Forgetting the founders*

The inability, or unwillingness, of 20^th‐century sociologists to move beyond the agenda bequeathed by Marx, Weber, and Durkheim is remarkable in view not only of the now outdated presuppositions shared by all three but of the increasing likelihood that the more important influence on the human behavioural sciences in the 21^st century will turn out to be Darwin's. Not only has the coming together of evolutionary theory, population genetics, and molecular biology shown that significantly more of human behaviour can be explained by the theory of natural selection than was previously recognized, but non‐reductionist explanations of cultural and social evolution from within a neo‐Darwinian paradigm can be framed in terms no longer vulnerable to the criticisms previously levelled against the application to sociology of Darwin's original insight about ‘descent with modification’.     

The History of Social Thought and the History of Sociology

Abstract

Just as sociologists in the past have been insistent upon making a distinction between the history of social thought and sociological theory, so is it argued here than an equally important distinction be made between the history of social thought and the history of sociology. It is suggested that the history of social thought is no more useful to the advance of sociological theory than any other contiguously related field of study. Since the history of social thought is not directly concerned with the discipline of sociology, it is suggested that it be eliminated from the curricula of sociology. Not only is this area of study unlikely to contribute to the development of sociological theory but also such a study can have unanticipated consequences that hinder such a contribution. The genetic fallacy is less likely to be committed when the distinction between the history of social thought and the history of sociology is kept clearly in mind.     

Why most sociologists don't (and won't) think evolutionarily

The general failure of sociologists to understand, much less accept, an evolutionary perspective on human behavior transcends mere ignorance and ideological bias, although it incorporates a good deal of both. It also includes a general anthropocentric discomfort with evolutionary thinking, a self-interested resistance to self-understanding, and a trained sociological incapacity to accept the fundamental canons of scientific theory construction: reductionism, individualism, materialism, and parsimony.     

Authenticity: The Sociological Dimensions of a Politically Consequential Concept

In this brief essay, I reflect on the concept of authenticity and its potential convergence with topics of sociological concern. I argue that sociologists should consider the topic of authenticity for two reasons: its problematic role in modern social life and its prominence in contemporary electoral politics. I then provide a brief survey of the concept’s historical development in Western thought and argue that the modern notion of authenticity exists in sharp contrast with its antecedents in classical thought. Where once authenticity was associated with external and transcendent goods, the rise of modernity transformed the concept into an individual and interior phenomenon. Thus, contemporary authenticity is coterminous with the sociological theories of dramaturgy and social performance. Finally, I argue that if sociologists integrate the notion of authenticity into dramaturgical analysis, the apparently perplexing role of authenticity in politics will be rendered more intelligible.     

The Poverty of Deductivism: A Constructive Realist Model of Sociological Explanation

Despite the lip service which many sociologists pay to Popper's hypothetico‐deductive model (HDM) of theory testing, few if any major social theories have been definitively falsified. The reason is that sociological explanations do not fit the deductivist model of explanation: They do not contain universal or statistical "covering laws" from which falsifiable hypotheses could be deduced. Sociological explanations are better conceived in realist terms as causal models of the social processes that produce certain outcomes. While few models are completely false, some are nonetheless more empirically adequate than others. This essay argues that (1) the CLM is inadequate to sociology and that (2) attempts to reformulate the HDM are therefore destined to fail. It then outlines (3) a constructive realist model (CRM) of sociological explanation and uses it to develop (4) explanatory realist (ER) criteria for evaluating explanations. Deductivist and realist approaches to methodology are then compared through an examination of Skocpol's States and Social Revolutions .     

Death. So what? Sociology,sequestration and emancipation

The paper argues for the widely unacknowledged importance of death in the motivation of human conduct and the significance of the sequestration of death for sociological theory. Sociological studies that illuminate modern strategies for coping with death also contribute to its sequestration as they routinely naturalise the contemporary commonsense understanding of death as something negative that must be coped with. The (negative or morbid) representation of death, it is argued, should be re‐cognised as a social product, not reproduced in sociological studies as something that is seemingly innate to the human condition. Otherwise, a commonsense representation of death as unequivocally negative is reinforced rather than scrutinised; and alternative understandings of the significance of mortality for analysing everyday life and human emancipation are suppressed.     

Whither the Blank Slate? A Report on the Reception of Evolutionary Biological Ideas among Sociological Theorists

Sociologists have drawn considerable criticism over the years for their failure to integrate evolutionary biological principles in their work. Critics such as Stephen Pinker (2002 Pinker , Steven. 2002 . The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature . New York : Penguin Books . [Google Scholar]) have popularized the notion that sociologists adhere dogmatically to a “blank slate” or cultural determinist view of the human mind and social behavior. This report assesses whether sociologists indeed ascribe to such a blank slate view. Drawing from a survey of 155 sociological theorists, we find the field about evenly divided over the applicability of evolutionary reasoning to a range of human tendencies. Although there are signs of a shift toward greater openness to evolutionary biological ideas, sociologists are least receptive to evolutionary accounts of human sex differences. Echoing earlier research, we find political identity to be a significant predictor of sociologists' receptiveness. We close by cautioning our colleagues against sociological reductionism and we speculate about the blank slate's political-psychological appeal to liberal-minded social scientists.     

