经济社会学:理论、方法与研究

一(一)对“经济社会学”内涵的重新认识任何学科的发展都需经历一定的历史过程。熊彼特是“经济社会学”的最早倡导者之一,他在《经济分析史》中提出“经济社会学”概念,并将其定义为研究“经济制度”的科学。但熊彼特的“经济社会学”更多地强调经济,而与现代意义上的经济社会学并不一致。即使就经济学而言,“经济”制度最初指罗马社会的家庭管理(“Ｏｉｋｏｓ”);而熊彼特的纯粹经济学概念则过于狭隘。主流经济学的发展从来就不是线性的,而是经历了无数曲折和往复,并在此过程中形成各个时代的基本假设和定义。对于“经济社会学”自身含义…     

Reflections on Public Sociology: Public Relations, Disciplinary Identity, and the Strong Program in Professional Sociology

Public sociology is an attempt to redress the issues of public engagement and disciplinary identity that have beset the discipline over the past several decades. While public sociology seeks to rectify the public invisibility of sociology, this paper investigates the limitations of it program. Several points of critique are offered. First, public sociology's affiliations with Marxism serve to potentially entrench existing divisions within the discipline. Second, public sociology's advancement of an agenda geared toward a "sociology for publics" instead of a "sociology of publics" imposes limitations on the development of a public interface. Third, the lack of a methodological agenda for public sociology raises concerns of how sociology can compete within a contested climate of public opinion. Fourth, issues of disciplinary coherence are not necessarily resolved by public sociology, and are potentially exacerbated by the invocation of public sociology as a new disciplinary identity. Fifth, the incoherence of professional sociology is obviated, and a misleading affiliation is made between scientific knowledge and the hegemonic structure of the profession. Finally, the idealism of public sociology's putative defense of civil society is explored as a utopian gesture akin to that of Habermas' attempt to revive the public sphere. The development of a strong program in professional sociology is briefly offered as a means to repair the disciplinary problems that are illustrated by emergence of the project of public sociology.     

Committing Canadian Sociology: Developing a Canadian Sociology and a Sociology of Canada

This paper is a slightly revised version of the author's “Outstanding Career Award Lecture” presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Sociological Association in Victoria, British Columbia on June 6, 2013. The paper distinguishes between Canadian Sociology and the Sociology of Canada. The former involves the explanatory stance that one takes to understanding Canada. The latter addresses the significant social dimensions that underlie Canadian social organization, culture, and behavior. I make a case for a Canadian Sociology that focuses on the unique features of Canadian society rather than adopting a comparative perspective. I also argue that there is a continuing need within the Sociology of Canada to address the issues of staples development. However, I argue that “new” staples analysis must have a directional change from that of the past, in that social processes now largely determine the pattern of staples development. Moreover, new staples analysis must include issues that were never part of earlier staples analysis, such as issues of environmental impacts and of staples depletion under conditions, such as climate change. The paper concludes by analyzing four factors that provide the dominant social contexts for analyzing modern staples development: (1) the rise of neoliberal government, (2) the implementation of globalization and its social consequences, (3) the assumption of aboriginal rights and entitlement, and (4) the rise of environmentalism. These factors were generally not considered in earlier staples approaches. They are critical to understanding the role of staples development and its impact on Canada in the present time. Cet article est une version quelque peu révisé du cours pour le “prix pour contributions exceptionnelles” de l'auteur, présenté à la réunion annuelle de la Société Canadienne de Sociologie à Victoria, Colombie‐Britannique le 6 juin 2013. Cet article ce distingue entre la sociologie canadienne et la sociologie du Canada. Le premier ce concerne la position explicative que l'on prend pour comprendre le Canada. Le dernier adresse les importantes dimensions sociales qui sous‐tendent l'organisation sociale, culturelle et comportementale. Je soutiendrai une sociologie canadienne qui se concentre sur les aspects uniques de la société canadienne au lieu d'adopter une perspective comparative. Je soutiendrai aussi qu'il existe un besoin continu au sein de la sociologie du Canada pour adresser les questions de la théorie des principales ressources. Cependant, je soutiens que l'analyse des principales ressources “nouvelle” nécessite un changement de direction que celles du passé, en ce que les processus sociaux déterminent principalement le système de développement des principales ressources. De plus, l'analyse des principales ressources “nouveau” doit inclure les problèmes qui n’étaient jamais partis des analyses précédentes, comme les problèmes d'impacts environnementaux et de la diminution des principales ressources dans les conditions comme celui des changements climatiques. Cet article ce termine par scruter quatre facteurs qui produisent le contexte social dominant dans les analyses du développement des principales ressources moderne: (1) la croissance du gouvernement néolibéral; (2) l'implémentation de la globalisation et ses conséquences sociales ; (3) l'assomption des droits autochtones, et (4) l'ascension d'environnementalisme. Ces facteurs n'ont été généralement pas considérés dans les méthodes d'analyse des principales ressources antérieures. Ils sont cruciaux pour comprendre le rôle du développement des principales ressources et leurs impacts contemporains sur le Canada.     

