Search

In this paper a notion of experiment will be discussed that does not model itself along the natural scientific idea of laboratory experiment, but on a sociological perspective of experiment beyond the realm of the laboratory that was outlined by Robert E. Park. This sociological notion of experiment implies a process of societal self-experimentation especially in the big cities without a fixed setting of a sociological experimenter. The paper will highlight some of Park's ideas of a self-experimental society as a sociological means to understand and analyze contemporary societies. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The history of sociology can be thought of as the history of the reception of the classics. While this applies to all of the classical authors, it is particularly apparent in the case of Max Weber. This paper focuses on Weber's sociology of legitimate domination and the meaning Weber gives to the concept legitimacy. Endlessly nuanced, Weber's approach to domination has led to different and opposite interpretations. While uncertainty as to what Weber really meant might lead to abandon the possibility of benefiting from his work, this paper understands that further efforts are worth pursuing for two reasons. First, regardless of how much certainty can be attained, discussing Weber's categories allows the scholar to relate critically to basic sociological problems—which certainly go beyond Weber. Second, the intellectual history of sociology reveals itself in the different readings of Weber: these readings tell us about Weber as much as they tell us about the theoretical programs they stem from. This paper proceeds keeping these two parallel goals in mind. In order to do so it examines, first, the typology of domination in the three forms Weber presented it; and secondly, it discusses some of the subsequent interpretations, focusing on a particular stage in the history of the discipline—the critique of functionalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper illumines the emergence of a sociology of altruism, morality and social solidarity through an analysis of the linked lives and thought of four visionaries: Lev N. Tolstoy, Jane Addams, Mohandas K. Gandhi and Pitirim A. Sorokin. Although much is known about each of these prophetic figures individually, there has not been a systematic exploration of their interpersonal encounters and mutual influences. The common thread in the discussion here is Tolstoy, whose writings and personal example made a powerful and lasting impression on each of the other three. Addams, who met personally with Tolstoy, testified that his teachings had changed her life, and she further evidenced this by writing about him over a period of nearly five decades. Gandhi, the most famous practitioner of Tolstoy's doctrine of non-violent resistance, briefly corresponded with the Russian dissident sage and created an early ashram called "Tolstoy Farm." Sorokin, while part of a rising generation of young Russian intellectuals, published a laudatory article about Tolstoy not long after his death, describing and defending him as a philosopher of love. In his later work on altruism and the sociology of love, Sorokin frequently cited both Tolstoy and Gandhi as inspirations and exemplars. The paper concludes with a brief consideration of how these seminal figures have contributed to the contemporary development of a new, positive and solidary sociology that includes the study of love and is rooted in an ethos of non-violence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociology is a multiparadigmatic discipline but in some subfields certain theoretical tools and methods dominate over others. Why so? I examine the historical trajectory of the new economic sociology to show that network theory gained prominence over cultural analysis in this subfield because of academic familism, borrowed prestige, and disciplinary status hierarchies. First, academic familism in a form of intergenerational networks and mentormentee transmission reinforced network-based research among early champions of the new economic sociology such as Harrison White and Mark Granovetter and their students. Second, the network perspective in economic sociology thrived on borrowed prestige from natural sciences, which also embraced the study of networks, as well as from affinity with economics because it did not question the fundamental assumption of rational action. This encouraged more placement of network economic sociologists at better-paid business schools, further augmenting legitimacy to this perspective. Third, existing status hierarchies in the discipline in terms of methodological approaches and gender also aided the dominance of the quantitative-male led network analyses over the qualitative female-led cultural analyses. The paper stipulates at the end how the theoretical dynamics of the subfield might have recently changed with the growing intellectual fragmentation, migration of network-based economic sociologists out of the discipline, and crisis of legitimacy for economics. More broadly, the paper finds less support for instrumental action of idea entrepreneurs or dense strong networks that create halo effects and collective solidarity, and, instead, highlights the role of inter-disciplinary positioning and borrowed prestige, particularly for lower-status disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper recovers neglected parts of C. Wright Mills' work for the comparative-historical study of public culture. Mills and John Dewey provided an American anticipation of Jürgen Habermas' Structural Transfor-mation of the Public Sphere. The reception of Mills' The Power Elite focused on its descriptive assessment and overlooked Mills' very