Using humanist sociology in the classroom

This essay examines the nature, organization, and activities of humanist sociology from an interventionist perspective as I used it within my sociology and criminology classes. While sociological humanism stresses the role of human agency (Ballard 1987; Zald 1991), identity (Stone 1988), reflexivity (Friedrichs 1987; Homan 1986), and social structure in determining and defining a social activity such as teaching, standard discussions of sociological humanism neglect to discuss how social agency can be taught in the classroom and beyond (McClung Lee 1976, 1988). My argument is that sociological humanism should be understood as more than individual appreciation of identity or liberal reformist political perspectives. The future of sociological humanism must become part of a critical interventionism to attack social forms of domination and oppression both inside and outside of the classroom. I demonstrate how some of this can be accomplished while examining my own teaching practices. Assistant professor of sociology at the University of Dayton and also an affiliate of their Criminal Justice Studies Program.     

Social identity and emotion: the meeting of psychoanalysis and sociology

This paper attempts to develop a framework for understanding social identities by linking together ideas from two disciplines which are normally pursued separately from each other namely, sociology and psychoanalysis. Drawing on the work of Craib (1989, 1994, 1998a) Bion (1961) and Scheff (1994a) in psychoanalysis and Mann (1986, 1993a, 1995, 1997) in sociology, the main argument is that social identities such as national identity are not just the result of sociological factors such as social classification, boundaries and processes of identification, they also have an important emotional dimension which coexists with but cannot be reduced to the social. In order to understand the persistence and indeed strengthening of nationalism and national identities in the contemporary world, we need to take account not just of changes in the inter‐relationships between economics, politics and culture at the global level, but also of the ways in which they may now be coming to inter‐relate with the kind of unconscious psychological processes and strong emotions such as love, hate, shame and anger, which occur within groups. The paper begins with a critique of existing sociological approaches to identity followed by an attempt to develop an alternative approach based on the psychoanalytic concept of emotional inter‐subjectivity. By means of a case study of British trade unions in the 1980’s and 1990’s, it then goes on to show how unconscious psychological processes and strong feelings may now be articulating with sociological processes to form a mutually reinforcing loop which is strengthening and reinforcing nationalism in a sociological context in which other aspects of society are globalising. Finally, it is suggested that the reason why sociologists need to take feelings seriously in the contemporary world is that they may now be combining with sociological changes to strengthen and reinforce nationalism and the principle of nationality in situations in which it might be more productive to question it.     

Decorative sociology: towards a critique of the cultural turn

In this paper we outline a critique of ‘decorative sociology’ as a trend in contemporary sociology where ‘culture’ has eclipsed the ‘social’ and where literary interpretation has marginalized sociological methods. By the term ‘decorative sociology’ we mean a branch of modernist aesthetics which is devoted to a politicized, textual reading of society and culture. Although we acknowledge slippage between the textual and material levels of cultural analysis, notably in the output of the Birmingham School, we propose that the intellectual roots of cultural studies inevitably mean that the textual level is pre‐eminent. In emphasizing the aesthetic dimension we seek to challenge the political self‐image of decorative sociology as a contribution to political intervention. We argue that while the cultural turn has contributed to revising approaches to the relationships between identity and power, race and class, ideology and representation, it has done so chiefly at an aesthetic level. Following Davies (1993), we submit that the greatest achievement of the cultural turn has been to teach students to ‘read politically’. The effect of this upon concrete political action is an empirical question. Without wishing to minimize the political importance of cultural studies, our hypothesis is that, what might be called the ‘aestheticization of life’ has not translated fully into the politicization of culture. We argue that an adequate cultural sociology would have to be driven by an empirical research agenda, embrace an historical and comparative framework, and have a genuinely sociological focus, that is, a focus on the changing balance of power in Western capitalism. We reject the attempt to submerge the social in the cultural and outline the development of an alternative, integrated perspective on body, self and society. We conclude by briefly commenting on three sociological contributions to the comparative and historical study of cultural institutions which approximate this research agenda: Norbert Elias, Pierre Bourdieu and Richard Sennett.     

