Search

The term `sub-culture' is one that has been part of sociology for many years, and which, like "role," "class" and "charisma," whether or not it was in current usage before the rise of sociology, is certainly now a feature of everyday language. lying utility, even if coupled with a superficial lack of clarity. In this article the author considers three distinct but interrelating problems about sub-culture. The first of these is the general issue of culture and structure as perspectives on social relations, the second the problem of the definition of the boundaries of a sub-culture, and the last the question of the genesis, maintenance and change of sub-cultures. The concept "Culture" is often more a loose reference to social milieu than an adequate idea of social structure. Although sociologists at times write as though social relations could be empirically carved up into culture and structure, these two concepts represent only an analytical distinction, that is they cover the same actual social relations from a different standpoint, selecting different aspects for consideration.

Educational under-achievement loosely defined may be seen as referring to the inability of individual pupils, or groups of pupils to match in academic performance what evaluations of their intelligence suggests. Psychologists, for their part, with increasingly sophisticated measurement techniques, have sought to explain under-achievement in terms of individual differences in personality, in physical attributes, in cognitive ability, in early socialization and motivation. In brief, taking as their reference point for comparison the achieving individual, psychologists have focused in the main upon ostensibly classless variables. A recent boundary rub-out between psychology and sociology surrounds the relationship of teacher expectations on academic achievement and under-achievement. Yet significantly absent in this latest fusion is any critical evaluation and reappraisal of each discipline's underlying assumptions, with resultant research following the same hackneyed lines as before, without incidentally, the benefit of any interdisciplinary criticism. As this has had a particularly depressing effect upon more sociologically oriented research, the ensuing discussion will remain within this general orbit.

The problems of the Marxist approach, is that a debate on the Marxist interpretation of literature, as of anything else, is too likely to become merely a debate on the validity of Marxism-so that if alienation is a useful substantive concept, then it will suffice to explain literature as well as all other human phenomena, superstructure as well as base. Having accepted the coherence of alienation one can accept all the inbuilt assumptions that come with, it, and in approaching literature simply select those key works which illustrate most cogently the truth of alienation-not a dishonest process, of course, since clearly alienation applies equally to all literary works, some just bring it out better than others. The first task in any sociology of the novel is to get away from facile stylistic-ideological correlations. Although the novel was the product of the bourgeois epoch, there is no way of correlating the novelist's growing awareness of alienation with formal or substantive changes in the novel itself.

This article presents information regarding the sociology of anti-institution. Most social groups or collectivities, other than those of a most impermanent kind, seek to perpetuate their existence and identity over time. The modern formal organization, for example, tends to adopt a rational, bureaucratic structure in order to ensure its survival, i.e., it sets rational goals, assesses the efficiency of performances in pursuit of those goals, specifies behaviour requirements in written rules or an understood code of conduct, replaces inefficient personnel, clearly demarcates lines of authority to minimize conflicting claims, plans for unforeseen contingencies, socializes personnel to play the required roles, and trains successors to take over the leadership when required. Face-to-face few individuals could match W.B. Curry, in set pieces he was almost irresistible to both adults and children. But just occasionally the collective illusion was pierced. A very real danger was that the pupil society which was vulnerable to his manipulation might also fall sway to an alternative leader, now and again, a boisterous boy with a kind of natural authority would magnetize a group and begin to define deviance as social so that it threatened to become a slavishly followed norm.

This article presents information regarding methodological implications of symbolic interactionism for the study of deviance. Theoretically symbolic interactionism rests on three primitive assumptionst reality as it is sensed, known and understood is a social production. As such it consists of social objects, the meanings of which arise out of the behaviours persons direct towards them. Humans are granted the capacity to engage in minded, self-reflexive behaviour. In the course of taking their own standpoint and fitting that standpoint to the behaviours of others, humans interact with one another. Interaction is seen as an emergent, negotiated, often times unpredictable concern. Interaction is symbolic simply because minded, self-reflexive behaviour demands the manipulation of symbols, words, meanings and diverse languages. Language refers to all the utterances, gestures and movements one interactant communicates to self or other. It is viewed as a conversation of gestures arising out of the interaction process. Interactants can communicate in a silent-gestural language or in a set of personally specific vocal utterances. Their languages may transcend situations.

The sociology of leisure can be illuminated by examining the four main themes that have preoccupied its contributors. These preoccupations are: the definitions of leisure, the diffusion of leisure, Leisure and life styles, Macro and micro-social perspectives on leisure. According to the Countryside Recreation and Research Advisory Group(CRRAG), leisure is the time available to the individual when the disciplines of work, sleep and other basic needs have been met. The essential elements of leisure, an antithesis to "work" as an economic function, a pleasant expectation and recollection, a minimum of involuntary social-role obligations, a psychological perception of freedom, a close relation to the values of the culture, the inclusion of an entire range from inconsequence and insignificance to weightiness and importance and often, but not necessarily, an activity characterized by the element of play. Leisure is none of these by itself but all together in one emphasis or another."

