Search

The points raised by professor Delbert C. Miller in his paper about the future direction of industrial sociology are analyzed. The critic agreed with the argument by Miller that industrial sociology needs to be reestablished as a separate discipline--separate from organizational sociology, sociology of occupations and sociology of work. Points in the history of industrial sociology are reviewed to support the grounds of Miller's paper. Along with industrial sociology and economics, sociology has successfully dealt with the central institution of economic life in the United States. Furthermore, industry was the scene of what seemed then to be the most important developments in American society: the rise of the labor movement and the intense conflicts between management and labor.

Tins paper is intended as an effort at taking-stock of the reference group concept after nearly three decades of use, the latter two of which have been marked by its more than ample employment. Its popularity indeed has so frequently led to its serving as an all-purpose post hoc explanation of behavior that it has led to the wry definition, "Your reference group is a group that you behave like and you behave like them because they're your reference group" (Cohen, 1962: 104). The inconsistencies, lack of clarity, but also areas of agreement which have marked the varied formulations of the concept, will be apparent from the following review and commentary. The Final discussion indicates some of the matters still to be considered in the use of thin important but perhaps overworked concept. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The sociological study of intellectual recognition has tended to focus on highly cited and highly acclaimed authors and perspectives, while reserving some interest for those who are "forgotten." We know much less about the liminal cases: authors who are in-between fame and oblivion. This paper proposes a way to study intellectual recognition, by examining the liminal case of sociologist Charles H. Cooley. Based on a multilayered (quantitative and qualitative) citation analysis of Cooley's classic work, Human Nature and the Social Order (HNSO), we study the role of intellectual deference in accounting for this liminality. Specifically, we identify two distinct deference processes: acknowledgment and involvement. We argue that Cooley has survived intellectual oblivion by standing on the shoulders of citers, as he has received substantial acknowledgment but decreasing involvement. In the conclusion, we discuss the implications of our paper for the understanding of the making of sociological theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent flourishing of visual methods is not mirrored in studies of taste. This paper engages with photo elicitation (PE), which Bourdieu applied in Distinction, but never elaborated on. We conducted systematic photo-interviewing in arts, fiction and architecture. After reviewing the relevant literature, we highlight illustrative findings and discuss the potential of PE. In studies of taste, PE helps in bridging "social worlds", and can unveil class-based repertoires for understanding culture. It provides entry to tacit knowledge, and aids comparisons. Importantly, when two methods, PE and oral interviewing, are used in combination, this significantly helps substantiate our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article serves as an introduction to the issue's special feature on "The Nuclear Threat." The early sociological literature on nuclear war related issues is reviewed and the dearth of sociological work in this area since the early 1960s is documented. A new call for sociological theory and research on the nuclear threat is issued and possible topics are outlined. The paper concludes with a brief review of the papers that make up the special feature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of the stress rule (a temporary role assumed by actors experiencing unusual or critical stress) is developed in this paper. It is hypothesized that the stress role is a patterned, regularly occurring set of rights, obligations, and expectations which accords special latitude to stressed actors, specifies appropriate behavior toward the stressed, and releases the actors from culpability for atypical role performances during the stressful period. The stress role and similar disabling, adjective-type roles are proposed as examples of "role riders." This paper identities the stress role norms and outlines the process by which one acquires, occupies, and relinquishes the role. The legitimacy of assuming the stress role is addressed and the timetables, or containment norms, of the stress role are developed. Finally, the functions of the stress role for the actor and for society are discussed. The propositions and concepts introduced here are based on data from in-depth interviews with a random sample of reentry university women, as well as from the growing body of stress and social-support research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent increase in American divorce rates has aroused a great deal of media publicity, popular discussion, and social science research. Several recent works have begun to reexamine the origins, trends, and implications of divorce in American history. This paper presents systematic data concerning the extent of divorce in three North Central states for the 1810-60 period. The findings establish the incidence of mass divorce for a considerable period prior to official divorce statistics. Major patterns are analyzed and compared to late 19th-century data from the first governmental studies of divorce for the 1870-1900 decades. While some urban-rural differences are found, changing laws and norms played the principal role in the increase in divorce rates during the 1800s. The final part of the paper discusses the implications of these findings for understanding marital disruption in social-historical perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The arguments presented by Professor Delbert C. Miller in his paper about the future direction of industrial sociology are examined. The paper manifests the espousal of applied interests. Miller has shown his desire to bring industrial sociology back to the glories of its past by raising the fundamental issues of what sociology is and is to become, which are issues at the heart of the contrast between the pure and the applied orientations. In one sense, it is a question of what kind of knowledge and theory is wanted. Applied interests, no matter how much they rely on deductive theory, are always single-case interests, the case that is here and now. Despite certain disclaimers, Miller sees industrial sociology as oriented toward the interests and problems of those who run industrial organizations and those whose job it is to keep the environment stable for such organizations.