The sociology of popular music, interdisciplinarity and aesthetic autonomy

This paper considers the impact of interdisciplinarity upon sociological research, focusing on one particular case: the academic study of popular music. 'Popular music studies' is an area of research characterized by interdisciplinarity and, in keeping with broader intellectual trends, this approach is assumed to offer significant advantages. As such, popular music studies is broadly typical of contemporary intellectual and governmental attitudes regarding the best way to research specific topics. Such interdisciplinarity, however, has potential costs and this paper highlights one of the most significant: an over-emphasis upon shared substantive interests and subsequent undervaluation of shared epistemological understandings. The end result is a form of 'ghettoization' within sociology itself, with residents of any particular ghetto displaying little awareness of developments in neighbouring ghettos. Reporting from one such ghetto, this paper considers some of the ways in which the sociology of popular music has been limited by its positioning within an interdisciplinary environment and suggests two strategies for developing a more fully-realized sociology of popular music. First, based on the assumption that a sociological understanding of popular music shares much in common with a sociological understanding of everything else, this paper calls for increased intradisciplinary research between sociologists of varying specialisms. The second strategy, however, involves a reconceptualization of the disciplinary limits of sociology, as it argues that a sociology of popular music needs to accept musical specificity as part of its remit. Such acceptance has thus far been limited not only by an interdisciplinary context but also by the long-standing sociological scepticism toward the analysis of aesthetic objects. As such, this paper offers an intervention into wider debates concerning the remit of sociological enquiry, and whether it is ever appropriate for sociological analyses of culture to consider 'internal' aesthetic structures. In relation to the specific case study, the paper argues that considering musical specificity is a necessary component of a sociology of popular music, and some possibilities for developing a 'materialist sociology of music' are outlined.     

Social inequality and the sociology of work and occupations

Although occupation for a long time played a central role in sociological research on inequality, today it is only one topic among others. In spite of this development, this article asks whether sociology has abandoned the topic of occupation too soon. Based on a theory of functional differentiation supplemented with some arguments concerning the sociological concepts of stratification and individualization, this article presents a new possibility of analysing the problem of social inequality focusing on the forms occupation and organization in modern society.     

Towards sociology from the arts: An epistemological turn

Over the past two decades, Howard Becker's Art Worlds and Pierre Bourdieu's The Rules of Art were guidelines for the dominant paradigms in sociology of art. Nevertheless, according to Bourdieu, sociology and art do not make a good match. To overcome this dilemma, the French sociologist Nathalie Heinich proposed a “sociology from art,” based on the uniqueness of artists and their works, but she neglected artworks as sociological subject. A realistic and persistent criticism against sociology from the arts claims that artworks are fictions created by artists, therefore epistemologically unacceptable as social realities. Is it possible the making of sociology from artworks? Through theoretical review and using the example of literature, I will argue in this paper that artworks are important heuristic resources and a legitimate subject of sociological research.     

Japanese urban sociology: Development and current trends

This article focuses on current trends in Japanese urban sociology as they developed historically. They can be understood in the distinctive context of Japanese sociology, as the products of an interaction between Western sociological theories and their adaptation to Japan’s own materials. The article begins with the historical context of urban development and provides an overview of the development of urban studies in Japan, including issues in the theory of urbanization, the distinctive character of the neighborhood association, Cbonaikai, and the formation of new local communities in suburban areas. The current trends since the 1980s involve the macro approach to urban restructuring, studies on urban ethnicity, and social network analysis. Overall, it is suggested that the influence of American sociology makes Japanese urban analysis comparative. I thank Claude S. Fischer and Tazuko Hanzawa for their help with editing this paper. Remain-ing deficiencies are mine.     

