Search

One of the first and largest migrations of Latin Americans to the United States occurred from Puerto Rico to New York City in the 1950s. At its height in 1953, the Great Puerto Rican Migration saw some seventy-five thousand Puerto Ricans settled in the great metropolis, and by 1960 there were over half a million New Yorkers of Puerto Rican ancestry in the city. The exodus transformed the capital of the world and taxed its social fabric and institutions. Joseph P. Fitzpatrick, S.J. (1913–95), a Harvard-trained sociologist teaching at Fordham University in the Bronx, played a key role in helping both New York City, its people and social institutions, respond with compassion and creativity to this upheaval. This article chronicles Fitzpatrick's involvement with the Puerto Ricans for over three decades as priest, public intellectual, and advocate on behalf of the newcomers, and social researcher. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article critically evaluates the idea that the division between objectivity and subjectivity can illuminate the relationship between social scientific and lay perspectives on the social world. It examines a conceptualization which associates objectivity with a grasp of the features of the object of investigation and associates subjectivity with the potential for lay actors to suffer from misapprehensions. The article explores how this division is used in critical social science, such that the critical perspective of the sociologist is seen as objective, whereas the perspectives of lay actors are seen as subjective and always potentially problematic. The article explores Michael Burawoy's analysis of objectivity and subjectivity within the context of a critical social scientific appraisal of the labour process. Contrary to Burawoy's approach, this article postulates that a meaningful dialogue between sociologists and lay actors can only be achieved if the objectivity of social scientific accounts is not assumed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the author's comments on Michael Burawoy's article examining the critical turn to a public sociology. There is much that is attractive about Burawoy's examination of the critical turn to a public sociology. I find plausible his account of the academic nature of 1970s radical sociology especially that mobilized notions such as Althusser's theoretical practice. I also was cheered to read the account of the positive developments currently in train in the U.S. and especially with how social movements have got inside American sociology and are changing it from within. And I was with his advocacy of sociology developing new forms of engaging with and responding to multiple publics and modes of participation, to bring the public and sociology into intimate juxtaposition. But from the other side of the pond Burawoy's argument seems at the same time rather strange. The paper is unambiguously written from within American sociology. Sociologists from nowhere else could treat their sociology as nationally bounded and unrelated to global processes that in all other fields are transforming the social world. This means first that the stories of other sociologies are necessarily different from that of the U.S., but second that much about the story of any sociology cannot be understood without situating it within wider globalizing processes that sociology everywhere struggles to engage with.

Empirical studies on happiness have found that: a) most people are happy in modem nations, b) average happiness in nations is rising, c) inequality in happiness is going down, d) happiness depends heavily on the kind of society one lives in, but e) not very much on one's place in society. These remarkable findings are largely ignored in sociology, if not denied. This has several reasons. One reason is professional bias: most sociologists earn their living dealing with social problems are therefore not apt to see that people flourish. Another reason is ideological: many sociologists are 'critical' of modem society and can therefore hardly imagine that people thrive in these conditions. Lastly, some sociological theories play them false, in particular cognitive theories implying that happiness is relative. These theories and the evidence against them are discussed in this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents a response to an article by Timothy Fitzgerald regarding the definition of religion in sociology published in an issue of "Method & Theory in the Study of Religion." Misconceptions of sociologists and anthropologists about the definition of religion; Significance of Western influences to the socio-history of religion; Factors that affected the relationship between religion and the secular.