The article presents a study into Weber's view of Islam, the author have attempted to show that one can plausibly perceive four different theses in Weber's sociology of civilizations. On the basis of contemporary research and theoretical discussion, three theses can be dismissed as either false or theoretically weak. The fourth thesis is that Islam declined and was eventually forced into economic dependence on Europe because it could not solve an inherent weakness in what Weber called "sultanism." In this final perspective, Islamic beliefs are still treated as influential, but the presence of these beliefs rather than other beliefs is explained by the social and economic structure of patrimonialism. When Muslim reformers came to understand their own economic decline, they often employed theories of ascetic motivation, but this fact cannot be taken as evidence that asceticism is a necessary aspect of capitalist development. The ideology of hard work in modern Islam was very largely a colonial importation.

The present article is an effort to extend the investigation of informal patterns within the discipline by focusing on the relationship between the doctoral origins of session organizers and participants in the Annual Meetings of the American Sociological Association. In this study the author will be concerned with two issues: An examination of the pattern indicated in his 1971 study, that is, do session organizers with doctorates from Chicago, Columbia, or Harvard tend to favour as participants individuals who also hold doctorates from these three schools. This is in keeping with the session, several sessions in each Annual Meeting were excluded from this study; a discussion of findings from several recent empirical studies in the sociology of sociology with the aim of integrating such findings into an explanatory scheme. Originally, the author intended to examine the Annual Meetings for the last five years 1966-70. This is in keeping with the session, several sessions in each Annual Meeting were excluded from this study.

The paper traces some consequences of characterizing the sociological discipline as an 'occupation.' The concept of 'occupation,' while suffering from abuse, nevertheless retains its reference to the crucial defining process which characterizes sociology. Using the concept of 'occupation' in its sensitizing function, it was suggested that evidence of phenomena in sociology which indicated efforts to achieve orientation could be found by the location and identification of 'pieties' of individual sociologists, by granting recognition to a form of knowledge termed mystique, by the identification of forms of ritual and what was termed 'secular prayer,' a form of character-building and by the location of different 'cognitive styles.' Two styles were mentioned, one being characterized by continuity, the other by 'conversion' experience. These phenomena it was suggested, would best be termed 'cultic' in character. Possible hypotheses were suggested. Some attempt was made to indicate types of interpretations and observations possible using cult as an orientational or sensitizing concept.

In this article the author focuses on the controversy surrounding sociologist Thomas S. Kuhn's book entitled "The Structure of Scientific Revolution." The author here makes two points that are raised for sociology by Kuhn's argument. The first point will detail the non-radical and the radical responses to his account, both responses being characterized by a belief that Kuhn's argument about natural scientific development somehow legitimates the sort of sociology they are currently practicing. The second point is that it does not follow from this that Kuhn is of no interest to sociologists; on the contrary, he has an extremely interesting although limited sociology of natural scientific knowledge. What are the non-radical and radical sociological reactions that have developed or could develop in response to this thesis? Central to both and to Kuhn's argument is the notion of a paradigm. The none radical sociological reaction is the claim that if sociology is to develop it must transcend the present situation where there are multitudinous pre-pre-paradigms competing with each other, where work is done at all sorts of levels and significance, and where there is excessive methodological neurosis.

In this article the author focuses on the sociological career in Great Britain. The author remarks that as a student he knew nothing of working-class life, and the great industrial north was a nightmare land of smoke and grime through which one had to travel to get from London to the Lake District. At Cambridge he read history, which was at that time, with a few exceptions, very badly taught. The experience was not, on the whole, either attractive or enlightening. Nevertheless his whole outlook on life changed very rapidly. Although, history was in general badly taught at Cambridge in the years just before the First World War, there were two teachers who not only taught the author a lot but also left their mark on his subsequent career. The author says that if only he had been a sociologist then, what an opportunity this would have given him to study, by participant observation and any other survey method not requiring a computer, the emergence of a structured society from a miscellaneous collection of individuals flung together by chance in a confined space and its subsequent fortunes.

Differences between residential institutions may be greater than existing theory on the subject would have one to believe. The study describes the development of a questionnaire to assess the ways boys in approved schools perceive their social environment. Considerable differences were found between schools and it is concluded that approved school training is not homogeneous form of treatment. The differences could be explained by a number of factors. First, the questions could have been answered differently if schools had differed in the percentage of boys faking good or faking bad. A second source of spurious variation could have been tendency for some boys to agree with any statement favorable or unfavorable. A third source of variation may have resulted from halo effect. Thus while the act of faking good or faking bad would have involved a deliberate effort on the part of the respondent, it is also possible for a respondent to genuinely believe that all is right, or alternatively everything is wrong, with his surroundings. There is an evidence of large differences in the way approved schools are perceived and have produced a questionnaire for measuring these differences. This or similar questionnaires may play a useful part in the increasingly important field of cross-institutional research.

