The Problem of Individuality in Karl Mannheim's Sociology

Karl Mannheim's intellectual career shows a consistent interest in the moral aim of keeping in productive tension individuality and social solidarity. For Mannheim the modern individual emerges from and is necessary to the continuance of a complex social process including differentiation, delocalization, abstraction, and democratization. Yet modern individuals surpass and may become subversive of the social conditions that nurture them, either through separation from society in the "bottomless individualism" of existential freedom or the submission to directionless crowd emotion. Once the individual has been released in society the only moral basis for solidarity is voluntary commitment, which Mannheim did not believe is a sufficient guarantor of society's survival because it does not provide unconditional backing for social norms. In his late work Mannheim feared that individuality would be effaced by technical manipulation of the mind, though he maintained the ideal that society should create strong individuals.     

Karl Lamprecht: Pioneer of Historical Sociology?

Abstract This contribution is an outline of the life, work and scientific impact of the Leipzig cultural historian Karl Lamprecht (1856–1915); Lamprecht's work was very controversial within German historiography at the turn of the century. He was accused of writing history from a materialist viewpoint. Anong his international contemporaries, however, Lamprecht was held in high esteem. There are divergent evaluations of the consequences of his methodological and substantive suggestions in the inter-war era, in the era of the Third Reich, and later in the two German states which emerged after 1945. The article tries to highlight some lines of continuity which point especially to the regional historiography and to the sociology of the 1920s and 1930s. From there a connection with the social historiography after 1945 may be made.     

Social Psychology and the Sociology of Knowledge

Resumen

Se parte de la revisión de los tres modelos que se han formulado desde las ciencias sociales para intentar explicar la difusión de la infección de la infección por el VIH: el modelo epidemiológico-conductal, el modelo antropológico-cultural y el modelo político-económico. Se sintetizan los resultados obtenidos en tres estudios realizados en la Argentina en relación con el tema: los códigos actuales en la sexualidad de los jóvenes, el SIDA en los medios y las organizaciones no gubernamentales que actúan en el campo del SIDA. La revisión de los resultados muestra que en la Argentina, a pesar de que algunos grupos han captado la necesidad de la incorporación del modelo político-social en el trabajo preventivo en relación con el SIDA, existen grupos que persisten en el modelo epidemiológico-conductal, que no favorece la reflexión crítica sobre el sistema social, por lo que no se da pie a acciones transformadoras que permitan el “empoderamiento” de los sectores más afectados por la epidemia.     

Textbooks, the History of Sociology, and the Sociological Stock of Knowledge

Textbooks increasingly reflect changes in our sociological stock of knowledge about the founders of the discipline. Richard Hamilton is unaware of this research and its documentation of the flaws in earlier accounts of the history of the profession. In an effort to expand his disciplinary understanding, I briefly review the extensive scholarship on the sociology of Harriet Martineau which has been published over the last quarter of a century.     

Strange Bedfellows: Deafness,Language, and the Sociology of Knowledge

Most deaf children lack mundane knowledge of the world because of language deprivation and, sometimes, social isolation. Most of these children acquire language late and, therefore, remain longer in the Unwelt (the world of stimuli and physical objects) along with non-symboling animals. This ethnographic study of a State School for the Deaf (SSD) presents a picture of a relatively closed linguistic community and its limited fund of knowledge. Wittgenstein's (1973) aphorism, “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world”, is perfectly realized and illustrated at SSD. Some high school students did not know names for parts of a human face. The findings indicate that deaf children live in a world of “gaps” and “blanks” as they maneuver among a disproportionate number of physical (as opposed to social) objects. Their multiple sign language systems and funds of knowledge are relatively more holistic, concrete, and context-bound than are the language and knowledge systems of their English-speaking counterparts. Education at SSD is more a preparation for life at SSD than it is for life in the outlying economic and high-tech society.     

