known about how many sociologists are actually involved in this activity, who these people are, or how this group has changed over time. Although some related studies exist, none consider the historical dynamics of op-ed writing or theorize about why some sociologists publish op-eds and others do not. This study examines op-ed publications in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post over a 32-year period (1980 to 2011). In addition to estimating the total number of publications by sociologists, it presents a descriptive portrait of the authors themselves. The study also shows that the length and number of op-eds published by sociologists depend on the authors' sex, professional rank, university affiliation and other elements of social status. Finally, supporting Merton's Matthew effect, the findings reveal in part how the gap between the upper and lower levels of the academic hierarchy - as it pertains to op-ed publication - has widened in the last decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this article is to highlight key features of the Russian sociological tradition and to demonstrate its relevance for certain ongoing international debates. In the current literature the image of 'Russian sociology' remains fragmentary and incomplete. Different stages in the history of Russian sociology are usually considered as mutually antagonistic. We challenge this view by arguing that the Russian sociological tradition can be seen as a continuing trajectory of social thought development, lasting from the XIXth century until present days and unified by a set of underlying historically determined common features: publicism (an orientation to non-academic audiences and a desire to promote changes in the real world); moral and ethical concern (a clear expression of value orientations; the particular importance of ethical and moral issues); problem orientation (a focus on urgent social concerns with 'problem' dominating over 'method' in sociological research). We demonstrate the importance of these features for a better understanding of the perspectives and contributions of Russian sociologists to current international debates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Public sociology' has flourished as an idea with limited success in practice. We argue that movement towards the consensual goal of public engagement is more likely using audiovisual than text-based communication. We briefly review the history of the idea with a focus on the post-Burawoy era and its central debates. We argue that such disputes over politics, activism, disciplinary identity, and theoretical coherence are diversionary, with little hope of resolution and even less of providing the engagement sought by public sociology. Sadly and wrongly, they assume that only educated and literate audiences possess interest or capacity to engage scholarly knowledge of the social world. Advances in audiovisual technologies, familiarization, and routinization during the past decade suggest a solution that does not involve significant structural or cultural changes to the discipline. In this essay we offer two illustrations of audiovisual practices in sociology and provide an overview of video ethnography as an option in graduate methods training. This proposed course is a reasonable, low cost, and implementable solution to the problem of public sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over 40 percent of today's college students are enrolled at community colleges. While the institutions of community colleges have been gaining national attention given this growing statistic, we do not engage in large scale conversations about teaching practices that best benefit our local populations. This paper looks at the risks and rewards of incorporating students' everyday life experiences into the classroom in an introduction to sociology course. This course is developed in an urban setting giving students tools both to see the world as sociologists and to critically analyze persistent inequalities in society. These goals are accomplished through challenging classroom conversations and culminate in a project where students collect data through their lived experience and analyze it as sociologists. While this style of teaching provides unique and often unexpected challenges, it creates a strong active learning environment in the classroom, confronts important social problems, and holds potential for consciousness raising and social change in the local community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public sociology in a community college setting offers great possibilities for the advancement of our discipline. As open access institutions whose stakeholders range from high school students dually enrolled in college to retirees epitomizing the ethos of lifetime learning, community colleges attract a diverse populace whose stock of life experiences resonates with sociological concepts. In this article I discuss how a well-known sociologist impacted a diverse audience, illustrating both the promise and the pitfalls of sociology for the public. I then situate 'public sociology' within the context of my role as a college president and discuss how I have utilized a sociological imagination to structure the central themes of a successful capital campaign. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why have social constructionists remained absent from debates over public sociology? I argue that constructionist scholarship would be particularly amenable to Michael Burawoy's notion of 'organic' public sociology, given the ability of constructionist scholars to orient awareness contexts in order to help engender constructionist imaginations. This approach requires that constructionists take on a different view of the role of the analyst. I also discuss some of the problems Canadian academics have had engaging with the media in their efforts to engage in 'traditional' public sociology, as well as what a constructionist public sociology may look like practice. I conclude by addressing potential challenges to a constructionist public sociology within Canada, including reference to sociology's disciplinary coherence and how we can approach-and what we mean by-'publics'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an effort to further advance public sociology and its relationship with technology, this paper looks