This article uses the recent work of sociologist Margaret M. Poloma to argue that developments in the sociology of Pentecostalism have the potential to revitalize a classical Pentecostal movement that can be otherwise understood as languishing. In particular, the social scientific study of benevolent service in various segments of the Pentecostal movement provides the springboard for the argument. After locating the interdisciplinary work of Poloma and her colleagues on godly love within the broader context of social science research in the last half century, this paper will explore its implications for the future and renewal of especially the classical Pentecostal movement, for Pentecostal theology and self-understanding, and for scholarship on Pentecostalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the history of international law has been mainly dominated by intellectual history, the neighboring humanities and social sciences have witnessed a 'material turn.' Influenced by the new materialisms, historians, sociologists, and anthropologists have highlighted the role of objects and nonhuman infrastructures in the making of the social. Law, however, has been conspicuously absent from these discussions. Only until recently, things began to be studied as instruments of – global – regulation. In this article, I trace an intellectual history of the intellectual history of international law, contextualizing it since its inception in the so-called 'Cambridge School' to its spread into the legal field via the Critical Legal Studies movement and its final import into international law in the last two decades. I conclude arguing that international legal historians can depart from the 'well-worn paths' of intellectual and conceptual history to engage with the materiality (past, present, and future) of global governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the use of comparative method in sociological studies. The earlier norm has been that virtually all social scientific methods are comparative in a broad sense, in sociology the term comparative method usually is used to refer to a specific kind of comparison, the comparison of whole societies. Recently, however, several comparativists have argued that there is nothing fundamentally distinctive about either comparative sociology or the comparative sociology. The position that there is nothing truly distinctive about comparative sociology and that virtually all sociological methods are comparative methods, is not the position the article author subscribes to. He believes that it ignores the fact that a fundamental metatheoretical difference separates comparativists from noncomparativists and this fundamental metatheoretical difference impinges on the practice and methods of comparative sociology. It is this impingement that is the main concern of this paper. There have been several attempts to delineate the field of comparative sociology. Yet, there is still little agreement today concerning comparative sociology.

The article reports on ethnicity in the world. The American analyses had developed in the context of two long and bitter debates on policy issues, the proper place of the Negro in American society and whether immigration should be restricted. In both cases the underlying issue was whether the differences between blacks and whites, between immigrants and natives, were more or less permanent and therefore significant, or were merely transitory and thus could be discounted for the long run. The objects of the two debates, Negroes and immigrants, generally took the latter position. With oppressed minorities on one side and their oppressors on the other, American sociologists of the 1920s knew how to slant their works. If all meaningful ethnic differences were disappearing, then it was incumbent on every person of good will to move a bit ahead of the trend and act as though the distinctions had already become obsolete. In the 1930s even to voice a phrase like the Jewish vote or the Negro vote put one beyond the pale. The American Civil Liberties Union tried to get the question on race deleted from the 1960 census schedule, and the suggestion that this might include one on religious affiliation was so emotionally opposed especially by Jewish organizations that the Census Bureau hastily dropped it.

Many notable female sociologists have vanished from the canonical history of American sociology. As the most influential crowd-sourced encyclopedia, Wikipedia promises - but does not necessarily deliver - a democratic corrective to the generation of knowledge, including academic knowledge. This article explores multiple mechanisms by which women either enter or disappear from the disciplinary record by analyzing the unfolding interaction between the canonical disciplinary history of sociology and Wikipedia. We argue that the uneven representation of women sociologists as (1) remembered, (2) neglected, (3) erased or, finally, (4) recovered is shaped by the emerging interactional space of knowledge production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jacques Lacan's theory of the subject is put forward in order to correct what the author calls "the naïve theory of the subject," which sociologists of religion tend to utilize by default in numerous quantitative sociological studies based on mass surveys and oriented towards obtaining exact, scientific, positivistic knowledge. This article applies Lacan's three registers--Imaginary, Symbolic, and Real--to the religious sphere and demonstrates their potential implications for the sociological analysis of religion. An analysis of the empirical research on Russia's post-Soviet religious situation reinforces the author's argument that an uncritical theory of the subject attends only to the superficial layers of the subject, which end up being devoid of actual subjectivity, according to Lacanian logic. The more fundamental layers of the subject, capable of making it "the subject" in the full sense of the word, seem to be completely outside of sociologists' current field of vision. This critique directs the reader's attention to the shortcomings of sociological surveys, and the author argues that a more robust understanding of the subject could enrich the sociology of religion, particularly by further developing certain conceptions, such as Grace Davie's "vicarious religion.". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is discussing the practical work of pastoral sociologists in the West German Catholic Church from 1945 to 1970. In this context the distinction between "consultant," "practitioner," and "researcher in a practical setting," can be used to highlight different sets of values, forms of engagement, and conceptual approaches to sociological work in the church. Using one specific example for each of the three types, this article argues that pastoral sociology during the 1960s was increasingly self-reflexive, and that different notions of "sociological enlightenment" were an important part of pastoral sociology, in the wake of the contestation of "1968". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An obituary for Robert M. Marsh, a renowned comparative sociologist, is presented.