explanation of the emergence of this alleged power elite: the structural transfor-mation of the public sphere as a major trend of modern societies. Likewise, it has also been neglected that Mills' other similarily famous book, The Sociological Imagination, is tied to the topic of public culture and the public sphere as well. After reason has been driven out of the public sphere, the sociological imagination is, as it were, the last retreat of public reason and the source for rebuilding the capacity for reasoned collective choice in public communication.This paper's recovery of the American anticipation of Habermas' framework proceeds as a disentanglement of the main analytical elements of the classic figures which reveals their basic compatibility with mainstream social science. Democratic life depends on the socio-historical structure of public culture. This approach measures democratization and de-democratization in terms of the role that reason plays in human affairs, as Mills put it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the initial, formative decade of Robert K. Merton's career, from 1931, when he entered the new doctoral program in sociology at Harvard, until 1939, when he left to become chair of sociology at Tulane. Drawing on archival sources, as well as professional literature, the paper sketches Merton's development, with particular attention to his early publications and with some consideration also of his teaching. The discussion delineates the rich interdisciplinary context of social science at Harvard, and considers ways in which local intellectual networks and scientific paradigms may have shaped Merton's emerging perspective. The paper concludes that Merton's "forgotten decade" is of prime importance for understanding his overall career and his place in the history of the social sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The postwar transformation of American sociology took place in the context of enormous expansion in scale-of sociology in particular and higher education in general. This shaped a series of "structural transformations" in the field that cannot be adequately understood in terms of intellectual orientations or professional ambitions alone. Greater attention to this structural side of this story can lay the groundwork for a more systematic assessment of the extent to which a postwar sociological "establishment" was able to successfully "impose" a common set of disciplinary issues, discursive stakes, and evaluative criteria--as some have claimed--thereby paving the way for more detailed considerations of the interplay between dominance and resistance, consensus and fragmentation, integration and heterogeneity, orthodoxy and heterodoxy, in postwar American sociology. To that end, we attempt in this paper to shed more light on the structural transformations of the discipline, especially in the postwar period. We focus in particular on the expansion and differentiation of venues for the production of PhDs. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper claims that there are normative principles that when adhered to in a given territorial area, promote rising (material) living standards. Furthermore, these principles of social organization are largely part of modern economics with its traditional emphasis on specialization and the division of labor. As we converge towards a world of fast communications and international mobility, one group of ideas that should be upheld involves the notion of 'human rights.' I shall identify the purpose of human rights and the several literatures in law, sociology and economics out of which a coherent fabric can be woven. [end of abstract] ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although sociology is now firmly entrenched in academe, a century ago various strands of sociology vied to define the discipline. A vibrant community-based, women-centered public sociology coexisted with academic sociology and offered an alternative vision of sociology and sociologists. Women such as Jane Addams and Caroline Bartlett Crane raised feminist concerns regarding research methods and the goals of social research. Their story, and the vast numbers of other women they represent, have largely been lost in the history of sociology. In this paper, I present an alternative version of the history of American sociology and suggest how the lost legacy of a democratic, public sociology has important implications for sociology in the 21st century. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the following thesis: The discipline's gatekeepers of the World War I era systematically -- and largely correctly -- associated applied sociology with the work of African American and female professionals (such as WEB DuBois and Jane Addams). Because they shared (unconsciously or otherwise) prevailing cultural assumptions about the deficient intellectual capacity of women and blacks, the founders were thus able to relegate application to the marginal status (as, for example, "women's work") that it maintains to this day. In addition to Addams and DuBois, the contributions of lesser known practitioners, including Lucille Eaves and Horace Taylor, are noted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines conditions and consequences of sociology's "fizzling out at the edges," a process through which sociology passes areas of specialization on to newly institutionalizing fields with their own academic departments, associations, journals, and funding programs. Examining the case of American crime and crime control research, we find support for arguments from the sociology of science regarding push factors such as sociology's structural weakness and task uncertainty. Theses from political sociology are also supported