The article presents a list of books reviewed, names of authors who contributed to the journal and a table of contents to volume 24 of the "British Journal of Sociology." Some books that are reviewed in the journal are "Society and the Policeman's Role," by M.E. Cain, "Arabs and Berbers," edited by E. Gellner and C. Micaud and "The Future of Work and Leisure," by S. Parker.

The paper asks whether mass media rather than being a homogenizing force, is in fact one that promotes differentiation, whether mass media is one for revolutionary change and whether rather than generating a crisis of identity, it aids in generating new identity. In other words, the advent of new communications techniques and patterns particularly television may have proven to have had precisely the contrary effect of that suggested by some of the classical views of the increasing massification of society and social relationships. The emergence of sundry militant minority groups in the 1960s, the black revolutionists, student and anti-war groups, neo-feminists, the poor, the Indians organized as red power with the aid of the electronic mass media implies that the social consequences of the new technologies of communication will profoundly alter the social order but not in the exact way foreseen by most of the contemporary mass society essayists. Although mass media may have a confirmative potential for majority groups, it possesses a transformative function for minority group identities. With future developments of multi-channel cable vision and other individualized media, an accentuation of the process may occur.

The article focuses on social integration of a society and deviance. Remarkably little interest has attached to whether high levels of social integration beget deviance. The idea of reciprocity in role-playing provides a useful way of giving greater meaning to the concept of social integration. The view here is that the more do roles in given types of situation mutually facilitate the playing of each other, that is, the more is reciprocity built into role relationships, the greater will be social integration. A group may be well integrated internally and little integrated with the larger society of which it is a part. Again, a whole society may be characterized by overall social integration of any degree. Tension in a social structure depends on the degree of reciprocity in role relationships. The less is reciprocity, the greater is tension. Thus if role reciprocity in a social structure is very low, tension in that structure is very great.

The article focuses on various sociologists. There were a number of sociologists who were rather bemused and puzzled seeing Sorokin being idolized by the radical students and young faculty members. It seemed to them that Sorokin, who had condemned violence and revolutionary activity ever since the Revolution, was being worshipped by the wrong people. Some of the famous scholars are Pitirim A. Sorokin, Nicholas S. Timasheff and Georges Gurvitch. Timasheff, Sorokin and Gurvitch have succeeded, each in his own way, in becoming internationally famous scholars. The paths they each chose to follow seem to have been determined to a significant degree by their respective family backgrounds, as well as by the Revolution. Timasheff's approach in his sociological writings was historical and analytical. Sorokin's work and style represent a marked contrast to Timasheff's. While Timasheff used historical data as empirical facts, Sorokin used the data as means for conforming his personal apocalyptic vision. Gurvitch's ideas were also formed under the direct impact of the Revolution.

The search for universals means not so much stepping over the borders of cultural communities, as discovering construction principles common to the Spheres of the human praxis apparently belonging to entirely different realms. In other words, universal principles instead of common denominators, theory instead of endless rearrangement of disarrayed empirical records follow immediately. It is quite possible that in non-linguistic cultural sub-systems, like in language, the value of each element depends entirely on their opposition to other elements, on their being different from other elements. They are therefore characterised not by any positive quality of their own but by their oppositional quality and differential value. Common misinterpretations notwithstanding, a chance to bridge the conceptual chasm between statics and dynamics, synchronic and diachronic dimensions, is also built into the analytical equipment of the modern linguistics. The numerous statements to the contrary, frequent as they have been, have been born out of the understandable, though not necessarily convincing, passion of the devout preachers of an undoubtedly revolutionary idea.

The article focuses on social mobility and economic growth. Concerning the nature of the entrepreneurial role itself, the industrial capitalist, though he may seek profit for a variety of motives, nevertheless must behave as if profit were the defining goal of economic action. He must, in competitive circumstances, seek to discover and employ those tools and techniques which multiply the human energy invested in their creation and use, thereby providing income-yielding power in the process of production and exchange. One may reason that people who are in general achievement-oriented displayed the same orientation in selecting a career, i.e., they experimented with different occupations, either imaginatively on the basis of whatever information they had or by trial and error in practice, and so chose to stay with the activity for which they were best suited, business. It thus seems clear, then, that the achievement norm-potentially so appropriate for entrepreneurial roles-became operative in economic growth not because of the high social prestige of business activity, but rather because transformations in Elizabethan patterns of social mobility.