Towards an immature sociology

Sociological theory displays a tendency to depict the social world in terms of completed ‘beings’. The social, thus depicted, is a world of powers to ‘finish’(such as the power granted to convention to provide for social order), and finished products (such as agents and ethical points-of-view). As sociologists of childhood have attempted to bring children into sociological focus in their own right, the disciplinary concern with the ‘complete’ has required that children be attributed the properties assumed more normally to belong to adults. The sociology of childhood has thus preserved the privilege of the complete and the mature over the incomplete and the immature. In this paper the key sociological issues of convention, agency and ethics are given a theoretical interpretation that makes them fit for understanding childhood. The ability of convention to complete social order is questioned. Agency is portrayed as the emergent property of networks of dependency rather than the possession of individuals. An alternative to the ethics of ‘positions’ is offered in the form of an ethics of ‘motion’. Where extant sociologies of childhood have brought children into the ‘finished’ world of sociological theory, this paper uses childhood's ontological ambiguity to open the door onto an unfinished social world.     

Metatheorizing in sociology

This paper describes and makes the case for sociological metatheorizing, or the systematic study of sociological theory. Three types of metatheorizing are delineated on the basis of their end products: the attainment of a deeper understanding of theory, the creation of new theory, and the creation of an overarching theoretical perspective (a metatheory). The basic problems in metatheorizing are reviewed and it is concluded that the most basic difficulty has been the lack of a clear definition of the subfield. Some thoughts on the future of metatheorizing in sociology are offered.     

Revitalizing sociology: urban life and mental illness between history and the present

This paper proposes a re‐thinking of the relationship between sociology and the biological sciences. Tracing lines of connection between the history of sociology and the contemporary landscape of biology, the paper argues for a reconfiguration of this relationship beyond popular rhetorics of ‘biologization' or ‘medicalization'. At the heart of the paper is a claim that, today, there are some potent new frames for re‐imagining the traffic between sociological and biological research – even for ‘revitalizing’ the sociological enterprise as such. The paper threads this argument through one empirical case: the relationship between urban life and mental illness. In its first section, it shows how this relationship enlivened both early psychiatric epidemiology, and some forms of the new discipline of sociology; it then traces the historical division of these sciences, as the sociological investment in psychiatric questions waned, and ‘the social' become marginalized within an increasingly ‘biological' psychiatry. In its third section, however, the paper shows how this relationship has lately been revivified, but now by a nuanced epigenetic and neurobiological attention to the links between mental health and urban life. What role can sociology play here? In its final section, the paper shows how this older sociology, with its lively interest in the psychiatric and neurobiological vicissitudes of urban social life, can be our guide in helping to identify intersections between sociological and biological attention. With a new century now underway, the paper concludes by suggesting that the relationship between urban life and mental illness may prove a core testing‐ground for a ‘revitalized' sociology.     

Simmel,rationalisation and the sociology of money

Simmel was born in 1858. Raised in the centre of the Jewish business culture of Berlin. Simmel studied history and philosophy, becoming a Privatdozent in 1885. Although he published numerous books and artickes, simmel was excluded from influential university positions as a result of the pervasive anti-Semitism of the period and it was bot until 1914 that Simmel was finally promoted to a full professorship at the University of Strasbourg. Like Durkheim. Simmel was both the object of anti-Semitic prejudice and a fervent supporter of the nationalist cause in the First World War. Simmel died in 1918 if cancer of the liver.¹ This basic and naïve factual biography of Simmel in many respects provides many of the themes in Simmel's sociology. First, his sociology is held to be the brilliant reflection of the glittering, cospospolitan world of pre-war Berlin and that his commentary on that world took the form of impressionism his sociological essays are snapshots sub specie aeternitatis”? simmel's perspective has been regarded as an example of the nature of modern society as contained in Robert Musil's The Man's Without Qualities. That is a social existence without roots, commitments or purpose.³ Secondly, Simmel was and remained a social outsider despite his good connections with Berlin's cultural elite. His writing has been as a result characterised as perspectivism and an aestheticication of reality. As an indication of this, Simmel's influence has in the past often rested on such minor contributions as‘The Stranger’⁴ Thridly, because Simmel failed to secure an influential location within the German university system, there was no development of the Simmelian school of sociology at all comparable to Durkheimain sociology. Decades of sociological interpretation of Simmel's work have still left Simmel as a theoretical enigma on the ambitus of the sociological tradition. His sociology has been categorised as interactionist, formal and conflict sociology.⁵ In more recent years there has been a renewal of interest in Simmel which has begun to show a greater appreciation of the unity and stature of his sociology. This renewal has been brought about by the cominentaries of Levine. Frisby, Robertson, and Holzner. ⁶ More importantly, the translation of Simmel's The Philosophy of Money⁷ by Bottomore and Frisby provides a new opportunity for a systematic evaluation of Simmel's sociology of modern culture. The main burden of this paper is that existing commentaries have failed to focus on the central theme of‘alienation’and‘rationalisation’in The Philosophy of Money which provided the major theoretical backing for on the one hand, Weber's analysis capitalism as the iron cage and on the other Lukács so-called rediscovery of the alienation theme in the young Marx.     

