Search

The article discusses various issues related to the husband-wife differences. The reciprocal nature of the role of husband and wife in the construction of reality is an assumption made in nearly all theoretical discussions. Authors wish to raise the question of whether feminine construction of reality, the woman's construction of her sex role constellation can exist apart from masculine construction of reality. It is the authors' attempt to investigate some of the similarities and differences in such constructions within the marital dyad. In this article the authors illustrate some of the differences they found in subjective reports of husbands and their wives involved in dual-profession marriages, specifically in cases where the wife is actively engaged in the practice of law or medicine or teaching at the university level. It seems probable that the husband or wife's perception of reality would have much effect on the spouse's internalization process. But the process is not a perfect one, making data from only one spouse most incomplete. In the case of the husband's attitude toward his wife's work, we see at least this pattern in operation in the dissimilar responses: some wives are reluctant to admit that their husbands disapprove of their activities, although their husbands may in fact be against such employment.

The article focuses on the problems in terminology, concept formation, and theory construction. Satisfactory verbal theory in sociology is dependent on appropriate concept formation, which in turn must be based on precise terminology and word usage. The absence of a clear and unambiguous terminology can only result in concepts of the same unfortunate quality. And concepts of this defective nature can only hinder the development of sociology as a science, for its premises, propositions and theories will seldom the succeed in rising above the confusion and disagreement that reigns; ancumulative nature characteristic of all science can hardly be expected to characterize sociology so long as adequate communication among practitioners of the discipline remains a goal, not a reality. The social scientist may be permitted a degree of optimism in recalling the contributions of the logical positivists with their insistence upon the crucial role of sense-experience and the necessity of clear and unambiguous terminology and definitions.