Drawing upon insights from the social movement literature as well as leadership experience in a successful social movement organization, this paper suggests aspects of a framework for integrating traditional and contemporary approaches. The case history of JUST (Johnstowners United to Stop another Tragedy) is used to illustrate the interaction of grievances and structures in the career of a social movement organization. In addition to helping fill a lacuna in the literature on the internal dynamics of such organizations, this analysis also demonstrates the importance of the nature of the grievance as well as the target group's structural entrenchment. The paper focuses upon a relatively anomalous case for U.S. social movement organizations: an SMO which was successful despite displacement goals. The final section of the paper includes a summary diagram of the factors involved in JUSTs successful protest effort as well as broader generalizations suggesting the conditions under which grievances or infrastructures are more salient in explaining social movement phenomena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to determine the directions which the field of sociology of occupations has taken in recent years, a content analysis of articles on work and occupations in four general sociological journals and two specialized journals was completed for the years of 1976 to early 1982. Not surprisingly, there has been a rapid increase in the number of papers dealing with status and income attainment. Very surprisingly, there has been a near demise of papers on the professions. Another dominant thrust has been the large number of articles on women and sex roles. Satisfaction and alienation at work and attempts at job redesign have also received increasing attention. Papers on other topics have received less concentrated attention. Moving beyond the results of the content analysis, the present work discusses unresolved theoretical issues and potential new directions for the content areas. It is suggested that even for sociologists who do not identify themselves as specialists in occupations, the occupational variable remains a dominant one in sociological analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the importance of race and racial attitudes among sociologists by attempting to document the existence of what has been called a "black insiders doctrine" and showing that black sociologists are more likely than their white counterparts to subscribe to this doctrine. Data in this paper are based on a survey questionnaire administered during the winter of 1978. The findings show that: (1) race is a strong predictor in determining how sociologists perceive the role and characteristics of black sociologists and (2) black sociologists do not think highly of whites who study race relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates race-sex differences in achievement orientation using a national sample of high school seniors. Achievement orientation is approximated by attitudinal measures (educational expectations, occupational aspirations, academic self concept, self-esteem, and locus-of-control) known to be correlated with expected and actual attainments. Three major sets of student background factors are related to achievement orientation:(1) family SES (2) choosy school context, and (3) parental expectations. Race-sex comparisons of achievement a orientation revealed several interesting, but few definitive differences. Occupational aspirations were a dimension of consistent differentiation; whites and males aspired to higher status, less stereotypic occupations than did blacks and females.Pronounced interpersonal effects are implied throughout, with family and educational attainments, peer plans, teacher evaluations (grades) and parent aspirations strongly influencing achievement orientations in all race-sex subgroups. The paper calls for intensive, longitudinal studies of student interactions with parents, friends, teachers, and other individuals who influence their perceptions of what constitute desirable and possible future roles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the relationship between sociology and Marxism and attempts to delineate the fundamental components of sociology within the framework of Marxist theory as presented in the voluminous writings of Gramsci. After reviewing Gramsci's systematic critique of positivist sociology and that brand of Marxism which accepts any positivist canon of analysis, the paper focuses on certain Gramscian concepts hermencutically useful for a macro-sociology of social structures. Of great importance is the concept of catharsis, that is the development of a given fundamental social group from a mere economic to an hegemonic entity, entailing a process of transformation of the structure of a given historical bloc and the nature and functions of intellectuals in the organization of the ideological, juridical, and political superstructure. The paper concludes that Gramsci's sociology contains specific sociohistorical criteria very useful in understanding how dominant hegemonic systems disintegrate and new ones are formed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper outlines the career of Maurice F. Parmelee, sociologist, government official, nudist, and author of thirteen books, including the first American criminology text (1918). The contents of the latter are examined and contrasts with contemporary textbooks are noted. Parmelee's career is an anomoly, for although he published abundantly, he faded into sociological obscurity. Some conjecture is offered about scholarly career paths generally, drawn out of the Parmelee case. Finally, the paper argues that historical accounts of the development of American criminology are incomplete, for they fail to mention a number of early figures, including Parmelee. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to suggest a procedure for constructing a city theology which effectively deals with the two major problems confronted in developing such a typology (1) the selection of dimensions 'along which cities vary in a relatively uniform way, and (2) the formation of homogeneous groups of cities on the basis of these dimensions jointly considered. The procedure suggested in this paper consists of uniting findings from previous research on the "selection of dimensions" problem with hierarchical grouping cluster analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considerable attention has been given recently to the perplexing problem of the relationship between attitudes and behavior (Ehrlich, 1969; Deutscher, 1969; Warner and DeFleur, 1969; Ajzen et al., 1970; Lastrucci, 1970; Tarter, 1970). Methodological issues have been debated, the lack of congruence between attitudes and behavior has been examined, and a variety of solutions have been offered. We are told, for example, that the continuing poor correlation between measured attitudes and overt behavior requires us to search for the intervening variable or variables which apparently obtain (Ehrlich, 1969); or to employ the "direct observation" of the phenomenon under investigation rather than try to