Transnational Feminism in Sociology: Articulations,Agendas, Debates

What is the current terrain of transnational feminism in sociology? This essay begins by introducing the key interdisciplinary writings that helped initiate a specifically transnational feminist approach in women’s and gender studies. It then delineates three primary ways in which these writings have been adapted and/or expanded with/in sociology, as well as some points of tension and debate among these varying approaches. It argues that although there are numerous sociologically oriented transnational feminisms, most authors do not acknowledge this multiplicity and complexity, contributing to a sometimes confusing conversation where assumptions about key concepts, causality, and processes remain unclear. The essay ends with suggestions for future research.     

Human Trafficking: Globalization, Exploitation, and Transnational Sociology

In the last decade, human trafficking has emerged as a new area of research for sociologists and other scholars across a wide range of fields. Globalization has exacerbated the illicit trade of people and their parts within and across territorial borders, generating concern among activists and academics and prompting the development of a burgeoning literature with varying concerns and viewpoints. This article reviews what we know about human trafficking dynamics and trends, its causes, and current responses, including critiques of anti-trafficking efforts. While much work remains to be done in simply mapping current trafficking activities, a transnational sociological framework can help to move theory and research on trafficking forward.     

Demography,Sociology and Schizophrenia

The problem of schizophrenia is one of considerable magnitude. Davies and Rorke (1964) quote the summary of findings that for every 100,000 persons in the community, 30 are admitted to hospital as emergency psychiatric patients each year; 300 occupy hospital beds for the mentally ill or defective; 3,000 are seen in psychiatric clinics or receive some sort of specialist psychiatric assistance. Many of the patients included in the above numbers are likely to be diagnosed as schizophrenics.     

Discipline,Field, Nexus: Re‐Visioning Sociology

Cet article propose une reconceptualisation de la discipline sociologique ainsi que de sa place dans le monde actuel. Nous remettrons tout d'abord en question l'idée même que la sociologie puisse être considérée en tant que discipline académique dans le sens habituel du terme, tout comme le fait qu'il soit possible de distinguer, à la manière des sciences de la nature, autant de disciplines distinctes au sein du champ des sciences sociales. Au contraire, nous defendrons la thèse selon laquelle la sociologie et ses disciplines connexes furent plutôt constitueés en tant que champs sociaux à travers un processus historique particulier. Cette analyse nous permettra de réaffirmer la position centrale qu'occupe la sociologie dans le champ de la recherche sociale, de par les liens étroits qu'elle entretient avec les autres disciplines qui constituent ce champ, ainsi que par sa nature interdisciplinaire et critique. Cette reconceptualisation implique qu'une ontologie sociale claire fondée sur une méthodologie cohérente, en l'occurence le réalisme critique, puisse remédier aux tendences centrifuges propre à la discipline, en renforçant sa capacité à analyser les problèmes sociaux, et donc à contribuer à défendre et à élargir les pratiques démocratiques au fondement d'un avenir meilleur. This article proposes a re‐visioning of sociology and of its relationship to the late‐modern world it inhabits. I first problematize the claim that sociology is a discipline in any ordinary sense of the term, indeed, that social science can be reasonably cleaved into “disciplines” on the model of natural science. I then explore the thesis that sociology and kindred pursuits have been constituted as fields. Finally, I argue that among the fields of social scientific inquiry, the sociological terrain is of great import, as a nexus whose permeability, dense connectivity to other fields and critical transdisciplinarity are prime assets. By implication, the remedy for centrifugal tendencies that worry some sociologists is greater clarity on matters of social ontology and, on that basis, a coherent methodology (critical realism) that can strengthen sociology's capacity to understand our troubled world and to defend and enrich democratic practices that may portend a better future.     