It is well known that American agriculture benefited enormously by mechanization and rationalization, even if the spirit of industrial production had to be modified in its adaptation to this field of economic endeavor. A case of over-zealous organization is revealed in the institution of hand-shaking practiced at various receptions. In a reception given after a wedding, for example, the bride and bridegroom and their parents stand at the door in a line and shake the hand of every guest turning up, a laborious and lengthy process in many cases. Every system of examination involves a measure of order and organization, but the American approach goes in this respect to extremes. A significant expression of the principle of organization is the establishment of rules. Rules try to organize human behavior in such a way as to achieve the desired goals efficiently. It would be unimaginable to have a system of mass-production in which the division of functions was not complemented by the following of strict rules as to how each function must be performed.

The crisis confronting Western sociology is seen to hinge on a fundamental re-examination of the identification of the logic of natural and social sciences. The dialectical logic involved is viewed as providing a bridge between Marxist and non-Marxist sociology which are battling for the mantle of orthodoxy in Western sociology. Sociologist Karl Marx viewed his method as scientific and its product, historical materialism, as a reality. The dominant forces in Western sociology shape their self-image to foresee and relegate anticipation to those engaged in policy planning. Western sociology has been inhospitable to dialectical imagery. Sociology is dialectically linked with alienation, the two working together as a single interactive process. Sociologists began to suspect that the consistency and closure demanded by the system assumption failed to provide a place for fundamental social change. The decision of sociologist Charles Loomis to title his presidential address before the American Sociological Association granted both official sanction and encouragement to the dialectical mode from the Western sociological orthodoxy. The division that has taken place in the house of Western sociology is evidenced within Marxist sociology.

Propositions and concepts are reexamined and modified as a result of the discussion on social mobility. Social structures which are ethnically differentiated give rise to the kind of definition that would apply the label 'minority.' An imbalance arises between aspirations and actual chances of mobility leading as a rule to partial mobility. Social mobility is seen as the movement in social status or social position by individuals of diverse social origins measurable by the occupational index. This is a search for the causal explanation of differential mobility rates between coloured minorities and white minorities. A number of studies have stated and others have implied that the immobility of coloured groups is due to discrimination on grounds of the special racial factor of colour. A factor which influences the social mobility chances of minority groups is the stereotyping or homogenization of attitudes in the receiving country with regard to social class. Another factor is the socio-economic structure and politico-legal condition prevalent in the receiving country. Re-statements of the propositions include that social mobility in terms of socio-economic indicators is not caused by a rigidity in social structure and that it depends on the rank order in which the minority group is.

This article discusses current student discontent in terms of the "politics of the knowable," the possible social effects of a view of reality. The author argues that the current revolt--itself but part of an age-old revolt--is bolstered by an ideology that is by no means so weak that it can be wholly disregarded--particularly in the social, as opposed to the natural, sciences. Some students feel that a university career but renders them fit for capitalist consumption, tailors them to dummydom, seduces them with an appeal to cupidity, thus endowing them with the status of a kind of organization courtesan--a rich, kept amenity of the status quo. The present system is felt to be excessively vocational. Individuals are turned out to meet pre-determined ends-not to expand. These ends are resented. They are felt--to put it kindly--to be beside the Point. They are felt to be "irrelevant," of use neither to society as seen by them nor to the individual. Syllabuses are accused of being too detailed studies are accused of being too rule-bound--both are held to be symbols, not of professional rectitude, rather of social decadence. It is clear that students do not mean by "relevance" what one might have thought they would.

It is the contention of this article that there has been a pronounced tendency in sociology to under-emphasize the study of values and moral issues, and that the cause of this is twofold: the cultural and organizational climate within which sociologists operate and the lack of consensus among them on a conceptual framework within which accumulative research on values could occur. The article has attempted to assess the current level of accomplishment in the field of value study and to suggest possible reasons for the apparent lack of progress. The need for an increased emphasis on this aspect of social relations is considered sufficiently urgent to warrant a renewed effort toward the achievement of a measure of consensus in theory. The premise that human social action is an integral part of a totally interrelated, determined but largely undeterminable universe of matter is offered as a possible starting point. It is hoped that the model of value change proposed might eventually prove capable of generating hypotheses concerning cultural and social change and the relation of such change to value systems.

The article presents the author's opinions on sociology. There is only one sociology and that it is functionalist. We are all functionalists now, if indeed it is society we are studying. Society in this assertion does not mean the whole society but the state of human association or interaction. I am not advocating that there is any special need to study whole societies, but that there is a special need to stay focused on social facts. In so far as anyone thinks there is a different sociological approach from the functionalist, it will be because he has been diverted from the emergent properties of social action, probably to the psychology of the actor. That is to say, he will not be making a different approach but approaching a different thing. But in so far as we try to grapple with social facts we will be functionalists. It is sometimes suggested that a theoretical task for the moment is to work out a synthesis that would reconcile functionalism with some of the other assumed non-functionalist views such as a conflict view or a balance view of order.