The body in sociology: tensions inside and outside sociological thought

The human body has in recent years become a ‘hot’ topic in sociology, not just in empirical research but also in sociological theorizing. In the latter context, the body has been variously a resource for broadening the parameters of traditional sociological thought deriving from the nineteenth century, and for overturning that paradigm and fundamentally reorienting the assumptions and concepts of sociological thinking. Attempts to abandon the old paradigm and foster a new one through the means of thinking about bodies are many and manifold, and in this paper we trace out the intricate history of moves towards a ‘corporeal sociology’. We identify the dilemmas that have attended these developments, especially as concerns the ways in which new modes of thinking sociologically have tended to founder over the classical sociological dichotomy between social structure and social action. Through tracing out the various moves and counter‐moves within this field, we identify a central contradiction that affects all contemporary sociological practice, not just that dealing with the body: an oscillation between judging the utility of conceptual tools in terms of criteria derived from the discipline of Cultural Studies, and evaluating the arguments created by those tools on the basis of the incompatible criteria of classical sociology. The paper challenges sociologists to choose one set of criteria or the other, for sociological practice cannot be based on both such antagonistic paradigms.     

Grassroots sociology and the future of the discipline

It has become a truism to say that the sociological enterprise is in disarray. The sociological niche is neither self-evident nor safe. Given the problems facing sociology, it is imperative that the discipline begins to plan to protect is assets and to project its capabitlities into the twenty-first century. State sociological assocations could be major components of such a plan. The state sociological association is, however, a largely unknown entity. The present study presents the result of a survey of the officers of state assocations to determine the demographic makeup of their membership, concerns addressed by their associations and their strategies for dealing with these concerns. The findings suggest that state socioclogical associations are in an excellent position to build community in the discipline by breaking down the lines of stratification separating the organizational levels of the sociological enterprise and the different needs of our academic and applied endeavors. Both are past presidents of the North Carolina State Sociological Association. Harris is past president of the National Association of State Sociological Associations and Wise is its current president.     

Michael Polanyi and the sociology of a free society

Michael Polanyi’s defense of freedom in science and society conflicts in major ways with Weber (process of rationalization, value neutrality of sociologists), Popper (objective knowledge, open society), and technological or oppositional sociology. Polanyi rejects positivism, utilitarianism, and Marxism, and defends freedom as a necessary condition for pursuit of spiritual ideals such as truth, justice, charity, and tolerance. Half truths about science seen as rejecting tradition, faith, authority, values, and the subjective, have helped bring valuable social results, but in the form taken by radical philosophical skepticism (doubt), also called objectivism, they also threaten freedom itself. A more truthful account is needed. Scientists and citizens who would maintain a free society are morally responsible persons, joined together in quest of truth and certain other ideals, demanding of themselves and each other that they be faithful to that quest. Polanyi’s thought has connections with that of Shils, and has implications for what Shils calls a consensual sociology. Louis H. Swartz teaches law, and is interested in the development of sociological theory and legal sociology, building upon the contributions of Polanyi and Shils.     