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.     

Bringing Identity Theory into Environmental Sociology

In an effort to explain pro‐environmental behavior, environmental sociologists often study environmental attitudes. While much of this work is atheoretical, the focus on attitudes suggests that researchers are implicitly drawing upon attitude theory in psychology. The present research brings sociological theory to environmental sociology by drawing on identity theory to understand environmentally responsive behavior. We develop an environment identity model of environmental behavior that includes not only the meanings of the environment identity, but also the prominence and salience of the environment identity and commitment to the environment identity. We examine the identity process as it relates to behavior, though not to the exclusion of examining the effects of environmental attitudes. The findings reveal that individual agency is important in influencing environmentally responsive behavior, but this agency is largely through identity processes, rather than attitude processes. This provides an important theoretical and empirical advance over earlier work in environmental sociology.     

Berle and Means revisited: The governance and power of large U.S. corporations

In The Modern Corporation and Private Property (1932), Berle and Means warned of the concentration of economic power brought on by the rise of the large corporation and the emergence of a powerful class of professional managers, insulated from the pressure not only of stockholders, but of the larger public as well. In the tradition of Thomas Jefferson, Berle and Means warned that the ascendance of management control and unchecked corporate power had potentially serious consequences for the democratic character of the United States. Social scientists who drew on Berle and Means in subsequent decades presented a far more benign interpretation of the rise of managerialism, however. For them, the separation of ownership from control actually led to an increased level of democratization in the society as a whole. Beginning in the late 1960s, sociologists and other social scientists rekindled the debate over ownership and control, culminating in a series of rigorous empirical studies on the nature of corporate power in American society. In recent years, however, sociologists have largely abandoned the topic, ceding it to finance economists, legal scholars, and corporate strategy researchers. In this article, I provide a brief history of the sociological and finance/legal/strategy debates over corporate ownership and control. I discuss some of the similarities between the two streams of thought, and I discuss the reasons that the issue was of such significance sociologically. I then argue that by neglecting this topic in recent years, sociologists have failed to contribute to an understanding of some of the key issues in contemporary business behavior. I provide brief reviews of four loosely developed current perspectives and then present an argument of my own about the changing nature of the U.S. corporate elite over the past three decades. I conclude with a call for sociologists to refocus their attention on an issue that, however fruitfully handled by scholars in other fields, cries out for sociological analysis.     

The Evolution of Culture and Sociology

Orthodox neo-Darwinians have typically sought to explain human pro-social behavior by invoking kin altruism and reciprocal altruism, principles that explain the pro-social behavior of non-human species. These principles, however, do not account for those features of our species that are most unique and of greatest importance to sociologists—our group identities and behavior, our cognitive and behavioral plasticity, our capacity for social learning and cumulative culture, among other things. This article describes the efforts of “dual inheritance” theorists to overcome the deficiencies of orthodox neo-Darwinism by developing an evolutionary theory of culture, a theory that also seeks to account for human “groupishness,” intelligence, language use, empathy, morality and religion. The article asserts that dual inheritance theory accommodates most of the traditional research interests of sociologists while proving a robust explanatory framework and that sociologists are positioned especially well to contribute to the study of the evolution of culture.     

A Sociological Overview of Cortisol as a Biomarker of Response to the Social Environment

Cortisol is a stress hormone that is reactive to social stress and thus should be of use to sociologists interested in understanding specific processes related to the broad category of “threats to the social self”. In this paper I use cortisol as a case study to explore the utility of biomarkers for elucidating the relationship between the social environment and human biology. I focus on cortisol because it is a stress hormone that reacts in particular to social stress, and therefore could be of special interest to sociologists. I first discuss the relationship between the social environment and cortisol response. Then I briefly review sociological literature that uses cortisol as a measure. Finally, I provide an overview of how to use cortisol in research projects. This overview addresses some of the basic questions that are typically asked by social scientists who are considering taking cortisol measures in their own work.     

Sociological theory: Looking forward

A brief model of the rise, salience, criticism, and relative decline of theoretical perspectives in sociology is sketched, citing the dominance of sociological positivism in the early part of the twentieth century as an example. Classical evolutionary theory and structural-functionalism are also mentioned as illustrations. Viewing the contemporary theoretical scene, the author sees a kind of peaceful pluralism as a visible motif, and some modest signs of integrative or synthetic theoretical activity on the horizon. He is the author of many books and articles on sociological theory, economic sociology, collective behavior and social movements, and the sociology of education. Most recently he edited theHandbook of Sociology (1988).     