The article offers the author view on the role of religion in peaceful governance and violent conflict. She mentions its emergence in prehistory as a diverse response of the people. She notes that communities made proper ways of managing the affairs of humankind as it evolved along with culture. She points out that anthropologists and sociologists have suggested empirical theories of its origin. These include Herbert Spencer, Edward Burnett Tylor and James Frazer. She also states that Spencer corroborated it and the human society from ancestor worship while Tylor and Frazer relate it to animism and magic respectively.

Abstract Despite the interest that sociologists, especially in the English-speaking world, show in animals and human-animal relations, we know little about the place that animals actually have in work. The social sciences still see work as a distinctive feature of humans. Based on the hypothesis that animals are actors involved in the process of work, and not simply objects, the relationship of a herd of 60 cows was studied (a) with their farmer, (b) among themselves, and (c) with a milking robot. Our findings show that cows do collaborate in the farmer's work, and our results raise the question: can cows' collaboration in work be considered work? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract How far have social theorists in Russia engaged with the international academic world since the era dominated by Soviet-style historical materialism? Mainstream theories in sociology and 'culturology' use new vocabulary but remain loyal to ideological interpretations of society and culture. A minority of Russian sociologists have translated, adopted and critiqued Western ideas. Works by three such authors are explored and compared. This leads to consideration of the institutional development of the social sciences in post-Soviet Russia and their relative isolation from international trends, especially in the regions. The discussion highlights the limitations of old institutional hierarchies and suggests that there is new demand for internationally-trained social scientists to analyze and interpret the post-Soviet experience in innovative ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract In this article I discuss the social roles of Polish sociologists in the period between 1945 and 1989. Sociologists in Poland are assumed to have constituted a heterogeneous group representing various attitudes towards the political system. Over time, they defined their intellectual role in public discourse differently. This picture remains incomplete without consideration of some crucial aspects: whether there were ways in which sociologists neutralized their participation in building the regime; and the techniques used for evasion and 'legal criticism' of the system. The analysis is based on my comments of well-known sociologists published in the press and in books. Issues discussed include the function of sociology, the role of sociologists in a socialist country, and the position of sociology among other sciences and political doctrines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract This article examines the relationship between sociologists and the Communist Party headquarters in 1960 Czechoslovakia. It is based on the archives of the coordinating body of Czechoslovak sociology, the Scientific Board of Philosophy and Sociology at the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences. First, the article depicts the synergy between sociology and the powers: the research commissioned by the supreme Party bodies or the Party sponsorship of sociology's institutionalization. However, instances of lacking material support to the discipline are noted as well. Second, the conflicts between social scientists and the Party headquarters are discussed: namely, the layoff of the philosopher Ivan Sviták in 1964 and the following interventions into the Institute of Philosophy. Finally, the article maps the demands for autonomy as formulated by the scholars in 1968. In concluding, it points to the fact that despite requesting independence from the Communist headquarters, the Marxist elite in the social sciences never abandoned their own claim to hegemony. They resisted both the challenge of non-Marxist scholars in 1968, and the spontaneous claims and complaints that might come from the society at large. In that respect, the sociology of the 1960s seems a perfect child of the Czechoslovak reformist movement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article will argue that the growing polarization between what is perceived as Western society and Muslim 'communities' can neither be analyzed as a clash between identities nor as a reflection of cultural differences. This polarization operates in a context of cultural hegemony, a sort of cultural logic of late capitalism, through which power and global capital are allied and where the migrants are either invisible or hyper-visible. I will take the example of the Danish cartoon episode as a controversy that reflects the cultural hegemony and power structure deployed against undesirable groups such as migrants living in Europe. Yet, to recall Antonio Gramsci, it is in this moment of crisis where migrants' agency will be in position to destabilize the hegemonic forces because migrants are not merely victims – they hold a responsibility toward their situation. After contextualizing this controversy within the migration space, I will argue that the controversy does not concern censorship and freedom of expression. It is a question of how one can define universalism. This has implications for how multiculturalism is perceived; this article argues that issues of multiculturalism and geopolitics cannot be detached from one another. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociologists enjoy, but don't always observe, a verbal distinction between the sociological and the social. Lexically-disadvantaged others simply pursue the psychological analysis of the psychological or the historical assessment of the historical. Yet, a clear separation of conceptual approach from its subject target is crucial. Discipline-specific conceptual reconstructions must supersede prevailing social constructions of reality, if scientific explanation is to transcend common sense. This issue is explored through a critique of the sociology of "race" relations and its more recent focus on "Whiteness" studies, both of them social constructions which, like Trojan Horses, intrude social biases that blunt the analytic edge of sociological probes into vital facets of power disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the study of human values. It comments on how studying the importance of human and cultural values date back to Ancient Greece with Plato and Aristotle. It mentions the year 1981 as a pivotal year regarding the empirical study of cultural values on a global scale and applauds prominent sociologists such as Ruud de Moor and Ronald Inglehart. The first values survey included many industrialized countries such as the United States, Argentina, and Japan.