American sociology is distinguished from British and continental European sociology by, among other things, a lack of interest in identifying and measuring social class, as distinct from social status. Indices of occupational prestige ratings have served as indices of social status. This article explicates the most popular American scale of occupational prestige ratings, and concludes that this index is not a plausible index either of the relative prestige of occupations or of social status, and furthermore, that such an index in principle is not obtainable. The errors of proponents of the scale lie in an idealistic theory of the social order and repetition of the classic mistake once committed, but now long avoided, by economists: aggregation of subjective evaluations. A well-known characteristic feature of American sociology, in contrast to British and continental European sociology, has been the absence of serious attempts to establish numerical indices of social class. Yet there have been a number of attempts to establish indices of what is variously known as social status or socio-economic status, mainly by means of polled verbal evaluations of occupations.

This article presents some questions for the attention of medical sociologists. Some medical educators, admittedly few, still subscribe to the view that they alone are competent to provide role models for medical students and that, therefore, no matter what the subject, the proper training of the physician requires that a physician teach it. Others, adopting a less extreme standpoint, appear to be prepared to accept the behavioral sciences on trust as it were, even while retaining some of these reservations and often questioning the relevance of sociological theory and method to the practical problems of health and illness. While there are then a few medical educators with reservations, it appears that the vast majority nowadays consider that sociology, psychology and anthropology, and perhaps other allied disciplines, have an acknowledged place somewhere in the medical curriculum. It is not proposed in this paper to enter into the general debate on whether the behavioral sciences have anything to contribute to medicine and should be incorporated into medical training.

The article comments on the concept of power. Power is one of the most central and yet problematic concepts in sociological theory. Power, like love, is a word used continually in ordinary speech, understood intuitively, and defined rarely, people know what the power game is. In many instances sociologists have been no more precise than this. Yet it is possible to define power precisely without losing the core of its common-sense meaning. This section discusses critically current definitions of power, and concludes by suggesting a refinement of current definitions which maintains their essence while avoiding some of their misleading assumptions. Most sociological theorists have defined power in more restricted terms, as a specific type of relation between objects, persons and groups. The most influential definition remains that of the sociologist Max Weber: power is the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless the basis on which this probability rests.

Too often, sociological accounts of literature have used fiction merely as illustrative of sociological theories, concepts and schemes of analysis, adding little to sociological theory and impoverishing en passant the richness of the literary work. The concentration upon the nineteenth-century novel by Marxist writers is understandable, for it is in this novel that the phenomenon of class conflict, the disenchantment of the writer with bourgeois democracy and the flight from realism, either in the form of reactionary romanticism or avant-garde literary forms, are to be discovered. This approach is useful in overcoming a particular barrier presented to a sociology of literature by literary critics. By and large, the literary critics are concerned with the discernment of quality and taste and the establishment of the great works of art, and thus erect the distinction between high culture and low culture. Yet it is very often the case that a coherent world view is presented by what are generally regarded as second-rate or downright bad writers. An approach of this kind places the sociologist in bad company, because it directs attention to the interstices of respectable social life, where the fantasies of many are actualized in portrayals of the pursuits of thieves, murderers and perverts.

The article discusses sociologist Christopher Bryant's defence of scientific sociology. Bryant rejects the idea that sociology must be exclusively humanistic and he proposed three categories of social reality. Humanistic explanations vary in a number of ways, in directness, in simplicity and according to the persistence of the action referred to. Within humanistic explanation there are levels, continua rather than dichotomies. Most famed sociology is humanistic explanation. That this has not been recognized and is frequently denied is profoundly damaging to the defence of the subject. It leads sociologists to fail to push humanistic explanations to their limits of logical and empirical rigour, it leads them to self condemnation, and provides ammunition to sociology's opponents. Bryant, in keeping with his acceptance of a rather rigid dichotomy, is inclined to accept much of the philosophical case against comparison and generalization. Bryant's argument tends to miss the strongest of the philosophical cases. This involves recourse to a fundamental relativism.

The article focuses on the author's comment on sociologists Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore's paper "Some Principles of Stratification." According to the author, the paper offers some important point but that the argument they advance is contradictory in certain of its implications and therefore defective. The source of the difficulty is to be found in one of the premises of their argument. To state it most simply, the premise asserts, "people desire rewards." This assertion is incontestable, but it is not adequately qualified in their argument. The author shows in the first part of this article how their argument, containing this premise, leads to contradictory implications. Then, in the second part of this article, the author attempts to provide qualifications which he believes will allow Davis and Moore's argument to avoid contradictions and thus give it greater force.

