Search

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]

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 article presents information on the work of sociologist Vilfredo Pareto. The paper attempts a conjunction of the two perspectives in the case of Pareto's sociology. The first refers to Pareto's role in relation to the crisis of the utilitarian-positivistic model of social action and the second concerns the "subjectivistic" crisis of both social and "natural" sciences. Pareto's recognizing the predominance of the non-logical element in human action has counterparts, even if couched in different terms, in the works of diverse scholars. More than any one else, Pareto then endeavors a super-historical generalization. It is this effort that allows him to recognize the importance of the immutability of the domination of some men over others and also to direct attention to the cyclical nature of human affairs, precisely at a time when the fashion was the search for linear directions in human evolution. The contradictions that may easily be brought to light through a reading of Pareto are, however, the very same one find in more recent authors.

This paper discusses the contribution of the sociologist to the planning of agricultural and rural development in Israel. The author first outlines the three levels of agricultural planning - national, regional and farm, and then provides some background to rural settlement activities in Israel. The confrontation of new immigrants from traditional societies with the technologically advanced agriculture of Israel resulted in severe social crises in the new villages, affecting also their economic achievements; and the subsequent assignment of rural sociologists to the villages to study the life-pattern of these traditional groups and provide them with counseling and instruction, whilst at the same time undertaking general research. The recommendations of the sociologists helped the development authorities to evolve suitable measures for integrating these immigrants into society as socially independent and economically successful members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents authors personal thoughts on the pursuit of sociological problems. The author intends to retrace his steps along one path of his intellectual career--the path that links two books, titled, "Social Change in the Industrial Revolution," and "Theory of Collective Behavior," and a number of recent articles and papers on sociological theory and psychological theory. The main emphasis in the article was on the need for a determinate synthesis of the several classes of variables that are essential for the explanation of collective behavior such as cultural, social, psychological, ecological and other variables. In attempting to sort out the major influences on his choice of sociological problems, he resorts to a device that he find congenial and helpful: to arrange these influences in a series extending from very general, predisposing influences which have steered his intellectual interests to the very specific, immediate influences that have determined a particular strategy of analysis in working on a sociological problem.

The article discusses the basis of urbanism in Texas. The paper presented in the article is in the nature of a preliminary report of a study begun some months ago on the subject of urbanism in Texas. While it is necessarily incomplete, the facts already secured justify presentation of certain conclusions as to the causal factors involved in the location and development of cities in this state. No particular method is utilized in the study to the exclusion of others. Geography is consulted for the facts about the natural environment, to which human life must inevitably adapt itself. History yields information about events, many apparently accidental, which have figured in the location of settlements, later expanded into cities. Statistical correlations show connections between various phenomena, from which the relationship of cause and effect may be inferred. Case studies of selected units give the necessary detail for a sympathetic understanding and appreciation of the interplay of forces between individual and community. The plan of the study as a whole is cast on broad lines. Taking aggregation of population as the prerequisite of urbanism, the investigators have undertaken, as their first task, to present a picture of growth of urban population in Texas. This is obviously necessary for a delineation of the field. The second task involves the discovery, classification and evaluation of the factors responsible for the location and increase of urban aggregations.

When sociologists discuss the analytical concept "integration" they use an implicit conceptual imagery which must be made clear if some of the most common confusions and misunderstandings in this area are to be avoided. The recent discussion of the concept has been vigorous, but a systematic appraisal of the issue is needed. It is attempted in this paper. Our analysis must have two parts: first, we must understand the formal meaning of the concept "integration" as such—its logical properties, as it were, which stem from its nature as a characterization of whole-part relationships; second, we must apply the formal insights gained to a brief review of the analytical uses of the concept in sociological theory; it may then be possible to specify at least some of the conceptual relationships between different types of "integration theories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]