This article presents the author's comments on Michael Burawoy's article, The Critical Turn to Public Sociology. Michael Burawoy's call for a public sociology is a serious challenge to the prevailing direction of sociology which has parallels that of economics and political science which have ceased to perform critical, let alone public social science, but instead have become the servants of power. While, as he argues, sociology is far more diverse than either of these disciplines and has preserved a scientific as well as a critical project more than the others, with few exceptions its inwardness has separated its minions from active engagement with publics. Burawoy has issued a kind of manifesto to two distinct enclaves of sociology: beginning with his own, he admonishes radical sociology for having, unwittingly, added to the professionalization of the discipline by becoming scholars and analysts of the vagaries of late capitalism, without finding a concomitant political practice. Implicitly, he suggests their militant opposition to the mainstream has contributed to a long series of defeats suffered by the discipline as a whole. And, he criticizes sociologists mired in the Merton program of privileging the work of adding small measures to the discipline's trove of social knowledge, or those who have focused on social policy.

Analyzes the debate of sociologists on the definition of religion. Survey of the debate and finding of a partially hidden consensus; Discussion on the definitional debate in sociology of religion; Geneology of religion; Information on Ludwig Wittgenstein's language games; Argument that religion,(as a phenomenon and as a concept, is a historical and social construction, but that this does not require us to dispense with the concept altogether.

The article focuses on the works of sociologist Hans Gerth. Gerth's most famous article was "The Nazi Party: Its Leadership and Composition." Using data from an internal party survey that he smuggled out of Germany, he showed among other things, that the Nazi had a greater base of support in the middle than working classes. He also had a wide range of other interests that made their way into unpublished and miscellaneous writings, ranging from an analysis of fashion to an appreciation for films. However, despite this range of accomplishments, Gerth is probably better known for his association with C. Wright Mills, the author of the sociological classics "White Collar," "The Power Elite," and "The Sociological Imagination." Mill was not in favor among the sociologist who was then teaching at Oklahoma because of the ideological differences. Over his thirty- year period at Madison, Gerth bewildered the majority of students passing through his classes and deeply influenced the few who did their best to learn from him.

The article focuses on the sociology of childhood and children's rights. The children's rights movement has undergone transformations from child-saving to propagating the personhood, integrity and autonomy of children. There are common grounds in sociology of childhood and children's rights. First, both sociologists of childhood and proponents of rights for children accept that, where once children were to be studied as passive beings structured by the social context of the family or the school, now research should focus on children's agency, on the ways that children construct their own autonomous social worlds. Secondly, there is a recognition within the literature of both that children are persons, not property; subjects, not objects of social concern or control; participants in social processes, not social problems. Thirdly, both are sensitive to the need to treat children as individuals rather than to categorize them as a collective and undifferentiated class. Sociology more generally can offer all sorts of insight to those concerned to improve the status of children using a rights agenda. The children's rights movement also has important things to say to sociologists of childhood about ways in which to enhance the understanding of the lives of children. The children's rights movement gives children new opportunities to speak, to correct what is partial, to throw light on children's lives, the wrongs from which they suffer, on how they perceive the world and the institutions which they suffer, on how they perceive the world and the institutions which define and structure their existence.