Digital Ethnography for Sociology: Craft,Rigor, and Creativity

Qualitative Sociology - This special issue gathers empirical papers that develop and employ digital ethnographic methods to answer core sociological questions related to community, culture, urban...     

Review Essay:Rural Sociology,Migration, and Community Change

Research in Rural Sociology and Development: Focus on Migration, edited by Harry K. Schwarzweller and Brendan P. Mullan. Population Change in the Rural West: 1975–1990, edited by John M. Wardwell and James H. Copp. Lanham, MD Community of Strangers: Change, Turnover, Turbulence and the Transformation of a Midwestern Country Town, by Joseph A. Amato and John Radzilowski.     

Toward a Buddhist Sociology: Theories,Methods, and Possibilities

This article explores potential links between Buddhism and sociology, highlighting the many commonalities between sociology and Buddhism, with an emphasis on ways that Buddhist thought and practice may contribute to the field of sociology. What could Buddhism offer to our understanding of social institutions, social problems, and to the dynamics and possibilities for social change? The Four Noble Truths, central to Buddhist teachings, are explored in reference to their sociological theory applications. Finally, mindfulness practices that are endemic to Buddhism are explored as tools for sociologists to consider as they work reflexively, develop sociological insights, and pursue social justice.     

Review Essay: Sociology and Knowledge: Trust, Truth, and Troth

Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge , by Karin Knorr Cetina.
Social Mechanisms: An Analytic Approach to Social Theory , edited by Peter Hedström and Richard Swedberg.
A Watched POT: How We Experience Time , by Michael G. Flaherty.     

Sociology,Psychoanalysis, and Marginalization: Unconscious Defenses and Disciplinary Interests

American sociology as a field tends to marginalize psychoanalytic perspectives despite scholars Cavalletto and Silver showing that this was not the case during Talcott Parson's intellectual heyday in the 1940s. From the 1970s on, though, constructionists emphasized the conservative rather than liberatory side of the Freudian tradition and symbolic interactionism took the place of psychoanalysis as the legitimized framework for understanding individuals. Marginalization has occurred for at least three reasons: (1) the legacies of positivism created a bias toward empirically observable rather than relatively unmeasurable concepts like the Freudian unconscious; (2) psychoanalysis uses internal data whereas sociologists look externally rather than inward; (3) because psychoanalysis focuses on individuals and sociology on groups, it is argued that the two are incommensurate. Nevertheless, even in the face of marginalization, some scholars have combined psychoanalytic and sociological perspectives in myriad ways conceiving of multi dimensional rather than rationalistic individuals within social and cultural settings; exploring interactional dynamics that are at once psychic‐and‐social; and, as in the work of Wilfred Bion, studying the psychoanalytic mechanisms of groups themselves. I posit that the ongoing marginalization of psychoanalysis deprives the discipline of an innovative tool of analysis, an especially salient one at times when the emotional and psychological dimensions of social life are glaringly evident.     

Sociology of Debt: States,Credit Markets,and Indebted Citizens

Within the context of the recent financial crisis, the causes and implications of mounting levels of household indebtedness have begun to be examined from a variety of angles: Why have nations differed so drastically, historically speaking, in terms of the level of debt that their citizens carry? Why have patterns converged over the past few decades, with levels of indebtedness increasing across the board? This paper considers these questions from a sociological perspective. I first consider the role of political, institutional, economic, and cultural factors, as well as individual characteristics, in shaping the demand for and supply of credit and the degree and nature of household indebtedness in and across nations. I then attempt to explain the cross‐national convergence towards rising indebtedness over the past few decades by situating the transformation of these various demand and supply side factors under the neoliberal regime.