extrapolate from paper-and-pencil tests to behavior (Deutscher, 1969); or to develop theories that, in turn, enable us to find indicators that are more valid than the paper-and-pencil type (Lastrueci, 1970); or to simply admit that attitudes as "presently conceptualized play no real role in behavior" (Tarter, 1970). A number of important aspects of attitude research, however, have been obscured or omitted in these discussions. For the surprising aspect of the situation is not, as has often been implied, the lack of congruence between attitudes and behavior, but the persistent use of research designs that are inappropriate for the complexity of the subject under investigation. Further, it is surprising that researchers have failed to draw out other important implications of their research. That is, the fact that an attitude does not lead directly to a behavior does not justify the assertion that attitudes play no role in behavior, or that attitude research lacks significant implications for social life. The basis for this latter statement will be shown below in a discussion of the values of attitude research. It may be that inadequate research designs, valued for their simplicity rather than their appropriateness, are a manifestation of the "publish or perish" syndrome. In any ease, this paper attempts to outline the problems and the values of attitude research, and to demonstrate thereby that such research is of great significance for the understanding of social phenomena. If that significance seems minimized by those studies that have found poor correlation between attitudes and behavior, the fault lies both in the failure to create research designs that reflect the complexity of the problem and in the tendency to exalt the importance of the proximate causes of overt behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is hard to disagree with J. A. Jackson when he writes in a recently published volume of papers concerned with migration: "It is clear that it may still not be possible to provide a completely satisfactory sociological model of migration which can adequately embrace its various types and implications" (Jackson, 1969:10). Though a vast amount of empirical work has been produced on such topics as rural-urban migration, international migratory movements, and the process of assimilation of migrants, an adequate integrating theoretical perspective is still to be established. This paper attempts to use the action frame of reference to provide a conceptual framework which can help to remedy this deficiency. Students of action theory may find it interesting to examine the extent to which this frame of reference bears fruit in an important field in which it has not been previously systematically applied. Initially, the attempt is to provide a distinctively sociological definition and typology of migration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Economic development has long been a dominant topic in sociology. Since Marx' and Weber's initial insights, sociologists have been unraveling the complex relationships in this ubiquitous process. Recent conceptual work (Smelser, 1959, 1963; Parsons, 1966; More, 1964; Eisenstadt, 1964, 1965; Rostow, 1963) has attempted to isolate critical variables and relationships among them in the process of economic development. One of the consistent attempts of this literature is predicting when, where, and how fast economic development will occur in modernizing Third World nations. Drawing upon this growing body of literature, this paper will outline an analytical model of economic development. This model is especially relevant to developing Third World nations, although it is sufficiently abstract to encompass economic development in other types of historical and contemporary societies. The term model has an ambiguous meaning. In this paper, a model is a map or grid of relationships among analytically important units. The model presented here is cybernetic, denoting key feedback processes, both negative (Weiner, 1954; Nadel, 1953) and positive (Maruyama, 1963). Ideally, a model should assign differential weights to various relationships, but in the model to be presented, only general weights will be assigned to some relationships. As will be emphasized, feedback relationships among units will be considered to carry more weight than other relationships in determining rates of economic development. Beyond this, existing data do not warrant further weighting. But an attempt will be made to delineate those variables within and outside the economy affecting the weights of any particular relationship in the model. In doing so, elements in the model can begin to approximate a set of propositions in a more general theory of economic development. For the purposes of analysis, the economy can be divided into two general sectors (Moore, 1967): (1) the productive; and (2) the distributive. Production concerns those structures and processes involved in gathering resources from the environment and converting them into goods and commodities, while distribution refers to those structures and processes dealing with the dissemination of commodities throughout a social system. The model presented in this paper will focus on relationships between and within these two general economic sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the name suggests, social-psychology is a bastard field. It consists of such a variety of peoples doing so many different things in different ways, that it defies definition—at least for me. In spite of the neat delineations which are made in textbooks and the scholarly historical treatments which appear in encyclopediae and symposia, I find it difficult to grasp a concept of "social-psychology" which is anything more than the operational definition: "Social psychology is what people who call themselves social-psychologists, do." That is not much help, but it is all we have got. I mention my own confusion in this matter, not with the aim of confusing others, but by way of explanation: some of the issues I will touch upon in this paper may infringe upon what readers consider to be other areas of sociology. I regret such territorial invasions. But in my own quest for understanding why people act as they do, I have increasingly found that the traditional "fields" in the discipline and the traditional courses in the catalogue do not provide appropriate categories with which I can explain to colleagues and students what it is I am discovering. Having said all of this, let us get down to business. It is a decade since Dennis Wrong published the paper in which he challenged "The oversocialized conception of man in modern society" (1961). Reacting to a determinism which pervaded the social sciences and which seemed to be seeping into popular currency, Wrong asked if man were in fact as constrained by a monolithic culture as we social scientists would have it. A few years later Harold Garfinkel referred more bluntly to the models of men constructed by the various social sciences: he called them "judgmental dopes." The cultural dope and the psychological dope are, respectively, the man in the sociologist's society and the man in the psychologist's society (1967:67-68). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines some theoretical and empirical problems in local-cosmopolitan analysis. Although this distinction has been popularized through exploratory studies conducted by Merton (1957), Gouldner 1957-58), and others, the theoretical status of this distinction and empirical knowledge acquired through its use remain obscure. Judged by the frequency with which this distinction gets used in ad hoc interpretation of research findings (e.g., Glock and Stark, 1965:280), it would appear that localism-cosmopolitanism constitutes a well-established explanatory principle in sociology. In fact, frequent use of the local-cosmopolitan distinction is a poor indicator of either explanatory power or empirical knowledge about the social relations or processes these terms may be taken to represent. Usage is often vague, e.g., regarding the nature of the theory or what, if anything, is to be explained by it (cf. Blau and Scott, 1962:64-71). This paper makes problematic what is sometimes assumed about localism-cosmopolitanism, and attempts, through analysis of empirical findings and propositions, to assess the prospects for a theory of localism-cosmopolitanism. Of concern here are: (i) whether writings on localism-cosmopolitanism consist only of an elaboration of an insightful distinction, or whether these writings contain empirical discoveries that through refinement can be worked into a theory of explanatory power; (ii) whether various interpretations of social events in terms of localism-cosmopolitanism focus on some common empirical referents about which a single theory is appropriate; and (iii) what the content and nature of local-cosmopolitan theory should be. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is the thesis of this paper that the theoretical trend within the sociology of science during the past three decades has increasingly embraced an implicit organic model of science and this is an incorrect model of science. It is further hypothesized that a mechanical model is more appropriate, and many of the empirical "facts" which have supported the organic approach are equally valid for the mechanical. This paper presents an argument to support these hypotheses composed of the following parts. First, the organic and mechanical models are described and discussed as a composite of the famous typologies of Durkheim and Toennies. In addition, those aspects of these models which have undergone conceptual transformation since their early formulation will be discussed insofar as they have a bearing upon the application of the models to the scientific community. Second, the theoretical history of the sociology of science will be presented and critically examined to illustrate exactly how components of the organic model entered this history at various times and in various guises. Third, the social characteristics of science will be compared to the organic and mechanical models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports some observations and findings resulting from a pilot study of the use of nude models posing for art classes. What happens, simply, is that for certain art classes it is thought desirable to employ persons who will model in the nude for the students in the course. When instruction of this type is offered, the college or university must employ such a model. In this paper we will discuss some of the problems of finding and maintaining him or her, and the conduct of the students and model toward one another. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to outline and examine a few basic functions which ideology performs for the individual and for society. In order to progress in this direction, it might help to agree on some basic conceptual definitions. To begin with, some effort must be made to arrive at a satisfactory definition of ideology, since that term occupies a rather central place in this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper has tried to make as explicit as possible the many problems involved in creating typologies in criminology. Initially the paper presented some logical and methodological requirements for typologies in general and some illustrations of how existing typologies in criminology fail to meet particular requirements. Following this, five typologies of criminality were assessed in detail. The minimal scheme of the criminal, the victim, and the act, presented at the end of the paper, is an effort to find a universal framework for analyzing criminality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the preceding pages we have described alternative methods of measuring the extent of goal agreement between a husband and a wife and the extent to which this agreement changes over time. Two different methods of measuring an individual's goals, the forced-choice response and the open-end response types, were shown to be amenable to measurement of agreement between the individuals. It is not the purpose of this paper to discuss the validity of either or both measures of an individual's goals. The methods of measuring husband-wife goal agreement and goal agreement change presented in this paper admittedly do not represent a high degree of methodological sophistication. At the same time, they do seem to represent a not too difficult procedure for operationalizing what could otherwise be some rather fuzzy variables. Often times, the inability to operationalize sociological concepts is a barrier to effective research. To the extent that the methods presented in this paper help to remove such a barrier from conducting research in the area of husband-wife goal agreement, the efforts have been warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the history of science it has often happened that a scholar's ideas are denied full recognition because of that scholar's real or assumed connection to some controversial ideology. The position accorded to Vilfredo Pareto is one illustration of such practice in present-day sociology. This scholar is often said to have been a "Newton of the Moral World," or altogether a fascist ideologist. So Faris informs us that "The book [The Mind and Society] formulates the implicit philosophy of Italian Fascism, advocating the right of the strong to take what they want without apology or appeal to moral principles." In tracing the development of social thought, Bogardus devotes an entire chapter to "Pareto and Fascist Thought," and authoritatively argues that "While fascism has some of its roots in Nietzsche's concepts and other roots in Machiavellianism, yet Pareto's ideas come even closer to giving an adequate basis." Zanden, in turn, interprets Pareto's sociology to be "a philosophy of society, a social creed, determined mainly by violent and ever purely personal passions. The logical fulfillment of this political manifesto is fascism." We need not continue further; analogous affirmations are bountiful in the literature. To be sure, not all sociologists accept this view, but to date little or no systematic effort has been made to resolve the controversy, with the result that many students of sociology are unwitting