While Pierre Bourdieu is dearly one of the most important living sociologists, there are problems with his theory of practice, his methodology, and his conception of science. In an attempt to overcome the subjectivist/objectivist divide, Bourdieu has developed his theory of human practice This theory, while seen as an advance by many, interacts with Bourcheu's methodology to produce a sociology plagued by tautologies, contradictions, and a positivistic view of social science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article suggests some measures by which sociologists, who do not specialize in lesbian and gay studies or are not queer theorists, can be part of the queer-ing of sociology. It is informed that lesbian and gay studies and queer theory have significant implications for sociology because they show that sexuality is neither a marginal nor discrete subject. Queer theory asserts that the production and regulating of sexuality is central to social order, such that "no facet of social life is fully comprehensible without an examination of how sexual meanings intersect with it." Thus, sociology courses needs to both provide queer perspectives and show how normative heterosexuality is a central social organizing principal. Courses that fail to do so are as inadequate at exploring the social as courses that do not address class, gender, and race. It is further informed that calls for a "sexual revolution" in sociology needs to be followed with explanations of how to do it The recent explosion of sexuality studies and queer theory has prompted the establishment of resources for creating sociology courses about sexualities and lesbian/gay topics. However, few texts focus specifically on integrating sexuality and queer perspectives into existing sociology courses, even though many scholars agree that integration is crucial.

Historians and sociologists point to the Bismarckian welfare reforms as the prime example of a strong state acting independently of class interests Explanations of this sort ignore the class biases and contradictions embedded in the structure and functioning of the nineteenth-century German state The class compromises between the industrial and agricultural fractions of capital as well as class conflicts between capitalists and workers were institutionalized within the state The shape of the national welfare reforms can be understood as the outcome of protracted struggles and unstable compromises between a state-organized power bloc and a state-disorganized petty bourgeoisie The theoretical insights of Nicos Poulantzas serve as a partial guide to this attempt to "being class back into" analyses of the policy making activities of capitalist states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses about the development of sociological movement in different parts of the world with special reference to Afro-American sociologist. It says much about the indifferences faced by Afro-American students in schools and colleges. By 1960's, the tune was of considerable sentiment for separatist politics. Consequently, the march provided a fertile setting to have petitions signed which enabled the Freedom Now Party to gain a place on the 1964 ballot. The idea of an independent Afro-American political party was being viewed as a viable and necessary course of action. As exemplified by the SNCC political action Lowndes County, Alabama, among others, this effort at an independent black politics was not isolated. Even more, there was a national effort at an independent political action through the National Afro-American Political Assembly. The Freedom Now Party, however, failed to get enough votes to become a more permanent fixture in Michigan politics.

The article compares sociologists Emile Durkheim's and Max Weber's methodological positions by looking at the different influences at work in the French and German theory schools. The author argues that Durkheim primarily sought to bring sociological subject matter within the confines of a positivist methodology. This methodology, it is argued, principally took the view that laws must be subject to the test of fact and thereby stressed the criterion of observability. Accordingly, most of the programmatic statements Durkheim made about sociological subject matter tended to equate sociological events with external regularity. On the other hand, Weber's work emphasized the subjective side of social action. He rejected a methodology, which tended to equate social life with external regularities. Weber's recently translated methodological essays cast some new light on his critique of positivist methodology. Durkhei, according to the author, had argued that for sociology to be possible, it had to have an investigative object of its own.