Edward Shils’ Turn Against Karl Mannheim: The Central European Connection

This paper traces Edward Shils’ transition, during World War II, from enthusiasm to harsh criticism of Karl Mannheim, the Hungarian-born sociologist of knowledge. While serving in London, Shils drew upon a direct and explicit intellectual assault on Mannheim by fellow emigrés to England. Even while Shils maintained regular contact with Mannheim, Shils was exposed to an often vituperative dismissal of Mannheim’s work by Karl Popper and Friedrich Hayek, in the pages of the London School of Economics (LSE) journal Economica. After the war, when both Popper and Shils joined the LSE faculty—Hayek’s affiliation dated to 1931—Shils’ encounter with their critiques was deepened. And in these early postwar years, Shils became close friends with yet another emigré Mannheim critic, Michael Polanyi. Combined, these sustained and sophisticated criticisms helped wrest Shils from his interwar, Mannheim-friendly intellectual coordinates. The implications for Shils’ later propagation of the “mass society theory” label are considered.     

A Systematic View on the Use of History for Current Debates in Sociology,and on the Potential and Problems of a Historical Epistemology of Sociology

For various reasons, among them changes in the global higher education regime and competitive knowledge claims from other disciplines, the field of the history of sociology (HoS) has experienced an increased pressure to justify its own existence during the last decade. Positing that the best approach to justify the existence of a thing is to show its usefulness, the article discusses four types of claims to usefulness made by historians of sociology. The history of sociology can be said to be relevant in (I) shaping and maintaining the discipline’s identity; (II) in providing a rich fund of teaching future sociologists; (III) in informing current research and theorizing; and (IV) in reflecting more broadly on the cultural status of sociology in modern societies. The article then assesses the potential and problems of aspiring a historical epistemology of sociology, a proposal made recently especially in German and Anglophone contexts to link the history of science with its philosophy in the sense described as type III. It concludes that selected principles or ideas of historical epistemology can be very fruitfully applied in HoS. However, the project of transferring the whole program of historical epistemology into HoS is bound to fail. Nonetheless, there is plenty of reason to continue conceiving of HoS as an integral part of sociology.     

Power and Knowledge: The Case of the New Epistemology

This paper is in part a critique of the new epistemology. However, its focus is not the content of the new epistemology, but rather the process of the generation and legitimisation of knowledge which is represented by the new epistemology. It is argued that the new epistemology has been embedded in foundationalism, or a framework that poses epistemology as the (legitimate) base of thinking, knowledge and practice. This is a very conservative process of knowledge, as it allows the censorship of other ideas and knowledges in family therapy. My critique is part of a wider project of exploring the relationship of knowledge and power. To this extent, the new epistemology can be used as a case to illustrate the powerful effects of knowledge, and to remind us of the importance of allowing the space for differences in knowledge to enrich the field of family therapy.     

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.     

Contributions of American Pragmatism to the Sociology of Knowledge

The authors identify and develop the contribution of pragmatic thought to the sociology of knowledge. The argument presented here elucidates the pragmatist position on several controversial issues currently confronting the sociology of knowledge, namely; the issues of rationality, relativism, subjectivism, objectivity, language, truth, and the nature of theory and explanation. The paper concludes that the corpus of pragmatic thought resolves these issues in a timely, relevant, and significant way.     

An Empirical Study in the Sociology of Knowledge*

Investigations in the sociology of knowledge usually take as their point of departure some substantive property of a mode of thought. They then seek to delineate and understand the social origins of that mode of thought. This paper suggests the possibility of supplementing the substantive approach with structural materials. Portions of two different intellectual systems are treated empirically to ascertain the manner in which their demonstrations of proof are structured. These structures are uncovered through the use of Guttman scale analysis. While any set of branching deductions may be considered a partly ordered set, the findings reported here show that the portions of the intellectual system chosen for analysis converge to an almost perfectly ordered set (a Guttman scale). Finally, known properties of Guttman scales are assigned to the structural dimension, and implications for the sociology of knowledge are drawn.     