The article focuses on the relationship between epistemology and sociology, for it is here that the general relationship between philosophy and science appears most obvious and direct. Although there is no necessary or logical connection between an epistemological doctrine and a sociological orientation, sociologists often use epistemology to support their sociological orientation. Using works of sociologists Emile Durkheim, William James, Charles H. Cooley and W.I. Thomas, this article will show how these men employed an epistemology to justify their conceptions of sociology. The author finds that understanding past theories and orientations can be made easier by examining philosophical issues. Being aware of philosophical assumptions should place endeavours in a wider context, perhaps alerting to unthought of implications and thereby helping to understand where the society have been, what the society is doing and where the society is going. Philosophical awareness may help us to see that existing controversies over the nature, scope and subject matter of sociology are fundamentally philosophical controversies that cannot be settled on empirical grounds.

The article presents information about the relation between sociologist E. Durkheim's concepts of anomie and egoism. While the obscurity of Durkheim's distinction has frequently been commented upon, it is implicitly assumed to be irrelevant for contemporary theorization in social pathology. Against this view, two theses will be advanced. Firstly, if Durkheim had pursued and attempted to clarify his distinction between the two concepts, he would have been forced to re-examine the presuppositions upon which his sociology had been based. Secondly, despite difficulties in Durkheim's theory in which concepts of anomie and egoism play a crucial part, a distinction between them still has to be drawn which in fact retains some elements of their original meaning. All contemporary studies of anomie have neglected the distinction between anomie and egoism with the result that social conditions, psychological states and processes which are entirely different from one another have been assimilated.

The article compares influentials in contemporary American and British sociology for a time span for 11 years, between 1958-68. Authors of the article have compared names of the men most cited in journals "American Sociological Review" and "British Journal of Sociology" for two time periods and have found that lists for the second time period contained a larger number of names in common than the list for the first period. This finding was interpreted as support for the thesis that sociology is becoming more international. A comparison of the two American lists revealed no essential differences in the national origin of the most important influentials for the two periods. A similar examination of the two British lists revealed that contemporary sociologists from the U.S. are becoming increasingly influential in British sociology. It was therefore suggested that the internationalization of sociology may, for the immediate future, be equivalent or almost equivalent to the Americanization of sociology.

Roots of the increasingly close collaboration between sociology and medical care are to be found partly in a common interest in certain aspects of disease and therapy and partly in their similarity of approach to research problems. This article reports a study in the sociology of medical care that is characterized not only by the multiplicity of disciplines represented in it, but also by the cross-cultural comparisons which it introduces. It is concerned with the contribution that the study makes to the refinement and development of social theory, and especially to the theory of illness and sick-role behaviour given by sociologist T. Parson. The article presents data from three small-scale populations surveys, in different cultures to examine some of the components of Parsons' analysis of illness and sick-role behaviour. Central issues concern the criteria that define entry into and performance in the sick role, and they are both conceptual and methodological issues. The underlying objective is to examine sociology of illness and illness behaviour.

This article focuses on the theory of sociology given by sociologist Talcott Parsons. The fate of the functional requisites in Parsonian sociology can be regarded as happy or sad according to one's theoretical predilections. It has been shown that in many respects the development and changes that have taken place in and around the concept have reflected the development and changes in Parson's theory of society. The caveat on theory-building expressed in the book "The Structure of Social Action," has held good over the years as of March 1970. This is especially the case with respect to the universal imperatives. They are not subject to change for they are not empirical realities; they are, however, real in their consequences for social systems and for the structure of social organization in terms of all human societies. Parsons has made and elaborated the important distinction between social and personality systems in such a fashion that old notions of the individual versus the society have been seen to be inadequate. This is particularly relevant here as it paves the way to an understanding of individual and social requisites of human society, though Parsons himself has not taken full advantage of the possibilities in this context.

Defending sociologist's right to exist is as old as sociology itself. So it is hardly surprising that it is possible to cite the work of classical figures in its development when rejecting the stringent criticisms of three contemporary British philosophers. Their criticisms are modern variants of the old case against social science. The three philosophers are Peter Winch, A. R. Louch, and Alasdair Maclntyre. Taken together they present three arguments which would, if acceptable, invalidate the basis of sociology. The first contends that sociologists fail to recognize quite how social reality differs from nature. The second, in its extreme form, states that the concept cause is only applicable to the natural world, so that causal accounts of social phenomena are, by definition, the product of conceptual confusion. The third holds that cross-cultural analysis is impossible. The philosopher's most profound mistake is to equate all sociology with accounting for human action qua action, i.e. explaining why actors act as they do. Correspondingly their most serious omission is their failure to consider the meaning of social structure.

The article presents a list of articles, published in the December 2, 1969 issue of the journal "British Journal of Sociology." Articles included are "Adaptive Sociology," by W.G. Head, "Bilingualism and Cultural Marginality," by R. Pieris and "Arbitration and Industrial Conflict," by D.L. Lockwood.