at a democratic model of collaboration within the technological sciences. We draw on the concept of user- led research to demonstrate how sociologists, scientists and various stakeholders within the public sphere can achieve reciprocal, meaningful and sustained knowledge translation. Furthermore, we argue that by acknowledging participants' technological needs and reducing unnecessary complexity, the user -led method advances Burawoy's 'dialogue as mutual education' within public sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay treats Burawoy's advocacy for public sociology as a social problems claim. Using a social constructionist approach, I examine the rhetorical strategies Burawoy uses to construct the discipline in a way that makes public sociology seem not only relevant, but integral to what sociologists do. Sociology's history, ethos and practitioners are framed in ways that make its commitment to the civil sphere appear as a 'natural' direction for the discipline. Certain features of the discipline are foregrounded. Motives and desires are imputed. Villains are constructed and the paths to progress are outlined. By examining the framing strategies Burawoy uses to present his vision, the promise of public sociology is called into question. I do not argue that public sociology is without value. Rather, I unpack the claims its advocates make and question whether public sociology can deliver on its promise of a better sociology or a better society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This embedded case study of the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy (CSCP) illustrates the development of disciplinary boundaries during a transitional period of professionalization in the social sciences, particularly for the fields of sociology and social work. Drawing on archival data (e.g., reports, scholarly and autobiographical writings, and correspondence) we first document sociological contributions of the community-based school, one of many progressive projects among social settlements and social gospelers of the day. Then using the lens of an intergenerational struggle reflective of the historical social movements of the period, we analyze the circumstances surrounding the 1920 merger of the CSCP with the University of Chicago. Succeeding their early social settlement mentors, Graham Taylor of the Chicago Commons and Jane Addams and Julia Lathrop of Hull House, a second generation of social reformer protégés became a formidable force in this disciplinary differentiation. This case can be read as a micro-level illustration of a much larger macro-level political contest as professional social scientists vied for control of the definition of social science and its applied mission. The "ghosts of sociologies past" still haunt the discipline today offering important lessons for sustaining a science that joins theory with action to solve social problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper identifies the common themes in 245-plus refereed articles on whiteness studies that were published in academic journals after 1992 in an attempt to assess the implications of whiteness studies for the discipline of sociology. Of special interest is the relationship between whiteness studies and Michael Burawoy’s call for public sociology. I argue that the emerging field of whiteness studies identifies itself as a public sociology that is infused by the moral vision of critical sociology. Nevertheless, the field does not accept professional sociology as Burawoy defined it. The ontological, epistemological, and soteriological foundations of whiteness studies encourage the field to pander to one segment of the public—the marginalized—and condemn another segment of the public—“privileged whites,” thus rendering impossible a democratic dialogue on one of the most basic social issues of our time. Conflating Western epistemology with whiteness encourages a misreading of American social scientific work on race relations, thus opening the door to a so-called hermeneutics of suspicion. The result is not an innocuous “pop” sociology, but a partisan sociology, whose implications should caution sociologists against an uncritical embracing of public sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reflecting on my experiences as a graduate student, I argue that the terminology of public sociology should be dropped. The public sociology rhetoric is at odds with the fundamental professional reality in the discipline. Sociology, as a “hyper-professionalized” endeavor, primarily values abstract, explanatory theories, even if those theories make the world less descriptively comprehensible to people seeking to act in the world. Moreover, I question whether sociologists, as a professional class, should or can take on the public position as the partisan representatives of civil society and marginalized peoples. Instead, I argue for a greater openness within professional sociology to descriptive work, as well as more departmental supports for graduate students to pursue careers outside of sociology. Sociologists interested in public engagement should focus primarily on cataloguing and practical evaluation of engaged research tactics and community oriented teaching strategies, rather than theoretical discussions of what sociology can or should be. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent and prolific attention to public sociology has involved a great deal of theoretical debate about its merits, flaws, and potential future within the discipline. Despite the loud call for becoming more public, existing research on the discipline lacks both an empirical understanding of where we are as well as a methodological rubric to guide future inquiry. This project explores one outlet for public sociology—the press—as a starting point for this line of research. Through an investigation of Associated Press stories featuring sociology and sociologists, we seek to provide a baseline for consideration of public sociology efforts by describing the current state of how our discipline and its members are portrayed in the press. Further, based on our findings we provide some insights for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the discipline of sociology has seen an increased discussion of public sociology, but the discussion has focused on whether or not it is a good idea for sociologists to