victims of one of the most cruel intellectual hoaxes perpetrated against their discipline and one of their kind. The present paper proposes to offer a clarification with respect to the alleged connection between Pareto's sociology and fascist ideology. Our approach takes us in two major directions: first, an examination of Pareto's Treatise, his chief sociological work, and second, an examination of a series of letters written to his great friend Pantaleoni during the period when fascism was a political reality in Italy. Before proceeding to present our argument, it may be useful to inquire briefly about the meaning of "fascism," as his critics tend to use that word. A rapid glance at the literature reveals that the following are generally believed to be among the chief characteristics of fascist ideology: distrust of reason, a code of behavior based on "race" and violence, belligerent nationalism, government by an elite, and totalitarianism. Characteristically, these then provide the basis for accusing Pareto of "antirationalism," "anti-intellectualism," "contempt for democracy," and approval of the use of force at all costs. The major portion of this paper will be concerned, therefore, with explicating Pareto's position on these four issues. We shall begin by considering Pareto's alleged antirationalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper is an attempt to apply modern sociological thinking to the analysis of the descriptive materials that have been accumulated on the subject of romantic love. In this sense then it is offered as a partial contribution to the understanding of the general phenomenon of love. More specifically, however, it is offered as an analysis of the place of love in modern American society. Following the lead of the family sociologists and marriage counselors, love will be treated not in the philosopher's or poet's sense of a "sweeping experience," not in the psychologist's sense of a universal physical power, and not in the sociologist's sense of a universal attribute of man. Instead, love shall be looked upon as a part of society, as a distinctive pattern of social behavior—as a specific culture trait. Thus we shall take the word to mean a given behavioral complex that exists in a specifiable social context. In this sense, our approach is ethnographic and synchronic. In this paper, therefore, the term love will be used to refer to a specific culture trait that has been described in modern American society. Whether or not it exists in other societies—or in all human societies—in the same or a modified form is a matter to be demonstrated ethnographically and not assumed a priori. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We want to do three things in this paper: (1) to propose a more general probability model than the one considered by Toby or Davies for dealing with the number of buses a student would see, on the average, going in the wrong direction; (2) to show that, with this general model, one would not see more wrong-direction buses, or the same number of wrong-direction buses, as suggested by Toby and Davies, but fewer wrong-direction buses; (8) to question the advisability of using a student's experiences with wrong-direction buses as the way to shake his faith in the validity of personal experience. As Davies has said, clarification is especially necessary now that Toby's paper has appeared in books of readings designed for the course in introductory sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Culture and Social Character, several authors have written essays primarily devoted to a criticism of The Lonely Crowd. An unfortunate aspect of the former book is that it is most difficult to ascertain whether the total impact of the criticism is to destroy the concepts of inner- and other-directedness or whether the analysis has enhanced their meaningfulness by correcting flaws in methodology and emphasis. Also, if the latter is true, there is the further problem of a consistent use of the Riesman topology. In the first part of this paper I will bring together various statements from Culture and Social Character that put the question of the validity of the concepts in better perspective, define the terms inner- and other-directedness more rigorously, and show the usefulness of the concepts in their sociological context as action (behavior) patterns coming about in response to differing structural settings. The first section of the paper will in a sense establish benchmark of meaning for the concepts by solidifying the argument for their use in describing particular types of action patterns. In later sections I will speculate as to the psychological and historical bases of the Riesman topology relying on work that has been published after The Lonely Crowd. Since my discussion will range over several areas, it seems appropriate to offer first a rather lengthy sketch of my entire argument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this essay is to examine some of the uses and abuses of rhetorical devices in sociological analysis and inquire into their function in applied research. Implicit in this inquiry are the following assumptions: (1) that sociological analyses and explications are based upon rhetorical devices; (2) that sociologists would be better sociologists if they understood rhetoric; (3) that a study of the rhetoric of sociology would prove immensely useful to the discipline. This paper is meant to be suggestive of the directions which could be undertaken in a more extended study. Rhetoric is defined here to mean on the one hand the principles which guide the effective use of language and on the other hand the forms and sequence of forms which structure a language. It is to the latter area, the study of rhetorical forms, that this paper is directed. Some rhetorical devices which have been a basic part of literature are metaphor, simile, analogy, allegory, irony, satire, caricature, metonymy, synecdoche, understatement, overstatement, paradox, allusion, personification, parable, epigram, epithet, oxymoron, catachresis, kenning, periphrasis. This paper can explore briefly only two devices: the metaphor and irony and forms closely associated with them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ordinarily an anniversary occasions the reification of an artificial period. In this case however, there is a certain juncture in the history of the point of view which makes of the past quarter-century something worthy of consideration for symbolic interactionism as well as for our celebration of the founding of the Midwest Sociological Society. The year 1937 lies virtually in the middle of a four-year period which saw the publication of Mind, Self, and Society, Movements of Thought in the Nineteenth Century, and The Philosophy of the Act. It would represent the greatest naiveté to suggest that thus the year 1937 represented the introduction of symbolic interactionism. We are all aware of the long development: from James, Baldwin, and Cooley to Thomas, Faris, Dewey, Blumer, and Young. Even the Tardean imitation and suggestion which underlay Ross's Social Psychology contributed a good deal ordinarily not credited