The article focuses on the works of Karl Kautsky who was one of the most prolific and eclectic writers of the international socialist movement. At the age of twenty-one, he published his first contribution to the socialist presses of Germany and Austria. He wrote about medieval England and Germany, ancient Greece, modern industry, philosophy, education, economics, history, modern society, imperialism, the natural and social sciences, contemporary affairs, party politics, Russia, France, the United States, anything, in fact, which struck his fancy and seemed important to him. Critics have long pointed out that Kautsky was attracted to and influenced by Darwinian thought. For over half a century he devoted himself to advancing the cause of the workers' socialist movement and, more specifically, to the advancement of Marxism. Kautsky was somewhat different from many of his fellow members of the Austrian movement to the extent to which he was concerned with the abstract theoretical underpinnings of socialism rather than with organization or political activity.

The article focuses on the abrupt decline of Karl Kautsky's influence and reputation as a sociologist. In 1914, Karl Kautsky stood at the pinnacle of his fame and influence as the leading theoretical spokesman of the German Social Democratic Party. Kautsky for three decades before 1914 had been expounding and adapting Marxist doctrine in ways that are still honored (with reservations) by socialists. But the ensuing era of war and revolutions changed all this. By the end of 1919, Kautsky was effectively a man without a party, his editorial career over and his views on most subjects little heeded; by 1924, he had passed into a scholarly retirement in Vienna, Austria. Though he wrote extensively after 1914, including some of his largest works, today only his commentaries on the Bolshevik and German Revolutions are known beyond small circles of specialists and admirers. The collapse of his standing before contemporaries and before history was abrupt and dramatic. Kautsky's thinking belonged to an era of peace and seemingly inexorable progress; of semi-authoritarian institutions and sharply drawn class lines which affronted the workers' sense of justice and formed them into a united movement seeking radical change; of prosperity and political stability that made violent political action seem neither necessary nor possible in the near future.

The article presents information on the reference books used in compiling the article "Comparisons of Male and Female Student Aspirants," by Gabriel Bar-Haim and John M. Wilkes published in the 1998 issue of the "journal of Comparative Sociology." Some of the references are from "Problem Solvers and Problem Identifiers-The Marking of Research Styles" "International Journal of Science Education," by Gabriel Bar-Haim and John M. Wilkes, "Expanding the Role of Women in the Sciences," by A. Briscoe and S. Prafflin, "Women in the Scientfic Community," by J. Cole, "Creative Potential and Organization Structure." by G. Gordon and E. Morse, "Women in Science: Why So Few?" "In Toward a Sociology of Women," by A. Rossi, "Women Scientists in America: Struggles on Strategies to 1940," by Margaret Rossiter, "Rosalind Franklin and DNA," by A. Sayre.

The article presents an analysis of values in England and the U.S. In his studies of cultural evolution, U.S. sociologist Talcott Parsons suggested that, in the modern era, core Western values were essentially unified and stable. The evidence Parsons used to substantiate his claims was selective and the empirical literature comparing values in England and the U.S. disagrees as to whether value similarities or differences are predominant. Consequently, hypotheses concerning the unity, diversity, and stability of value patterns in these two countries are explored using three distinct cross-national data sets. Although a direct comparison of the data sets is impossible because the value concepts and operational definitions used by each method differed, the data lead to remarkably consistent and unambiguous conclusions. On the level of general value patterning, England and America do seem to have significant value unity. Strong cross-national agreement in value priorities in general was indicated in all data sets considered--the adult interview data on personal values, the student questionnaire data on social values, and the content analysis data on value themes in dominant culture magazines.

The article first reflects on the conditions of a "global community," as discussed by sociologist Talcott Parsons, in search of a broad theoretical framework for more concrete considerations, secondly, discusses the nature of the contemporary crisis and thirdly, in line with Parsons' argument, a brief rundown of Japanese history of internationalization is given. Japan is the only non-Western latecomer to have achieved the status of a world economic superpower. Yet, its economy is most heavily dependent on international trade, and hence has a real stake in keeping the world market stable. In this developmental process, Japan has loomed large as a serious threat to the Western economic hegemony, which has invited protectionist attitudes among the Western countries. The alleged global crisis, in this sense, could be assumed as a largely Western phenomenon, arising out of status inconsistency. Finally, according to the author, Japan in its own turn should seriously start thinking what internationalization means for its own future and for the world as a whole.