The article presents list of authors and reviewers published in the December 2, 1969 issue of the journal "British Journal of Sociology." Some of the authors included in the list are J. Abbot, W. Balfour, F.G. Brook, P. Brown and E. Bene.

Very broadly, the term structure serves to mark off questions about constituents of the object under study from questions about its workings. In sociology (or anthropology or history), therefore, questions about structure can be answered in as many ways as there are held to be kinds of constituents of societies. The old-fashioned answer would be to say that societies are made up of institutions, the fashionable answer would be to say that they are made up of messages. But they can equally well be held to be made up of groups, or relationships, or classes, or roles, or exchanges, or norms and sanctions, or even shared concepts and symbols. Structuralism should not be claimed to constitute a novel, coherent and comprehensive paradigm for sociological and anthropological theory. Whether viewed as a doctrine or a method, structuralism as such does not, on examination, stand for a more distinctive standpoint than a belief in the applicability of rigorous models to social behavior; and this is equally true whether it is taken to apply to societies as a whole, or only to their rituals and beliefs.

This article discusses the book "Readings in the Philosophy of the Social Sciences," edited by May Brodbeck. The author gives attention to three topics discussed in this anthology. The first is the controversy over whether the account of explanation given by sociologist Hempel is applicable in the human as well as in the natural sciences. The second theme in the anthology obviously relevant to sociologist is that of methodological individualism versus holism. Many of the papers in this anthology characterize at one level the alternatives confronting a scientist whose theorizing confronts either empirical or conceptual difficulties. Just because actions are informed by intentions and purposes, and intentions and purposes presuppose beliefs, so a social role-which specifies and prescribes or permits certain courses of action for certain types of person presupposes certain beliefs. The matter of the philosophy of science may not only be regulative as regards the form of our theories and the lessons to be learnt here may well be one that the sociologist now feels have been conveyed to him almost too often-but suggestive as to their content.

This article studies the application of sociologist Max Weber's theory of community, on the ethnic groups of Negroes residing in the ghettoes of the U.S. This article reaffirms that analysis of conditions underlying the present predicament of deprived urban Negroes and of changes occurring within the Dark Ghetto has necessarily been incomplete. Weber's investigation concerned with the origin of capitalism and the sociology of religion are generally interpreted as a refutation-rather than a modification and continuation- of Marx's sociological orientation. For Weber, social change essentially involves the change in relative positions of major and basic social groups, including social and economic classes, which is determined by interaction, antagonism, and conflict. Black power still lacks a definitive statement of policies and action strategies regarding how Negroes can attain access to political and economic privileges.

Some problems in the interpretation of alien belief systems, which were suggested to this article's author in his own fieldwork on Aladura churches among the Yoruba of Western Nigeria and by the analysis of other belief systems by social anthropologists, in ethnographies and in general surveys are considered. To 'understand' human belief and behaviour is, despite its ambiguity, the universally agreed programme of these studies. Since people are social beings it might seem adequate initially if, when confronted with other people with different social standards of what was right or true, they were able to encompass them in their mental system, to show how others had gone wrong and to preserve and validate their own beliefs. It is in this sense that convinced Communists are able, to their own satisfaction, to show how those who disagree with them are the prisoners of their own social situation, and so to understand them. Any successful ideology must be able to do this with competing belief-systems. The understanding of sociology is rather different, however. Sociology models itself on biology to the extent that just as the biologist aspires to produce a theory to account for the forms of all organisms, none excluded, so the sociologist aspires to account for all belief systems.

The sociological analysis of factions has been developing rapidly in sociological research. According to the definition, a faction is stipulated to be an ephemeral group which emerges in order to operate in the interest of a specific aim or conflict. The criteria of recruitment of members to the different factions in the community are based on upon personal aspirations which are involved in the acute cause of rivalry or conflict and not upon any pre-existing connection among its members such as kinship ties, religious affiliations, common caste membership etc. By this definition, it follows that when a faction develops into a more stable group based on some permanent criteria of membership, it is no longer a faction. The paper discusses the phenomenon of factions in communities of immigrants. It presents findings of a research project in Israel which tried to reconstruct and analyze the history and conditions under which factions first emerged and then disappeared in some newly created communities of immigrants in the course of ten years. It attempts to develop further analysis about the conditions under which factions may arise, some possible variations they may display in their composition and structure and most importantly, the function that they possibly perform in the process of adjustment of immigrants to the new social, political and economic conditions.

The paper attempts to outline some of the major problems and opportunities involved in efforts to apply sociology to social work training. Social work, along with other professional disciplines, is becoming increasingly interested in the application of sociological theory and research to its particular field of activity. Social workers have been encouraged to investigate the social factors surrounding the social and psychological causalities whom they have attempted to help. Social workers' interest in social factors has met, however, some formidable obstacles which have generally prevented them until recently from developing this interest into a fuller exercise of the sociological imagination, an exercise which demands a sound appreciation of sociological theory. The areas of social work research are closely linked and should provide eventually interlocking analyses giving an overall picture of social work practice, for the study of the professional development of social work students leads inevitably to the study of social work practice in its organizational and wider sociocultural setting. The sociology of social work, based as it must be upon theoretical analysis and empirical research can provide for the sociologist a new field of investigation and for the social worker an important part of professional training.