Marshall, Mannheim and contested citizenship

In this paper we address tensions in Marshall's account of the successive emergence of civil, political and social rights in citizenship. These tensions were Marshall's implicit and typically modern assumption of human nature, his privileging of the analytical rationality that follows from it, and the disjunction between the fixity of that rationality and the 'evolution' of his central metaphor. When he returned to it by emphasizing strains between democratic, welfare and capitalist moments that were co-present in the 'hyphenated society' rather than successive, he did so in a pessimistic tone at odds with the progressive modernism of his first schema. Although Marshall noted that conflicting principles in citizenship arose 'from the very roots of our social order', he did not elaborate the point in this first tripartite model. We argue that by adopting a single and typically modern form of rationality Marshall foreclosed on the contradictions that he held to be characteristic of academic disputes over citizenship. Since Mannheim had focused on the effects of such contradictions, his work allows a fruitful revisiting of Marshall's themes. To blend the two models we read Marshall through Karl Mannheim's early studies of political knowledge. Here Mannheim had anticipated the shift from stages to co-presence, and had prefigured a resolution of Marshall's sense of impasse. In his account of liberal, socialist and conservative thought-styles--the ways of seeing and knowing that are characteristic of particular ways of life--he saw political change as a dynamic interactive effect of individually calculating, dialectically collective and culturally symbolic forms of rationality.     

Imputing Beliefs: a Controversy in the Sociology of Knowledge1

The problem of imputation - how to ascribe ideas and beliefs to groups, or to individuals on the basis of their group membership - has occasionally occupied the attention of those working in the sociology of knowledge. This article offers a critical discussion of this debate. It is argued that the various proposed solutions - idealist, empiricist, and structuralist - do not adequately tackle the problem since each assumes a deterministic model of sociological explanation, and adheres to a dualism of actor versus structure. We suggest that a theory of group formation informed by a social action perspective may offer some pointers towards taking such issues beyond self-sustaining debate between sociological idealism and objectivism.     

Standpoint Epistemology and the Uses of Self‐Reflection in Feminist Ethnography: Lessons for Rural Sociology*

Abstract We explore how feminist researchers informed by standpoint theoretical frameworks employ the process of self‐reflection to counter the reproduction of inequalities in ethnographic investigation. Although it is not a cure for this dilemma, we argue that researchers can be self‐conscious about the ways in which they reproduce power in the course of their work; furthermore, sustained attention to these dynamics will enrich ethnographic accounts. We begin by outlining the diverse ways in which feminist ethnographers draw on standpoint epistemology to generate strong reflexive methodological strategies. Then we describe challenges posed by postmodern and postcolonial critics, and outline how feminists have contributed to these debates and have responded with innovative methodological strategies, especially in relation to self‐reflexive techniques. In conclusion, we discuss how rural sociologists might incorporate these methodological insights into their ethnographic investigations.     

American Sociology: History and Racially Gendered Classed Knowledge Reproduction

The purpose of this paper is to explore how racially gendered classed power‐relations structure history, knowledge and American Sociology's historical memory and disciplinary knowledge production. In order to do so, this paper will 1) utilize Cabral's (1970) theory of history to center humanity as historically developed into a racially gendered classed capitalist world‐system, 2) employ intersectionality as a heuristic device to see how knowledge is manipulated to normalize dehumanization as well as to perpetuate exploitation and privilege by denying “Othered' ” knowledges, and lastly 3) sociologically imagine this racially gendered classed process in the “institutional‐structure” of American Sociology by exploring the ancestry of the concept of “intersectionality.” In all this paper argues 1) American Sociology under theorizes history, a central aspect of the sociological imagination and production of new sociological knowledge, 2) American Sociology reproduces a dehumanized theory of history per Marx's “historical materialism” and 3) the structure of American Sociology's knowledge is racially gendered classed, as illustrated in the collective memory of the concept of “intersectionality.”     

Alvin Gouldner and the Sociology of Knowledge: Three Significant Problem Shifts*

One thing is certain, a man might feel: the building of this bridge will never be completed, but my life will surely have its end. A man might therefore risk a running leap from the unfinished edge to the shore that he thinks he sees ahead. Perhaps he has seen right and has estimated his own powers correctly. In which event, applause. Perhaps he has badly miscalculated on both counts. In which event, a certain dampness sets in. Maybe he can swim back to safety, even if somewhat less than applauded. In any event, he has found out how far he can see and how well he can jump. Even if he is never heard from again, perhaps those who are still dawdling at the edge will learn something useful (Gouldner, 1973).