to him in the development of interaction theory. Nor is it the fact that Mead represents the fullest development of the orientation that makes so significant the posthumous publication of his works (for which we may conveniently take 1937 as an anchoring point). Mead's ideas had been known for a very long time. He had taught University of Chicago students from 1893 to 1931. His notions were bruited about in classes and seminars wherever there were professors conducting them who had studied at the University of Chicago—not least in the great heartland included in the Mid-west of our Society. Some of Mead's students had published their versions of his ideas or quotations from some of his philosophical papers—Kimbali Young's Source Book in Social Psychology of a decade earlier contained a paper by Mead, and his Social Psychology bore the strong imprint of Meadian interactionism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Symbolic interaction theory as derived mainly from the work of George Herbert Mead views the self-concept as a structure of attitudes which arises in social experience and organizes the individual's perception of his social milieu. Recently, tests based upon this symbolic interaction orientation have been developed for the elicitation of self attitudes. One such test frequently used is the Twenty Statements Test (TST) constructed by Manford Kuhn and Thomas McPartland. The TST attempts to ascertain the specific statements respondents use to identify themselves to themselves. The applicability of the TST to problems of self theory is indicated by the rather wide use which has been made of the instrument. Investigations using the TST have focused upon the following: self-concept and social position; a self-concept and behavior; and the self-concept and attitudes toward other social objects. While TST results have been of substantive interest, little attention has been given to the methodological issues involved in the instrument and its use. For example, little is known concerning the validity and reliability of the test and its scoring procedures. If substantive assertions based upon TST results are to be considered as sound, judicious concern should be directed toward basic methodological issues. It is the purpose of this paper to consider empirically one methodological aspect of the TST. The focus is upon the test format itself. The question is posed: Do variations in the TST format produce variations in individuals' response patterns? Specifically, does the length of the test influence the number and the nature of statements made by respondents? This paper is directed toward answering this question. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to examine the possibility of some common foci of attention among behavioral scientists, with particular respect to social systems and self systems. Clearly, the relationships between the elements of social systems (which has seemed to be the traditional concern of sociology and social anthropology), the relationships between the individual actor and the social system (which many suggest to be the fundamental concern of social psychology), and the relationships of stability to change (which would seem to be necessarily an interdisciplinary concern) have not been fully explained. This paper will not offer such explanation; it represents, rather, an attempt at conceptual analysis. Conceptual analysis is, of course, a primitive undertaking but, as Merton has suggested, vital to the fledgling sciences. Conceptual analysis represents a concern with definitions, and definitions in sociology are legion. Perhaps we have too many; it may be, however, that the plethora of definitions is in inverse relationship to their adequacy. Without attempting to pick and choose from the many definitions already available, I would like to propose the following tentative working definition: A social system is a collectivity in organized pursuit of consensually carried goals. I will suggest some possible aspects of these goals later. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although we often believe that nature stands apart from social life, our experience of nature is profoundly social. This paper unpacks this paradox in order to (1) explain sociology's neglect of the environment and (2) introduce the articles in this special issue on 'the sociology of nature.' I argue that sociology's disinterest in the biophysical world is a legacy of its classical concern with tracing society's 'Great Transformation' from gemeinschaft to gesellschaft: while early anthropologists studied 'primitive' societies that allegedly had not yet completed 'the passage from nature to culture' (Lévi-Strauss : 99), pioneering sociologists presumed that industrialization and urbanization liberated 'modern' society from nature and therefore focused their attention on 'urbanism as a way of life' (Wirth 1938). As exemplified by the articles in this symposium, environmental sociology critiques the nature-culture and town-country dualisms. One of environmental sociology's core contributions has been demonstrating that nature is just as much a social construction as race or gender; however, its more profound challenge to the discipline lies in its refutation of the sociological axiom that social facts can be explained purely through reference to other social facts. 'Environmental facts' are a constitutive feature of social life, not merely an effect of it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Marshall's (2008 ) critique of Black's (1995, 2000a, 2000b ) pure sociology paradigm reveals his preference for studying the psychological properties of individuals, rather than developing a genuinely sociological framework for studying “social life.” The current rejoinder concentrates on four main issues, starting with a discussion of the ontological status of social life as a reality sui generis. The second section deals with the scientific status of pure sociology and clarifies the underlying logic of the explanatory approach. The third part considers the scientific adequacy or validity of pure sociology. Where the intellectual stakes are highest—the theoretical validity of “pure sociology”—Marshall's critique falls flattest: the available evidence overwhelmingly supports the theoretical claims of pure sociologists. By the same token, Marshall fails to demonstrate the utility of psychologizing social life, or how the imputation of psychological variables enhances the explanatory power of purely sociological models. The paper then reveals the hypocrisy of particular aspects of Marshall's critique, as the evidence indicates that he has used some similar elements of theory construction for which he has criticized Black and the pure sociology framework. The conclusion reminds readers of the excitement of pure sociology's mission beyond the futility of irresolvable philosophical quibbles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For the St. Louis meeting of the Midwest Sociological Society, the author organized a special session to reflect on the particular sociological tradition associated with Washington University, with a particular focus on Alvin