Search

This article presents a list of books received by the "Canadian Journal of Sociology" as of September 2004.

This section presents a bibliography of books on Canadian sociology.

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This section discusses articles and issues which reflect the attempt to assess and evaluate important aspects of the publishing record in Canadian sociology during the last millennium as important reflections of the evolution of the discipline in Canada during the last century. In one of the classic documents of Canadian sociology, Everett Hughes suggested that sociology in this country should be framed by what he called the more-so principle, that is, what are the features of Canadian life from which we would learn more about as an aspect of society that we would not learn about as much elsewhere. He suggested that sociology in Canada had to be rooted in and must begin with its own societal context. Thus it can be concluded that as the societal context changes, Canadian sociology itself should reflect both the unique aspects of the society's character as well as the evolution of the society. The occasion of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Canadian Sociology and Anthropology Association provided a significant opportunity for sociologists in Canada to reflect on their organizational history and the practice of their craft in Canada. The results of this work is contained in an article by William K. Carroll, Linda Christensen-Ruffman, Raymond F. Currie, and Deborah Harrison.

When the notion that Quebec is a distinct society within Canada became the chief object of discord during the Meech Lake constitutional debate, sociologists were offered a golden opportunity to participate in shaping the evolving understandings that Canadians have of their country. But this opportunity was not grasped. This paper evaluates some of the discursive conditions that have produced the apparent indifference of Anglo-Canadian sociologists to this most crucial of sociological questions as it applies to their own country: what is a society? Of particular interest are the general underconceptualization in sociology of "society," and the conceptual confusion that links "society" to "nation," "state," and "country." Canada's political-economic autonomy relative to the United States is quite limited, and Canadian "sense of society" is vague and is challenged from within.

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article presents the author's comments on the paper Canada's Impossible Science: Historical and Institutional Origins of the Coming Crisis in Anglo-Canadian Sociology. Do grand visions and preoccupations with how we ought to be doing our work have a place in the contemporary world of Anglo-Canadian sociology or should we avert our gaze from the flood of imperatives that we are implored to take seriously and just get on with it? Get on with the teaching? Get on with the scramble for resources and recognition? Get on with the construction of our world, the consensual observations that once on the page are us, the texts of sociology? Recognition and reputation do flow from publication and engaged teaching. That much we know or should know. So why not just do it and, thereby, perhaps, banish or, at least, reduce the innervating gloom of collective self-doubt that seems to be so much with us these days? So why not stop wringing our hands about our journals and simply fill their pages with worthy observations? So why not stop complaining about the quality of our meetings and take up the challenge of finding there those who can understand our specialized ways of talking and writing? McLaughlin provides us with plenty of reasons why not,

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the future of Anglo-Canadian sociology as a scientific discipline. Several prominent members of the field have speculated on the possible imminent demise of the discipline and point to loss of identity and autonomy as the primary cause. The author examines the issue thoroughly, concluding that the direction of Anglo-Canadian sociology lies in the professional attitudes and activities of its members. Suggestions for future avenues of sociological research and activity are provided.

The article discusses the state Anglo-Canadian sociology as a scientific discipline. The author addresses several claims made by contemporary sociologists that Canadian sociology is experiencing a progressive loss of autonomy and identity. With the intention of revitalizing debate and examination of the field and widening the scope and epistemological context, the author examines the role of national sociological institutions in the promotion of new research and the professionalization of the field.

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article argues that emphasizing the proportion of explained variance is a methodological fetish. Neo-Marxist class categories, like conventional SES measures, generally predict only a small proportion of the variation in Canadian class voting. This has led some social scientists to downplay the role of class factors in shaping voting behaviour; some political scientists have gone so far as to abandon sociological models of voting behaviour altogether. It thus makes little sense to abandon particular models of voting behaviour on the grounds that explained variance is low. In extending research on the relationship between class and voting, authors criticize previous research for ignoring the complex social processes by which objective class position may or may not be transformed into subjective class action. We contend that studying how classes become politically mobilized or demobilized draws attention to a set of structural variables that markedly increase our confidence in the existence of a relationship between class and voting and therefore our understanding of this relationship.

The article provides a comparative analysis of the historical constitution of philosophical and sociological thought in Quebec. It reveals that in contrast to other Western societies, the human sciences in Quebec fulfilled the cognitive and social functions ascribed to philosophy elsewhere. This is particularly striking at the level of their inverted conceptualization of Quebec as a global society. The human sciences would have created both the mythical and societal ground allowing then, the emergence of a philosophical project.

The article presents an immanent critique of the social imaginary of otherness based in a definition of the cultural difference between English Canada as an absent nation and Quebec as an absent region. This is grounded in an examination of the dialogical forms of the life worlds in each society across three interrelated contexts of social discourse, world view, utterance and word.

The article examines the changing image of sociology within the English-speaking Canadian academic community and the society at large. Harold Innis, a sociologist, played the key role in pulling sociology out of its isolated position within the Canadian academic community. Within the University of Toronto in Ontario, the type of sociology expounded by C.W.M Hart, a teacher aroused in academic circles strong antagonisms. Sociology, with Hart as a teacher, did not suffer from being ignored. It came rather to be viewed as a threat. Hart was a great teacher, who built about himself a number of devoted students, but unfortunately his difficulty in getting along with people led many persons in the university to associate their feelings toward him with their attitude to sociology. The stereotype of American sociology as a discipline concerned only with the gathering of useless facts persisted throughout the Canadian academic community, in Toronto as elsewhere. Before the decade of the 1950s came to an end, something of a community of sociologists was beginning to emerge in Canada, and sociology was coming close to establishing itself as a respectable discipline within the Canadian academic community.

This article seeks to bring together a display as well as an analysis of the elements of fact and myth, which play their part in Canadian nationalism. The author's efforts to combine the methods of Marxism and phenomenology should be taken as a commitment to a particular style within the possibilities of Canadian sociology. It can hardly be claimed that Canada's experience of US economic domination has driven her into Third World revolution, although Canada shows occasional interest in the Mexican response to its problems with the US border. Everywhere one turns, the facts of US exploitation is clear enough to raise the voice of national indignation. The struggle over nationalist and scholarly interests in the Canadian University is exacerbated by attacks upon the university's role in society. Furthermore, the author discusses Canadian nationalism by turning from the consideration of the intellectual background predisposing to the myth of the nation to the consideration of the problems of national myth-making itself. Canadian sociology remains nerveless, ruled by its poor but legal use of American sociology.

The article represents the prevailing methodological position regarding the relationship of national identification and the development of sociological knowledge in Canada. Canadian sociology cannot be content to investigate the factors that have contributed to the sheer survival of the nation, but must go on to discover the complex web of economic, political, and cultural domination which has aborted the birth of an independent Canadian nation. It would appear that functionalism continues to influence a good number of sociologists in Canada. In the Canadian context functional theory easily translates into some form of the now familiar ideology of continentalism. in this view, Canada and the United States are by history and culture joined in a mutually beneficial arrangement that enables both countries to achieve high levels of industrial prosperity. The other wing of the "old" sociology, abstracted empiricism, has also been an inhibiting force on Canadian social science. It is today easy to denounce blatant empiricism as a hindrance to Canadian sociology since it is abrogated, if unofficially, in many professional circles on both sides of the border.

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Sociology is the property of Canadian Journal of Sociology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)