become more engaged with their various publics. A different question motivates this research: What are the institutional arrangements that make doing public sociology difficult, and thus less likely? Following Dorothy Smith, we start from the perspective of frontline actors and ask them about their experiences. We combine data from two sources: individual interviews with a sample of 50 academic feminists, a group that has theoretical motivation to be interested in public sociology and group interviews with 15 feminists engaged in some form of public sociology. These informants tell us about two related institutional barriers to doing public sociology: the culture of professional sociology and the standards we use for evaluating scholarship. The impact of these disciplinary barriers probably varies by institution type and career stage but there is reason to suspect they generate costs not just for individuals but for the discipline. Taking steps to break down these barriers would ameliorate concerns some have raised about public sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stimulated by debates on public sociology in the recent years I studied contributions of sociologists in daily newspapers in Austria. Although sociologists are rather present in the Austrian press, I argue this remains without noticeable effects on public opinion formation; the topics sociologists write and talk about are rather arbitrary and they lack factual content. Although my data refers to sociologists in the Austrian press, the study’s conclusions might be true to the wider sociological community: Through such exposure, a public profile of sociology cannot evolve. Furthermore, the article discusses criteria that prevent and complicate the relationship between sociologists and the press: avoidance of publicity, the problem of values and ideology, incompatibilities of language-games, divergence of relevance criteria, and deficient cultural empathy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines recent debates surrounding public sociology in the context of a UK based Department of Applied Social Sciences. Three areas of work within the department form the focus of the article: violence against women and children; community-based oral history projects and health ethics teaching. The article draws on Micheal Burawoy’s typology comprising public, policy, professional and critical sociology, and argues that much of the work described in the case studies more often lies somewhere in between, in the interstices, rather than within one or other of the four types. The result is not without its tensions and dilemmas, some of which are identified and explored, notably those arising from attempts to appeal to diverse audiences and meet the sometimes conflicting expectations of each. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, I argue for and illustrate ‘power mapping’ as a concrete research approach that can benefit specific publics while enhancing professional sociological knowledge and theory. I present power mapping as an example of a more broad approach to public sociology which seeks to harness sociological theory and knowledge in order to create generalizable analytical tools that social movements, policy makers, concerned citizens, voluntary associations, and community organizations can use to develop their own strategic assessments of the sociological contexts in which they act. One of the ironies of the current discussion of public sociology is that it has been conducted in an abstract, hyper-theoretical discourse which is precisely one of the factors that has disconnected so much sociology from general publics. In this article, I instead turn towards presenting a specific concrete research strategy which could engender mutually beneficial research collaboration and dialogue between sociologists and specific publics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Burawoy’s manifesto connects to a long series of debates on the role of science in society as well as on the myth of pure science. This paper argues that the gap between professional sociology and public sociology is far from being unbridgeable and that public sociology is not suppressed to the extent portrayed by Burawoy. In late modern societies a number of schools, including various scientific, public and intellectual movements have questioned the possibility, value position and social relevance of a functionally differentiated pure science by applying the sine qua non of modernity, i.e. critical reflection, to science. According to the argument developed here, also illustrated by a personal example, Burawoy could possibly prevent the gate-keepers of the empire of pure science from closing the otherwise open gates in front of his program and in front of critical reflection if only he used less harsh war-cries and were more careful in detecting the changes he himself urges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We can only welcome the discourse that has been initiated in our professional community with the concept of public sociology in the focus. Undoubtedly, Michael Burawoy has indisputable merits in fuelling this international dialogue. I find, however, that his position and conceptual framework is debatable at several points, therefore my review is on the side of those who criticize his ideas. My paper is divided into three parts: in keeping with the idea that the drop mirrors the ocean, I will start with the detailed critique of a single paragraph—the one which makes comments on his table entitled Types of sociological knowledge. It will be argued that by switching his viewpoints and using vaguely defined notions without empirical evidences he often tackles his subject inconsistently. Secondly, I intend to offer an alternative, three-dimensional conceptual model in which the social scientist’s prestige, influence and position on the action chain is taken into account as the main analytical aspects of the relationship between her/him and the public. Finally, based on this model, I propose to identify some strategies in order to find a better balance between the public and professional activity of social scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction to the journal is presented in which the editor discusses various articles within the issue concerning issues such as public sociology, social reform, and social policy.