Search

Excerpted from my book Generally Speaking, this paper introduces "concept‐driven sociology," a special way of theorizing designed to reveal abstract social patterns. As such, it examines the methodological process by which we can "distill" generic patterns from the culturally, historically, and situationally specific contexts in which we encounter them. It thus champions a "generic sociology" that is pronouncedly transcontextual (transcultural, transhistorical, transsituational, and translevel) in its scope. In order to uncover generic, transcontextual social patterns, we need to collect our data in a wide range of social contexts. Such contextual diversity is manifested multi‐culturally, multihistorically, multisituationally, as well as at multiple levels of social aggregation. True to its message, the book illustrates generic social patterns by drawing on numerous examples from diverse cultural contexts and historical periods and a wide range of diverse social domains, as well as by disregarding scale. Emphasizing cross‐contextual commonality, concept‐driven sociology tries to reveal formal "parallels" across seemingly disparate contexts. The paper features the four main types of cross‐contextual analogies concept‐driven sociologists tend to use—cross‐cultural, cross‐historical, cross‐domain, as well as cross‐level—disregarding conventionally noted substantive differences in order to note conventionally disregarded formal equivalences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Du Bois is often regarded as an important scholar for his contributions to the development of sociology. However, less is known about his work in developing interactionist thought. This essay is an introduction to this special issue, and a small attempt to acknowledge the work of scholars of color within the interactionist tradition. The Du Bosian approach to sociology has for too long been dismissed out of hand. Scholars pursuing new areas of inquiry, topics outside the bounds of "mainstream sociology," are often met with fierce resistance—even today. Instead of building these scholars up, through mentorship and aid, so‐called "accomplished" scholars see fit to tear down the work of those not like them. The Du Bosian perspective celebrates the plurality of voices, advocates for mentorship, and sees sociological inquiry as rooted in the real needs and concerns of those so marginalized. As this collection of articles illustrates, even when conforming to scientific standards work in this tradition has a political dimension as it lays bare the inequities in society—even, at times, drawing government interference with their work. This issue also calls upon professional sociologists to reflect on the ways they reproduce these patterns within the discipline and higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

David R. Maines was a key founder of the Society for the Study of Symbolic Interaction, and a champion of symbolic interactionist sociology. Maines fought against characterizations of symbolic interactionism as astructural and "subjectivist." He was adamant that symbolic interactionism offered vital perspectives on the study of social structure and organization, and that it was compatible with a variety of research methods. He played a vital role in developing narrative sociology and bringing narrative scholarship from communication studies to sociological audiences. In this retrospective on his life and career, I detail what Maines saw as the five central features of symbolic interactionism: (1) interpretation and meaning, (2) communication, (3) temporality and process, (4) agency, and (5) dialectical thinking. I then examine four interrelated themes of Maines' sociological contributions: (1) temporality, (2) debunking myths about interactionism, (3) mesostructure, and (4) narrative sociology. A video abstract is available at https://youtu.be/YodjvXbo51Q. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]