Gouldner's work. From that session came this symposium, for which various papers presented were developed into articles. The session and these articles raise important issues for what they tell us both about Gouldner's work and about where sociology is as a discipline today. Among these issues are (1) the optimistic quest for objective value-free knowledge positivism entailed in the past versus a self-reflexive quest for knowledge that entails a tragic acceptance of its limits at presents, (2) the effort to distinguish social theory from sociology, ideology, and politics, with all of whom it overlaps as they strive to be both social diagnosis and social therapy, (3) the production of knowledge as dependent both on the lived experiences that shape our biographies and on the intellectual influences available in the local settings where we work, (4) the effort to warn us against the various accesses to which our disciplinary and personal commitments give way, and (5) the role social theory can play as a search light that illuminates our way in the darkness of the empirical world in which we live, while it simultaneously casts a shadow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Visions of the Sociological Tradition Donald N. Levine presents a view of the German sociological tradition that emphasizes its origins in philosophical idealism. This paper discusses the implications of this view for understanding the formation of sociology in Germany. The author suggests that Levine's account can be supplemented and strengthened by reconstructing the German tradition both as an effort to proceed without foundational philosophical systems and as an outgrowth of social economics and the historical school of political economy. Most importantly, Levine shares the call for sociology as the site of dialogue with that reconstructed German tradition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I examine and critique Donald Levine's treatment of the "French Tradition" in sociological thought. After summarizing Levine's account of the development of the French tradition, I discuss the identification of the French tradition with the work of Durkheim, and discuss the reasons for the predominance of Durkheim's work over and above other plausible candidates for exemplars of the French tradition of sociology. I then use this discussion to problematize the identification of sociological theories with national traditions, and the idealist framework that Levine uses to discuss the development of sociological thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper responds to a comment by T. R. Young, who sought to intervene in the exchange between the author and Marc Wardell on the role of conceptual frameworks or paradigms in the development of theory in sociology and the social sciences. Young suggested that some of the less well known assumptions of Karl Marx could serve as uniting points between the two correspondents. The dualism of the historicist conceptualization of the transition from capitalism to socialism which appears in Young's comments underestimates the empirical complexity of the political and economic problems of the period of transition. This paper disagrees with Young's final assertion that too much Marxist theory has stood in the way of radical revolution and socialist transformation.

This article responds to author's commentaries on the article "The Study of Organizational Effectiveness," by J. L. Price. The basis of simplistic approach rests with three assumptions supposedly made by the paper. First, the paper, according to the authors, assumes uniformity in the meanings that respondents attach to words designating core organizational activities. The paper assumes that respondents possess knowledge and competency with respect to the evaluation of nursing care within their limited spheres of involvement in the hospitals. Although, it may be desirable to have a general measure of organizational effectiveness for the reason suggested in the paper, this may not be possible. Some scholars believe that organizational effectiveness is so specific that a general measure cannot be developed.

The author clarifies the points made by critic Leonard Beeghley about his sociological research on four function paradigm. The critic is correct in his contention that the paper missed the point on the dual application in the four function paradigm. The reasons why the paper never went too far with the argument is the lack of necessity to do so. However, the author examined the propositions upon which the four function paradigm is based and finding them contradictory, felt there was no need to deal with the applications of the paradigm that depended upon the validity of the propositions. Furthermore, the difficulties in the paradigm are so abundant that quite independent additional arguments can be advanced against it. Thus, while the argument presented in the research that the paradigm's foundational propositions are contradictory, the arguments presented in the research is quite sufficient.

In this article the author presents his views on an article by Augustana Kivisto. Author's paper was not about creating a sociological tradition that helps to think about moral obligations and boundaries, but about exposing the contradictions of all pompous arguments that invoke some transcendent concept of morality, in the Nieizschean sense. Kivisto is way off when he asks how one would respond to such phenomena as gay-bashing neo-Nazi skinheads" or the Asian Indian practice of sati, Author's intent was to discuss sociology. Postmodern ideas relative to the analysis of the knowledge-power articulation have little to do with deconstructionism which calls into question the foundations of western philosophy through textual analysis. Yet, that is what Kivisto seems to think postmodernism is all about. Deconstruction of metaphysics are a dead end for sociology because they lead to idealism and relativism. The twin matters of foundations and relevancy are also pertinent to the way sociology seeks to legitimate itself as a held. Currently mainstreamers argue for a number of selectively growing traditions which are actually very recent constructions in the organization of sociological knowledge.

The article examines Robert Stebbins' "Commitment to Deviance: The Nonprofessional Criminal in the Community" wherein the most basic proposition of labeling theory is that sanctions against deviance can inadvertently contribute to continuity in deviant activity and careers. It also presents critique on Stebbins' view of commitment, presentation of the three-fold commitment framework and labeling and types of commitment to deviance. An understanding of continuity in lines of action is crucial for middle-range theories of deviant careers in general and labeling theory in particular. The author proposes that the answer lies in a clear and adequate conceptualization of commitment processes. The goal of this paper, accordingly, is to provide such a conceptualization. In pursuing this goal, the author discusses Stebbins' approach to labeling and commitment to deviance and contrasts it with other treatments of commitment.