Marxism is still the main ideological issue nowadays. The past few decades witnessed a growing interest for scientific research in the Social Sciences and its institutionalization as a legitimate field of academic inquiry in several Western countries. These very decades also witnessed the transformation of Marxism from a sociological and economic theory into the official ideology in several countries and into the prevalent socioeconomic doctrine in certain academic subcultures in Western countries as well. As a result of circumstances over which social scientists have limited or no control, the controversy about Marxism went from theoretical and academic grounds to political and ideological ones. Ironically, this transition took place when the Social Sciences first began to develop instruments and coherent theoretical frameworks capable of settling the dispute on academic terms. Many Western social scientists unconsciously played an important ideological role by taking Marxism as a scientific theory. The scientific analysis of Marxism had negative consequences for Marxism itself. Several specific Marxist predictions, as the ones dealing with increasing misery, the proletarization of the middle classes, the end of social mobility and the growing revolutionary activities as consequences of industrialization under capitalism, all were mercilessly turned down by subsequent historical events and modern Social Science.

The article focuses on deviance in women. Deviance, according to Howard S. Becker, is not a quality of the act the person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an offender. The deviance of women is one of the areas of human behavior most notably ignored in sociological literature. There are many reasons for this gap in sociological literature. Women appear to have low rates of participation in deviant activities as measured by such indices as official criminal statistics, the range and number of their socially disapproved sexual outlets, suicide rates and involvement in activities labeled as vagrant. Not only do woman appear to be remarkably conformist, they seem to have consistently lower rates of deviance than men, with a fairly constant ratio which remains despite fluctuations in rates over time. It is perhaps therefore inevitable that male delinquents and deviants should be studied in preference to females as there are more of them and they have greater social visibility are more accessible.

Presents a list of books on Sociology received for the "British Journal of Sociology." Some of the books are: "Democracy and Social Ethics," by Jane Adams; "Psychology and Social Problems," by Michael Argyle; "The New Frontiersmen," by G.S. Aurora; "The Penal Press," by Russell N. Baird; "Race Relations," by Michael Banton; "The Impact of Television: Methods and Findings in Program Research," William A. Belson; "The Social Construction of Reality," by Thomas Luckmann and Peter Berger and "Culture and Society in India," by N.K. Bose.

The article focuses on the betting shop located in London, England's East End street market. A market in which the large number of stalls offer a rich variety of commodities, chiefly foodstuffs and apparel. The accent is on price, on repeatable bargains, clearance lines, bankrupt or fire stocks, with occasional innuendoes to bargains owing their value to stuff being nicked. The market is patronized largely by the local population, a heterogeneous mixture of White and Black, Gentile, Jew and Moslem, of firmly rooted and transient, locally born and bred and recently immigrated. They all seem to be able to count on their stable, regular clientele. Although punters, apart from other considerations affecting preferences, will after a prolonged unsuccessful run be inclined to switch custom. Naturally some punters will change under impact of external forces, new job, new home, a new set of mates, and many others, the floaters, will lay their bets at whichever betting shop happens to be most convenient at the time.

Comparative sociology poses certain problems which makes it perhaps the most fertile ground for theory. These problems might be classified under four heads: temporal, including the classic historical questions of evolution, progress or decline; structural, the institutional forms that particular societies take; behavioural, patterned relationships and attitudes of social groups; and cultural, knowledge, beliefs, rituals analysed in relation to the other three categories. Comparison is therefore possible at various levels, at the general level of societal stages like industrial societies and primitive societies, of specific institutions or aspects of structure from kinship to political structures, or of forms of behaviour. But the main obstacle to most comparative sociology is the absence of adequate classificatory tools: most comparative sociological theory is a search for methods of classification and of measurement. This is the main contribution to comparative sociology of those using structuralist and functionalist theories.

The article presents a paper on the theory of working-class Conservatism. In any study of voting behavior in industrial society, social class would figure prominently as a predictor of party choice and political loyalty. Whilst it is obvious that other influences are brought to bear upon individuals which help to shape their political commitments, such as religious, historical, ethnic, regional factors, and so forth, social class membership has proved to be one of the most reliable single indices of voting behavior. This theory of working-class conservatism would make the notions of deference and class perception unnecessary, in so far as it seeks to encompass both of these within its explanatory orbit. These two concepts differ from the ones employed here in that they are essentially socio-psychological in character, in the sense that they focus upon individual attitudes and perceptions as a means of explaining political behavior.