2004 American Sociological Association Presidential address: for public sociology*

Responding to the growing gap between the sociological ethos and the world we study, the challenge of public sociology is to engage multiple publics in multiple ways. These public sociologies should not be left out in the cold, but brought into the framework of our discipline. In this way we make public sociology a visible and legitimate enterprise, and, thereby, invigorate the discipline as a whole. Accordingly, if we map out the division of sociological labor, we discover antagonistic interdependence among four types of knowledge: professional, critical, policy, and public. In the best of all worlds the flourishing of each type of sociology is a condition for the flourishing of all, but they can just as easily assume pathological forms or become victims of exclusion and subordination. This field of power beckons us to explore the relations among the four types of sociology as they vary historically and nationally, and as they provide the template for divergent individual careers. Finally, comparing disciplines points to the umbilical chord that connects sociology to the world of publics, underlining sociology's particular investment in the defense of civil society, itself beleaguered by the encroachment of markets and states.     

The challenge of training in applied sociology

This paper adds to the current dialogue in our discipline regarding the challenge of expanding nonacademic employment opportunities for sociologists and training our students for such employment. The argument is made that this challenge should be seen as an opportunity for us to demonstrate the relevance of our knowledge and expertise to society and to advance the intellectual development of our discipline. Moreover, the achievement of these benefits does not require sacrificing the distinctive intellectual core of sociology as a humanistic liberal arts discipline. To help bridge the gap between academic and nonacademic cultures, several interrelated strategies are suggested that address issues of marketing and public relations, as well as curriculum revision. The internship, as a key feature of “applied” programs, is crucial in terms of both training students and facilitating our contacts with potential employers. where he developed the department’s internship program, and has done consultation with religious and social service organizations. where he helped develop the Master’s program in applied sociology, and has done extensive consultation with business organizations regarding their needs for sociological skills and expertise. which is jointly sponsored by the College of Business and Management and the Department of Sociology, and which conducts studies in organizational design, entrepreneurship, and strategic management at the University of Maryland in College Park. has done extensive consultation and research with business organizations and the military on personnel and family issues. in Jacksonville and utilizes sociological concepts in courses on organizational management and design. a member of the ASA Ad Hoc Committee on Under- and Un-employment. where he recently completed a term as Head of the Department and a leave of absence to the staff of the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress.     

Economic sociology as disequilibrium economics: a contribution to the critique of the new economic sociology

This paper analyses the problem of the asocial view of the market at the theoretical core of contemporary economic sociology. Despite much emphasis on the apparent interpenetration of society and the economy, contemporary economic sociology is rooted in an analytical distinction between the two spheres. The implicit reliance on the neoclassical economic conception of the market helps to explain why the ‘new economic sociology’ often collapses into disequilibrium economics, where disequilibrium becomes the central but unstated prediction of a good deal of the work in the paradigm. Using a sample of contributions from the field, I demonstrate that a strong tendency running through much of the new economic sociology tends to understand society as a fundamentally distortionary force. To resolve this problem, I argue that an independent field of economic sociology necessitates a distinction between social relationships and social relations.     

Habitus: beyond sociology

This paper presents a contribution of a set of interrelated innovative thinking to revitalize the sociological understanding of the notion of the habitus. It discusses contributions by sociologists exploring the sources of Bourdieu's inspiration from psychology and psychoanalysis to the development of the concept, and brings in new thinking inspired by authors and frameworks that branch out of sociology to bring into sociology fresher thinking. Three areas of concern about habitus are focused on: firstly, the objectivism and subjectivism dichotomy; secondly, the plasticity or rigidity of the concept; and thirdly, the implications of intangibles attached to the notion. The paper introduces a Special Section including five articles on theoretical and empirical explorations bringing exciting perspectives to creative and critical sociology.