as they point at pull factors such as government research funding, demand for training in new or expanding government-induced occupational fields, and the production of data sets and accompanying training programs by government agencies. The process is described based on a growing body of literature on the history of criminology and on the analysis of a data set resulting from content analysis of 1,612 journal articles on crime and crime control. The analysis indicates that shifts in the structure of crime research are accompanied by changes in the structure of social science knowledge about crime and crime control. The article concludes with considerations regarding the external validity of findings for other specialty areas in sociology and for sociology in other national contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since most sociologists are employed by academic institutions the emergence and long-term viability of sociology as an academic teaching enterprise in the United States should be of some interest. This paper provides an overview of the establishment of the discipline as a "department of knowledge" in American colleges and universities beginning with the first "advanced" social science courses taught in the 1870s through the blossoming of the discipline as a popular undergraduate major by the middle of the twentieth century. The history of sociology as an academic teaching enterprise (including brief discussions of early efforts to ensure the quality of sociological instruction and the debate between "pure science" advocates and "practical sociologists") demonstrates that the emergence of sociology as a significant player in the "academic credentials market" had less to do with theoretical and practical success than with being in the right place at the right time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reflecting on Michael Burawoy?s classificaton of sociology into professional, critical, policy, and public types, and the adoption of the latter as the theme of the ASA?s 99th Annual Meeting, in this paper I argue that the drive towards increasingly global and world-historical public sociologies may prove hazardous in the absence of a parallel emphasis on the development and practice of private inter/intrapersonal sociologies. This requires self-critical revisitation of our basic definitions and theories in sociology in order to develop unified theoretical frameworks that meet the challenges of understanding and practicing the dialectics of public and private social processes in the twenty-first century. We need to move beyond Newtonian definitions and theorizations of sociology and embrace new quantal sociological imaginations that integrally engage our macro and micro sociologies in favor of simultaneously world-historical and inter/intrapersonal frameworks. Public sociologies can not advance our theoretical and applied sociologies of what is or what can be in the absence of parallel efforts in invigorating our sociological imaginations in our private, inter/intrapersonal social landscapes. Although personal troubles can best be understood in relationship to broader public issues, the latter themselves can most effectively be addressed and resolved through the action of specific individual agencies who champion the need for broader socio-historical interpretation and change as deeply personal exercises in self-knowledge and self-liberation. As Mills reminded us, what sparks the sociological imagination is the meeting of public and private sociologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why should the History of Sociology care about neglected figures, under which circumstances, and in which ways? The first part of this paper is dedicated to methodological considerations about the status of neglected figures. The second part introduces Max Ralis, a Russian/German/US-American sociologist and opinion researcher, as an example for a neglected figure we should care about. Ralis played an important role for the development of Empirical Social Research in Germany after 1945, yet he is nearly unknown. He consulted on several empirical pioneer studies, participated in key conferences, and played a significant role in the edition of the first German speaking textbook on social research methodology (published in 1952). Based on a selection of archival resources, correspondence, and published material, I reconstruct Ralis' academic biography up to 1954 and show that his case adds several new insights to the History of Empirical Social Research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Has sociology been completely honest in the telling of its history? Sociology is usually thought of as an inclusive discipline, but the absence of W.E.B. Du Bois serves as a striking case to show how it is limited. While contemporary sociologists are in the midst of the quantitative-qualitative methodological divide and the eternal struggle of how to intertwine theory with data, Du Bois offers insights as to how a sociologist can navigate through these problems as well as showing us how to grow as scholars. Unfortunately, Du Bois has largely been excluded from the history of sociology and has been relegated to the margins of other academic disciplines. I attribute this to what I call the "epistemic limbo" - the state whereby the work of a scholar or a group of scholars are suspended from discussion in an academic discipline. The purpose of this paper is to show the important role that Du Bois has played within sociology and the lessons that sociology can learn from his career in hopes of escaping the epistemic limbo in order to reenvision a history of sociology that has honest conversations about one of its excluded giants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is (1) to reflect upon the idea of a sociological canon and (2) to explore the relationship between its making and the rise of the social. Both reflection and exploration are carried out by analyzing two works often portrayed as peripheral to the canon and the dominant discourse on the social: Smith's "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" (1759) and Tarde's "Monadologie et sociologie" (1893). By underlying their centrality for current debates in the social sciences, I seek to demonstrate that they challenge the idea of a disciplinary canon. A key reason is found in how the authors understood one of the discipline's central concepts: The social. I identify a common explanatory mechanism in both works, which provided a thought space for an "external metaphor" that could be perceived not as religious in nature, but rather as a secular one. It was this new secular space what progressively emerged as the modern notion of society. Smithian sentiments and Tardian monads functioned ultimately as external metaphors that placed the source of individual action outside the self. Although both, sentiments and monads, served as sources of the social, neither Smith nor Tarde located causality on structural forces, but rather on human interdependence and interaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Within the field of the sociology of ideas, Scott Frickel and Neil Gross's American Sociological Review (ASR) article "Scientific Intellectual Movements" is likely to become a classic, as it offers a broad ranging and analytically useful proposal for general theory that can structure and orient empirical research (Frickel and Gross 2004). Rooted in the assumptions of the "strong program" in the social of science, case study literature in the new sociology of ideas and social movement theory, Frickel and Gross draw from a range of empirical illustrations in the history of science, philosophy and social sciences to in order to make a compelling case for the concept of "Scientific Intellectual Movements" (SIMs). Their general theory of the SMI offers us a way into conceptualizing how paradigmatic and institutional change occurs in the academic field since the scientific revolution of the 17th century. The analysis is provocative, carefully framed and moves the literature forward in important ways. This paper, like the original article, is a conceptual piece that draws on illustrative case study material in order to help stimulate empirical research in the sociology of ideas, knowledge and education that could build on Frickel and Gross. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It presents an analysis of the origin and development of Sociology in Spain, focusing on the situation after 1990. It includes a discussion of the history of this discipline during the last century, and especially under Franco's dictatorship (1939-1976). It distinguishes schools and generations with a model of different fourteen schools. The paper presents hypotheses about the relationships between sociology and dictatorship, and the possibilities of developing a serious social science under a non-democratic regime. There is a discussion about the influence of the State. The basic content of Spanish sociology is described differentiating between theoretical and practical (research) approaches. It defines eight main areas of research, and about thirty main themes. The final objective is to describe the impact of Spanish sociology in the world, especially through the work of a score of prominent international sociologists. On the whole, it is an optimistic analysis, which demonstrates how Sociology can survive under dictatorship, being original and creative; also, how Sociology can contribute to the transition from dictatorship to democracy. Many sociologists were responsible to help bringing democracy into the country. Internationalization of Spanish sociology has been slow, but consistent thanks to the role of some academic, cosmopolitan, and imaginative sociologists. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Edward Shils, as a graduate student and instructor at the University of Chicago in the late 1930s, accepted the bleak prognosis of Karl Mannheim's Mensch und Gesellschaft im Zeitalter des Umbaus--which an enthralled Shils had translated into English. During the war, however, Shils came to reject Mannheim's gloomy, dissensual analysis of modernity. This paper argues that Shils' dismissal of Mannheim drew significantly upon a direct and explicit intellectual assault by fellow emigres to England. During the war--even while he maintained regular contact with Mannheim--Shils was exposed to an often vituperative dismissal of Mannheim's work by Karl Popper and Friedrich Hayek, in the pages of the London School of Economics journal Economica. After the war, when both Popper and Shils joined the LSE faculty--Hayek's affiliation dated to 1931--Shils' encounter with their critiques was deepened. And in these early postwar years, Shils became close friends with yet another emigre Mannheim critic, Michael Polanyi. Combined, these sustained and sophisticated criticisms helped wrest Shils from his interwar, Mannheim-friendly intellectual coordinates. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACTDifferences between W.E.B. Du Bois's and Robert E. Park's social reality and sociological vision are more than just distinctions between the understandings and experiences of an early black and early white sociologist in a highly race-conscious, segregated, racist American society and world at the dawn of the twentieth century. Rather, the life-defining psycho-social differences between Park and Du Bois, structured according to the color-line, and differences between their respective sociological ideas and approaches, stand at the root of the divergence and conflict of two traditions in American sociology: a highly marginalized, poorly institutionalized black or Afro-American sociological tradition; and a highly centralized, well-institutionalized white or Euro-American sociological tradition. The following essay attempts to reveal how specific ideas about race, race relations between groups, and the structural (macro) and psychological (micro) power of racism differently shaped Park's and Du Bois's social position (existence), sociological concerns (thought), and role in the development of American sociology (history), and to illustrate the significance of Du Bois and Park in the creation of a divided tradition or dual tradition in American sociology, which persists today, as demonstrated by American sociology's split into a largely-black Association of Black Sociologists (ABS) and largely-white American Sociological Association (ASA). ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Did the establishment of the Graduate School of Social Service Administration at the University of Chicago in 1920 mark the beginning or end of the differentiation process between the sociology and social work at Chicago? This essay explores this question by briefly examining the process of differentiation between the disciplines of sociology and social work at the University of Chicago during the first two decades of the twentieth century and looking at the works and actions of three central figures during this time—Albion Small and Charles Henderson in sociology and Sophonisba Preston Breckinridge in social work. The findings lead to the conclusion that the differentiation between Chicago sociology and social work was well underway long before the creation of the Graduate School of Social Service Administration at Chicago. The establishment of the Graduate School of Social Service Administration at the University of Chicago was a turning point for the relationship between the two disciplines, marking the completion, rather than the beginning, of differentiation between the two disciplines at the University of Chicago. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study the history of thought in the sociology of knowledge preceding, including, and following Karl Mannheim is retraced in order to reconstruct his intellectual project away from self-defeating argumentations and in favor of revitalization of his contributions. I argue that the sociology of knowledge needs to be recognized as a broader and much more flexibly defined field than one defined narrowly in terms of "the social determination of knowledge" thesis, taking into consideration the reciprocal ways in which social existence and knowledge may interact with one another in terms of the dialectics of part and whole. Alternatively I propose a postdeterminist dialectical research practice which considers the specific nature of causality between thought and society to be determinable only as a result of concrete analysis of specific biographical and historical conditions, treating in the process various causal modalities previously developed by various sociologists of knowledge as equally plausible and worthy of consideration. Demonstrating that discourses in cultural studies, poststructuralism, postmodernism, postcoloniality, hermeneutics, etc., may be interpreted as exercises in new, and more dialectical, sociologies of knowledge, I proceed to propose a sociology of self-knowledge as a sub-field of inquiry in the sociology of knowledge that extends the exercise of the sociological imagination in both directions in terms of the study of how the investigator's own self-knowledges and world-historical social structures constitute one another. The purpose of the study is to accomplish what Mannheim promised to be an important aim of his sociology of knowledge, namely, to consciously bring together and synthesize comparative perspectives and competing explanatory approaches to the subject matter at hand in order to arrive at a more all-rounded perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 1953 Wichita Jury Study holds an intriguing place in the history of sociology. It not only made a contribution to the study of small group studies and influenced jury selection practices, but it is often cited as an example of unethical research conduct. A framework is presented for assessing research risks to human subjects and assessing research threats to society. When compared with 1955 U.S. Senate testimony, the historical account found in Institutional Review Board materials reveals an attempt to justify the need for human research protections and illustrate specific violations of research ethics. The issue here is not the ultimate need for human research protections, but rather the accuracy of the historical account and the focus on the lessons learned. Several facts are not correct and the thrust of the argument about informed consent ignores the issues of a study violating major societal norms and protecting researchers from external pressures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the 95-year history of teaching high school sociology in the U.S. Sociology has been part of high school social studies curricula since the 1911-12 school year. The American Sociological Association's centennial in 2005 provided an opportunity to reflect on the teaching of sociology anywhere and everywhere that it happens. The article relies upon several sources of information including course descriptions, empirical studies, and research sponsored by the ASA. It has been demonstrated that past high school sociology courses have focused almost solely on examining current events and promoting citizenship education.