Cosmopolitan sociology and the classical canon: Ferdinand Tönnies and the emergence of global Gesellschaft

How relevant are figures from the classical sociological canon for present day efforts to found cosmopolitan forms of sociological thought? According to the critique of Ulrich Beck, the classical sociologists remain far too wedded to nation‐state‐centred ways of thinking to play an important role in the development of cosmopolitan sociology. This paper argues that such a critique fails to account for the ways in which certain classical sociologists were attuned to the emerging cosmopolitical conditions of their own time, were not wholly wedded to nation‐state‐based conceptualizations, and thus can function as both groundings of, and inspirations for, cosmopolitan sociological endeavours. The apparently unpromising case of Tönnies is focused on, the paper showing how he outlined an account of how and why a planet‐spanning condition of Gesellschaft developed a position which diverges from and counterpoints Marx's analysis of similar phenomena in important ways. The stereotype of Tönnies as an arch‐conservative is also dissolved, allowing him to be considered as one of the most important antecedents of contemporary cosmopolitan sociological practice and a canonical figure still relevant for present‐day purposes.     

THE SOCIAL REALITY OF PERSPECTIVES: ON G.H. MEAD'S POTENTIAL RELEVANCE FOR THE ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPORARY SOCIETIES

Mead's rarely explored notion of an “objective reality of perspectives” serves as a point of departure for a discussion of the implications of his work for general sociological theory and the analysis of contemporary societies. The epistemological background is explored to the point where sociology can be viewed as pragmatist mode of response to the inevitable relativity of knowledge. Mead's well known theory of identity formation plays an essential role in this context. The concept of perspective may serve as bridge for a generalization of the notion of identity in order to demonstrate the genuine sociological character of Mead's work. Illustrations are provided of the potential inherent in Mead's thought for research and to the study of contemporary societies. Finally sociology itself is conceived as a special kind of perspective, concerned with the inevitable perspectivity of human behavior.     

Aging and the course of desire

The desire to make a difference in the world, to receive the esteem and approval of others, and to be attractive to others for the person one is, is a basic human longing. The fate of such desire over the course of life is a subject that has largely been relegated to studies of changing patterns of sexual activity with advancing age. The broader topic of the human desire to remain actively engaged in the world has yet to be fully developed and incorporated within sociological theories of aging. We know little of the variables that affect the workings of desire and the circumstances under which desire is more or less likely to be manifest. Due to its reluctance to bridge the disciplinary boundaries that separate structural and social psychological approaches to theorizing age, sociologists of aging and the life course have rarely considered the ways in which human desire for recognition, love, and influence affect behavior at various points in the life course. In this paper, I address the problem of the social breakdown syndrome that is thought to bring about an atrophy in the skills and talents of those in old age. With concepts drawn from the dramaturgical literature in sociology, I argue that those who continue to benefit from the emotional energy that derives from satisfying and productive social interactions will age in ways that cannot be explained by existing sociological theories of aging.     

Evolution and Event in History and Social Change: Gerhard Lenski's Critical Theory

Authors have contrasted social change and history many times, especially in terms of the significance of the event in accounting for the broadest contours of human societies' evolution. After recasting Gerhard Lenski's ecological‐evolutionary theory in a critical fashion, by emphasizing its engagement with alternativity and by introducing a different approach to structure, I reconsider the salience of the event in the developmentalist project and suggest that ecological‐evolutionary theory can be quite helpful in posing new questions about an eventful sociology. By rethinking communism's collapse in 1989 and terrorism's explosion in 2001 within Lenski's theoretical frame, one can suggest critical transformations of theory and research on the evolution of human societies.     

Georg Simmel and Erving Goffman: Legitimators of the Sociological Investigation of Human Experience

By originating and developing the sociological investigation of human experience, Georg Simmel and Erving Goffman have shifted social phenomena at the edge of awareness to the center of attention, and have legitimated their study for contemporary sociologists. Both Simmel and Goffman describe these subtle social phenomena by distinguishing their perceptual boundaries and crossover elements, pointing out their common features when their statuses differ, and reversing their traditional location in means-end and cause-effect chains. But Durkheim's influence on Goffman's basic conceptions of interaction, individual, and society differentiated his interpretation of these social phenomena from Simmel's. Moreover, Simmel's and Goffman's explanations of these social phenomena evolve in different directions, revealing the antithetical goals toward which spiritual transcendental Simmelians and cynical reductive Goffmanians would lead sociology.     

Further Beyond the Durkheimian Problematic: Environmental Sociology and the Co‐construction of the Social and the Natural

The biophysical environment is not tangential to the social; it is only tangential to conventional sociological thought. Environmental sociology arose in the 1970s based on this presupposition, but over time theory and empirical research have generally adopted a social constructionist or natural realist approach. Despite rejection of the Durkheimian dictum of explaining social facts through the invocation of other social facts, and thus refusal to presuppose human exemptionalism from ecological constraints, scholarship continues to reflect this nature/culture divide. When environmental sociologists focus on one side or the other of the nature/culture divide, the intertwining and conjoint constitution of the social and the biophysical–material is obscured. The intent of the present essay is to articulate a co‐constructionist ontological position sensitive to the temporal emergence of hybridity between the social and the natural and amenable to recognition of salient dynamics not readily envisioned from either side of the nature/culture divide. In doing so, the argument builds upon prior metatheoretical scholarship in environmental sociology and science and technology studies and highlights ontological conundrums that must be confronted in order to further the move toward a viable co‐constructionist posture.