The article presents a citation of sociological entries in the International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences and its prospects for comparative analysis. The sociologists who contributed pieces on assigned analytic topics (or biographies) constitute by any measure a sociological elite. Many of the more prominent wrote several entries. Of the thirty-four living sociologists most cited in two major U.S.A. journals, eighteen wrote one or more entries including three of the five most cited in recent Introductory textbooks. The contributors are influentials. Further recognition by the "sociological establishment" was given the lESS in a major review symposium in the American Sociological Review and a lead review in Social Forces in which authors praised the TESS as an "enormously impressive achievement and undoubtedly one of the most significant social science documents of the twentieth century. The point is that one does not know the reasons for disproportionate reliance upon American sociologists in the TESS. Sills nowhere relates his criteria for selection of authors but the fact remains that one finds a greater reliance upon American authors in sociology than among the contributors in any other of the social sciences represented in the Encyclopedia.

The article focuses on the implications of sociological research for social policy. Sociology may be said to be that discipline which attempts to explain society, or to put forward theories which will provide adequately satisfying rationalizations about the social chaos around us. Sociology today is far less liable to see society as immutable or as something existing totally outside the sociologist. There are still fact gatherers, data collectors, but probably not any who would regard the act of gathering data as objective even though data itself might be regarded as objective in a third world sense. The phenomenology of sociology has become increasingly common, and the sociology of sociology or the sociology of sociology of the sociologist is in itself an almost necessary rite de passage acknowledgement to make to ensure that is with contemporary sociology. Social policy is concerned with finding best practical solutions to social problems. To write best is immediately to place social policy in the ethical and moral sphere. Social policy and sociology are closely linked although sociology is usually seen as the older and more theoretically oriented discipline.

In this article the author explores the relationship between sociological theory and social policy. According to the author much of what passes for sociological theory deserves the ridicule which has been heaped upon it. However, sociologists of diverse styles now recognize that theory, implicitly or explicitly, has a built-in praxis. That is, sociological theories rise and fall on how closely they meet the canons of scientific adequacy, but, in addition, they must be judged by how they tell men and women to lead their lives. Sociological theory consists of a set of abstract concepts organized into statements called propositions. Ideally, propositions form a hierarchic system and are logically related to one another. The aim of concepts, propositions and theory is to summarize and explain apparently disparate processes in the real world. The aim of theory is to explain what is in the most general terms possible. The goal of policy analysis is to spell out what can be as concretely as possible. Policy analysis is concerned with mapping alternative approaches and with specifying potential differences in the intention, effect, and cost of various programs.

Biographies of several notable sociologists and social scientists are presented including Joanna Bielecka-Prus, Howard Davis, and Christian Fleck. Bielecka-Prus works as a sociologist at the School of Entrepreneurship and Management in Lublin, Poland. Davis leads the Bangor team in an European Union (EU) Framework 7 collaborative research project on European identities using biographical methods. Fleck is a professor of sociology at the University of Graz in Spain.

The article offers brief profiles of Alberto Gasparini, Carl W. Roberts, and Yong Wang, who contributed to the writing of the journal.

This article presents letters related to critical sociology. The author of the book "Critical Perspectives in Sociology," had received his Ph.D. from the University of Oregon in 1977. During his graduate studies at Oregon, he participated in the Insurgent Sociologist collective for three years. The above book was a great success. The initial printing of 800 copies in June 1991 was sold out within the first 18 months of publication and an additional 300 copies were printed to fill orders for the spring and summer semesters of 1993. An agreement was made with the publisher in late 1992 to go to a second edition of the book as soon as the final batch of copies are exhausted. The second edition of the book will be available in June 1993 in adopting the book for introductory sociology and social problems courses, this newest edition can become even a greater success than the first. The author thanked all the contributors to the first edition of "Critical Perspectives in Sociology" for their participation in this project and for agreeing to contribute the royalties in such a manner to support progressive sociology. He himself has been using the book in his introductory sociology and social problems classes every semester since the Summer of 1991 when the book was first published.