We will briefly outline some of Marx's central ideas and concepts. Our purpose here is to show non-Marxists the excitement and potential that drive the enterprise. This review can also be of use to those who seized upon part of the Marxian enterprise and either misunderstood it or used it in a way that did violence to the integrity of Marx's methods and theories. While we do not make a claim for the correct reading, we argue that some readings are more plausible than others. We wish to underscore the fact that Marx is not just another sociologist or conflict theorist. Though sociologists have taken over part of the methods and some of the terms in question, sociology is not Marxist, nor is Marxism just another variant of sociology. I believe that many sociologists have no idea of what interested Marx, or why, and that many who parade under Marx's banner have forgotten the complexity of the intellectual enterprise which he identified. There has been a degeneration of the Marxian project, as well as a rebirth. These dual themes are explored in the course of this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper written by Professor Delbert Miller about the future direction of industrial sociology is critiqued. Miller addressed the related two related themes which are the need for sociology departments to remodel offerings to compete for students in the educational marketplace and the importance of sharpening the discipline's identity as a specialization directed at business and industry. As a result of the proposed changes in the discipline, students would become viable candidates for personnel, human resources and industrial relations positions. Miller was not suggesting that sociology departments or industrial sociologists have absolutely avoided applications. Rather, neither has sufficiently developed such programs to brake the loss of sociology majors to university units that promise more marketable training.

Studies of pre-industrial societies suggest that in response to protracted scarcity, individuals experience a decline in social relations, return to traditional practices and values, and become more subordinate to those in authority. In this paper, we examine the extent to which these same responses are found in an industrialized area. Evidence from survey data suggests that scarcity and economic decline do decrease social relations and cause some individuals (those with less formal education) to use more traditional means to solve problems, but they do not cause people to become more passive in respect to community leaders. Factors that may account for the different responses to scarcity in industrial and pre-industrial societies are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aspirations may be measured in absolute terms, by asking individuals how much of a given goal they desire, or in relative terms, by asking individuals how much they desire a given goal relative to other goals. Prior studies on the relationship between social class and success goals have always employed either relative or absolute measures alone, with the absolute measures focusing on desire for education, occupational prestige, or income and the relative measures usually focusing on such goals as job security, advancement, and importance. This paper argues that a focus on absolute or relative aspirations alone can produce a misleading image of the relationship between social class and success goals, and it remedies the above neglect by examining the absolute and relative aspirations of different social classes for the same set of goals. Using a sample of males from Detroit and Baltimore, it was found that the lower class places more emphasis on economic security, while the upper class places more emphasis on self-actualization goals like job advancement and importance. However, when absolute aspirations were examined, it was found that lower-class people have a strong desire for self-actualization and that middle-class people do not have a strong desire for security. These findings provide a more complete picture of the relationship between social class and success goals, and they are relevant to such topics as Rodman's "lower-class value stretch," social mobility, anomie theories of deviance, and explanations of social movements based on relative deprivation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes the nature of critical theory, its historical development, its connections to sociology and Marxism, and the central debates over its core ideas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite a large number of empirical studies showing blacks to have higher levels of self-esteem than whites, no adequate explanation for this difference has been developed. This paper proposes a theory dealing with differences in self-process and, in a related manner, self-esteem between blacks and whites, utilizing the concept of selective credulity (i.e., having relatively more faith in others' opinions of us who are relatively positive). Specifically, it is hypothesized that because blacks (as compared to whites) are more likely to focus on interpersonal relations and less likely to focus on internalized standards of comparison for purposes of self-enhancement, (a) blacks maximize the rewards of their interpersonal relations more so than whites (reflected by differences in selective credulity), and (b) levels of self-esteem between blacks and whites are no different when controlling the differential impact of selective credulity on self-esteem. Utilizing data from 1,560 high school students, evidence is presented which provides some initial support for the proposed theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes a procedure for facilitating the generation of theory useful to family sociologists. This procedure is based upon a linguistic model, and it utilizes the metaphor of literary genre as a guide. A distinction is made between the construction and the generation of sociological theory. The suggestion is made that the generation perspective may enhance the ability of theorists to find subtle interconnections among phenomena and thereby to extend fields of sociological knowledge along novel paths. The procedure itself depends first upon the construction of a binary lexicon. One such lexicon consists of one matrix of concepts describing social structure from the perspective of stabilization of social relations and a complementary matrix describing structure from the perspective of destabilization. From these matrices, one concept is chosen as a metonym or as a metaphor to act as a basis for deriving connections among the other concepts in the matrices. The manipulation of concepts from both matrices permits the development of propositions suggesting ironies and contradictions in social relations. Examples of the use of this procedure are presented, and some unresolved problems are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]