This essay focuses upon the productions of knowledge, the techniques of discipline, and the various deployments of authority and desire referred to as "community". Community is a fundamental element of sociological analysis, but the meaning and importance of community has always been a problem for sociologists. The sociological discourse of community from c.1945 to c.1975 laid the ground for some of our current views. C.1975 presented a break in the sociological investigation of community. Before this date, the sociological investigation of community centered on the requirements of definition and classification, which entailed the creation of a systematic nomenclature and a descriptive terminology; the mapping of territories, as community was understood as being territorial; the tracing of the history of community as the evolutionary development of a particular human essence. Although this essay addresses the narrow question of the history of community in sociology, it suggests an alternative periodization of the history of sociology. The history of sociology, like the history of any science, is as much the history of errors and forgetting as it is the history of truths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is intended as a contribution both to the literature that problematizes the presence/absence of the natural environment in the discipline of sociology and, more generally, to the discussion on the construction (and limits) of sociological knowledge. Specifically, it provides an account of the history of sociology as if nature did not matter from a theoretical perspective that borrows from George Steinmetz's historical sociology and Pierre Bourdieu's overall theoretical corpus. My primary objectives throughout the length of this article are to make a case for understanding modern sociology as a field in Bourdieu's sense, and to make explicit this same sociological era's ontological unconscious, which I argue is belief that the discipline could be constructed and practiced as if nature did not matter. In attempting to articulate modern sociology's ontological unconscious, I build from Steinmetz's recent account of postwar U.S. sociology's epistemological unconscious, namely by situating the structure and scope of sociological thought within the context of larger sociocultural formations. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The central prerequisite of this presentation lies in the fact that Talcott Parsons theoretical language emerged from a discursive climate that he was educated and trained in during his earlier years. A climate that was the result of the physiological-philosophical discourse of the nineteenth century. This discourse beginning with Immanuel Kant, J.C.Reil and Blumenbach among others has given birth to a variety of modes of thought that proved both fertile and disastrous over its progress. One of its most fertile and insightful branches was American Pragmatism. If viewed as having begun with the writings of Emerson and in particular as representing a form of cultural comment in order to make America as a society understood to Americans at their respective time, paired with the physiological language of Rudolf Hermann Lotze, Parsons can be perceived as an American Pragmatist of the older, pre-Dewey branch. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historical narratives often focus on singular star actors; however, much is lost in this story. One key issue for the history of science, for example, is how such ideas ebb and flow among practitioners, but few empirical studies have evaluated this question. Using sociology as a case, we develop dynamic network models with data on over 45,000 articles to map the structure of ideas. These models allow us to determine whether sociology has grown more fragmented. Our results suggest idea boundaries have shifted considerably since the 1960s in both strength and content. We find empirical evidence of the rise of social problems research both in the global structure of ideas and in a more focused context. Textual analyses, such as this study, provide fruitful new directions for the sociology of science and cultural sociology more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Feminist analysis can broaden and deepen the relatively new field of economic sociology, and also make it wiser and more self-reflective concerning its choices of subject matter and forms of analysis. This essay explores the profoundly gendered nature of the split between the disciplines of economics and sociology which took place in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, drawing on historical documents and feminist studies of science and language. The potential field of economic sociology, informed by feminist analysis, has the to heal this split, and along with it reverse longstanding and perverse habits of "either/or" dualistic thought. Alternatively, lack of attention to feminist analysis could result in the continued support for and accommodation of many aspects of neoclassical hegemony and bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The modern sociology of law is intellectually rooted in the foundational works of Max Weber and Emile Durkheim. Institutionally, however, the sociological study of law has also grown out of developments within legal scholarship, specifically the perspective of sociological jurisprudence. I argue that the decisive turning point towards the development of a distinctly sociological approach to law, rooted in the sociological classics and based on the perspectives that have emanated since then, was offered by Talcott Parsons. Yet, Parsons's critical role as a founder of the sociology of law has not been sufficiently recognized. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]